Untitled Sermon (2)

CC2

Read Philippians 3:10

I want to start out by saying I am no bible scholar, so if anyone wants a list of the sources I have used I would be happy to provide that for you. A lot of this will be review tonight. I wasn’t here during our first Zoom meeting and it sounds like you guys maybe went over the gospel, so I am sorry if I get a little repetitive but to talk about the Resurrection you have to talk about the Gospel of Jesus Christ too. know here at Calvary Chapel we go book by book verse by verse so I don’t want to just take a verse without context . I want to focus on the Resurrection but let me have someone read (Philippians 3:1-15 ).

I will put everything in context. READ

In Phil 3 , which there were no chapter divisions in the original, Paul is warning the brothers at Philippi against coming under legalism.

The IVP Bible background commentary says about 3:2,” The opponents here are not Jewish persecutors, who would be unlikely in Philippi, which had a very small Jewish community. Rather, they are like the traveling Jewish Christian teachers Paul had encountered in Galatia who want to circumcise Gentiles. It is not clear whether they have already come to Philippi or are simply traveling about, and Paul is warning that they may come there.”

Then in 3:5,6 Paul tells them that he is a Pharisee, a Hebrew of Hebrews, blameless in law keeping, yet he tells the brothers at Philippi that he has no confidence in his flesh- In his own ability to achieve the righteousness that is required to have a have a relationship with God, in-Christ.

He was telling them that none of his past achievements or practices, would get him where he wanted to be which was in a right relationship with his Creator, and nothing in his past life compared to knowing Christ. In the Tanakh the most noble effort was to “Know God”. Although all of his past actions were taken in an attempt to become closer to God, they failed him in every way.

In 3:8 he says, “I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord”, which is to say that total and full knowledge of the Lord Christ Jesus is the ultimate source of satisfaction and contentment. In-Christ every need is met.

In 3:9 he establishes that when we are found In-Christ we are found there “through the faith of Christ” and not “of the law”, and when we are found in Christ through faith, His righteousness is imputed to our account. (2 Cor 5:21 )” For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

I know that we all understand what Paul is saying, beware of people that try to put us under law because the only way to attain the righteousness needed to be “In-Christ” and in a right relationship with God is by faith in Christ’s. Paul leaves no doubt how we are saved in (Ephesians 2:8a ) he says, “For by grace are ye saved through faith;”, and the faith he is talking about is in particular three things-

a. Christ’s deity

b. Christ’s death

c. Christ’s Resurrection

The Apostle lays out the requirement for salvation in (Romans 10:9 ). That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus (deity of Christ), and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead (death and resurrection), thou shalt be saved.

Now, focusing on vs 3:10 he says, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death.”

Paul says that nothing is able to compare with knowing Christ and His Resurrection power. I pray this all the time,” That I may Know Him and the power of His Resurrection”. I think a lot of the time we think that the Gospel is just for salvation and then we are to move on to deeper study, but I am here to tell you it is by the Gospel that we are able to stand as Paul tells us in (1Cor 15:1 ). We don’t just get saved and then the Resurrection does no good anymore. Paul says, “I die daily” (1 Cor 15:31 ), so daily we have to see ourselves In-Christ at the crucifixion dying with Him daily, taking up our crosses daily (Luke 9:23 ) and following our Risen Lord, so that we too will be raised with him to newness of life (2 Cor 5:17 ).

And we live in a time that as Christians our views are challenged more than ever, so it is important to understand the particulars of our faith. I know that we all believe Christ was raised from the dead on the third day, and we have all experienced His resurrection power in our lives to be sure. However, we along with Paul should desire to know and experience more of Jesus and more of His resurrection power, and we should even desire to take part in suffering on Christ’s behalf. Paul was a scholar’s scholar we might say, and He knew the Tanakh, the Hebrew scriptures from a child and still the greatest thing Paul could possibly desire in life was to know more of Christ and to experience more of His resurrection power because he knew that was his only way to God. Paul’s end goal was to be resurrected with Christ at the Last Day, but I am not really going to touch on the eschatological side tonight. I know we all along with Paul can say, we want everything Christ has to give. So tonight, I want to ask and answer two questions- First, what does it mean to us, apart from our salvation, if Jesus really was raised from the dead? And secondly, what kind of evidence do have for a skeptical world?

The Christian faith lives and dies with the reality of the Resurrection. The Resurrection is what set’s Christianity apart from all other world religions. There are many people who accept Jesus of Nazareth as a good man, and a moral teacher but that is as far as most people are willing to take. Christ was crucified as a blasphemer; however, the Resurrection is God’s way authenticating everything Jesus ever said or promised.

All the allegations of blasphemy an unjustified crucifixion, were met by God the Father with the Resurrection, and Christ’s claims to be Creator God were totally validated. These claims are all over the bible in (John 8:58 ) Jesus says, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” This is a direct reference to (Exodus 3:14 ),” And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.

