[printable PDF of article]
[review previous article][advance to next article]
     We have established the authenticity of the Bible, i.e. we have the Bible as it was originally written, not being revised or edited.  Now we consider the credibility of the Bible.  From a legal viewpoint this would depend on the credibility of the writers.  Credibility of a witness relies upon three basic criteria:  Did the witness have opportunity to know the facts?   Did the witness have the intelligence to understand the facts? Did the witness present the facts honestly?  Since Christianity rests entirely upon the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, we shall consider whether the records of Jesus by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the New Testament are credible.  In this article we will consider the account of a miracle recorded solely by John.
     Is John, the apostle and writer of the Gospel of John, a credible witness?  He was with Jesus throughout His three year ministry, thus had opportunity to witness and know the facts.  John came from what appears to be a reputable family who had a fishing business (Matthew 4:21-22; Mark 1:19-20).  He was acquainted with the Jewish High Priest and was apparently allowed to witness the first Jewish trial of Jesus because of this relationship (John 18:15-16).  Thus John was known in his local community and in Jerusalem, by the highest official in Judaism.
     As part of Jesus’ inner circle, he witnessed events that other disciples didn’t, e.g. the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11:1-50).  Read the chapter and note the details:  He names the village (vv1, 18), the spot in the village (v 38) and the most interested individual.  We see the conversations of unbelieving Jews and how that affected Jesus (vv 36-38).  John stated the purpose of coming to the place, how long the body had been buried (v 39) and how the body was enshrouded (v 44).  Regarding the tomb, he remarks on its construction and how it was closed (vv 38-41).  He notes the effect of the resurrection on the eyewitnesses and that some went to Caiaphas the high priest (vv 45-49).
     First we conclude that John witnessed this fantastic miracle.  Second if the account was not true, there would have been refutations that would have stopped the spread of the report of Lazarus’ resurrection.  The entire book of John is filled with such detailed and intelligibly written accounts, reflecting John’s ability to understand and present the facts.  In a court detailed testimony, which is not refuted, point to the credibility of the witness.  That the entire book stands without refutation tells us that John was honest in his presentation and thus stands as a credible witness as does the Gospel of John.

[review previous article][advance to next article]