Monday, March 25, 2013

Is the Easter Story Legend or Myth? Part II



Don’t Forget the Calendar!

A major crisis in Israel’s history occurred in the year 70 AD when the temple in Jerusalem was completely demolished under General Titus’ Roman military.  Following its destruction, the entire sacrificial system (the offering of animal sacrifices on its altar) came to a complete end and has never been resumed.  About 35 years earlier John the Baptist announced at the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry, “Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29).  The entire point of Jesus’ coming into the world, according to the New Testament, was that He was (and is) the fulfillment of the entire sacrificial system of the Old (first) Testament.  He fulfilled the previous arrangement by Himself acting as its ultimate, final, and entirely sufficient sacrifice for our sins (Hebrews 7:23-25).  For this reason, it is astonishing that the New Testament never anywhere makes mention of this crisis in Jerusalem that brought the end to the Jewish sacrificial system on account of the destruction of the temple!  I am here using the “argument from silence,” a form of argumentation which should be used with caution, yet under certain circumstances is entirely valid.  The New Testament is entirely silent on the very event which brought a complete end to the sacrificial system that Jesus' death and resurrection replaced.  For this reason, the year 70 AD has a strong bearing on the question of the endpoint concerning the dating of the New Testament writings.

Another important year is 65 A D.  It was in that year that both Apostles Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome, the former by crucifixion upside down, and the latter by beheading, according to strong tradition.  The significance of this year for the purposes of today’s blog is that the death of the Apostle Paul is not mentioned in the Book of Acts.  Acts’ closing words are, “And he [Paul] lived there [Rome] two whole years…teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ quite openly and unhindered” (28:30,31).  The Apostle Paul is not treated in the Book of Acts in an incidental manner.  To the contrary his personality is front and center for a substantial portion of the book.  The flow of his life and ministry are chapter after chapter described in detail.  His intentions to eventually take the Gospel to Spain (Romans 15:28) add weight to the strong assessment that the author of Acts was not finished with the story of the Apostle Paul’s journeys.  For this reason alone there is strong reason for dating the Book of Acts prior to the death of Paul in 65 AD.

The author of Acts, known as Luke (Colossians 4:14, 2 Timothy 4:11, and Philemon 24), also (obviously) authored the third Gospel that bears his name (see Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1).  Since Acts is the second of a two-volume work (that was written in chronological order—see Acts 1:2) that begins with the Gospel of Luke, it then follows that the Gospel According to Luke was written substantially earlier than 65 AD.
 
I will continue to expand on the significance of the above two dates with respect to the dating of the New Testament.  For now I simply state that they demolish the assertions of the skeptics that the New Testament documents were compiled way after the time of the events they purport to describe.  The truth is the New Testament presents us with trustworthy accounts substantiated by eye-witness experiences of the events surrounding Jesus’ life, death, and the empty tomb on the third day.

To be continued…

No comments:

Post a Comment