Some of us respond to the motivation of the heart, as we are moved with God's compassion for the mission field which begins at our doorstep. Others of us respond to the motivation of the mind, as we are moved by God's authority and eternal accountability for our lives and obedience. We need to know that Jesus is Lord and God, and that we will give account for our lives and faithfulness in eternity.

Jesus' claim was clear: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). He claimed to be God, and the only way to God.

The following discussion may help as you seek to share Christ with those who are skeptical about his existence and divinity. And it may remind you that you live under mandate as Jesus' witness.

We believe that Jesus is Lord because the Bible teaches that it is so. But the Koran teaches that Allah is the only God. Buddhists follow their own sacred writings, as do Hindus and scores of other religions. Do we have any other evidence to support our commitment to Christ as the King of Kings? And how do we refute the claim that the divinity of Jesus was a doctrine which evolved centuries after his life and death, making our missions mandate irrelevant? This Lenten season, the following summary may help us appreciate the historical credibility of the events we remember.

If we had no New Testament, we could reconstruct the Christian doctrine that Christ is Lord on the basis of non-Christian writings, nearly all as old as the New Testament books themselves. Here is a brief survey of the evidence, in chronological order.

Thallus the Samaritan (A.D. 52) wrote a work tracing the history of Greece from the Trojan War to his own day. In it he attempts to explain the darkness of the crucifixion of Jesus as an eclipse of the sun. This is the earliest pagan reference to Jesus' existence and death.

Mara bar Serapion (writing after A.D. 70, as he describes the Fall of Jerusalem) adds: "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that their kingdom was abolished." His letter is on display in the British Museum today. It shows that the first Christians saw Jesus not just as a religious teacher, but as their King.

The Roman historian Suetonius (AD 65-135) later records, "Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief" (Nero 16.2). Note that the Empire would not punish people who followed a religious teacher, only one who made him Lord in place of Caesar.

Tacitus (AD 55-120) was the greatest ancient Roman historian. Around AD 115 he writes, "Christus . . . suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition broke out" (Annals XV.44). His description of Christian belief as "superstition" makes clear the fact that Tacitus considered the followers of Christus to believe something supernatural or miraculous, not simply that he was a great human teacher.

Pliny the Younger was a Roman administrator and author, governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor; two volumes of his letters are extant today. The tenth of his correspondence books (written ca. AD 112) contains the earliest non-biblical description of Christian worship: "They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ as to a god." Note that believers worshiped Christ as God in AD 112, not centuries later after their beliefs "evolved," as some critics claim.

Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian (AD 37/38-97), records: "Ananias called a Sanhedrin together, brought before it James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others...and he caused them to be stoned" (Antiquities 20.9.1). Thus the Christians called Jesus the Christ, the Messiah.

Finally, consider Josephus' most famous statement about Jesus (Antiquities 18.3.3): "Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." While most historians do not believe that this paragraph represents Josephus's own faith commitment, it does document the beliefs of the Christians regarding Jesus. And note that it was written before the end of the first century.

The earliest Christians believed Jesus to be Lord, as their letters and other writings make clear. For instance, the Didache, written before AD 100, repeatedly calls Jesus "the Lord." It ends thus: "The Lord shall come and all his saints with him. Then shall the world 'see the Lord coming on the clouds of Heaven'" (16.7-8). Clement of Rome, writing in AD 95, repeatedly refers to the "Lord Jesus Christ." And he promises a "future resurrection" on the basis of his "raising the Lord Jesus Christ from the dead" (24.1).

Ignatius, writing between AD 110 and 115, refers to "Jesus Christ our God" (introduction to his letter to the Ephesians). To the Smyrnaeans he adds, "I give glory to Jesus Christ, the God who has thus given you wisdom" (1.1). And Justin the Martyr (ca. AD 150), repeatedly refers to Jesus as the Son of God (cf. Apol. 22). He describes the fact that God raised him from the dead and brought him to heaven (Apol. 45).

The Empire persecuted Christians because they claimed no King but the Lord Jesus. The radical faith and courage of the first apostles, and the rapid spread of the Christian movement, have no other explanation except that the living Lord Jesus changed their lives and empowered their witness. Multiplied thousands died because of their commitment to this One. And men don't die for a lie.

In recent years it has become popular to claim that Jesus of Nazareth saw himself only as a religious teacher, and that the Church deified him over the centuries. Not according to the eyewitnesses. When Jesus stood on trial for his life, the high priest challenged him: "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God" (Matthew 26:63). His answer sealed his fate: "Yes, it is as you say" (v. 64). Earlier he told his opponents, "Before Abraham was born, I am!" (John 8:58).

