Who was Jesus, Really?
Jesus is clearly one of the most awe-inspiring men who ever lived. More has been written about him than any other person on the planet, past or present. But many people today question whether he was really God’s son. Most vary between believing that he was some sort of really special spiritual person, an avatar as the Hindu’s like to put it, or just a good teacher. The facts surrounding his life are evident. Jesus inspired a world changing movement in the form of early Christianity and he claimed radical things about himself in the gospels. To get to the heart of who Jesus was, we must research two aspects about this man who lived 2,000 years ago. The questions that must be addressed are:
1) Who did Jesus think he was? (Traditionally called the self-understanding of Jesus.)
2) Did Jesus really rise again from the dead?
Both of these questions have tremendous importance. If Jesus didn’t believe that he was uniquely God’s son, then the Christian message about him is wrong. Additionally, if Jesus didn’t rise again from the dead, there is no hope for Christians of life after death. In this article we proceed to answer the first question. A 
future article will address the subject of Jesus rising again from the dead
Who did Jesus think he was?
In this day and age it is very popular to believe that during the silent years of Jesus, the period of his life between the ages of twelve and thirty, in which nothing is written about him, he traveled to Asia. The theory is that Jesus settled in India and learned the secrets of eastern thought before returning to his homeland in Palestine. Unfortunately, this theory has absolutely no basis in fact. The first record that can be found supporting this view comes from a man named Nicholas Notovitch who published a book in 1894 called The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ. During his day, there was a movement to try and synthesize the teachings of Buddhism and Christianity, and his work helped to spur that movement on. Notovitch claims that his book was written while he was traveling in Tibet. Through various circumstances, one of the chief Lamas at a Himi Monastery informed him of a secret manuscript about Jesus’ life and travels in the east. The Lama then had it read aloud through a translator. There are numerous problems with Notovitch’s story, but one of the biggest is the manuscript he claims to have gotten his story from has never been found. There are also numerous inconsistencies within his own book that led credible scholars of his day to renounce his book. Nevertheless, his theory has been recapitulated through the years by other authors who use his work as a reference or to claim similar stories about Jesus. It’s interesting that most people are willing to believe the work of one man from 1894 rather than over 25,000 ancient New Testament manuscripts that point to Jesus being the unique son of God. The sad part is that if you were to ask most people on the street which idea is more ancient, the biblical account of Jesus, or the one proposed by Notovitch, some would pick the one by Notovitch. This idea about Jesus has circulated through the mass media in waves over the last hundred years and the result is that a significant portion of our society believes that there may be some truth in it.
As an aside, just notice how each year the major news magazines, Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report, all do a major cover story on some “new” aspect of Jesus’ life. They all claim that “modern research is re-thinking the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.” The next year they move on to some newer theory of Jesus’ life that contradicts last year’s theory. It is all done to sell magazines. This is not an entirely bad thing. It shows that even in modern society, people love to read about Jesus. However, it’s very important that our information about Jesus be based in credible research and not just a desire to sell magazines or new ideas.
The Jesus Seminar
Since the idea that Jesus traveled to India cannot be considered as a credible option, we must return to the gospel accounts. There has been a movement of liberal scholars in the past twenty years called “The Jesus Seminar” that seeks to re-evaluate the gospels and re-determine what Jesus really said. The Jesus Seminar places the apocryphal gospel of Thomas as a more reliable historical source than the traditional gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Right from the start, the Jesus Seminar desires to downplay the four eyewitness gospel testimonies of Jesus in favor of another document. Time does not permit a detailed account of the gospel of Thomas, but needless to say, it was written much later than the four gospels and by a person who was not an eyewitness. The Jesus Seminar teaches that Jesus never stated that he was God. In fact the results of the Jesus Seminar research reported that Jesus only really said about 20% of what the traditional gospel’s claim that he said. The rest is Christian tradition and myth. There are numerous problems with their research and their conclusions, but on an ironic note, evangelical scholar William Lane Craig took the 20% from the gospels the Jesus Seminar said was authentic and he still proved conclusively that Jesus believed that He was God. If you ever get a chance, please look up William Lane Craig’s stuff online. He is a master debater and thinker for the cause of Christianity.
The Evidence from the Bible
Good research regarding the reliability of the New Testament-(NT), discounts much of what the Jesus Seminar has to say, as well as those who believe that Jesus traveled to India. However, we will now study the evidence from the NT itself to see what Jesus believed about himself and what the earliest Christians believed about Jesus.
If we investigate the NT we find numerous examples of who Jesus thought he was. On three separate occasions the Jewish leaders sought to stone Jesus explicitly because he claimed to be God: John 5:16-18, John 8:54-58, John 10:29-33. Even back then, killing someone was a serious offense. In fact, the Romans only allowed Jewish leaders to administer capital punishment in one case, that of blasphemy. For the Jewish leaders to be so upset with Jesus as to try and kill him proves that he was saying things that led them to believe he was claiming to be God. In various other places, Jesus exhibits the qualities of God, such as omnipotence, an eternal nature and other qualities of God.
Omnipotence – All Powerful
John 6:40 – Jesus could raise the dead.
John 10:17-18 – Jesus had the power to lay down his own life and take it up again.
Colossians 1:15-20 – Jesus created all things in the universe.
An Eternal Nature – Existing Forever
John 1:1-2 – The Word always existed.
Hebrews 13:8 – Jesus Christ the same, yesterday, today forever.
Other scriptures that claim that Jesus is God are:
Titus 2:13-14 – the glorious appearing of our great God and savior Jesus Christ.
Acts 20:28 – the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.
II Peter 1:1 – Through the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ.
John 20:28 – My Lord and My God.
Matthew 14:32-33 – they worshipped him.
Colossians 2:9 – Jesus is the express image of the invisible God.
John 14:7-9 – anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.
The Son of Man
Some claim that Jesus did not believe that he was God because he was constantly referring to himself as “the Son of man.” And in fact, they are right in one sense. Jesus did refer to himself more as the Son of man than anything else. In our culture, if someone were to call themselves the son of man, we would take that as a reference to their humanity. Jesus however, meant something else entirely by his use of the term. Our first clue for this is in Daniel 7:13-14 where a divine being that looked like “a son of man” approaches God’s throne and is given dominion, power and an everlasting kingdom and all the peoples of the earth worship him. In Mark 14:60-65, the account Jesus gives of himself to the Sanhedrin is very similar to the one in Daniel. It’s almost a direct quote from Daniel. This was not lost on the Sanhedrin at all. Based upon Jesus’ words in verse 62, they condemn him to death with the charge of blasphemy.