There is no doubt that Jesus claimed to be God Almighty and His Resurrection proves that every single Word He spoke were True in (Romans 1:3-4 ) Paul says,“ Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:”

If time permits, go over YHWH.

So, God the Father has put His Royal stamp of approval on everything Jesus of Nazareth ever said and did, by raising him from the dead and seating Him at His right hand far above all principality and power. The notes on the Faithlife study bible’s notes for this verse say, “Jesus proved His divine authority and established Himself as the expected Davidic Messiah through His resurrection from the dead.”

The Resurrection is the single greatest event in human history. The cross was a triumph, not a failure. Jesus laid His life down willingly for the sins of us all. Paul in(Romans 4:25 ) says,” who [Christ] was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.”

Ultimately, He was not delivered up His enemies, but He gave up His life willingly in (John 10:15b ) we read,"I lay down my life for the sheep.”, and then in vs 18, “ No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”

The Father is the one who delivered Him to be crucified,( Acts 2:23 ),” Him [Jesus], being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:”

If Resurrection is true, all the other teaching it supports is true also. Likewise, if the Resurrection is not true, neither are the other teachings surrounding it.

I know, we all Know, the bible is true 100%, but a skeptical world does not believe that. So we need to know that we can have confidence in our faith beyond Sunday school. Like Mike said on Tuesday if you send your kids to collage without dealing with some of these apologetic issues you may lose them to naturalistic or liberal worldview because they are not getting the answers they should and could at home or church.

So how do we approach the question off how we know the resurrection is true? I wish we could always just say,” because the bible says so”, but this is not always the case if we wish to really show a lost and hurting world why they can trust our way to God as the only way to God.

The Gospels are still looked at with skepticism by some liberal scholars whether they be agnostic, Jewish, or whatever type or unbeliever they maybe. However, Dr. William Lane Craig says, these prejudices are unfounded. They are rejected simply on the basis a naturalistic world view saying that, miracles can’t happen, therefore Christ could not have been Resurrected. This type of reasoning is faulty.

The attack on scripture has gotten worse since the start of textual criticism in the Nineteenth century. Since then scholars like Bart Ehrman have been trying to undermined the scriptures and steal people’s faith by questioning all sorts of Truths. In mounting a defense against this evil Dr. Gary Habermas by the Holy Spirit came up with the minimal fact’s argument.

This type of argument is called a Evidentialism argument; Holman Reference defines Evidentialism, “as its name suggests, focuses on the factual verification of the Christian claims. If the Bible is to be taken seriously, its factual claims must be able to be investigated and found to agree with history, archaeology, anthropology, geography, and the findings of other relevant disciplines. Evidentialist cases are often presented like legal cases and appeal to legal standards of evidence.”

Those using the minimal facts argument will use evidence that the majority of N.T. scholars will accept as historically reliable. Things like Paul authoring 13 books in the N.T., but guys like Bart Ehrman will saying, we can only be sure Paul wrote 7 of those books- Romans, 1st & 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Philemon.

In The Risen Jesus and Future Hope Habermas says,”Those who see Jesus’ resurrection as an objective time-event emphasize the resurrection as having occurred within history as we know it. In this view, life from the dead is miraculous, but the empty tomb and records of Jesus’ physical appearances testify to an event played out fully within time. Gary R. Habermas maintains that “the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is truly exceptional, even using only the minimal historical facts as accepted by skeptical scholars”

So the majority of N.T. scholars on both sides of the aisle, will accept these books as having been authored by the Apostle Paul which means they will use them as they would any other document from ancient history. Paul was a scholar and he knew the eye witnesses which make his writings top notch as far as N.T. scholars are concerned. He would have to give us a reason not to trust him. In fact, Bart Erhman says, Paul’s letters, the 7 that are for sure his are absolutely reliable testimony, and that Paul believed he had an encounter with the Risen Christ. Habermas starts with the allowed data points such as, Christ’s death on the cross is the single best documented fact of ancient history.

And the Gospels are still 100% reliable, but for the sake of helping the lost we won’t use them to prove the Resurrection. Still though Dr. Craig believes the Gospels to be completely reliable and does not think that such a unanimous independent corruption of the text concerning the physical Resurrection to be probable. The same is thought to be true in regard to the extremely early oral traditions which also independently and uniformly corroborated the account of a bodily Resurrection.

The question is not are the Gospels reliable, but rather why won’t the skeptics accept their data?Skeptical critics are notorious for not treating all sources the same. With the Gospels liberal scholars will typically balk at things like:

Bias and authorship are a couple of the lame excuses they will give for rejecting the Gospels. They will claim that because the texts are not signed that we don’t know who wrote them. In reality this is not the case we have overwhelming evidence that each book was written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but they will still use this as a reason to not accept as a source.

