The Sure and Certain Hope of Christianity.

 (Luke 1:1-4)

Suppose a believer approached you and said something like this: "Recently, I've became a Christian, but how can I be so sure this is the truth? How did it all start and are those accounts reliable? 

Well, it appeared that someone in Lukes day did exactly that to him An important person named Theophilus. Interestingly his written response is recorded for us, in what we today call the Gospel of Like. In it he carefully crafted with a historians eye an account of the life of Christ and the early Church. This was  in response to a Christian believer who sought to strengthen their faith by reinforcing the certainty of Christianity. Luke's Gospel, specifically its first chapter, often referred to as the prologue or introduction, signposts his effort to do this for him.

Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

(Luke 1: 1-4)

There you have it right at the beginning in verse one, Luke mentions the importance of him creating a narrative account of the events that have come to pass. This account he states will include him referring to and using  all of the fulfilled prophecies as one piece of evidence supporting Christianity. But he also emphasizes the existence of eyewitnesses who can still verify these events, offering another basis for certainty. Then in the third verse, he emphasizes the value of a written account, underscoring the importance of a documented record. Thus, we can identify three key pieces of evidence for Christianity in this passage: fulfilled prophecies, eyewitness accounts, and a written record.

To look deeper into these elements, let's begin with the mention of as he states the "many" people who undertook the task of recording these events.

It is important to note that Luke was not the first to do so; others had already taken on this tsk. While these "many" might include the other apostles, it also utilises other eyewitness accounts and sources.

Scholars suggest Matthew wrote first, around 45-50 AD, followed by Luke around 59 AD, Mark's recording of Peter's teachings in the mid to late 60s, and John's writings, primarily before 70-80 AD. If we assume this timeline, the only gospel available before Luke was Matthew. Still, when Luke mentions "many," it tells us that several people were already documenting these events.

The significance of this point becomes clear when considering historical findings. In 1946, in Egypt, a collection of 50 Gnostic gospels was discovered, dating from around 400 A.D. far later than the New Testament. Some scholars have tried to use these findings to challenge the authenticity of the New Testament gospels, suggesting that these ‘other’ gospels indicate that different views of Jesus were around in the early church. This for some has complicated their understanding of Christianity and created confusion and debate.

 First and foremost, I firmly believe that the Gospels were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and this should provide ample assurance for any devout Christian who holds the Bible as authoritative.

Secondly, the issue of the number of Gospels had already been settled in the early church, well before the year 200 AD, never mind 400 AD, when these gnostic gospels appeared. There were only four recognized Gospels, and this view was asserted by a prominent individual from Iran at the end of the 2nd century.

But if you remain unconvinced, allow me to share an excerpt from one of those alternate gospels, the Gospel of Thomas. This particular passage suggests a notion quite distinct from the traditional Christian understanding, wherein Simon Peter inquires whether the women deserves to live. In response, Jesus appears to assert that making a woman into a man, i.e., a "male" is a means for her to attain the Kingdom of Heaven. This content certainly deviates from the accepted Christian beliefs but was common in Gnostic thought.

This is why it's crucial to recognize that claims of numerous other gospels, as you might hear in media today on channels like The History Channel or National Geographic, need to be contextualized. Indeed, there were other writings, but it's important to note that the four Gospels that we have in the New Testament had already been accepted and recognized within the church before 200 AD. This had been affirmed by early Christian leaders ever since and remains uncontested.

The significance of these four Gospels accounts is evident when we consider the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah. These prophecies were made long before the time of Christ. 

For instance, in Genesis 49:10, it was foretold that the Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah. Secondly, 2 Samuel 7 prophesied that the Messiah would be a descendant of David. Micah 5:2 anticipated that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Psalm 2 pointed towards the Messiah as the Son of God. Isaiah 9:6 hinted at the divinity of the Messiah as the "Mighty God." Isaiah 53 anticipated the death of the Messiah. Psalm 16 prophesied the resurrection of the Messiah. Finally, Daniel 9, dating back to 539 BC, specified a particular time for the Messiah's arrival. And that only a tiny sample of the 100’s of prophetic words there were about Jesus.

All these prophecies came to fruition and find their completion in the person of Jesus, confirming His identity as the Messiah. So, when Luke, in chapter 1, speaks of things being "fulfilled among us," he is referring to these Old Testament prophecies that have found their realization in Jesus. 

In essence, Luke presents Jesus as the Messiah, fulfilling all the prophecies that date back to hundreds of years before His birth.

The second piece of evidence Luke offers is the testimony of eyewitnesses. He mentions that those who were present from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word who handed down these accounts. Luke himself wasn't an eyewitness but meticulously investigated and interviewed those who were present, tracing their testimonies back to the time of John the Baptist, which is considered the ministry that heralded the coming of Jesus and the Kingdom of God.

It's worth noting that Luke mentions that the eyewitnesses of the events were not just observers but also ministers, people who actively preached what they had seen. While this group might include some of the apostles, we can't limit it to just them. Given that many had taken the initiative to write about these events, it likely extended beyond the apostolic circle.

