A Quick Summation of Some Evidence for The Exodus and Gospel

if you’re going to claim there was no Moses, then you’re going to have to explain why the Torah is written in the pattern of that like something Egyptian Royalty would write in the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. You’re going to have to explain why the Ark of the Covenant and the Tabernacle is patterned off of similar Arks and Tabernacles of the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. You’re also going to have to explain why 3 expeditions found an entire army, with Chariots off of Newiebu Beach, dated to the 18th Egyptian Dynasty. There’s a lot you’re going to have to account for, to claim Moses and the Exodus never happened.

As far as the Gospels, we do know who wrote them. As you’re going to have to also, explain why Papias wrote down who wrote the Gospel of Matthew and Mark, and why linguistic studies validate his claim. Such as Mark being written through memory on the account of Peter, and Matthew being written in Hebrew—as there’s a lot of puns made in the Book of Matthew that show it was written by an original Hebrew Source. How would Papias know that, unless it were true? And the Book of John was dictated by John to Papias, as we have surviving fragments of Papias saying that is who John the Elder was, and that John the Elder dictated the Gospel of John to Papias. You’re also going to have to explain why Luke accompanied Paul, and saying Paul didn’t actually know these people, is a bit of a stretch. You’re using an imaginative conspiracy theory, that doesn’t hold any evidential water. The fact is Paul was historical, did know early members of the Church—Josephus writes on the LORD’s Brother who died by stoning, and Paul actually met him, and was given the creed “He is God, Who died, and raised.”

Which gets to the next thing. In 31AD Christ is crucified. In 60AD there’s enough Christians in the Roman Empire for Nero to persecute, and blame Rome’s conflagration on. In 90AD there’s copious amount of writings from the Church Fathers, such members as Barnabas, or Clement who actually met Jesus as a child—purportedly—or the Didache which is the teachings of the Apostles, and this is in 90AD. So, in order for that to have happened, there would have to be real witnesses to Christ’s resurrection, and granted, people actually died, holding to the testimony that Jesus raised from the dead, and His disciples died believing they supped with him, ate and broke bread, and touched Him.

Now… that is all evidence. 1. The Gospel accounts are witness, as we have surviving authorities telling us who wrote them.

2. The evidence clearly shows an Egyptian Royal had written the Old Testament, and that there’s physical evidence of the Exodus, and circumstantial based on the Ark design and Tabernacle.

3. The gospel burst onto the scene, and many people believed it, and people actually were willing to be martyred on that belief, and historians actually recorded Christ being crucified, which would be Tacitus. Which shows, that Christ did raise from the dead, people He knew were willing to die on that testimony, and

4. The religious writings of Paul and the Gospels were heavily circulating by 90AD, enough for subsidiary epistles to be written and quote from them copiously, showing they do indeed have early authorship.