Eyewitnesses

 

In the Gospel of Luke’s prologue (Luke 1:1-4) Luke writes in verse two, “just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed down to us….” The Greek word translated eyewitnesses is autoptai. Richard Bauckham, in his important work Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, writes that autoptai “does not have a forensic meaning” and that it would be misleading to understand the word as a “metaphor from the law courts” (p 117). Bauckham goes on to say that autoptai  are “simply firsthand observers of the events.” With respect to Buackham, a “firsthand observer” is an eyewitness in the forensic sense. 

 

Bauckham makes the point that the eyewitnesses of Jesus were His followers “from the beginning” (c.f., John 15:27, “and you will bear witness also, because you have been with Me from the beginning”; Acts 1:21-22, “men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning with the baptism of John, until the day that He was taken up from us….”). Bauckham provides a translation of autoptai  in Acts 1:2 from Loveday Alexander, “those with personal/firsthand experience: those who know the facts at first hand.” Again, there is no meaningful distinction between an eyewitness in a law court and those “with personal/firsthand experience.” 

 

What if a person knows “the facts at first hand” (Alexander’s rendering of autoptai)? Is Bauckham contending that a person who hears accounts from a percipient witness (i.e., one who personally observes or hears) qualifies as autoptai? I think not, because such a person would be like a juror in a court trial that hears testimony from eyewitnesses. A non-percipient person who hears the accounts is clearly a second-hand source. Law court testimony from such a non-percipient person would be considered unreliable hearsay (“an out-of-court statement used to prove the truth of the matter asserted) and not admissible in a forensic proceeding unless the testimony falls under one of the (many) recognized exceptions to the hearsay rule. What other “personal” or “firsthand” experience is there other than seeing, hearing or touching? 

 

Consider what the Apostle John wrote in 1 John 1:1, 3 that emphasizes the empirical nature of the disciples’ testimony:

 

“What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life… what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.”

 

Dreams, visions and feelings are ruled out in courtroom trials as reliable bases for determining what happened or what was said. Generally, only percipient witnesses can testify in a law court, with an exception being expert witnesses who are allowed to render opinions within their area of expertise due to their special knowledge, experience and education. The purpose of the expert is to assist the trier of fact (usually the jury). 

 

Fortunately, Bauckham comes around regarding Luke’s use of autoptai, acknowledging “there is no doubt, from its total context in Luke-Acts, that it carries the historiographic meaning of people who witnessed firsthand the events of Luke’s gospel story.” Precisely a description of what is required for someone to testify in a law court—testimony that involves empirical (experienced by the senses—sight, sound, touch, smell) evidence.

 

Bauckham, citing The Preface to Luke’s Gospel by I. Alexander, mentions the use of autoptai by Josephus and Polybius “with reference to the observation of events narrated in a history or preface or other methodological passage” (p. 117). Polybius, a Greek historian who lived in the 2^nd century B.C. wrote The Histories that uncovered the period 264-146 B.C. Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian who recorded Jewish history during the 1^st century A.D. in The Jewish Wars and Antiquities. Josephus uses the word autoptai in Antiquities, Book 18, 342, “Anileus, the brother of Asineus, either heard of her beauty from others, or perhaps saw her himself (autoptai) and so became both her lover and her enemy.” In Antiquities, Book 19, 125, Joseph writes, “he came for the pleasure of seeing with his own eyes (autoptai) Gaius lying there dead.” From these accounts of Josephus the 1^st century A.D. meaning of autoptaibecomes clear—literally having seen what is being later described. 

 

Moulton and Milligan, in their seminal work The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, provide further insight as to how the word autoptai was used outside of the New Testament. In P Oxy VIII. 1154⁸ (late 1^st century), “a man, who was perhaps absent on military service, writes to his sister not to be anxious, ‘for I am personally acquainted (autoptai) with these places and am not a stranger here.'” Again, the notion of being an eyewitness in the law court sense is present in this papyrus. 

