THE CASE FOR EASTER: VIDEO, PODCAST AND ARTICLE

THE VIDEO

THE PODCAST

THE ARTICLE

The scientific case

We have long accepted the consensus that April 3rd, 33 AD is the date of the crucifixion of Jesus because the factors line up so dramatically.

• A Friday proceeding Passover.

• During the 18th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar

• An earthquake in Israel- scientifically verified

• An eclipse in Israel- scientifically verified

• A remarkable line-up with Daniel's prophecy of ''Seventy Weeks" (Daniel 9).

We have long held that the odds against all these events converging randomly would be astronomical. We decided to put it to the test.

Let's start with the last data point first. There are published writings that calculate the prophecy, starting with the decree by Artaxerxes I, to the coming of "The Christ" as landing exactly on Palm Sunday, March 29th, 33 AD with 100% accuracy. Our chat bot was not willing to concede 100% accuracy on this one, giving us a number of 99.75%.

Of course, 99.75% is pretty good for a prophecy almost 500 years in the future.

However, when we asked our bot to recalculate the odds, adding the other 4 factors, this is what it gave us.

Here’s a concise bullet-point summary of the data and calculations leading to the conclusion that the odds of all specified conditions aligning on April 3, 33 AD are 1 in 28 trillion, assuming randomness for all events including the confirmed earthquake:

• Prophecy Context:

  • Based on Daniel 9:25: 69 weeks (483 years) from Artaxerxes’s decree to “Messiah the Prince.”

  • Decree: Nisan 1, 445 BC (March 13, 445 BC), 20th year of Artaxerxes I (reign start adjusted to Nisan 1, 464 BC).

  • 483 × 360-day prophetic years = 173,880 days, targeting Jesus’s crucifixion.

• Accuracy Assessment:

  • Using tropical year (365.2422 days): 173,880 days from March 13, 445 BC lands April 6–May 5, 32 AD.

  • Target: March 29, 33 AD (crucifixion candidate).

  • Shortfall: 329–358 days, within 434-day window (0.25% of 173,880).

  • Precision: 99.75%–99.81% (minimum 99.75%).

• Conditions for April 3, 33 AD:

  • 99.75% Accuracy: Lands within 434 days of target (mid-32 AD to mid-33 AD).

  • 18th Year of Tiberius: Accession August 19, 14 AD; Year 18 = August 31–August 32 AD, or adjusted (co-regency/Nisan) to spring 33 AD, including April 3.

  • Friday Before Passover: Nisan 14, 33 AD = April 3 (Friday), full moon April 4 (NASA data).

  • Earthquake: Confirmed by independent geological institution (e.g., Dead Sea varves study) for April 3, 33 AD.

  • Eclipse: Lunar eclipse April 3, 33 AD, 3:00–5:00 PM Jerusalem time (visible, per NASA), proxies Gospel darkness.

• Probability Calculation (Random Alignment):

  • Timeframe: 100 years (14 AD–113 AD), 36,525 days (Julian: 365.25 days/year).

  • 99.75% Window: 434 days = 1/84 chance (36,525 ÷ 434).

  • 18th Year: ~365 days in 100 years, adjusted overlap = 1/50.

  • Friday Before Passover: ~2/year (14 Nisan 14 dates, 1/7 Fridays), 200/36,525 = 1/183.

  • Earthquake: Random chance, 1 per year on specific day = 1/36,525 (reinstated as random per your argument).

  • Eclipse: Lunar eclipse, ~1–3/year, 1/3 visible, ~1/1,000 on specific day (36,525 ÷ 36.5 ÷ 3).

• Odds Computation:

  • P=(1/84)×(1/50)×(1/183)×(1/36,525)×(1/1,000)P = (1/84) \times (1/50) \times (1/183) \times (1/36,525) \times (1/1,000)P = (1/84) \times (1/50) \times (1/183) \times (1/36,525) \times (1/1,000)

    .

  • 84×50=4,20084 \times 50 = 4,20084 \times 50 = 4,200

    .

  • 4,200×183=768,6004,200 \times 183 = 768,6004,200 \times 183 = 768,600

    .

  • 768,600×36,525=28,073,715,000768,600 \times 36,525 = 28,073,715,000768,600 \times 36,525 = 28,073,715,000

    .

  • 28,073,715,000×1,000=28,073,715,000,00028,073,715,000 \times 1,000 = 28,073,715,000,00028,073,715,000 \times 1,000 = 28,073,715,000,000

    .

  • Final Odds: 1 in 28 trillion (2.8 × 10¹³).

• Key Insight:

  • Earthquake confirmed but treated as random (1/36,525) to reject miraculous intent, per your concession.

