- For centuries many of the world's distinguished
philosophers have assaulted Christianity as being irrational, superstitious
and absurd. Many have chosen simply to ignore the central issue of the
resurrection. Others have tried to explain it away through various theories.
But the historical evidence just can't be discounted.
-
- A student at the University of Uruguay
said to me. "Professor McDowell, why can't you refute Christianity?"
-
- "For a very simple reason,"
I answered. "I am not able to explain away an event in history--the
resurrection of Jesus Christ."
-
- How can we explain the empty tomb? Can
it possibly be accounted for by any natural cause?
-
-
- A QUESTION OF HISTORY
- After more than 700 hours of studying
this subject, I have come to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus
Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever
foisted on the minds of human beings--or it is the most remarkable fact
of history.
-
- Here are some of the facts relevant to
the resurrection: Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet who claimed to be
the Christ prophesied in the Jewish Scriptures, was arrested, was judged
a political criminal, and was crucified. Three days after His death and
burial, some women who went to His tomb found the body gone. In subsequent
weeks, His disciples claimed that God had raised Him from the dead and
that He appeared to them various times before ascending into heaven.
-
- From that foundation, Christianity spread
throughout the Roman Empire and has continued to exert great influence
down through the centuries.
-
-
- LIVING WITNESSES
- The New Testament accounts of the resurrection
were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the
time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have confirmed or
denied the accuracy of such accounts.
-
- The writers of the four Gospels either
had themselves been witnesses or else were relating the accounts of eyewitnesses
of the actual events. In advocating their case for the gospel, a word that
means "good news," the apostles appealed (even when confronting
their most severe opponents) to common knowledge concerning the facts of
the resurrection.
-
- F. F. Bruce, Rylands professor of biblical
criticism and exegesis at the University of Manchester, says concerning
the value of the New Testament records as primary sources: "Had there
been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the
possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served
as a further corrective."
-
-
- IS THE NEW TESTAMENT RELIABLE?
- Because the New Testament provides the
primary historical source for information on the resurrection, many critics
during the 19th century attacked the reliability of these biblical documents.
-
- By the end of the 1 9th century, however,
archaeological discoveries had confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament
manuscripts. Discoveries of early papyri bridged the gap between the time
of Christ and existing manuscripts from a later date.
-
- Those findings increased scholarly confidence
in the reliability of the Bible. William F. Albright, who in his day was
the world's foremost biblical archaeologist, said: "We can already
say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any
book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before
the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics
of today."
-
- Coinciding with the papyri discoveries,
an abundance of other manuscripts came to light (over 24,000 copies of
early New Testament manuscripts are known to be in existence today). The
historian Luke wrote of "authentic evidence" concerning the resurrection.
Sir William Ramsay, who spent 15 years attempting to undermine Luke credentials
as a historian, and to refute the reliability of the New Testament, finally
concluded: "Luke is a historian of the first rank . . . This author
should be placed along with the very greatest of historians. "
- I claim to be an historian. My approach
to Classics is historical. And I tell you that the evidence for the life,
the death, and the resurrection of Christ is better authenticated than
most of the facts of ancient history . . .
-
- E. M. Blaiklock
- Professor of Classics
- Auckland University
-
-
- BACKGROUND
- The New Testament witnesses were fully
aware of the background against which the resurrection took place. The
body of Jesus, in accordance with Jewish burial custom, was wrapped in
a linen cloth. About 100 pounds of aromatic spices, mixed together to form
a gummy substance, were applied to the wrappings of cloth about the body.
After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, an extremely large stone
was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. Large stones weighing approximately
two tons were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance.
-
- A Roman guard of strictly disciplined
fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the
tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to "prevent any attempt at vandalizing
the sepulcher. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance
would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law.
-
- But three days later the tomb was empty.
The followers of Jesus said He had risen from the dead. They reported that
He appeared to them during a period of 40 days, showing Himself to them
by many "infallible proofs." Paul the apostle recounted that
Jesus appeared to more than 500 of His followers at one time, the majority
of whom were still alive and who could confirm what Paul wrote. So many
security precautions were taken with the trial, crucifixion, burial, entombment,
sealing, and guarding of Christ's tomb that it becomes very difficult for
critics to defend their position that Christ did not rise from the dead.
Consider these facts:
-
- FACT #1: BROKEN ROMAN SEAL
- As we have said, the first obvious
fact was the breaking of the seal that stood for the power and authority
of the Roman Empire. The consequences of breaking the seal were extremely
severe. The FBI and CIA of the Roman Empire were called into action to
find the man or men who were responsible. If they were apprehended, it
meant automatic execution by crucifixion upside down. People feared the
breaking of the seal. Jesus' disciples displayed signs of cowardice when
they hid themselves. Peter, one of these disciples, went out and denied
Christ three times.
-
- FACT #2: EMPTY TOMB
- As we have already discussed, another
obvious fact after the resurrection was the empty tomb. The disciples of
Christ did not go off to Athens or Rome to preach that Christ was raised
from the dead. Rather, they went right back to the city of Jerusalem, where,
if what they were teaching was false, the falsity would be evident. The
empty tomb was "too notorious to be denied." Paul Althaus states
that the resurrection "could have not been maintained in Jerusalem
for a single day, for a single hour, if the emptiness of the tomb had not
been established as a fact for all concerned."
-
- Both Jewish and Roman sources and
traditions admit an empty tomb. Those resources range from Josephus to
a compilation of fifth-century Jewish writings called the "Toledoth
Jeshu." Dr. Paul Maier calls this "positive evidence from a hostile
source, which is the strongest kind of historical evidence. In essence,
this means that if a source admits a fact decidedly not in its favor, then
that fact is genuine."
