Jon Topping – Eyewitness Testimony

www.jontopping.com                   Ultimate Questions Podcast

Instagram @jonktopping             YouTube @JonTopping

 

 

 

 

Arguments from skeptics

The Gospels quote each other = If they were eyewitnesses, they would just recount what they heard.

              Problem = They were quoting because they knew the writer, and knew he got it right.

The Greek is too good for a Jew = The Gospels have excellent motifs, skilled use of language.

              The Gospel of John has reason to think he was actually educated.

                           Implication he knew the high priest.

                           Educated people had mundane jobs (ex. Paul was well educated, but a tent maker).

                           John was written late, so, he had decades to become educated.

              The Gospel of Mark = Peter used a scribe (John Mark), so yes, he wouldn’t be good, so he used a scribe.

              The Gospel of Luke = Luke was a Greek, and an academic.

              The Gospel of Matthew = Matthew was well-educated, and worked closely with Romans = Knew Greek.

The theology is too goof for a layperson = The Gospels contain deep awareness of the Torah.

              The apostles studied under the greatest rabbi in the world = Jesus!

              The writers had decades to study before writing their works.

              Saying the Gospels are “too smart” and the disciples are “too dumb” is a terrible argument.

The Gospels contain predictions that came true = Therefore, they must have been written after 70ad.

              Problem = This is obviously bias. They assume no supernatural, to argue against the Bible.

              Also, the Gospels don’t really treat this as prophetic (i.e. The temple destruction)

When Jesus says the temple will be destroyed, the writers don’t acknowledge that this prophecy came true (but they do in other instances). Not even once, in the whole NT, is this acknowledged.

If the Gospels were written after, they would have gladly pointed out the fulfilled prophecy!

                          

​

The Early Church highly valued eyewitness testimony

Over and over again, the New Testament books show the Early Church highly valued eyewitness testimony.

Luke 1:1-4 = Talks about the Gospel writers using eyewitnesses.

John 19:35 = Writer refers to himself as an eyewitness of crucifixion, so you know you can trust him.

John 21:24 = Writer refers to himself again as an eyewitness.

Luke 23:55 = Says the women were witnesses of Jesus being buried in the tomb.

Acts 1:21-22 = When replacing Judas’ seat, one of the requirements was they be an eyewitness of all.

Acts 2:29-32 = Peter’s sermon, says they are all witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection.

Acts 4:20 = Before Jewish leaders, apostles say they are telling what they’ve “seen and heard”.

Acts 4:33 = The apostles would “testify to the resurrection”.

Acts 10:39-42 = Say they are witnesses of everything Jesus did.

              Goes on to list the Gospel. Jesus died, but God raised Him up TO BE SEEN.

              There were witnesses who at and drank with Jesus after the resurrection.

              Making it obvious = These people were eyewitnesses, up close and personal.

1 Cor 15:5-8 = Lists the eyewitnesses as evidence.

1 Peter 5:1 = Says he’s a “witness of the sufferings of Christ”.

2 Peter 1:16-17 = Says he was one of the many “eyewitnesses of Jesus’ majesty”

Rev 1:2 = John states he wrote Revelation, and that he was an eyewitness to Jesus.

1 John 1:1-3 = “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us.”

 

 

Early Church writers (disciples of the disciples) affirmed the NT as Scripture

Ignatius of Antioch, wrote around 108ad

              Personally knew John, quotes from many New Testament books, including Matthew, Luke, and John.

Polycarp, wrote around 107ad.

              Student of John, friend of Ignatius. Quoted most of the New Testament books as Scripture.

Papias, wrote around 95-110ad

              Student of John. Says Mark wrote stories he got directly from Peter.

 Irenaeus of Lyons, wrote around 175-200ad

              Taught by Ignatius and Polycarp (notice the progression of teachers/disciples). Says John taught Polycarp.

              Says Matthew comes from Matthew the tax collector from Capernaum, one of the 12.

              Says Mark comes from Mark, not one of the 12, but Peter’s interpreter.

              Says Luke comes from Luke, not one of the 12, medical doctor, accompanied Paul, maybe gentile.

              Says John from John, son of Zebedee, one of the 12, younger brother of James, fisherman Capernaum.

Muratorian Fragment, 180ad

              Earliest known canonical list of New Testament books, affirms 21 (or more) of the 27 books of the NT.

Clement of Alexandria, wrote 180-215ad

              Tells us Mark wrote down Peter’s eyewitness testimony, and that Luke wrote Luke and Acts.

Tertullian, wrote 190-225ad

              Quotes from four Gospels, 1 John, 1 Peter, Jude, Revelation, and the Pauline epistles (as Scripture).

Origen, wrote 240-250ad

              Says Matthew was written first, then Mark by Peter’s instruction, then Luke, then last John.

Athanasius, 39th Festal Letter, 267ad.

              Lists all and only the 27 books now considered the New Testament.

Jerome, wrote 392ad

              Confirms almost all the New Testament books. Says Mark was by Mark, Peter’s eyewitness accounts.

Conclusion: The very earliest Christians knew the writers of the New Testament books, and there is a tradition passing down confirmation of the authors.

 

Peter J. Williams, from his work, “Can we trust the Gospels?”

“In other words, these four books were treated together as the best source for information about Jesus long before any central city, group, or individual in Christianity possessed enough power to impose the collection on other people. It is most natural to suppose that the credentials of the four books themselves are why they were so widely accepted.”

 

 

Details in the New Testament prove it is eyewitness testimony

Details from the Gospels and Acts that show the writers were intimately familiar with the people and geography.

              Gospels and Acts use the most popular names at that location and time, to a very close percentage.

                           Ex. Simon and Joseph were most popular = 15.6%

                                         NT = 18.2% of men in Gospels and Acts had one of those names.

                           Ex. 41.5% of men during time/place had 9 top names.

                                         NT = 40.3% in Gospels and Acts had one of the top 9 names.

              Gospels and Acts give qualifiers to popular names, and don’t give qualifiers to unpopular names

                           Simon popular name = Simon Peter, Simon brother of Jesus, Simon the leper, Simon of Cyrene.

                           Ex. Unpopular names, Thaddeus, Bartholomew, Philip, Thomas, no qualifiers.

              Gospels and Acts refer to very specific geographical locations that non-locals wouldn’t know about.

                           Golgatha = A certain hill, you would NOT know this unless you’re from that area.

                           Gethsemane = Small garden area, no one would know this unless from that area.

Bethany, Bethphage, Sychar = Familiar to us from reading NT, not to others in that time.

 

Conclusion: The writers of the New Testament lived during the time, highly valued eyewitness testimony, claimed to be giving eyewitness testimony, and were intimately familiar with the geography and culture.

Why does the skeptic insist the New Testament can’t be eyewitness testimony? Only bias.