 

Terms Similar to autoptai

In 2 Peter 1:16 the Apostle Peter writes, “For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.” The word translated eyewitnesses is epoptais, from the word optai from whence comes the word optics (“to see”) which has the meaning of spectator, especially in observing firsthand the mysteries of God. As Thayer’s Lexicon says, “inasmuch as those were called ἐπόπται by the Greeks who had attained to the third [i. e. the highest] grade of the Eleusinian mysteries (Plutarch, Alcib. 22, and elsewhere), the word seems to be used here to designate those privileged to be present at the heavenly spectacle of the transfiguration of Christ.” In other words Thayer sees the term epopotais in 2 Peter 1:16 as being Peter’s reference to being an eyewitness of the transfiguration (cf Matthew 17:1 ff). According to Matthew’s account Peter was present, along with James and John, when Jesus took them to a high mountain and His appearance radically changed (transfigured) before them, and Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke with Jesus. Thus, Peter was a spectator, i.e., an eyewitness, of Jesus in a transfigured state, and the term epopotais proves to be a synonym of autoptai as used in Luke 1:2.

 

In John 20:25 Thomas is quoted as saying, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” Jesus had appeared to the 10 disciples in an upper room after His crucifixion, but Thomas was absent. When the other disciples later told him “We have seen the Lord” Thomas uttered his famous words of doubt as recorded on John 20:25. He wanted to see and feel Jesus, meaning he wanted empirical evidence—not merely the word of his fellow disciples. After being a follower of Jesus for what is commonly understood to be a three-year ministry of Jesus, which included miracle after miracle, and after hearing from Jesus that He would be killed and raised from the dead (cf., Matthew 16:21), how could Thomas not believe the 10 disciples account that the risen Jesus had appeared to them? 

 

The Gospel accounts are silent as to why Thomas was doubting, but clear on the fact that Jesus appeared again when Thomas was present, which prompted him to say to Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Thomas had empirical evidence that Jesus had risen from the dead, but Jesus gave a blessing to those who do not have empirical evidence yet believe (John 20:29). This is similar to a law court where, during a trial, the jury has not seen the evidence. Instead, the jury weighs the testimony of percipient witnesses who were present at the event in question in order to render a conclusion (verdict) as to what happened that is binding on the participants of the trial. And the verdict of a jury, in some cases, has life or death consequences.

 

Conclusion

Luke’s use of autoptai in Luke 1:2 is consistent with the common use of the term eyewitnesses as used in a forensic (i.e., law court) sense. There is no reason to hold otherwise. The events of the Gospel of Luke were derived from those who observed the life and teachings of Jesus, and Luke makes clear that he did all he could, after he “investigated everything carefully” (Luke 1:3), to “write [an account of the life of Jesus] in consecutive order” (Luke 1:3), so that the reader might know “the exact truth” (Luke 1:4). Luke, the investigative journalist, makes the case for Jesus being the Messiah (Christ), the Chosen One of God, who died for the sins of the world, and rose from the dead as evidence that He was the Christ. Believing the Gospel accounts of Jesus is similar to believing consistent, multiple eyewitness testimony in a law court, and thereby rendering a verdict based on the testimony. The verdict found in the Gospel record is simple—Jesus is Lord, the Christ who died, rose from the dead, and is coming again. Blessed are those who have not seen yet believe.

 

 

Does the White Horse of Revelation 6:2 Involve a Prediction of a Coronavirus Pandemic?

 

When St. Jerome translated the Bible from Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament) into Latin, his work is called the Vulgate, which means “common.” It was the standard Bible for the Roman Catholic Church for 1,000 years. When Jerome translated Revelation 6:2, it reads as follows: et vidi et ecce equus albus et qui sedebat super illum habebat arcum et data est ei corona et exivit vincens ut vinceret. The English translation (NASB) is as follows:

I looked, and behold, a white horse, and he who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer.

