Showing posts with label Jesus Christ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jesus Christ. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 14, 2026

Apologetic Review: "The Case Against Jesus' Historicity"



The video summarizes the arguments of Dr. Richard Carrier, a well-known proponent of "Jesus Mythicism," the idea that Jesus of Nazareth never existed as a historical person. Carrier’s main argument rests on comparing the evidence for Jesus with other historical figures like Spartacus, Socrates, and Caiaphas, claiming na mas marami tayong proof for them kaysa kay Jesus.

While the video presents these points as "provocative," it’s important to note that mythicism is a fringe view. The overwhelming consensus of historians, Christian, Jewish, Atheist, and Agnostic (like Bart Ehrman), is that Jesus definitely existed. Carrier’s standards for evidence are often considered "hyper-skeptical," meaning if we applied his rules to everyone, we’d have to delete many figures from ancient history, not just Jesus.

Below is the point-by-point response to the arguments in the video.

Argument 1: Mas matibay ang ebidensya kay Spartacus dahil sa contemporary references (Sallust, Cicero).

Claim: Sinasabi ni Carrier na we have contemporary accounts for Spartacus (Roman slave rebel) from people who lived at the same time, unlike Jesus na wala raw contemporary eyewitness accounts outside the Bible.

Apologetic Response:

Misleading Comparison: While it’s true na nabanggit si Spartacus nina Cicero, Spartacus led a massive army that threatened Rome itself. Jesus was an itinerant preacher in the rural province of Judea. Hindi fair i-expect na magsusulat ang mga Roman senators tungkol sa isang Jewish teacher during his lifetime unless he threatened the empire politically like Spartacus did.

We DO have contemporary evidence: Si Paul the Apostle is a contemporary of Jesus. Although hindi niya nakita si Jesus during His earthly ministry, Paul wrote his letters within 15-20 years after Jesus’ death. More importantly, Paul explicitly mentions meeting James, the brother of the Lord (Galatians 1:19), and Peter. Kung hindi totoo si Jesus, paano nagkaroon ng kapatid (James) ang isang fictional character? Sa history, meeting the brother of a person is virtually proof that the person existed.

Argument 2: Mas sigurado tayo kay Socrates dahil sa writings ni Plato at Xenophon.

Claim: Carrier argues that we have direct writings from Socrates' students (Plutarch, Xenophon) and a contemporary satire play by Aristophanes, whereas for Jesus, we only have the Gospels written decades later.

Apologetic Response:

The "Socratic Problem": Actually, historians admit na mahirap din malaman kung alin sa sinabi ni Socrates ang totoo, dahil he never wrote anything himself. We only know him through his followers, exactly like Jesus!

Timeline: Ang earliest Gospel (Mark) was written likely around AD 70 (about 40 years after Jesus). Ang pinaka-reliable biographies ni Alexander the Great (Arrian and Plutarch) were written 400 years after he died. Compared to Alexander, our sources for Jesus are incredibly early.

Genre: Carrier dismisses the Gospels as "religious," but Plato’s dialogues are philosophical constructs, often putting words in Socrates' mouth. If we dismiss the Gospels because they have an agenda, we have to dismiss Plato, too. Historians use biased sources all the time; tinatanggal lang nila ang bias to find the historical core.

Argument 3: May physical evidence (coins, statues, inscriptions) para kay Alexander the Great at mga Emperor, pero wala kay Jesus.

Claim: Walang naiwang coins, statues, or archaeological inscription si Jesus, unlike Roman Emperors.

Apologetic Response:

Category Error: This is an unfair demand. Jesus was a peasant carpenter-turned-preacher who had "nowhere to lay his head" (Matthew 8:20). He wasn’t a king or a general who minted coins. Bakit siya magpapagawa ng rebulto o barya?

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence: Just because walang archaeological physical trace (like a house sign saying "Jesus lived here"), it doesn't mean he didn't exist. Most people in antiquity left no physical trace. Even Pontius Pilate was doubted by some skeptics until the "Pilate Stone" was discovered in 1961. Archaeology often catches up later.

Argument 4: Even Caiaphas has an ossuary (bone box), but Jesus has none.

Claim: Nahanap ang burial box (ossuary) ni Caiaphas, proving he existed. Since wala tayong body o ossuary ni Jesus, mas less probable daw ang existence niya.

Apologetic Response:

The Theological Reason: As Christians, we believe the tomb was empty because He rose from the dead. Of course, walang "bone box" si Jesus, that’s the whole point of the Gospel!

