It doesn't surprise me that Christians need to
convince agnostics and atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, and Jews
of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. But what astounds me
is that by far the most vocal opponents of the physical resurrection of
Jesus Christ are liberal "Christian" scholars. For example,
High-profile liberals like retired Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong
of Newark has disputed the idea that Jesus literally rose from the
dead. In his book Jesus for the Non-Religious, Spong argues that "to
literalize Resurrection has become the defining heresy of traditional
Protestant and Catholic Christianity."
John Dominic Crossan, a Roman Catholic and a former
professor at DePaul University, said the Resurrection is best
understood as a metaphor. Saying the Resurrection "is a metaphor
doesn't dismiss it. Crossan said. "I get the message, I get the
challenge from the metaphor." But a metaphor is not a real event and to
call resurrection a metaphor is to lose the reality of God in the
world.
The truth is that where you stand on the
Resurrection tends to mirror how you interpret the Bible, said Stephen
T. Davis, a professor of philosophy at California's Claremont McKenna
College (quoted in Washington Post, By Daniel Burke, Religion News
Service. Saturday, 3/ 31/07)
People Just Don't Come Back to Life
What clouds the issue is one of assumptions and
worldview. Today's opponents of a literal, bodily resurrection assume a
Western scientific worldview where if something cannot be explained or
proven by science, it is unscientific and false. Paul's opponents, the
Epicurean and Stoic philosophers, who heard him preach on Jesus'
resurrection made fun of him (Acts 17:18, 32) because their worldview
included the immortality of the soul, but not physical resurrection of
the dead. But for those who struggle with their own mortality, the news
that Jesus overcame death and was raised to life gives hope. It is
"Good News." In fact, the resurrection of Jesus is the core of the good
news preached by the early church.
Is the
resurrection
historical?
Liberal
Christian writers say no. "We can
no longer understand the resurrection of Jesus in a literal sense, i.e.
in a bloody way for historically speaking we do not know the slightest
thing about the tomb (was it empty? Was it an individual tomb at all?)
And about the fate of Jesus' corpse: did it decay? At any rate I regard
this conclusion as unavoidable [Gerd Luedemann, The Resurrection of
Jesus: History, Experience, Theology (translated by John Bowden;
Fortress Press, 1994), p. 180]"
To them, Jesus' resurrection can't be examined with
the normal tools of historical inquiry because it is:
Unrepeatable.
They say that it is a one-of-a-kind event that can't be studied.
However, do things become "historical" only once they are repeated?
Incomparable.
They say that we have no analogies to
which to compare it. However, do things become historical once we have
a parallel event similar to it?
Lacks credible evidence.
They say that there is no
evidence? But is there? I hope to show later that there is.
The resurrection is history.
Today's historians
examine events that happened two or three millennia ago all the time.
There are accepted ways to determine historical probabilities. However,
the problem with the resurrection is not that it can't be demonstrated
historically, but that it can't be explained in naturalistic terms. The
explanation requires recognition that God has intervened in history -
and that is the roadblock for many to believe it.
Is the
resurrection
myth?
By these scholars own testimony,
a myth develops over a
number of generations. There are no other events in other literature
where myth developed and was believed in the presence of eyewitnesses
and within the short timeframe in which the New Testament was formed.
Further, the Gospels don't resemble either Greek
myth or Jewish legend.
[Bultmann, Kerygma and Myth, 42, cited by Ladd, Resurrection, 136-137.]
In comparison to myth, the Gospels understate, lack embellishment, and
often contain details counterproductive to the invention of legendary
heroes.
For example, these factors from John 20 show the
contrast:
1. With great restraint, no attempt is made to describe the
resurrection itself.
2. Mary neither initially recognized the risen Jesus (the "hero") (John
20:14). Even by the end of the day, the disciples (the secondary
"heroes") were still in hiding "for fear of the Jews" (John 20:19). If
the Gospels are as chauvinistic as feminists charge, it is incredible
the writers would have chosen women to be the first witnesses of the
risen Jesus. The testimony of women didn't even count legally in that
day. Yet, it was their courage the morning after the Resurrection that
put the men's contrasting cowardice to shame.
Sir William Ramsay, regarded as a great
archaeologist in the 20th century, concluded, "Luke is a historian of
the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy this
author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."
The reason is that the story of the gospels is history - not myth.
Alternate Theories of the Resurrection Before we demonstrate the
evidence of the resurrection, let's consider those theories people
present to explain the gospel narratives.
1. Theft
Theory
The theft
theory is the first explanation
given by Jesus' enemies and is still suggested by resurrection
opponents today. When soldiers reported to the chief priests that the
stone had been rolled away, they were given "a large sum of money" to
tell the story that "His disciples came during the night and stole him
away while we were asleep" (Matthew 28:11-15).