The Messiah Complex
Another clue is found throughout the gospels, in that Jesus would not publicly be recognized as the Messiah of Israel. John 6:14-15 gives us one of the reasons. The Jews believed that the coming Messiah would be the one to overthrow the Romans and begin Israel’s domination of the earth by a military kingdom. Historically, it is proven that this was their primary interpretation of the ministry of the Messiah at the time Jesus showed up. If Jesus claimed to be the messiah openly, he would have subjected himself to all their wrong ideas about what the messiah would do. In fact, whenever Jesus did tell one of his followers that he was the Messiah, he also tells them not to say anything about it until after he had risen from the dead, Matthew 16:20. What Jesus did instead, is to give himself a divine title without all the excess baggage. Designating himself “The Son of Man” allowed him to still be true to who he was without all the wrong perceptions of the title of Messiah. For he was indeed the figure of Daniel 7, and also the Messiah, but he could not openly recognize himself as the Messiah or it would have been detrimental to his ministry. So, rather than be a claim against Jesus, the title Son of Man turns out to be a claim for Jesus actually being the Son of God.
Many people have claimed that they have finally figured out Jesus and what he stood for during his ministry on earth. Everything from Time and Newsweek during the holidays of Christmas and Easter to more liberal academic works abound on the subject. Yet for all the volume of work that has been produced about Jesus, the clearest and most significant documents are still the four gospels. In these gospels, Jesus clearly shares the message that He is God’s unique son, and that any person who believes in Him may enter into a relationship with God. John 3:16 clearly spells out the purpose of Jesus coming to the earth when it says, “God loved the world so much that He gave his only son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but will have eternal life.”
Acts 12:1-17 – Open Doors
I was blessed to teach at a sister church in the area this last Sunday. The message is below. The entire service is recorded so the message starts about 42 minutes in. Go to the web site for North Coast Calvary Chapel to watch it.
Daniel’s vision of Future Kingdoms
I just preached on Daniel 7:1-14 at my home church. In this passage, Daniel is given a dream by God which pertains to the future kingdoms of the world, culminating in the Antichrist. Because this is a passage which many people have a lot of questions about, I thought I would post the first half of my written notes from this passage for you here:
Introduction to the 2nd half of the book of Daniel: Today in Daniel we have reached a dividing marker in the book from the historical narratives, the stories of the life of Daniel and his three friends, into the visions of Daniel given to him by God himself. The rest of the book of Daniel will comprise these visions and they are markedly different from what has gone before. YET, there are some similarities. We will see consistency in how God gives these visions to Daniel which plays into his former experiences, some of King Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams, etc…
The type of literature that we are now going to be reading is called apocalyptic.[1] Apocalyptic literature is the type of literature of the book of Revelation. It is no secret that there are many themes in the book of Revelation that are similar to Daniel. Daniel has rightly been called the Old Testament Revelation. Apocalyptic literature presents the ending of the present age of conflict replacing it with an age of unparalleled peace. It presents a violent end to our present human history with a coronation of God’s kingdom in conquering reign over the former ages. It is the end of human corruption and the victory of God. It also presents a sad, sad fact. The fact of human rebellion against God. It just won’t stop. We sinful humans are going to rebel against God until the bitter end, all the way to the finish line, but we are not going to win. God is going to win decisively. And, in this, we humans who have submitted to the rule of God through Jesus have nothing to fear. We will be protected. God protects his people. Although human evil is concentrated increasingly in arrogant government, God will eventually win and wipe them out.
Apocalyptic literature is different from straight forward non-fiction writing. History, a non-fiction story about the past, is usually rather straightforward. The visions from Daniel 7-12 are not. They are given in symbolic form. That is to say, they represent real things, real people and real events, but they are given in symbol in order to concentrate on what the things really are rather than what they appear to be from the outside. This is a metaphor rich genre and it teaches us by analogy, it reveals while preserving mystery. We immediately recognize we are reading apocalyptic literature through the following example:
“The sun will not shine and the moon will turn to blood and the stars will fall from the sky and the rest of the county will be partly cloudy.” (Duguid-Reformed Expository Commentary) Do you see the sentence that did not fit? Of course you did. You picked it out immediately. Apocalyptic literature is large-scale world ending, universe shaking, cosmos interrupting events, not just predictions about the local weather. So, take a deep breath, here we go. We are now going to dive into this type of literature in scripture to see what our Lord God will show us through the visions that he gave to Daniel 2,500 years ago.
1) Apocalyptic visions are symbols that get to the heart of the matter instead of the outer, physical appearances of things.
2) Apocalyptic visions in scripture, (Daniel, Revelation) are always about the end of the present physical age and the conquering victory of God in saving his people.
(v. 1) Earlier, during the first year of King Belshazzar’s reign in Babylon, Daniel had a dream and saw visions as he lay in his bed. He wrote down the dream, and this is what he saw.
By Daniel 6, we saw Daniel as a truly aged man, in his mid-eighties. But here, we return to a slightly former state. This would have been about 552 BC. Daniel at this time would have been about 70 years old. The first thing I see about this is that God continues to reveal things to us throughout our lives. We don’t just get all the good stuff when we are young. God continues to use and speak through Daniel all through his life, even giving him deep and complex dreams and visions, as we shall see, up through his eighties. Sometimes the good stuff is reserved for those who grow in wisdom as they grow older.
We learn the context of this dream. Daniel laying in bed is a reference to nighttime and to his sleep. He was sleeping and God gave him something directly through his dreams. This is not your normal or average dream. This is a dream or a vision that means something important. We also learn that Daniel writes down the dream. Here we switch from the 3rd person story telling about Daniel into the 1st person accounts directly from Daniel’s thoughts. This is his own journal, as it were. He wrote this dream down. In doing so, he was writing scripture. This is not a compilation or a combination over the generations of scribal additions and editorial combinations. This is one man’s experience through the Holy Spirit who revealed the future to him and it was written down for our edification. This is holy scripture. He wrote what he saw, and now we read it:
(v. 2) In my vision that night, I, Daniel, saw a great storm churning the surface of a great sea, with strong winds blowing from every direction. 3 Then four huge beasts came up out of the water, each different from the others.