Luke emphasizes that these ministers and preachers passed down their message, which could have been oral and/or written. It's a fascinating aspect, as it implies that these testimonies were not only preserved in written form but also orally transmitted. When we consider the timeframe between the events and Luke's writing (29 years), the question arises: How can we trust the reliability of these eyewitness accounts? Could people remember such details accurately over time?

The reliability of eyewitness accounts over time isn't hard to accept, especially when you think about how some events can be etched into memory. Consider, for instance, the witnesses of significant historical events like the Kennedy assassination in the U.S., or the death of princess Diana  in the UK. The memories of those who were close to the event remains vivid, even after decades. It's reasonable to assume that eyewitnesses, including Zacharias, Elizabeth, and Mary, would have had a strong recollection of their experiences, after all Luke records them just 29 years later.

Moreover, Matthew, one of the apostles, wrote his Gospel just 15 years after the crucifixion of Christ. Some scholars even argue that part of Matthew quotes from other written accounts circulated within just a couple of years after the events, making written and oral records available from early on. Therefore, there are strong reasons to believe that the eyewitnesses interviewed by Luke provided trustworthy accounts.

If you consider that the earliest accounts of Julius Caesar's life that were written 400 years after his death, no historian questions their reliability. In the case of Christianity, with Luke's Gospel was written 29 years after the crucifixion, and other Gospels were composed earlier, offering compelling evidence of our faith's historical authenticity.

Lastly, Luke, in verse 3, clarifies that he meticulously investigated the accounts he had gathered. It's important to mention that while the New King James Version translates this as "it seemed good to me," the Greek text, along with other modern translations, suggests that Luke carefully investigated the accounts. He didn't rely on hearsay or second-hand information. He pursued the truth through thorough investigation.

In summary, the certainty of Christianity is supported by three key factors: fulfilled prophecies, eyewitness accounts, and a reliable written record. These witnesses, who were both ministers, Rabbis, and speakers as well as ordinary eyewitnesses, ensuring that the message was accurately conveyed. Furthermore, Luke's careful investigation added another layer of credibility to these accounts. Ultimately, this lends substantial support to the claims and authenticity of Christianity.

Certainly, there are always sceptics and doubters when it comes to the Word of God, including at the time of the New Testament and the Gospel of Luke itself. It's important to acknowledge that scepticism and questioning are natural parts of the human experience, but we shouldn’t be put off by them or judge people to harshly. A sceptic is still someone who is often open to hear what you have to say to contradict their position.

A notable example of someone who initially doubted the historical accuracy of the New Testament, especially the book of Acts, is Sir William Ramsay. Ramsay, was a distinguished scholar and archaeologist, and a professor of classical art and archaeology at Oxford University in the early 20th century. He later became a professor of humanities at the University of Aberdeen and was even knighted for his contributions to the scholarly world. His initial scepticism led him to investigate the historical accuracy of Luke's writings.

As he delved into his research, Ramsay concluded that Luke's history was meticulously accurate and unsurpassed in its precision. His detailed archaeological work and historical studies convinced him that the Book of Acts, in particular, was not fabricated in the 2nd century, as some were suggested, at the time but rather had to be written in the 1st century due to its thorough and reliable portrayal of the time. He even went so far as to state that Luke should be placed among the greatest historians. Importantly, Ramsay wasn't motivated by a preconceived agenda to prove a point; he was simply examining the historical, geographical, and archaeological evidence.

To sum it up, this passage is about emphasizing the certainty of the things in which we've been instructed. It underscores that we have reliable evidence and trustworthy historical accounts, backed by fulfilled prophecy, eyewitness testimonies, and the historical accuracy of the inspired Word of God. Regardless of one's perspective on inspiration, it's in my estimation not credible to deny the historical accuracy of these accounts.

In simple terms, this passage confirms that we have a certain, reliable, and trustworthy Word, both in historical and spiritual truth. It's a Word that provides assurance in our understanding of history and spiritual realities. 

Through these accounts of fulfilled prophecies and historical accounts, we have certainty that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, died for our sins, rose from the dead, and offers forgiveness and eternal life to all who believe in Him. This certainty is what gives Christians hope and assurance in their faith.

On a final interesting note keep in mind this passage says that he's going to write about things that were fulfilled among us resting on fulfilled prophecy.  But you have got to have and keep an open mind to see what God is in fact doing amongst us today.

Don, t as some do fail to see God at work because of you pre-conceived prejudices.

In AD 180 a Roman engineer said inventions have long since reached their limit, and said, I see no hope for further developments. In 1873 the surgeon to Queen Victoria said the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of wise humas.

In 1949 a computer scientist said it would appear we have reached the limits of what is possible to achieve with computer technology. In 1954 the U.S.  Secretary of State John Foster said the Japanese don't make anything that people in the United States or Europe would ever want.

I heard the computer was supposed to eliminate paper I buy more paper now than I ever bought to feed the computer, that was once going to eliminate paper. 

One more,1999 it was predicted the Internet would catastrophic and the worldwide economic system would end. Aren't you glad that our faith isn't based in human words or predictions but in plain word of God.