The problems with this explanation are three-fold:
(1) The disciples had no motive to steal the body.
(2) Roman soldiers who fall asleep on watch are subject to death.
(3) The disciples wouldn't have died for a faith they knew not to be
true.
2. Swoon Theory
According to the swoon theory,
originally propounded by a
German scholar Paulus in 1828, Jesus didn't really die but was weakened
by his wounds and loss of blood and slipped into a coma and presumed
dead. Later, they say, in the cool of the tomb, he revived and left the
tomb.
The problems in this theory are:
(1) the spear thrust
to his side apparently pierced his pericardium and released blood and
water, signifying death. If Jesus had survived,
(2) the cool of the
tomb would be more likely to kill than revive him. Also, in his
weakened condition
(3) he would have had to unwrap himself from the
burial wrappings - or be helped by friends - and roll the stone away.
3. Wrong
Tomb Theory
First
developed by Kirsopp Lake
(1872-1946), a noted English Biblical scholar and Harvard professor who
wrote Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (1907),
this theory suggests that the women mistook the location of the actual
tomb where Jesus' body was. Instead, a young man, guessing their
errand, points them in the right direction saying, "He is not here, see
the place where they laid him" (misquoting Mark 16:6), but the women
misunderstand, are frightened, and flee.
The problem, of course, is that:
(1) Mary Magdalene
had been to that tomb two days prior on Friday night (Matthew 27:61;
Mark 15:47). In addition,
(2) it bore the seal of Rome and there was a
guard of Roman soldiers camped in front of it. They couldn't have
missed it.
(3) And if this theory were true, all the Jewish authorities
would have needed to do to refute claims of the resurrection would be
to produce Jesus' body. They didn't.
4. Vision
Theory
German New
Testament scholar Rudolf
Bultmann (1884-1976) sought to "demythologize" the gospel and make it
believable to modern man. He wrote in 1941 of "the incredibility of a
mythical event like the resuscitation of a corpse - for that is what
resurrection means." Since a bodily resurrection was out of the
question for Bultmann, he theorized that the disciples experienced
subjective visions that convinced them that Jesus had risen from the
dead. He wrote,
"The historian can perhaps to some extent account for that faith [in
the resurrection] from the personal intimacy which the disciples had
enjoyed with Jesus during his earthly life and so reduce the
resurrection appearances to a series of subjective visions." [Bultmann,
Kerygma and Myth, p. 42, cited by Ladd, Resurrection, 136-137].
The problem, of course, is that it doesn't explain
the exploding growth of the Jerusalem church based on the preaching of
the resurrection.
To refute
this,
(1) all Jesus' enemies would
have to do would be to produce
the body. Sometimes called the Hallucination Theory, this is a
desperate theory without support.
(2) It is inconsistent with the disciples' mental state and
(3) doesn't
explain Jesus' appearance to 500 persons at once. Maybe one person
might see a vision others can't - but 500 at one time?
Five
Important Facts of
Resurrection Morning
What does add
up to a credible story,
however, is the evidence of the New Testament. Let's examine the
cumulative power of the account that makes it by far the most plausible
explanation of what happened on Resurrection morning.
1. The
Empty Tomb
The first
important fact of Resurrection
morning is that tomb is empty. This in and of itself does not create
faith in the resurrection. To Mary Magdalene it was a sign of grave
robbers but any explanation of the resurrection must deal with the fact
that Jesus' tomb was empty. In other words, there must be some
explanation of what happened to his body.
2. The
Undisturbed Grave
Clothes
The second
important fact of Resurrection
morning is that two of the gospel accounts make it clear that Jesus'
grave clothes lay essentially undisturbed on the stone shelf within the
tomb. None of the alternate theories above attempt an explanation. If
the grave clothes were missing or even thrown on the floor it could
have meant that Jesus' body had been stolen or even revived and left.
But for them to be still folded as they had been when they had been
wrapped round and round Jesus' body is very strange. It indicates that
his body just slipped out of them without disturbance. The best
explanation is that Jesus' body was raised from the dead miraculously
by God.
3. The
Disciples'
Psychological State
The third
important fact of Resurrection
morning is the disciples' psychological state, which is mentioned in
all four gospels. They were in hiding, discouraged, and disheartened.
They did not at first believe the women's report of Jesus'
resurrection. It was only after Jesus appeared to them in person that
they believed. This indicates that they were not inclined to concoct a
story of Jesus' resurrection, to mistake Jesus' missing body for
resurrection, or inclined to steal Jesus' body. But let's suppose for a
moment that they were part of a conspiracy to steal Jesus' body and
claim that he had been raised from the dead. Of the original 12
disciples, ten were martyred for their faith. Only John seemed to have
died of natural causes. As Origin put it, men do not risk their lives
and suffer martyrdom for a lie.
