The Case for Christ Student Response #11

In the first term of the school year 2016-2017 my grade 7/8 class has read The Case for Christ: Student Edition by Lee Strobel. At the end of the study of the book each student was asked to answer one of the questions posed in the chapters of the book. I told that I would be sharing their responses online. So, throughout the rest of the year I will be posting their work. Please note, I have not edited these responses, they are exactly what the student handed me.

The Question: If archaeology shows that the New Testament writers were accurate in reporting historical and geographical details, does this increase your confidence that they would be similarly careful in recording events about Jesus? Why or why not?

The Answer: Unlike the famous Indiana Jones movie Raiders of the Lost Ark the real ark of the covenant has not been found yet. Just because it hasn't been found does that mean it does not exist? In Ethiopia a church called The Chapel of the Tablet at the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion claims to have the original ark inside the church but no one has ever been inside to see it. There are clues within the Bible supporting the fact that the ark could be in Ethiopia.

There has not been any evidence found from archaeology that contradicts the Bible's writings. For example, in Luke 5:2, it describes the pool of Bethesda. It states the the pool has five covered porches. When archaeologists went to dig up the historical site they noticed that in the same place this pool had five covered porches.

When archaeologists go on digs they have a bias depending on their religious faith. If they are an unbeliever or an atheist they would most likely try to find artifacts contradicting the Bible's writings. Contradicting this, however, is the case of Sir William Ramsay of Oxford University in England. He spent 25 years doing digs trying to disprove the teachings in the book of Acts which was written by the historian Luke. During his digs he could not find anything to contradict the writings in Acts. Later, he was influenced by his findings and became a Christian.

Archaeology isn’t necessary to base your faith upon but provides visual examples from the Bible. Examples like how big Goliath was, the size and how many courts the temples had, the size of Noah's ark, are to name a few. When the Bible was translated did the number of days or months or years it took to created the world get modified? Translations were done by scribes

Because we found these things does that mean the accounts in the Bible are true? They do help them feel more trustworthy because there is nothing that disproves the facts and stories only artifacts that help prove. As Psalm 85:11 states, “Truth shall spring out of the earth.”

Jesus walked on the earth. He visited and preached from many historical places that have been discovered through archaeology. Like faith, we do not need to see it, or touch it to believe it. Jesus was not famous, in that there would be no statues or monuments to his name. He was poor therefore no big castle or worldly possessions to discover. Jesus life is recorded through eyewitnesses and passed down through generations.

The Bible itself is grounded in historical facts. So if the places, cities and remains of other people have been found and proven - why would we not believe that the story of Jesus is true?

Works Cited

@AiG. "Does Archaeology Support the Bible?" Answers in Genesis. 24 Jan. 2008. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

"Does Archaeology Support the Bible?" Truth Or Tradition. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Zondervan Pub. House, 1998. Print.

"Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered?" Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered? | The Institute for Creation Research. Web. 22 Nov. 2016.

By Samuel Smith , CP Reporter. "Archaeological Discoveries Prove Jesus Existed, Disprove Atheist 'Mythicist' Scholarship, Book Claims (Interview)." Christian News, The Christian Post. Web. 22 Nov. 2016.