Historical Context: Extremely rare ang makahanap ng specific ossuary ng isang tao. The fact that we found Caiaphas' ossuary is an exception, not the rule. To require an ossuary for Jesus to exist is an absurdly high standard.

Textual Evidence is Enough: We have Josephus (a Jewish historian born AD 37) mentioning Caiaphas. The same Josephus also mentions Jesus twice (Antiquities 18.3.3 and 20.9.1). While parts of the first passage might be edited, the reference to "James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ" is widely accepted by scholars as authentic. So, sa writings pa lang ni Josephus, established na si Jesus.

Argument 5: The Gospels are not valid historical sources.

Claim: Carrier discards the Gospels because they are religious texts and not "histories" like those of Sallust.

Apologetic Response:

Double Standard: Ancient historians almost always had an agenda (political, moral, or philosophical). We don't throw away Tacitus just because biased siya against certain emperors. The Gospels, while theological, contain accurate geographical, cultural, and historical details (verified by archaeology) about 1st-century Judea.

The Criteria of Embarrassment: The Gospels contain details that the early church wouldn't invent if they were making up a hero. For example, the women being the first witnesses to the resurrection (women's testimony was considered less valid then), or Jesus being crucified (a shameful death cursed by God in Jewish law). These "embarrassing" facts argue strongly for their historicity.

Conclusion

Ang argument ni Carrier ay nakadepende sa pag-set ng sobrang taas na standard para kay Jesus na hindi naman ina-apply sa ibang ancient figures. If we use standard historical methods:

1. We have multiple independent sources (Mark, Q, Paul, Josephus, Tacitus).
2. We have sources dating within the generation of the eyewitnesses.
3. We have the explosion of the early church in Jerusalem, exactly where Jesus was said to be crucified, something impossible to explain if He was just a myth made up overseas.

Gaya ng sabi ni Bart Ehrman (who is not a Christian): "Jesus existed, and those doubting it are not doing so because of the data." The historical Jesus stands on solid ground.

Monday, December 11, 2023

GOD GAVE US THE GREATEST GIFT OF ALL SO BEWARE OF ELLEN G. WHITE!


Advent is probably my favorite time of the year. Every year I tend to spend quite a bit of time reflecting on Christ’s incarnation and why it deserves to be celebrated. This meditation naturally leads to meditating on why Christ came the first time.

Why the Incarnation?

In Charles Spurgeon’s Good Tidings of Great Joy, he writes:

“Our Lord so visited us as to become our surety, our substitute, our ransom, He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all. This was wonderful tender mercy on his part; it excels all human conception and language. If, for the first time, you had heard of the visit of the incarnate God to this world, you would be struck with wonder which would last throughout all eternity, that God himself should really condescend to such a deed as this. This is the heart of the gospel, the incomparable fact of the incarnation of the Son of God—his dwelling upon the earth, and his presentation of himself as a sacrifice unto God.”

At the heart of Christmas is the celebration of the gospel. That God himself came and tabernacled among us, ransoming fallen sinners, bearing their iniquities as their substitute and surety, to reconcile the world to himself. This is why Jesus incarnated.

In Hebrews 9:24–28, we also read:

“Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”

Not often considered the most popular of Christmas passages, this small pericope gives us quite a bit of information as to why Christ came the first time. It was to bear the sins of many and deal with sin by putting it away at the cross. Because His first incarnation was to put away sin, the author says in verse 28 that Christ isn’t returning the second time to deal with sin.

In conjunction with this insight in Hebrews, we read in 1 John 3:8 that Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. As the Second Adam, Christ did what the first Adam failed to do—which was to obey the prescriptive will of God perfectly. It was Jesus’s perfect active and passive obedience to His Father that paved the way for His perfect, sinless, antitypical Passover lamb offering at Calvary. And it’s through that work that sinners can be reconciled to God (Romans 5:1-9).

It was also at Calvary that the righteousness, love, and justice of God met head-on. Paul tells us in Romans 3:22-26 that…

“The righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness because in his divine forbearance, he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”

Notice Paul says the righteousness of God has been manifested. He is clearly referring to the Incarnate One to whom the Law and the Prophets—the Old Testament Scriptures—pointed and foretold. And sinners, which all of us are, can be seen as righteous through faith in Christ. All of this exchange—our sin being transferred to Jesus Christ so that we can be justified in Him—is a gift from Him to us. (Doesn’t that just feel so Christmas-y?)
He was just punishing sin in the person of Christ and not letting it slide.
At Calvary, the Only Son of God was put forth as a propitiatory offering, and this offering was to show God’s righteousness such that He would be the just one and the justifier. He was just punishing sin in the person of Christ and not letting it slide. But He is also the justifier since He is the one who justifies those who trust in the person and work of Christ at Calvary, a gift from Him to us, received by faith.