Great storm on the sea. If we do our best to return to the context of the original audience, the ancient middle eastern people who would have read this and to Daniel himself, the image of a great storm on the great sea is a virtual picture of unrest and horror in the very world itself. (Many near eastern myths concentrate on the sea as chaos) and the Old Testament does at times use this same imagery. However, the sea itself is directly pictured as the nations of the world, the goyim as they were called in Hebrew. The nations.
Isaiah 17:12-13 – 12 Listen! The armies of many nations roar like the roaring of the sea. Hear the thunder of the mighty forces as they rush forward like thundering waves. 13 But though they thunder like breakers on a beach, God will silence them, and they will run away.
Additionally, at the very end of time, we also read of monstrous beast arising “out of the sea” which probably pictures the gentile nations: Revelation 13:1 -1 Then I saw a beast rising up out of the sea. It had seven heads and ten horns, with ten crowns on its horns. And written on each head were names that blasphemed God.
**Picture of the four beasts coming up
Next, we see everything is being churned up by the four winds, which is a reference to the entire earth. The phrase is often used, the “four winds of heaven” or the “four corners of the earth.” These are very ancient metaphors with their roots deep in middle eastern imagery. This is symbolic of the entire earth. Something is going on which regards all peoples and all the earth.
The four beasts of Daniel 7
Ok, why BEASTS? Well, it’s easier. It preserves the mystery, but animals have always been the symbol of national power. We Americans have an Eagle as our national symbol. If “this means that” it is easier to do this than to show Daniel a picture of the man himself who would have ruled that nation, especially when the nation or empire went through more than one ruler. If you think about it, apart from being more in tune with how ancient people would have received symbols, it was also a pretty ingenious way to do things. More spiritually to the point, we are now going to encounter a change in symbol from earlier in the book. Back in Daniel chapter two, we read about the coming kingdoms of the earth like they were a great statue of a person, a great metal image. Now, we are going to see these same kingdoms more from a purely spiritual point of view, in which they are portrayed as beasts. Wild beasts that are amalgams or mutants, pieces put together mostly from known animals, but horrific, wild, terrible and nasty. Except for the second kingdom, the bear, they are all a mix mash of different animal pieces unnaturally put together. They aren’t even just regular animals. They are mutants. This is how God thinks of human kingdoms that arrogantly exalt themselves. They are like a nightmarish combination of parts. We will speak more of this later today.
(v. 4) The first beast was like a lion with eagles’ wings. As I watched, its wings were pulled off, and it was left standing with its two hind feet on the ground, like a human being. And it was given a human mind.
Most scholars agree that this kingdom, made of a lion and an eagle represents the kingdom of Babylon. In Jeremiah 49:19-22, Nebuchadnezzar and the forces under him are compared to both a lion and an eagle. It was almost at its end when this vision was given to Daniel. It had only about ten years left. The emphasis upon its wings being torn off may be a reference to its soon defeat, but it is also surely a reference to what happened to Nebuchadnezzar later on in his life when he went insane and then was humbled and was saved. This is the only kingdom that has any sort of positive connotation on it, which only strengthens our belief that Nebuchadnezzar was truly saved. In this dream, to be given a human “Mind” is a very good thing. (Later, the Antichrist will have what seem to be human eyes and a mouth, but this is different. A human mind will connect Nebuchadnezzar to the human Son of Man later on, not to the Antichrist.)
This image also conforms to the dream Nebuchadnezzar had in Daniel 2, where he was represented as the first kingdom, the head of gold. So here, his kingdom is first in that it was contemporary when Daniel had the dream.
3) The first beast, the Lion with eagles wings, is the Babylonian empire.
(v. 5) Then I saw a second beast, and it looked like a bear. It was rearing up on one side, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And I heard a voice saying to it, “Get up! Devour the flesh of many people!”
Extent of the Persian Empire
This is the only kingdom that is not an amalgam of different animal parts and that is strange because most scholars believe it represents the kingdom of the Medes and the Persians, which was an amalgam of two people groups. I am not arguing with the consensus, just pointing out an anomaly. However, this voracious bear is raised up on one side, probably to represent the Persian dominance which came to characterize the empire the more powerful it became. It has three ribs in its mouth and this could represent Babylon, Lydia and Egypt, the three main areas it conquered, but we cannot be sure. Even though our versions of bears are now a little tame because of the image of a bear in our cartoon culture, in the ancient world, a bear was a forest predator not to be messed with. Syrian bears only died out in certain portions of the middle east as lately as about 100 years ago and they grew to up to about 550 pounds which is slightly less than a grizzly. Additionally, the command to devour much flesh could be a reference to the fact that this kingdom was larger even than the Babylonian empire and was the single largest world empire up to this point in time.
-This is the chest and ARMS-(2 parts) of silver in Daniel 2. The silver Arms corresponding to two different empires combined into one piece.
4) The second beast, the bear, is the Medo-Persian empire.
(v. 6) Then the third of these strange beasts appeared, and it looked like a leopard. It had four bird’s
wings on its back, and it had four heads. Great authority was given to this beast.
Many scholars believe this to be none other than the Greek empire headed by Alexander the Great. We will cover this in greater detail when we move to chapter 8, but for now it is sufficient to mention that a leopard was considered the quickest predator in that area of the world. Now, add to this four wings, which in ancient times was an indicator of speed, (see the wings on the feet and helmet of Hermes) and the standout element of this animal is speed and quickness to the kill. This was indicative of Alexander’s great conquests. His empire grew larger than even the Persian empire as he made it from Macedonia in Greece all the way into India itself. However, the four heads probably symbolize that he was killed at only 32 and the empire was divided into four parts and given to four of his generals. Thus, the four heads. The great authority was probably to signify the actual authority that Alexander possessed during his life, being one of the few people in world history to control that much of the land mass AND populace under one name.
-This is the torso of bronze according to the dream of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel chapter 2.
5) The third beast, the leopard with four wings and four heads, is the Greek empire.
(v. 7) Then in my vision that night, I saw a fourth beast—terrifying, dreadful, and very strong. It devoured and crushed its victims with huge iron teeth and trampled their remains beneath its feet. It was different from any of the other beasts, and it had ten horns.
First, a marker of importance is introduced. “Then in my vision that night” which lets us know, as it does later in verse 13, that something more important is coming. So, this beast is important. This beast cannot even be described by either pointing to a human animal or by the combination of known animal body parts. It is simply described by the feelings it causes Daniel to have. Terrifying, Dreadful. Look at the combination of words from this verse all strung together: Beast – terrifying, dreadful, strong, devoured, crushed victims, huge iron teeth, trampled remains, ten horns.