Then because the writers of the Gospels of the New Testament knew Christ and were His disciples liberal scholars will say, they have a bias because they knew Christ. This certainly is true but it would not disqualify any other ancient document as being used as a historical document.

According to scholar William Lane Craig in his book On Guard the skeptics are wrong for rejecting the Gospels and unreliable historically. A few reasons he gives-

There was insufficient time for legendary influences to erase the core historical facts. It doesn’t matter if the evidence from the event is two thousand years because the gap between the event and the evidence is such a short period of time. The Gospels are not comparable to folk tales or contemporary ‘urban legends’, like “Paul Bunyan” or, “Pecos Bill”.

The Jewish transmission of sacred traditions was highly developed and reliable. This was not a game of telephone; they took this kind of stuff very serious. At very early ages, the children would begin to memorize large portions of scripture. They were very precise. The Gospel writers have an excellent track record for being historically reliable. Not to mention that they are extremely early compared to other ancient history.

The two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than four hundred years after Alexander’s death, and we know he was a real figure. If equal scales were used to weigh the Gospels and all other ancient history, they would have to use the gospels. In fact, we have more evidence for the historical Jesus. The Jesus who died by crucifixion on a cross and rose again on the third day than any other figure of antiquity. Jesus was really a man who lived and died and was raised for us all.

Just as a side note the Holman QuickSource Guide says,”archaeology has repeatedly and consistently confirmed the New Testament”, which I absolutely love to hear stuff like that.

Now without the Gospels how do we know that the earliest disciples believed and taught the bodily Resurrection of Jesus from the dead? Now this is assuming the Gospels to be untrusty worthy because they have miracles, so guys like Dr. Mike Licona, who wrote a book over 700 pages on the resurrection called The Resurrection: A New Historiographic Approach, and he says, Ok, I won’t use the Gospels and I can still prove that the bodily resurrection is the best explanation for the information using a minimum of facts.

So what type of evidence are we talking about? Apostle Paul had an experience with the Resurrected Christ during his famous “Damascus road experience” (Acts 9 ). Most scholars, both believers and non-believers alike, estimate that Paul would have had his “experience” about plus two or three from the cross which to have a round number we will use the year 30 ad but some scholars think it could also be 32 ad. We will use the accepted date of 30 ad.,

When I say the “accepted date”, I mean that N.T. scholars, men and women in the field of N.T. study would accept the data we will be going over tonight.I have all the references material for anything I say tonight if anyone wants those just let me know. Ok, they have to have a degree in the field, publish in peer review journals and things like that to be considered a scholar in the field. In today's world we have the World Wide Web and anyone can publish whatever they want.

That is why we have to be careful and make sure anyone we listen to is qualified in the area of study. I am certainly no bible scholar but I can get any source that I have used tonight and those will all be from scholarly sources Just because someone with a Phd in psychology posts a blog, it does not mean it is a trusted source. I don’t care what an Art History PhD has to day about scripture. All the data we will be talking about tonight would be accepted by non-believing N.T. scholars like Bart Erhman. Not that scholarship is infallible but we have to have some sort of standard if we ever hope to explain and defend our beliefs.

Dr. Liconia with the Minimal Facts arguments first goes to (Galatians 1:11-24 ). Can someone please read this passage.

Ok, so Paul’s Damascus road experience would have been say ad 32 ad 34. The point is that Paul’s conversion happened very shortly after the cross within three years. Paul was a very hostile combatant to Christianity. He was on his way to persecute Christians when he was saved, so for him to come up with the Gospel by revelation there is no way that could happen without supernatural help. Paul gets saved and goes to Damascus for three years by himself, and at the end of that he goes to Jerusalem to go over what he was preaching to make sure they were all on the same page.

(Galatians 2:7-9 )Then 14 years later Paul went back to Jerusalem again and this time was just double checking that they all had the same thing. He met with Peter, John, and James the Lord’s brother and they gave Paul the right hand of fellowship. So whatever the Gospel Paul was preaching, it is the same Gospel that the rest of the Apostles were also preaching.

To bad Paul did layout word for word what the Gospel was exactly. Oh wait he did just that in (1 Cor 15 ). Oh, a side note James the Lord’s brother did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, when He was still alive. In (John 7:5 ) we read,” For even His brothers did not believe in Him.”

It was only after the resurrection, His brothers started to worship Him as Messiah. I don’t know about you but I would probably do the same thing if my little brother told me he was God. I would think he was crazy, but if He truly appeared to me in His physically resurrected body, I guess I would have no choice but believe.

In 1 Cor 15 :

The Lexham Bible Dictionary reports,” In most places and at most times in antiquity, only a small proportion of the population could read or write proficiently.Many biblical texts display generic and stylistic features that reflect oral-traditional influence. Early Jewish and Christian sources affirm the deliberate transmission of oral traditions in the composition and interpretation of some biblical materials ”