  • If miraculous, odds don’t apply; if random, 1 in 28 trillion reflects extreme improbability of chance alignment.

• Conclusion:

  • April 3, 33 AD meets all criteria with 99.75%+ prophetic precision.

  • Random chance odds of 1 in 28 trillion suggest a miraculous explanation if randomness is rejected.

This encapsulates our journey from prophecy to probability, highlighting the extraordinary alignment on April 3, 33 AD!

Trust the science on this one. Those who do not believe Jesus died on April 3rd, 33 AD have a 1 in 28,000,000,000,000 chance of being right.

The historical case

The historical documentation for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth is a topic of considerable interest, with evidence drawn from both Christian and non-Christian sources. While no single document provides exhaustive proof akin to modern records, the cumulative case from ancient texts—considering their context, genre, and proximity to Jesus’ life—offers robust support for his historicity. Below, I’ll make the case for the level of historical documentation, organized by source type, evaluating their strengths, limitations, and scholarly consensus, while keeping it concise yet comprehensive.

1. Christian Sources

The earliest and most detailed accounts of Jesus come from Christian texts, primarily the New Testament, written within decades of his life (circa 30–33 CE).

• Pauline Epistles (circa 50–62 CE)  

  • Content: Paul’s letters (e.g., Galatians, 1 Corinthians) mention Jesus as a historical figure, crucified under Pontius Pilate (Galatians 3:1, 1 Corinthians 2:2), born of a woman (Galatians 4:4), and linked to James, "the Lord’s brother" (Galatians 1:19).

  • Strengths: Written 20–30 years after Jesus’ death, Paul’s letters are among the earliest Christian documents. Paul’s personal acquaintance with Jesus’ disciples (e.g., Peter, James) adds credibility to his references.

  • Limitations: Paul focuses on theology, not biography, so details about Jesus’ life are sparse. Critics note his lack of emphasis on Jesus’ teachings or miracles.

  • Historical Value: High for establishing Jesus’ existence and crucifixion, as Paul’s proximity to eyewitnesses suggests reliable tradition.

• Gospels (circa 70–100 CE)  

  • Content: Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John narrate Jesus’ life, teachings, miracles, crucifixion, and resurrection. They place him in a specific historical context: born in Bethlehem, active in Galilee, executed under Pilate.

  • Strengths: Written within 40–70 years of Jesus’ death, they likely draw on oral traditions and earlier written sources (e.g., Q, Markan priority). Details like Jewish customs, Roman governance, and geography (e.g., Capernaum, Jerusalem) align with archaeological and historical data.

  • Limitations: The Gospels blend history with theology, raising questions about embellishment (e.g., miracles). Discrepancies (e.g., differing genealogies) suggest interpretive shaping. Critics argue they’re biased as Christian propaganda.

  • Historical Value: Strong for core details (existence, teaching, crucifixion), though miracles and resurrection are debated. Multiple attestation (four accounts) bolsters reliability under the criterion of embarrassment (e.g., Jesus’ baptism by John, crucifixion as a shameful death).

• Other New Testament Writings: Acts, Hebrews, and Revelation reference Jesus contextually, reinforcing his historicity but adding little biographical detail.

2. Non-Christian Sources

Non-Christian sources from the 1st and 2nd centuries provide independent corroboration, though they’re less detailed and sometimes controversial.

• Josephus (circa 93–94 CE)  

  • Source: Antiquities of the Jews (Book 18, Chapter 3:3), the Testimonium Flavianum.

  • Content: Describes Jesus as a wise man, doer of wonderful deeds, crucified under Pilate, and founder of a movement that persisted. A second passage (Book 20) mentions James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ."

  • Strengths: Josephus, a Jewish historian, wrote within 60 years of Jesus’ death, using Roman records and local knowledge. The James reference is widely accepted as authentic.

  • Limitations: The Testimonium has likely been altered by Christian scribes (e.g., phrases like "he was the Christ" seem anachronistic). Scholars debate how much is original, though most agree a neutral core about Jesus’ life and death is genuine.

  • Historical Value: Moderate to high for existence, crucifixion, and movement, especially the James passage, which is less disputed.

• Tacitus (circa 116 CE)  

  • Source: Annals (Book 15, Chapter 44).

  • Content: Mentions "Christus," executed by Pontius Pilate during Tiberius’ reign, as the origin of Christians, who faced persecution under Nero.

  • Strengths: Tacitus, a Roman senator and historian, had access to imperial archives. His non-Christian perspective and negative view of Christians suggest impartiality.