Now, something that often happens in prophecy, is that something very close to the receiver’s (Daniel) time is described and then God talks about something VERY far off. The concept is called prophetic fore-shortening. It’s like all these things coming right around the corner are described and then something VERY far away, but that is STILL RELEVANT to the discussion, the end of the process, is described. I wish I had more time to deal with it now, but it really does happen a fair amount in the Old Testament. So, although I do believe that this “monster” is somehow describing the Roman empire that conquered the Greek empire, I believe God is mix-mashing future kingdoms into a gross monstrosity that is arising as a future kingdom, with “10 horns” many horns, so symbolize many different branches or many different rulers and that eventually, something else will come of all this. It is described as different from the other beasts because it really is different, for out of this kingdom, the anti-Christ is going to arise. Now, this is when prophecy buffs start to come out of the woodwork and think about every possible combination of the ancient Roman empire and how that transitioned into the European union and where America fits in and all that stuff. And to that I say, “WHOA!!” I don’t even think that is what is being communicated by this passage, perhaps other biblical passages make that connection, but I think the basic thrust of this one is that there is coming a future “monster” of a kingdom that is a gross monstrosity and
In ancient Israel, horns symbolized strength
indescribable compared to the kingdoms that have gone before it. Indeed, in the book of Revelation, the beast that arises to challenge the Lord at the end of time has elements of all the kingdoms that have gone before it, the very ones described in Daniel. Remember that in biblical imagery, a horn symbolizes strength, authority and honor. Look with me at that passage:
Revelation 13:1-2 – 1 Then I saw a beast rising up out of the sea. It had seven heads and ten horns, with ten crowns on its horns. And written on each head were names that blasphemed God. 2 This beast looked like a leopard, but it had the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion! And the dragon gave the beast his own power and throne and great authority.
Do you see the elements of the animals we have already talked about incorporated into this beast? Of course you do. So, I think in Daniel, the description of this beast is not even so much to describe the Roman empire as to prophetically foreshorten the last kingdom that will be on display when Jesus Christ comes again to judge the earth. And from the book of Revelation, we know that kingdom will truly be a BEAST of a kingdom, arrogantly rising to fight against God himself. That is why this beast in Daniel has more focus on the antichrist, and much, much less on the Roman aspect of things than most prophecy people give credence to.
One thing that is important to note here also is that although many people think we are on a road of progress because of technology and innovation and globalization, in fact, the opposite is true. Technology is great, but usually, the great things we invent as humans are put to more evil purposes. We warp and mutate everything for power and control. In this vision, the kingdoms of the earth culminate in this awful beast, which is worse than anything that has come before it. This is regress, not progress.
Lastly, I want to point out that the human kingdoms of this earth are represented by beasts, but there is an organization that looks different from this. In the New Testament, Paul calls the church the body of the Lord. We are part of something that looks much different. Jesus told his disciples that he is the vine and we are the branches. We are part of a living organism in Christ. Unfortunately, people on this earth are either associated with one or the other, you cannot have it both ways. Now, in setting up this distinction between the church and human government, I do not mean to say that the church here on the earth looks spotless or in distinction from human kingdoms is run perfectly. Indeed, those of us who have been Christians for some time can attest that a lot of mess happens in the church. But, it is as Martin Luther once said of the church, “The human church is a lot like the way it must have been in Noah’s Ark. It was very smelly in there at times, but it was a lot better to be in there than outside.”
Along with that, I must say that in distinction from the human systems of government, leaders in the church must not be territorial by nature with those that also name the name of Jesus. We serve a different leader than a human master who accumulates power for himself. Therefore, the leaders of the church must constantly be in it for our master Jesus and not for an earthly kingdom or piece of the pie. We are all slaves of Jesus Christ, not masters of our own domain. Any pastor who jealously territorializes against other, truly Christian churches is both petty and blinded to his own role in the kingdom. (This is not said about protecting the sheep from wolves or false movements. This is said in regard to the brotherhood that exists among ALL churches who belong to Christ.)
(v. 8) As I was looking at the horns, suddenly another small horn appeared among them. Three of the first horns were torn out by the roots to make room for it. This little horn had eyes like human eyes and a mouth that was boasting arrogantly.
As Daniel was watching these numerous horns (presumably on the head of the beast) another horn “sprouted” up. It was so ambitious that it took up room that three others had made for themselves. This is a sign of this little horns ambition and quest for power. In saying that the little horn eyes “like” human eyes and a mouth that was boasting the meaning is given that he has greater ambition “seeing” what a beast cannot, or that he understands more than just the other beasts. This could be a reference to the Satanic inspiration of this leader, this little horn. In line with this is the mouth that is boasting arrogantly, which is indicative of Satan himself, whose pride got him kicked out of the heavenly court. We will spend more of next week talking about the Antichrist, so I am not going to spend any more real-time on him now.
6) The fourth beast, the monster with ten horns and a little horn, is the accumulation of human kingdoms that will eventually produce the Antichrist. This is sometimes pictured as the Roman empire, but don’t focus too much on that.
[1] In regard to the discussion about apocalyptic literature, I am indebted to Tremper Longman, the NIV Application Commentary, Zondervan. Iain Duguid, Reformed Expository Commentary, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing. Joyce Baldwin, Daniel, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Intervarsity Press.
Daniel 5 – The Writing on the Wall
In my continuing series on the book of Daniel at Rancho del Rey Church, we are now in Daniel 5. you can listen to the messages here.
the writing on the wall
Daniel 5 presents a pretty crazy judgment by God on a guy who just wanted to do what he wanted to do. It was such a famous passage that it elicited a painting by no less than Rembrandt himself.
One of the more interesting facts about the passage is that the main character in the passage, king Belshazzar, was unknown to secular history until fairly recently. In fact, Daniel chapter 5 was often ridiculed by secular historians because they were convinced that Daniel was such a storyteller that he even invented a character. Even as recently as the late 1800′s, King Belshazzar was unknown in the extant records. However, archaeology turned up some amazing finds in the decades to come. It turns out that after King Nebuchadnezzar died, there was some political instability in the Babylonian empire. A series of kings ruled until we get to King Nabonidus, about 20 years after Nebuchadnezzar. However, King Nabonidus was a pretty fervent worshiper of a certain Babylonian god, Sin, the moon god. He was so fervent in his devotion that it appears to have made the ruling Chaldean class in Babylon upset and uneasy about him. A political solution was arranged when he agreed to allow his oldest son, Belshazzar to rule alongside him as co-regent, while he “retired” to another area of his kingdom. From that point on, Belshazzar ruled from Babylon effectively as king. Daniel not only proved to be right about this story, but one of the details in the chapter gives a historical detail of great accuracy when he has the king Belshazzar say, “whoever interprets the dream I will make the THIRD ruler in the kingdom.” This is significant because he himself was only the 2nd in command, under his father. This not only proves that Daniel knew his history, but that the detail was probably
A timeline of Babylonian kings during Daniel's lifetime.
provided by an eyewitness to the events themselves.
