The Ephesian Goddess, Evolution, and the Resurrection of Jesus the Messiah

The Riot

In the course of his missionary journeys, the apostle Paul and his companions came to the city of Ephesus. Located in what is presently the country of Turkey, Ephesus had been under Greek and Roman rule successively. It was also the home of the temple of the goddess Diana, aka Artemis.

Paul was there, preaching the gospel of salvation through Jesus the Messiah. And there was a certain silversmith named Demetrius who became incensed by the Christian's denial of all gods other than Yahweh, the living God who created the heavens and the earth. Obviously, since Demetrius was a silversmith, he made his living by sculpting images of Diana and her temple.

Demetrius called together a crowd of people who did similar work to his own. He gave a speech against Paul and the gospel, and a riot began to boil. For two hours the crowd was shouting and chanting "Great is Diana of the Ephesians!"

Then the city clerk quieted the crowd and said "Men of Ephesus, what man is there who does not know that the city of the Ephesians is temple guardian of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Zeus? Therefore, since these things can not be denied, you ought to be quiet and do nothing rashly" (Acts 19:35-36).

The "Empirical" Claim

I love how the city clerk considered what was probably a meteorite to be proof of the existence of Zeus and Diana. It reminds me of people who think evolution is confirmed by empirical science.

The city clerk had his interpretation of the fact. An "image" came down from Zeus. And it was probably kept in the temple of Diana, like a fossil in a museum. But his worldview did not come from the fact. Rather he used his pagan worldview, which he already had, to interpret the meaning of the object that fell from the sky.

In the same way, evolutionists have their interpretation of the facts. There are fossils. There are objects that range from simple to complex. There are sedimentary rock layers all over the earth. There are different kinds of creatures with similar biological or anatomical features. The evolutionist interprets these things according to his or her naturalistic worldview.

As a creationist, I see the fossil record as a record of extinction, not evolution. I see the simple-to-complex nature of things not as proof of evolution, but of the plain fact that there have always been simple-to-complex things in the universe. I see the sedimentary layers of the geological column as evidence of deep water (during the Genesis Flood), not deep time. I see biological/anatomical similitude in different kinds of creatures as evidence of a common Creator, not of a common evolutionary ancestor.

Worldviews do not come from evidence. Worldviews are used to interpret the evidence. 

Evidence for Jesus the Messiah

But perhaps the most well attested event in all of antiquities is the miraculous, bodily resurrection of Jesus the Messiah from the dead.

It is a historical fact that Jesus of Nazareth really lived in first century Israel. He was crucified and died. Furthermore, His disciples believed that He was raised from the dead and that He appeared to them as the risen Lord. 

It is a historical fact that Jesus' half-brother, James, became a believer after initially doubting Jesus. And it is a fact that Saul of Tarsus, a Pharisee, ceased persecuting Christians and began preaching that Jesus is the risen Savior, and had appeared to him on the road to Damascus. And he began to go by his gentile name, "Paul" since his ministry was primarily aimed at converting gentiles to the Messiah, Jesus.

These disciples of Jesus were willing to spread His gospel under severe persecution. All of them, except John, died martyr's deaths because they were convinced that Jesus rose from the dead and had appeared bodily to them. 

John, the youngest of the twelve apostles, suffered persecution for preaching about Jesus. In his old age he was exiled to the Island of Patmos. There he wrote the book of Revelation. John was also the author of the fourth Gospel account, and three letters (1st, 2nd, and 3rd John) that are now a part of the New Testament.

In fact, one of the oldest extant fragments from the New Testament is the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, also known as St. John's Papyrus. Being a portion of John chapter 18, the fragment of ancient papyrus was uncovered in Egypt and is considered to date back to approximately 100 A.D. to 150 A.D.

John died around 100 A.D. That's about seventy years after he witnessed the miracles of Christ, including His post-resurrection appearances, with his own eyes (1st John 1:1-4).

There is also much reason to believe confidently that Luke's gospel and the book of Acts were written by Luke before 65 A.D. If the book of Acts had been written later, it would not end where it does.

Acts is a sequel to Luke's gospel. It is a record of the works (deeds, or actions) of the apostles after Jesus rose from the dead.

The narrative of Acts ends with the apostle Paul still alive in Rome. Paul was beheaded by the Romans circa 67 A.D. for preaching about Jesus.

The book of Acts ends with no mention of the Jewish War, or the fall of Jerusalem which happened in 70 A.D. These major events of the first century were significant to early Church history.Yet the narrative ends where it does because Luke wrote it before these events took place.

In addition to all this, the Church leaders of the second century quoted so much from the New Testament books that even if there were no copies of the New Testament texts from earlier, virtually the entire N.T. could be reproduced just from the writings of the early Church leaders.

What it comes down to is this. Those who deny the resurrection of Jesus, do so not because of the historical evidence, but because they hold to a worldview that miracles don't happen. 

As C.S. Lewis wrote in the first chapter of his book, Miracles:

"In all my life I have met only one person who claims to have seen a ghost. And the interesting thing about the story is that the person disbelieved in the immortal soul before she saw the ghost and still disbelieves after seeing it. She says that what she saw must have been an illusion or a trick of the nerves...If anything extraordinary seems to have happened, we can always say that we have been the victims of an illusion. If we hold to a philosophy which excludes the supernatural, that is what we always shall say" (emphasis added).

So again we see that worldviews do not come from the evidence, but are utilized to interpret the evidence.