He clearly claimed to be God, as the following statements prove. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away" (Matthew 24:35). "'So that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins....' He said to the paralytic, 'I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.' He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all" (Mark 2:10-12). "Anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me" (Matthew 10:38).

"I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life" (John 8:12). "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him" (John 5:23). "As the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man" (John 5:26-27). "'My Father is always at work to this very day, and I, too, am working.' For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:17-18).

Among the most famous words of C. S. Lewis is this paragraph: "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to" (Mere Christianity [New York: Macmillan, 1943] 55-6).

Jesus' first followers accepted his claim to be true. Peter and the other apostles refused to stop preaching that Jesus is Lord, even when threatened with their lives (cf. Acts 5:29-32). Each but John was martyred for his faith in Christ, and John was exiled to the prison island of Patmos for preaching the Lordship of Jesus. Billions of people across twenty centuries have accepted their truth claims and followed their Lord as God.

Here is the rope from which Christianity swings: "If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead" (1 Corinthians 15:13-15). Before Easter, the disciples assumed their leader was dead and gone. After that day, they were transfused with divine courage and set about winning the world to Jesus. The resurrection was the basis for their commitment to Christ as Lord. It is ours as well.

We know Jesus existed, and was crucified at the hands of Pontius Pilate. We know that the first Christians believed him to be raised from the dead. But believing doesn't make it so. Is there objective evidence for their faith in a risen Savior?

David Hume was an 18th century Scottish philosopher, known today as the "Father of Skepticism." He made it his life's work to debunk assumptions which he considered to be unprovable, among them the veracity of miracles. He argued for six criteria by which we should judge those who claim to have witnessed a miracle: they should be numerous, intelligent, educated, of unquestioned integrity, willing to undergo severe loss if proven wrong, and their claims should be capable of easy validation. Each is appropriate for determining the truthfulness of a witness. How do the eyewitnesses of the risen Christ fare by such standards?

They were numerous: over 500 saw the resurrected Lord (1 Corinthians 15:6). They were intelligent and well-educated, as the literature they produced makes clear (the Acts 4:13 claim that they were "unschooled, ordinary men" meant only that they had not attended rabbinic schools). Paul was in fact trained by Gamaliel, the finest scholar in Judaism (Acts 22:3). They were men and women of unquestioned integrity, clearly willing to undergo severe loss, as proven by their martyrdoms. And their claims were easily validated, as witnessed by the empty tomb (cf. Acts 26:26, "this thing was not done in a corner").

So the witnesses were credible. What of the objective evidence for their claims? It is a fact of history that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and buried, and that on the third day his tomb was found empty. Skeptics have struggled to explain the empty tomb ever since.

Three strategies center on theft. The first was to claim that while the guards slept, the disciples stole the body (Matthew 28:11-15). How would sleeping guards know the identity of such thieves? How could the disciples convince 500 people that the corpse was alive? And why would these disciples then die for what they knew to be a lie?

A second approach claims that the women stole the body. How would they overpower the guards? How would they make a corpse look alive? Why would they suffer and die for such fabrication?

A third explanation is that the authorities stole the body. When the misguided disciples found an empty tomb, they announced a risen Lord. But why would the authorities steal the body they had positioned guards to watch? And when the Christians began preaching the resurrection, wouldn't they quickly produce the corpse?

A fourth approach is the wrong tomb theory--the grief-stricken women and apostles went to the wrong tomb, found it empty, and began announcing Easter. But the women saw where he was buried (Matthew 27:61); Joseph of Arimathea would have corrected the error (Matthew 27:57-61); and the authorities would have gone to the correct tomb and produced the corpse.

A fifth strategy is the "swoon theory"--Jesus did not actually die on the cross. He or his followers bribed the medical examiner to pronounce him dead, then he revived in the tomb and appeared to be resurrected. But how could he survive burial clothes which cut off all air? How could he shove aside the stone and overpower the guards? How could he appear through walls (John 20:19, 26) and ascend to heaven (Acts 1:9)?

There is only one reasonable explanation for the empty tomb, the changed lives of the disciples, and the overnight explosion of the Christian movement upon the world stage: Jesus Christ rose from the dead. He is therefore the person he claimed to be: our Lord and God. He was justified in making the most stupendous claim in human history, one repeated by no other individual in all of recorded history: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matthew 28:18). With this result: "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations" (v. 19).