Secular historians often laugh at the details of the Bible for a time, and then more evidence is unearthed and the Bible again proves its historical value and truth filled message.
Daniel – Researching the Past
I just started preaching through Daniel at my church and I thought I would share some of the more interesting historical and cultural information I have learned while researching this series.
First, there is a lot of debate about the year in which Daniel was written, but I will save that debate for future blog as I 
teach through the book.
Surprisingly, there is a TON of archeological information that is relevant to the book of Daniel, because the city of Babylon has some ruins that have been investigated and can be seen today. One of them is the famous Ishtar Gate, one of the gates that lead into the inner, fortified city of Babylon. It was through this gate that Daniel would have probably come many times during his life.
One of the main characters of the book of Daniel is the figure of Nebuchadnezzar. He was an ancient king that exerted tremendous power and was a dominating individual. In the year 605 BC or thereabouts, God used Nebuchadnezzar to attack and conquer the entire Middle-East.
A coin found bearing the image of Nebuchadnezzar
Nebuchadnezzar himself is a well-known historical figure. Technically he is Nebuchadnezzar II and exists as the preeminent king of the Babylonian dynasty, which was brief, albeit very powerful during his day. At its height, it controlled virtually the entire middle eastern region.
He began this particular conquest at the head of his father Nabopolassar’s, army. Nabopolassar was a Chaldean prince who rebelled against the Assyrian army with the help of some allies. He eventually secured his own kingdom centered in Babylon. After he consolidated power, he reigned in Babylon for 20 years. After some time, Nebuchadnezzar, his son, was sent out to crush the Syrian opposition and move down to Egypt where Egypt was trying to fill the void left by the recent fall of the Assyrian empire. Nebuchadnezzar did just that. He conquered Egypt overwhelmingly in battle, but soon after the battle received word
Territory conquered by the Babylonians.
that his father had died and so he returned to Babylon with a small contingent of warriors. It was during series of conquests that he conquered the Judean realm.
Daniel 1:2 mentions how Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and carried off the sacred items used in the Hebrew’s temple worship. This was a common thing to do in the ancient middle-east, but it would have been strange for an
Israelite to read this because what it signified back then was that the gods of whoever won were stronger than the gods of whoever they conquered. So, to an ancient reader, this would seem like Nebuchadnezzar was the stronger person and Babylon was the stronger land. The text tells us that it was God that gave Judah into Nebuchadnezzar’s hand. In Israel, nothing was more sacred than the objects used to worship the Lord in the very temple itself. No one was allowed to touch them except the Levites and the priests themselves. Incense burners, menorahs, cups, plates and other instruments. These things were used in the very worship of Yahweh himself. They never left the temple area. They were the epitome of what was holy. And now, they are going to reside in a pagan temple, a temple where people bowed down and worshiped idols.
So, now the story will shift to the land of Babylon. Babylon itself later became somewhat of a by word among religious people of many faiths in that it signified the “WORLD” and it’s systems. This is directly the result of how the Jews were deported in this story to the land of Babylon. It signified their defeat at the hands of the world and their longing to return home to their own promised land. Babylon itself however at this time was the very height of education, military might, engineering and prestige. By this time the Babylonians had measure the hour into sixty minutes, they had measured the circle into 360 degrees.
The City of Babylon
The city itself is near the Persian Gulf and lies about 30 miles outside of the modern city of Baghdad. It lay right next to
A stylized rendering of how magnificent Babylon must have seemed back then.
the Euphrates river and indeed there were sections of the city on both sides of the river. Nebuchadnezzar greatly fortified the city, erecting larger city walls on both sides of the river so that it could not be attacked. There was an inner fortified city which was about 500 acres in all in which lay their most sacred temple and the king’s palace. Outside of this was the regular city, which was still strongly fortified and was about 3,000 acres total. The outer wall of this city was so large that a four house chariot could ride on the top with room. The city itself was laid out in a square so that the streets intersected each other in ninety degree angles.
The Hanging Gardens of Babylon
This was also the place where Nebuchadnezzar built the famous hanging gardens of Babylon, which were considered one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. He built them for one of his wives who was homesick for her native land. During this period, Babylon was probably the most impressive city in the entire ancient world.
One of the things that surprises people about Daniel is the journey he had to take even to reach Babylon as a captive. Since the actual mileage is not listed in scripture, we are dependent on historical records of the routes that people traveled on back then. In being transported as a refugee from Jerusalem to Babylon, the Babylonian army would have
Daniel's route to Babylon
traveled through the well-known trade routes of the middle east, moving north through Judea before crossing over and moving down along the routes of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. This is only one piece of the story that suggests what great trials Daniel went through in his life of service to God. We are sometimes tempted to believe that the characters in scripture had epic moments of faith, without realizing what trials and struggles they also must have had to go through. Thinking through the life situation and possible trials of the heroes of our faith makes their stands of faith and ministry more incredible as we learn more about the things that actually happened to them. In Daniel’s case, he was forced to make this 500 mile journey after having experienced the siege and destruction of all those things he held dearest. He may have lost family members in the war against Nebuchadnezzar’s army. His faith surely took a hit when it was learned that Nebuchadnezzar had raided the very temple itself. In addition to this, the word used to describe Daniel and his friends in Daniel chapter one is the Hebrew word yeled, which is the word for “young man” usually denoting a male between the ages of 15-20. So Daniel was probably only 16-17 when these events took place. It is an incredible beginning to a remarkable life of faith and dependence of the Lord.
A day in the life of Mary in Ancient Nazareth
Sometimes we forget that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was really just a Jewish girl between the ages of 13-16 years old when she gave birth to Jesus. Yep, that’s right, somewhere between 13-16. It was during this age in the first century BC when girls were usually betrothed to their husbands. The betrothal would last about a year, and then the couple would be officially married. I know our Nativity sets maker her out to look in her mid to late twenties, but realistically, that never would have been the case in the ancient world. Additionally, we sort of implicitly brush up their lives to make them seem a little more glamorous than they really were. Here is what a probable day would have looked like for Mary in her village of Nazareth before she became pregnant with Jesus.