4. The
Post-Resurrection
Appearances of Jesus
The fourth
important fact of Resurrection
morning involves Jesus' appearances to several individuals and to ten
of the disciples at the same time - all on the Sunday of the
resurrection.
Mary Magdalene
Mary the mother of James, Salome, Joanna and other women start
for the tomb (Mt.28:1, Lk.23:55-24:1).
To Peter later in the day (Lk.24:34, 1Cor.15:5).
To Clopas and another Emmaus disciple (Lk.24:13-33).
To the 10 Apostles in Jerusalem, on Sunday, with Thomas absent
(Lk.24:36-43, Jn.20:19-24).
To the 11 Apostles in Jerusalem, one week later, with Thomas
present (Jn.20:26-29).
To seven Apostles, by the Lake of Tiberias, in Galilee
(Jn.21:1-23).
To 500 brothers and sisters on a Galilean mountain (1Cor.15:6).
To James (1Cor.15:7).
To the 11 in Galilee (Mt.28:16-20, Mk.16:14-20, Lk.24:33-53,
Act.1:3-12).
At the Ascension (Act.1:3-12).
To Paul, in his way to Damascus (Act.9:3-6, 1Cor.15:15:8).
To Paul in the temple (Act.22:17-21, 23:11).
To John in Patmos (Rev.1:10-19).
The statements of Act.1:3, 10:41, and 13:31
imply the possibility that he had made many appearances beside those
recorded.
The gospel writers and Paul are crystal clear that the risen Christ
appeared to different individuals and groups of people at different
times over a period of about 40 days. This pretty well shoots down the
vision theory - all the alternate resurrection theories in fact. Paul
indicates in 1 Corinthians 15:6 that "most of whom are still living,
though some have fallen asleep," in other words, he is claiming that
eyewitnesses were living then -- approximately 53-55 AD - to whom Jesus
had actually appeared. This was not some kind of secretive, hidden
phenomenon, but was openly known and talked about in the early church.
Detractors claim there were no credible eyewitnesses. That is patently
false; they are merely choosing to disbelieve any of the New Testament
accounts.
5. The
Spread of Christianity
The final
important fact of the
Resurrection account really took place after Resurrection Sunday in the
rapid growth of the Church. Fifty days after the Passover on which
Jesus was crucified was the feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem. On that
day the Holy Spirit fell upon 120 believers who were gathered praying.
"The rest is history," as they say. The Holy Spirit prompted the
apostles to preach that Jesus had been raised from the dead - in the
very city where he had been crucified and buried.
"But God raised him from the dead, freeing him
from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep
its hold on him." (Acts 2:24).
"God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are
all witnesses of the fact." (Acts 2:32).
"You killed the author of life, but God raised
him from the dead. We are witnesses of this." (Acts 3:15).
" Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified
but whom God raised from the dead" (Acts 4:10).
"With great power the apostles continued to
testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon
them all." (Acts 4:33).
"The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the
dead -- whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree." (Acts 5:30).
The church grew to 3,000 on the day of Pentecost
(Acts 2:41), then to 5,000 men (Acts 4:4), one fifth the population of
Jerusalem, then the New Testament records that many among the priests
of the city believed (Acts 6:7). When the Jews began heavy persecution
against the Christian church, they preached the resurrection wherever
they went.
Peter in Caesarea:
"They killed him by hanging him on a tree, but God raised him from the
dead on the third day and caused him to be seen." (Acts 10:39-40)
Paul in Pisidian Antioch:
"They took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb. But God
raised him from the dead." (Acts 13:29-30)
Paul in Thessalonica:
" Explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from
the dead." (Acts 17:3)
Paul in Athens:
"[God] has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the
dead." (Acts 17:31)
Paul before King Agrippa and Governor Festus:
" That the Christ would suffer and, as the first to rise from the
dead." (Acts 26:23)
What galvanized a demoralized band of followers into
fearless
proclaimers of the resurrection within a generation? A risen Lord.
The
Sufficiency of the Evidence
Taken
individually, the various details of
Jesus' resurrection would be powerful. But taking all the evidence
together, the case for the resurrection is compelling. No alternate
theory of the resurrection explains the remarkable facts of:
The empty tomb,
The undisturbed grave clothes,
The disciples' psychological state,
The post-resurrection appearances of Christ,
and
The spread of Christianity.
What seems to some as too good to be true indeed is
true. We all face
death, but Christ's resurrection is the Good News that we Christians
can proclaim to our world. Dying Was His Reason for Living. And Being
Raised was God's verdict the story was true.
"For what I received I passed on to you as of first
importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to
the Scriptures, and that he appeared" (1 Corinthians 15:3-8)