Paul goes on to say in the fifth chapter that it’s by faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ that a person has been reconciled to God (Romans 5:1-11). The hostility that existed between God and man due to sin is removed because God has punished the sins of believers in Christ while also justifying believers based on Christ. This is why Paul could emphatically declare that He had peace with God (Romans 5:1), and there no longer remains any condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1).

All of this work of propitiation is at the heart of the incarnation. In fact, it is what Christmas is all about.

Beware of Theological Grinches & Scrooges

But with all of the Christmas cheer, of course, come many theological Grinches and Scrooges out there that want to steal our joy and center our focus elsewhere. One of those joy-stealers is the Adventist Church which, through Mrs. E. G. Scrooge-White herself, wants us to see the incarnation through their extra-biblical, Great Controversy, pre-earth origin story.

One of the central reasons for the incarnation in Adventist theology can be seen in the Ellen White Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 5 on John chapter 1. We read that…

“Christ left His position in the heavenly courts and came to this earth to live the life of human beings. This sacrifice He made in order to show that Satan’s charge against God is false—that it is possible for man to obey the laws of God’s kingdom. Equal with the Father, honored and adored by the angels, in our behalf, Christ humbled Himself, and came to this earth to live a life of lowliness and poverty—to be a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. Yet the stamp of divinity was upon His humanity. He came as a divine Teacher, to uplift human beings, to increase their physical, mental, and spiritual efficiency” (Ellen White Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, pg. 1129.6 [5BC 1129.6]).

In Adventist theology, part of the reason Jesus incarnated was to silence the accusations of Satan and prove that it is possible for man to keep the 10 Commandments perfectly. Through faith in Christ, He can upgrade you to be able to do as He did. This was a consistent message across the gamut of her writings.

For example, in Mind, Character and Personality, Vol. 2, she writes:

“Christ came to demonstrate the fact that humanity, allied by living faith to divinity, can keep all the commandments of God. He came to make plain the immutable character of the law, to declare that disobedience and transgression can never be rewarded with eternal life. He came as a man to humanity, that humanity might touch humanity, while divinity laid hold upon the throne of God.”

Again she claims that Christ incarnated to demonstrate that, with the aid of God, you too can keep the law of God perfectly like Jesus. This scenario, where Jesus came to demonstrate that humans can keep the law as He did, centers on the idea of needing to silence the accusations of one of God’s creatures—the Devil.

Now, if you’ve read your Bible and you’re wondering why you missed all of this, it’s because it isn’t there. It’s ultimately coming from the Great Controversy Theme and not Scripture. Nowhere does the Bible claim that Satan made an accusation against God and the 10 Commandments before the creation of the earth. Neither does Scripture even hint that Jesus incarnated to silence those accusations.

Since this idea can’t be found in Scripture, in order to find out more about this supposed accusation, we have to consult more of Ellen White’s writings.

In one of her capstone works, the Desire of Ages, which she claimed to be “barricaded by a thus saith the Lord,” (3SM 122.2) we get further clarification on what exactly this accusation of Satan entailed. On page 761, she writes:

“In the opening of the great controversy, Satan had declared that the law of God could not be obeyed, that justice was inconsistent with mercy, and that, should the law be broken, it would be impossible for the sinner to be pardoned. Every sin must meet its punishment, urged Satan; and if God should remit the punishment of sin, He would not be a God of truth and justice. When men broke the law of God and defied His will, Satan exulted. It was proved, he declared, that the law could not be obeyed; man could not be forgiven.”

Ahh!

So, at the beginning of the Great Controversy—something Scripture knows nothing of—before the earth was even created, Satan supposedly declared that the law of God could not be obeyed and that violating it would make it impossible for a sinner to be pardoned. This accusation was supposedly why Satan rejoiced when man fell because their failure proved that Satan was right, the law couldn’t be obeyed, and forgiveness was not possible.