Nazareth itself was a village of somewhere between 400-800 people, no bigger.
As the day begins:
-She gets up in the cold.
-She helps her mom or dad begin the fire.
-She begins her day. (she doesn’t brush her teeth.)
-She begins helping her mother prepare a small meal for the men who will go out to work.
-Once they eat and leave, she begins her daily projects.
-She milks the family goats and takes the milk inside to the small kitchen area where her mother takes it from her and they begin to make it into cheese and give a little milk to her youngest brother.
-She helps her mother with the younger children.
-She begins drying fruit or baking bread, kneading the dough and then walking it to one of the open village ovens nearer the center of the village. While she waits for it to bake, she gets to talk to one of her friends, another girl in the village, as they both watch their young siblings.
-She brings the bread back to her home, wrapped in clothes.
-She starts the daily mending of the men’s clothes. After this she sits down at a family loom and helps her mother weave.
-She prepares food to take to the men in the fields who are harvesting grapes or grain or olives.
-She takes the food to her father and her brothers and they sit and talk while she waits on them for 20 to 30 minutes.
-She lugs back all the leftovers, water and anything else they needed to bring to the house.
-She puts all those things away, ready for the next time they will be needed.
-As the little children take a mid day nap after lunch, she is allowed to sit and rest, or walk out to overlook the valley and perhaps spend another fifteen minutes with her friend again.
-She moves back to begin helping her mother with the preparations for her cousin’s wedding, a village feast or perhaps making something useful for the home.
-She begins the preparations for the nightly meal and the men coming home from the fields.
-She goes to the village well to draw water for the entire family for the entire evening. Her two younger sisters come with her and it takes them a half an hour to complete because other women and children are there. But they don’t mind because this is when she can catch up with what has gone on in her village of about five hundred people during the day. Then they carry the heavy stone pots back to their home.
-The men arrive from the fields. If they are eating as a family, perhaps they will eat together. If family relatives are eating with them, the men sit down to eat first, where she will again wait on them for perhaps thirty minutes, and then she and the other females eat together quickly.
-the younger children are laid to bed.
-She is allowed to stay up around the fire just outside the house as her grandfather tells stories with some of the other men of the village.
-She goes in the house and takes her place in the raised corner of the room, where the entire family sleeps. The goats also move in the house because this is the cold season of the year. They all lay down, and they go to sleep.
-End of day. Tomorrow, repeat.
This is the village, and this is the type of family that Jesus, the son of God was born into. this picture of a day in the life of Mary shows us how a life of significance is not found in being rich or powerful or famous, but simply in doing the things that God has set before us and in being obedient to what he wants for our lives. There was NOTHING significant about Mary in the world’s eyes. She was just a young girl who went about doing what the majority of women have had to do throughout world history. She believed in God and was submissive to his will for her life. For that, the angel Gabriel calls her “Highly Favored!”
God does not see like we see. He is not impressed by the things that impress us. Remember that this Christmas.
Questions about Christianity -If God planned for Jesus to die for us, why did the Ten Commandments and sacrifice come first?
God used the Ten Commandments to show us our sin. It was necessary to help us understand how bad we really are. Otherwise, we wouldn’t understand our need for a savior in any way. The Ten Commandments constantly point us towards the fact that we do not live consistently under God’s law. We always want to do things our own way. Paul tells us in Romans 7:7-8 that it was only because of the law that he understood how sinful he really was. The law is just one of God’s ways to help us realize our need for a Savior. It shows us that we cannot save ourselves because we cannot properly follow God’s directions.
God gave the Israelites the system of sacrifice in order to point to something greater that was coming, the sacrifice of his own dear son. In the ancient world, anything important in the way of a promise or covenant involved the shedding of blood and the killing of an animal. God used this in order to point to the shedding of blood that would be required for the forgiveness of our sins in Christ. Jesus came and died on a cross in order to show us how greatly God loves us. All the sacrifices that came before Jesus were pointing us to the great sacrifice that Jesus would perform for us. In theological terms, this is called a “foreshadowing”, something that points toward something else in the future. The sacrificial system was pointing toward the coming of Jesus and the once and for all sacrifice that God was giving us in Jesus. This is why, in John 1:29, John the Baptist can look at Jesus and say, “Look, the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world!” John realized that Jesus was going to be a sacrifice for the sins of humanity.
Questions about Christianity – Who decided which books would be in the Bible?
This blog is adapted from the appendix in my book, Read the Word. You can purchase the entire book here.
When I was young, my friends and I made our ultimate all-star teams from our baseball card collections. We’d spend hours laboring over which players to include on our teams. When we were finished, we’d compare and contrast each team, endlessly picking over the finer points of each player’s batting averages and home runs. We were only eleven years old, but it was serious business to us. Of course, the selections we made involved some interpretive decisions on our part. There was always room to criticize each other’s decisions because we all came from a biased viewpoint. I don’t think any of us ever completely agreed on anything.
When it comes to the Bible, how did the church, with so many leaders, ever agree on the sixty-six books that would make up what we consider the Old and New Testaments? In this blog, I wanted to give you the background on how the books of the Bible came together in the first place.
Ultimately, the books in the Bible are there because God directly inspired them. He directed and guided their writing to such a degree that the men who wrote them were writing from their own perspectives but writing timeless and divine truth. How that happened is still somewhat of a mystery. We do know that the Holy Spirit led the authors of Scripture as they wrote (1 Pet. 1:21).
However, from a human perspective, how did the Bible get put together, and who decided it should be the books we have today? Can you be sure that the books you have in your Bible today are really the ones that are supposed to be there? To answer that question, we must go back to the beginning of Christianity ― actually, to the one who began it.
Christianity began with Jesus, and Jesus was a Jew. Jesus believed in the Scriptures of the Jewish nation, which we now call the Old Testament. Jesus taught from the Old Testament and considered it the supreme guide for life. He said in Matthew 5:17-18, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”
In his day and age, the Jewish Bible was known as “The Law and the Prophets.” When Jesus said that he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, he didn’t question their origin. He knew they were from God. Whenever Jesus talked about the Old Testament, it was with the utmost reverence. Therefore, because of Jesus’ high view of the Old Testament Scriptures, the apostles continued to use the Old Testament when teaching about Jesus. To them, it was a given that the Old Testament was God’s Word.