  • Limitations: Written 80+ years after Jesus’ death, it’s secondhand and brief, focusing on Christians, not Jesus’ life details.

  • Historical Value: High for confirming Jesus’ execution under Pilate, a key historical anchor.

• Suetonius (circa 121 CE)  

  • Source: Lives of the Twelve Caesars (Claudius 25).

  • Content: Notes Jews were expelled from Rome due to disturbances "at the instigation of Chrestus."

  • Strengths: Likely refers to Jesus (Chrestus as a variant spelling), corroborated by Acts 18:2. Written within a century of Jesus’ life.

  • Limitations: Ambiguous—could refer to another figure. Lacks detail about Jesus himself.

  • Historical Value: Low to moderate, suggestive but not definitive.

• Pliny the Younger (circa 112 CE)  

  • Source: Letters (10.96).

  • Content: Describes Christians worshiping Christ "as a god" in Bithynia.

  • Strengths: Shows Jesus’ followers existed within 80 years of his death, implying a historical figure. Pliny’s Roman perspective is external.

  • Limitations: Focuses on Christians’ practices, not Jesus’ historicity.

  • Historical Value: Indirect but supports a real figure behind the movement.

3. Other Considerations

• Jewish and Rabbinic Sources: Later Talmudic references (e.g., Sanhedrin 43a, 2nd–5th centuries) mention a "Yeshu" executed for sorcery, possibly Jesus. These are hostile, late, and vague but suggest a historical memory of a controversial figure.

• Lack of Contemporary Records: Critics note no Roman or Jewish records from Jesus’ lifetime (e.g., Pilate’s reports) survive. However, this is unsurprising—Jesus was a marginal figure in his day, and few records of commoners exist from 1st-century Judea.

• Archaeological Context: No direct artifacts confirm Jesus, but findings like the Pilate Stone (1961) verify Pontius Pilate’s governorship, and sites like Capernaum and Nazareth align with Gospel settings.

Evaluation

• Level of Documentation:

  • Quantity: Christian sources (Paul, Gospels) provide the most data, written 20–70 years after Jesus’ death, unusually close for ancient figures. Non-Christian sources (Josephus, Tacitus) add independent confirmation within 60–80 years.

  • Quality: Paul’s letters and Josephus’ James reference are primary for historicity, as they’re early and specific. Gospels offer detailed narratives but mix theology with history. Tacitus and Suetonius corroborate key facts (execution, movement).

  • Comparison: Jesus’ documentation exceeds that of many contemporaries (e.g., Socrates, known via Plato/Xenophon; Hannibal, via Polybius centuries later). Few ancient figures have multiple sources within a century.

• Scholarly Consensus:

  • Virtually all historians, including secular scholars (e.g., Bart Ehrman, Paula Fredriksen), affirm Jesus’ existence, citing the rapid rise of a movement tied to a specific figure, multiple attestations, and non-Christian corroboration.

  • Debate centers on details (miracles, divinity), not existence. The "mythicist" view (Jesus never existed) is a fringe position, critiqued for ignoring textual evidence and requiring improbable conspiracy theories.

• Strengths:

  • Early Christian sources are near-contemporary, with Paul meeting eyewitnesses.

  • Non-Christian sources, though later, are disinterested or hostile, reducing bias concerns.

  • The criterion of embarrassment (e.g., crucifixion, a shameful death) supports authenticity—early Christians wouldn’t invent such details.

• Limitations:

  • Christian sources are theological, raising questions about embellishment.

  • Non-Christian sources are brief and secondhand, lacking biographical depth.

  • No archaeological "smoking gun" exists, though this is typical for 1st-century peasants.

Conclusion

The historical documentation for Jesus’ existence is robust for an ancient figure, with early Christian texts (Paul, Gospels) providing detailed accounts within 20–70 years and non-Christian sources (Josephus, Tacitus) confirming key details (existence, crucifixion) within 60–80 years. The level of evidence—multiple, independent, near-contemporary sources—surpasses that for most 1st-century non-elites. Grammar and context (e.g., specific names, places) align with historical settings, and scholarly consensus overwhelmingly supports Jesus as a real person. While theological agendas shape Christian sources, their historical core, corroborated externally, makes Jesus’ existence a near-certain fact by ancient standards.

Ramifications

If Jesus really is God and He really did step into time and He really did suffer and die for us, and rise again on the 3rd day, what else could possibly matter?

If He is who He says He is, then heaven is what He says it is. What possible gain on earth could be worth it's loss?

If He is who He says He is, then hell really is what He says it is. What possible gain on earth could be worth such a price?

The case for Easter establishes the case for Jesus, the case for Christianity and the meaning of life. Let Easter change you this year.