And this is supposedly why Jesus incarnated: to silence this accusation in the Great Controversy. This accusation will supposedly come to a head in the future when enough people side with God in this cosmic conflict and demonstrate to the watching world that the 10 Commandments can be kept perfectly.

In Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, she adds:

“Just before us is the closing struggle of the great controversy when, with ’all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness,’ Satan is to work to misrepresent the character of God, that he may ’seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.’ If there was ever a people in need of constantly increasing light from heaven, it is the people that, in this time of peril, God has called to be the depositaries of His holy law and to vindicate His character before the world” (Testimonies To the Church, vol. 5, p. 746 [5T 746]).

Amidst her sprinkling of out-of-context biblical proof texts, we see that the closing struggle of the Great Controversy will come down to having enough Seventh-day Adventists, which is who God has supposedly called to be the depositories of His law, vindicate God’s character before the world by keeping the law perfectly as a fallen sinner.

Connecting the Theological Dots

When we connect the theological dots of the Adventist theological framework, we see that they teach that before the creation of the earth, the Devil began making accusations about the character of God and the 10 Commandments—namely that God is a tyrant, and His law cannot be kept. When man fell in the Garden, the Devil rejoiced because that meant that there was no hope for the fallen man.

But Jesus then offered up a plan to the Father to ransom fallen man, and, in the words of Ellen White, “man could be returned to favor with God through the merits of Christ’s blood and obedience to the 10 Commandments.” The Father then accepted this plan after three attempts on Christ’s part, and Jesus incarnated into fallen human flesh, demonstrating that, with the aid of the Holy Spirit and faith in Christ, fallen man can keep the law of God.

Christ’s doing this, it silenced the accusations of Satan, and anyone who does the same and obeys the law will side with Christ in the Great Controversy. Then they, too, will silence Satan’s accusations against them. This succession of obedience will then ultimately vindicate God’s character.

Is vindicating God really what Christmas and the incarnation are about, though? This scenario is a perfect example of how the Great Controversy filters all aspects of Adventist theology and thought—bringing totally foreign ideas to general statements of scripture, plugging those foreign ideas in, and building an entirely novel worldview off of that which is then branded as “being biblical.”
The sad fact is that, in Adventism, it isn’t God who saves man, but man who saves God from the accusations of one of His creatures.
The sad fact is that, in Adventism, it isn’t God who saves man, but man who saves God from the accusations of one of His creatures. Instead of God’s character being fully vindicated at Calvary like Romans 3 and John 3:16 clearly say, the Adventist god is beholden to accusations from one of His creatures and needs your help to prove that he is who he says he is.

We also see how, in the Adventist mind, keeping the 10 Commandments perfectly is seen as being the gospel. The “good news” is that Christ gives you a shot at doing so if you’ll just really, really trust Him and try your best. Yet in my engagement with possibly thousands of Adventists at this point, I have yet to meet the Adventist that has ever arrived at such a place.

Jesus never violated the law—He FULFILLED it. He doesn’t provide us with multiple do-overs to try again and again until eventually you achieve it.

We are born dead in our sins and trespasses, and no amount of trying our best can remedy that. Instead, we come to Christ as broken, unworthy sinners, accepting the free gift (not a reward) of salvation by faith in Him and His work, recognizing that nothing we do can add to His perfect person and work. In doing so, He makes us a new creature in Him (2 Corinthians 5:17), freeing us from our slavery to sin (Romans 6:18), and continues that work He started within us all the way to completion (Philippians 1:6). He will do this, not based on if you arrive at a sinlessly perfect state, but because of who He is. It’s this work that demonstrates the character of God.

And that’s what Christmas is actually about—God condescending to fallen man, not to vindicate himself against the Devil, but out of love for the world (John 3:16). He was not forced to come and be incarnated to defend Himself or His character. So, despite Ellen “Scrooge” White and Adventist humbug theology trying to steal your joy this season, remember what Christmas is truly about—the Person and finished work of Jesus Christ where God gave us the greatest gift of all—Himself.

Thursday, October 5, 2023

MULA SA PRIESTHOOD NI MELQUIZEDEK BINABA SA AARONIC PRIESTHOOD!

Wednesday, October 4, 2023

"TANGING SI JESUS CHRIST ANG TAGAPAGLIGTAS!"



FEATURED POST

Hebrews 7:12: Why were the Ten Commandments included?

In the arena of polemical theology and apologetics, few passages spark as much fierce debate as the Book of Hebrews, particularly Chapter 7...

MOST POPULAR POSTS