In the first years of the church, all the Christians were Jews. They already believed and revered the Old Testament as Scripture. They believed that the Old Testament Scriptures spoke about Jesus, and they spent their time convincing other Jews of this. The book of Acts contains many examples of Paul going into Jewish synagogues and preaching Jesus as the Christ, using the Old Testament Scriptures. Acts 17:1-3 provides one such example.
“Paul and Silas…came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. As was Paul’s custom, he went to the synagogue service, and for three Sabbaths in a row he used the Scriptures to reason with the people. He explained the prophecies and proved that the Messiah must suffer and rise from the dead. He said, “This Jesus I’m telling you about is the Messiah.”
I could cite many other Scriptures as well, but I think you get the point. The early Christian church used the same “Bible” as the Jews. We now call it the Old Testament. The real question is, “how did they come up with the belief that certain books should be placed alongside the Old Testament Scriptures to form a new portion of the Bible?” In studying church history, it seems that the early church had one main test that a book had to meet before they considered it worthy of being Scripture. Was the book written by an apostle or a close friend of the apostles? Along with this one test, they had some rational criteria for whether it should be included or not. These can be stated as:
The Test – “Was it written by an Apostle or close associate of an Apostle?”
An ancient manuscript copy of the New Testament
Additionally, it seems that they worked through a couple of other questions in determining if a book was truly scriptural. First, they thought, “Is it accepted by the whole church?” They also asked, “Is it consistent with the Old Testament and other New Testament Scripture?” and lastly, “Does it have the “feel” of Scripture?”
Let’s briefly examine these four questions and why the early church asked them.
Was It Written by an Apostle or a Close Associate?
It was important to the early church to keep a record of the teachings of the apostles, and it was vital that the church have a direct link to Jesus. If a book was being considered for Scripture, it had to have been written by an apostle or someone in their circle of friendship and influence. The apostles Peter, John, Matthew, and Paul account for twenty-one of the twenty-seven New Testament books. James and Jude, the brothers of Jesus, account for two books. Luke and Mark, friends of the apostles, account for three, and the book of Hebrews, whose authorship is debated, rounds out the list of books. Even in Hebrews, there is evidence that the author, whoever he was, was close to the original followers of Christ, for he wrote, “I want you to know that our brother Timothy has been released from jail. If he comes here soon, I will bring him with me to see you” (Heb. 13:23). This verse shows that the author of Hebrews was a friend of Timothy, who was a close friend of Paul. All the authors of the New Testament pass the test of either being an apostle or being well within the sphere of the apostle’s friendship.
For instance, church history records that the Gospel of Mark was written by John Mark as he followed and wrote down the sermons of the apostle Peter. Peter called Mark “my son” in 1 Peter 5:13, so we know that Peter and Mark had a close relationship. Although an apostle didn’t write Mark, someone close to an apostle did.
Another example is the book of Acts, which was written by Luke. He was not an apostle but was a traveling companion of the apostle Paul. In the later chapters of Acts, the travel log of Paul and his companions switches from a “they” voice to a “we” voice, as in “we traveled to such and such a place.” Luke was with Paul on some of his journeys, which provides evidence that Paul approved of Luke’s writings. In addition to this, Paul mentions Luke as one of his companions in chapter 4 of Colossians. While Christians wrote many commendable documents in the years after the church started, the only ones that made it into Scripture were those written by apostles or close associates of the apostles.
Is It Accepted by the Church? The reason I underlined the word “Church” is because I’m not referring to one church or a group of churches in an area, but to the leaders of the entire church in the Mediterranean world. The leaders of the church did get together and talk. They also wrote letters to one another. It was a foregone conclusion that a book was Scripture only if the entire church recognized the book’s importance. Certain books had an appeal to a group of churches in a certain area, but only the books that everybody knew about made it into Scripture. It’s not just that a certain book was more popular or appeared on a first-century version of the New York Times best-seller list. Rather, it needed to be both well-known and highly valued by the church. Remember, there were only twelve original apostles. When Paul or John wrote a letter to a church, it was so important that church did everything it could to get that letter reproduced and into the hands of the other churches. In Colossians 4:15-16, Paul wrote, “After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.”
From the earliest times, Christians have been voracious copiers of Scripture. This may not seem amazing in our day of Christian bookstores and twenty different Bible translations, but it was extremely important before the invention of the printing press and in a culture in which Christians were persecuted. I once read that the English word “traitor” comes from a word meaning “hander over,” referring to Christians who handed over copies of the Scriptures to the Roman authorities who arrested them for their faith. The early Christians were intensely committed to the Scriptures. Also, the church was not divided into Catholic, Protestant, and various other denominations until hundreds of years after the apostles died. Therefore, the unity of the bishops or pastors of the churches was more important than it might seem today. The early church consisted of people from places as diverse as Rome, Italy, and Alexandria, North Africa. A book was confirmed as Scripture only when it had a majority of support from a wide spectrum of the church. When they all agreed about something, it was significant.
Is It Consistent with the Old Testament and Other New Testament Scripture? The document in question had to line up with the other Scriptures already accepted by the church. If a book or letter contradicted the teaching of Jesus or the record of the Old Testament, it was not considered Scripture. When you read the book of Romans, you see that Paul had a firm grasp of the Old Testament law and its relationship to our hearts. Paul accurately described the role and purpose of the Old Testament law as seen through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Acts 7 records a long sermon from the deacon Stephen, in which he accurately recounts Israel’s history and comes to the same conclusions as Jesus did in Matthew 23:29-36. Stephen’s speech is consistent with both the Old Testament and with Jesus’ words about the current leaders of Israel. Hebrews 11 lists what many consider to be the “hall of faith” of Old Testament heroes. It accurately describes the lives of Abraham, Moses, and many others. All the books called Scripture by the early church had an accurate view of the Old Testament Scriptures and the teaching of Jesus. This point is important because the early church leaders faced constant opposition from the Jewish leaders. They needed to prove that Jesus and the church he started correctly interpreted the Old Testament Scriptures about the Messiah.