For those who can’t decipher Latin (which is most of us), there may be some words that you recognize, but there is one word you are sure to recognize because you now see it a dozen times per day or more—corona. The Latin word corona means “crown,” and the virus that is currently wreaking havoc is referred to as the coronavirus (which causes the disease COVID-19). The name derives from the appearance of the virus under high magnification where the outer material of the virus has raised, spike-like portions that make it look like a crown. A virus is a microscopic parasite that can only multiply in cells of living hosts such as humans. One type of coronavirus (there are several types) is responsible for the common cold, and one sneeze can emit 20,000 droplets containing the virus particles. All it takes for the cold virus to spread is touching or breathing the droplets, which can enter through the nose or mouth.
 
Back to Revelation chapter six—the first question is, “Who is the rider of the white horse?” He emerges after the first of seven seals is broken and is the first of the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.” Perhaps it helps to determine the identity of the rider if we look at the next three seals that also have riders, and they represent war (red horse), famine (black horse) and death (pale horse). In light of the last three horsemen, it seems the first is likely not Christ, but another conquering force. The rider of the white horse has a bow but no arrows, which could symbolize conquering without conventional weapons (speculation, not certainty). The rider “went out conquering and to conquer.” He has a bow and a corona. With no arrows and no conventional weapons, is it plausible that the rider does not subdue the world through conventional warfare but through something more akin to biological warfare, i.e., the release of a virus that becomes a pandemic? Could the rider’s corona be a clue? 
 
The context of Revelation chapter six is the beginning of events that take place during a seven-year period of tribulation (the events continue through chapter 18, so the heart of the Book of Revelation is the tribulation period). The two-fold purpose of the tribulation is to bring Israel to faith in the Messiah (“Christ”) and to punish unbelief. There are three series of events—the seals (including the Four Horsemen of chapter six), trumpets and bowls. The Book of Revelation, sometimes referred to by the Greek title Apocalypse, describes events that will affect the entire world. Revelation includes symbolic language that depicts two beasts and a dragon that are commonly thought to represent a false religious system, a false prophet and Satan. Multitudes that rebel against God are finally defeated by the return of Jesus (Revelation chapter 19), followed by God sitting on a white throne in judgment (Revelation 20:11ff).
 
The culmination of the Book of Revelation is Jesus’ return to earth, which he foretold in the Gospel of John chapter 14 and verse 3 (“I will come again”). The historic view of the church is that Jesus returns to earth after the tribulation period. An interesting fact is that the church is not mentioned in Revelation chapters 6-18. For this reason, and many others, in the past nearly 200 years the view arose that Jesus will return for the church before the seven-year tribulation period (a pre-tribulation "rapture”). Suffice to say that space does not permit a full discussion of the evidence for the pre-tribulation and post-tribulation return of Christ views. But if, perchance, the current pandemic is related to what John foresaw in Revelation chapter 6, then either the tribulation is about to emerge or, from a post-tribulation perspective, the tribulation has already begun. 
 
The Antichrist
In John’s first two epistles in the New Testament there are four references to “the antichrist” (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7). Jesus spoke of “false Christs” and the Apostle Paul writes concerning a future “man of sin” (2 Thessalonians 2:3). Based upon these references many think they are referring to a man who opposes God in the last days, especially the tribulation period. There are many ways to interpret Jesus’ teachings about his Second Coming and the Book of Revelation, including understanding the events as being still future (“futurist”), seeing the events as having already occurred (“preterist”) or thinking that some of the events have occurred (“partial preterist”). The vast majority of evangelical Christians hold to a futurist view of the prophetic teachings of Jesus, Paul and the Book of Revelation. 
 
The Times and Seasons
Jesus promised that He would come again to earth (John 14:3), but made it clear that no one, including Himself, knows the day or hour when He will return (Matthew 24:36). After Jesus told hiis disciples that the Temple in Jerusalem would be destroyed, His disciples asked Him three questions: When will the Temple be destroyed, what will be the sign of His retun to earth, and what will be the sign of the end of the age (Matthew 24:3)? Jesus answers by giving some general signs (wars, falling away from faith in God, earthquakes, famine, false prophets) but adds a specific reference to the Old Testament Book of Daniel (Matthew 25:15 cf Daniel 9:27) that involves an abomination in relation to the Temple. The Apostle Paul mentions that Jesus will not come back until first the “man of lawlessness” is revealed who takes a seat in the Temple and claims to be God. 

The Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 by a Roman army lead by Titus the son of the Emperor Vespasian, so those who hold to a futurist view of Bible prophecy regarding Jesus’ second coming expect there will, some day, be a Third Temple. (The first was Solomon’s Temple, destroyed in 586 B.C by the Babylonians, the second temple was begun under Ezra and Nehemiah, and expanded by King Herod around the time of Jesus’ birth, then destroyed by the Romans. Today only the foundation remains, called the “Western Wall” or “Wailing Wall.")

In order for a Third Temple to be build, the Jews would have to return to Israel, become a nation, and control the Temple Mount where the Temple originally stood. There was no nation Israel after 586 B.C., and during the time of Jesus the Jews lived in a colony controlled by Rome. Very few Jews were in the land formerly called Israel until the late 19^th century when the “Zionist” movement began and more Jews began to settle in the Palestinian territory. Following World War II and the atrocities committed against the Jews (the “Holocaust”) the world became sympathetic to Jewish suffering and a Jewish homeland, leading up to the rebirth of the nation Israel on May 14, 1948. The Jews did not control the Temple Mount area in Jerusalem, but following the Six-Day War in 1967 the Jews regained control of the Temple Mount, but ceded control back to Jordan to administer the site as a way to placate Arab Muslims (a sore spot for Jews who want to rebuilds the Temple).

 
Thus, in 2020 the Jews again have their own nation Israel, and voices continue to grow louder advocating for the rebuilding of the Temple. The rebuilding could happen at any time, but it could also be years or decades away. But a futurist view of Jesus’ return required the Jews back in the land, which happened in 1948. Therefore, to many who study Bible prophecy, even without a Temple, the stage is set for the rebuilding of the Temple, the events of the Book of Revelation, and the return of Jesus to earth.
 
The Stage Appears to be Set for Christ’s Return
Even though Jesus said that no one knows when He is coming back, Paul wrote that the Thessalonian Christians were aware of the “times and seasons” (I Thessalonians 5:1). This admonition, along with Paul and Jesus providing clues to when Jesus might be coming back, has lead to endless speculation about when Christ will return, including those who were convinced that they knew the date based on some scheme of interpretation they had devised. It is best to be aware of Scriptures that deal with Jesus’ promised return to earth first, and then see whether the prophetic clues have an application to our present age. If one concludes that the stage is set for Jesus to return (meaning nothing has to happen before He comes back for His church), there needs to be a recognition that we best tread softly and show humility rather than proclaim with certitude that we know what Jesus said we don’t know. Thus, when interpreting Revelation and other prophetic passages in light of the current situation, make a case from Scripture but acknowledge that we are putting together a puzzle without all the pieces. 
 
Regardless of whether Jesus is coming back this week, this year, or a thousand years from now, the calling of the church does not change, which is to “disciple all nations” (Matthew 28:19). The return of Jesus is a “Blessed Hope” (Titus 3:15), and in God’s time it will happen. Meanwhile, we need to search the Scriptures, not to decipher the date of Jesus’ return, but to be equipped to defend and proclaim the Good News that Jesus died for the sins of the world and rose from the dead as proof He is the Messiah. 
 
Conclusion
There are compelling reasons to believe that Jesus is coming again. Given the rebirth of Israel in 1948, there are reasons to conclude that His return could be soon. Whether the corona is a sign that we are near the end or not, the task of the church remains, and the fear that a pandemic brings creates an opportunity to tell people about the “Blessed Hope.” To quote the lyrics of the song “Outlaw” by the late singer/songwriter Larry Norman:
 
            Some say He was the Son of God, a man above all men.
            That He came to be a servant, and set us free from sin.
            And that’s who I believe He was, cause that’s who I believe
            And I think we should get ready, cause its time for us to leave.
 
Why do I believe that Jesus is coming back? Because He said so, and that’s who I believe. Even so “Come Lord Jesus” (Revelation 22:20).