Does It Have the “Feel” of Scripture? Early Christians spent hours committing the Scriptures to memory. They could tell the difference between profound writing and something that was not. You do essentially the same thing when you distinguish great fiction from dime-store fiction. Early Christians were better at it because the leaders of the church read Scripture all the time and they regularly read, out loud, entire portions of the Bible to their congregations. A lot of people back then couldn’t read, and they didn’t have their own Bibles at home anyway. If they wanted to remember something about Scripture, they had to memorize it. The early church leaders spent their lives, their time, their energy, and their intellects devouring Scripture. Even most pastors today don’t have the memory for Scripture that those men had. The early church leaders didn’t have five hundred other books on ministry in their personal libraries. Before the printing press made the printed word widely available, everything had to be copied by hand. Parchments were expensive and time-consuming to produce, so the only books church leaders had were usually Scripture or writings from the previous bishop of their church.
Consequently, when they read a fake letter or even good Christian teaching, they could usually tell right away that it wasn’t the same as the Holy Bible, inspired by God. A good example is the letter to the Corinthians from Clement of Rome (not the books of 1 and 2 Corinthians written by Paul). Clement was an early church leader, but his letter to the Corinthian church did not pass the tests, or criteria, of being divinely inspired scripture. Historians believe the author was the same Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3, and his letter was read in some early churches; but it never gained the status of Scripture precisely because it isn’t Scripture. It was not divinely inspired, and it didn’t pass the four tests. Therefore, even though it’s good reading, it isn’t contained in the collection of inspired literature, our Bible. The bishops who read it over and over came to the conclusion that it didn’t have the feel of Scripture, and they were right.
In conclusion, it is better to say that the early church discovered which books should be counted as Scripture rather than that they decided upon Scripture. There was never a group of people who came together and said, “Let’s make these books our sacred writings.” Instead, they came together and agreed that the stamp of God’s hand was obvious on certain books.
It did take more time for a few New Testament books to be agreed upon than others. Serious debate took place on only five of the twenty-seven New Testament books that we now have in our Bible. In the end, the church agreed that those five books were also divinely inspired. There were other books that were written by early Christians that did not make it in as scriptural. Two of those are I Clement and the Shepherd of Hermas. If you wonder whether they should be scripture, my encouragement is that you should read them. You will see very quickly that although they contain some good material, they are nowhere near the books of the New Testament in spiritual value.
I hope this has helped you understand why the books in the Bible today are the ones God intended us to have. You can be certain that what you are reading is, in fact, the inspired Word of God. It was tested by the early church and found true. The writings of the Old and New Testament are what God intended the church to have.
Questions about Christianity – How can Jesus be God? He was neither omnipotent or omnipresent.
The question of the identity of Jesus has long been discussed. Ever since he appeared on a Galilean hillside healing the
sick and speaking unparalleled words of significance, people of every race and culture have wondered about him. Jesus is without par in the world for his ability to reach the heart’s deepest feelings with the simplest statements and for his ethic of non-resistance to his enemies which was matched only by his own ability to live by this ethic even when it led to his own death. It is easy to see why Jesus is the most talked about person ever to live on planet earth.
But there is something more to Jesus. He claimed some incredible things about himself. There were times when he spoke as if he had a certain divine privilege to circumstances and knowledge. His own followers, the disciples, clearly taught that he even believed himself to be God. This is what divides people about Jesus. It has long been acknowledged that Jesus was a remarkable figure, but God? People are divided on this topic. To the point of today’s question, the attributes of God are usually listed as being someone who knows everything and someone who has the power to do anything. Jesus did not exhibit either of these traits. Wouldn’t this immediately disqualify Jesus from being God?
The New Testament authors seemed to think about this question and write about it a good deal. The Christian belief is that Jesus is God, but that he came to earth in order to offer himself as the sacrifice for our sins. In order to be the sacrifice, he had to be a human. But to be human, and experience life as one of us, he would need to somehow “limit” himself. Without going into a long theological controversy about how Jesus took on the limits of humanity, I will quote Philippians 2:5-11 which succinctly lays out what Jesus voluntarily did for humanity by coming to earth:
5 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.
6 Though he was God,
he did not think of equality with God
as something to cling to.
7 Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
he took the humble position of a slave
and was born as a human being.
When he appeared in human form,
8 he humbled himself in obedience to God
and died a criminal’s death on a cross.
9 Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
and gave him the name above all other names,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
This is just one of the passages in the New Testament that addresses the mystery of what happened when Jesus came to earth. He was the Son of God in power, but he came as the Son of God in humility and lowliness, bowing so low as to become one of us. And it is true that in that form, there were certain things that Jesus did not know at that time. While he was on earth, he didn’t know the exact day or hour of when he would return to earth a second time.
And yet, at the same time, he displayed knowledge that could have come from nothing else but a connection with, or attachment to, God the Father. He knew the thoughts of others. He knew exactly how he would be put to death. He knew things about the past of other people that he had never met. He was more than just a prophet with a lot of knowledge, he had access to the very mind of God himself and no mere human can claim that. In addition to this, he performed unparalleled miracles and even rose from the dead.
C.S. Lewis put the question of Jesus in such a way as to make it simple. Jesus was either who he said he was, or he was a liar, or a crazy man. His ethical teaching realistically rules out him being a liar, and he gave us such intelligent, insightful teachings about our lives that it is impossible for him to have been crazy, so that leaves only one option: Jesus was who he said he was. He was the eternal Son of God.
Read the Gospels accounts of Jesus and read for yourself what people around him thought. Jesus was the most remarkable person that has ever lived on planet earth. He deserves a closer look.
Teaching through Luke
I am currently teaching through the Gospel of Luke. 
You can catch the last couple sermons via video here: http://vimeo.com/25978365
About
Matt was born and raised in Carlsbad, Calif. Although he grew up in a devout Christian home, he struggled and rebelled against the Lord as a teenager. However, at eighteen, Matt gave in to God’s love and submitted to Jesus. Soon after, he met and married his wife Kelli. They now have six children and love the role that God has given them as parents.
In 1998, Matt graduated from Vanguard University with a degree in Ministry and Leadership. He is currently pursuing a Master’s Degree in Biblical Studies from Westminster Seminary, California. For the last eighteen years, he has worked for a variety of Christian ministries including Horizon Christian Fellowship, the Christian Research Institute, and Carlsbad Community Church.
In 2005, the Lord called Matt to plant Rancho del Rey Christian Church in Carlsbad, California. Matt’s heart desire is to help people see Jesus in all his glory. He and his wife are passionate about parenting, adoption, The Bible, missions, discipleship and helping people see Jesus in every aspect of life. His life’s calling is to present the Jesus of the Bible to people who don’t yet believe, and to encourage fellow Christ-followers to live in complete, life-altering obedience to God. He recently authored his first book, Read the Word: The Bible was written for you.