-
- Gamaliel, who was a member of the
Jewish high court, the Sanhedrin, put forth the suggestion that the rise
of the Christian movement was God's doing; he could not have done that
if the tomb were still occupied, or if the Sanhedrin knew the whereabouts
of Christ's body.
-
- Paul Maier observes that "
. . . if all the evidence is weighed carefully and fairly, it is indeed
justifiable, according to the canons of historical research, to conclude
that the sepulcher of Joseph of Arimathea, in which Jesus was buried, was
actually empty on the morning of the first Easter. And no shred of evidence
has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy, or archaeology
that would disprove this statement."
-
-
- FACT #3: LARGE STONE MOVED
- On that Sunday morning the first
thing that impressed the people who approached the tomb was the unusual
position of the one and a half to two ton stone that had been lodged in
front of the doorway. All the Gospel writers mention it.
- There exists no document from the
ancient world, witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical
testimonies . . . Skepticism regarding the historical credentials of Christianity
is based upon an irrational bias.
-
-
- Clark Pinnock
- Mcmaster University
-
- Those who observed the stone after
the resurrection describe its position as having been rolled up a slope
away not just from the entrance of the tomb, but from the entire massive
sepulcher. It was in such a position that it looked as if it had been picked
up and carried away. Now, I ask you, if the disciples had wanted to come
in, tiptoe around the sleeping guards, and then roll the stone over and
steal Jesus' body, how could they have done that without the guards' awareness?
-
-
- FACT #4: ROMAN GUARD GOES AWOL
- The Roman guards fled. They left
their place of responsibility. How can their attrition he explained, when
Roman military discipline was so exceptional? Justin, in Digest #49, mentions
all the offenses that required the death penalty. The fear of their superiors'
wrath and the possibility of death meant that they paid close attention
to the minutest details of their jobs. One way a guard was put to death
was by being stripped of his clothes and then burned alive in a fire started
with his garments. If it was not apparent which soldier had failed in his
duty, then lots were drawn to see which one wand be punished with death
for the guard unit's failure. Certainly the entire unit would not have
fallen asleep with that kind of threat over their heads. Dr. George Currie,
a student of Roman military discipline, wrote that fear of punishment "produced
flawless attention to duty, especially in the night watches."
-
-
- FACT #5: GRAVECLOTHES TELL A TALE
- In a literal sense, against all
statements to the contrary, the tomb was not totally empty--because of
an amazing phenomenon. John, a disciple of Jesus, looked over to the place
where the body of Jesus had lain, and there were the grave clothes, in
the form of the body, slightly caved in and empty--like the empty chrysalis
of a caterpillar's cocoon. That's enough to make a believer out of anybody.
John never did get over it. The first thing that stuck in the minds of
the disciples was not the empty tomb, but rather the empty grave clothes--undisturbed
in form and position.
-
-
- FACT #6: JESUS' APPEARANCES CONFIRMED
- Christ appeared alive on several occasions
after the cataclysmic events of that first Easter . When studying an event
in history, it is important to know whether enough people who were participants
or eyewitnesses to the event were alive when the facts about the event
were published. To know this is obviously helpful in ascertaining the accuracy
of the published report. If the number of eyewitnesses is substantial,
the event can he regarded as fairly well established. For instance, if
we all witness a murder, and a later police report turns out to he a fabrication
of lies, we as eyewitnesses can refute it.
-
-
- OVER 500 WITNESSES
- Several very important factors arc often
overlooked when considering Christ's post-resurrection appearances to individuals.
The first is the large number of witnesses of Christ after that resurrection
morning. One of the earliest records of Christ's appearing after the resurrection
is by Paul. The apostle appealed to his audience's knowledge of the fact
that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. Paul reminded
them that the majority of those people were still alive and could be questioned.
Dr. Edwin M. Yamauchi, associate professor of history at Miami University
in Oxford, Ohio, emphasizes: "What gives a special authority to the
list (of witnesses) as historical evidence is the reference to most of
the five hundred brethren being still alive. St. Paul says in effect, 'If
you do not believe me, you can ask them.' Such a statement in an admittedly
genuine letter written within thirty years of the event is almost as strong
evidence as one could hope to get for something that happened nearly two
thousand years ago." Let's take the more than 500 witnesses who saw
Jesus alive after His death and burial, and place them in a courtroom.
Do you realize that if each of those 500 people were to testify for only
six minutes, including cross-examination, you would have an amazing 50
hours of firsthand testimony? Add to this the testimony of many other eyewitnesses
and you would well have the largest and most lopsided trial in history.
-
-
- HOSTILE WITNESSES
- Another factor crucial to interpreting
Christ's appearances is that He also appeared to those who were hostile
or unconvinced.
-
- Over and over again, I have read or heard
people comment that Jesus was seen alive after His death and burial only
by His friends and followers. Using that argument, they attempt to water
down the overwhelming impact of the multiple eyewitness accounts. But that
line of reasoning is so pathetic it hardly deserves comment. No author
or informed individual would regard Saul of Tarsus as being a follower
of Christ. The facts show the exact opposite. Saul despised Christ and
persecuted Christ's followers. It was a life-shattering experience when
Christ appeared to him. Although he was at the time not a disciple, he
later became the apostle Paul, one of the greatest witnesses for the truth
of the resurrection.
- If the New Testament were a collection
of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as
beyond all doubt.
-
-
- F. F. Bruce
- Manchester University
-
- The argument that Christ's appearances
were only to followers is an argument for the most part from silence, and
arguments from silence can be dangerous. It is equally possible that all
to whom Jesus appeared became followers. No one acquainted with the facts
can accurately say that Jesus appeared to just "an insignificant few."
-
- Christians believe that Jesus was bodily
resurrected in time and space by the supernatural power of God. The difficulties
of belief may be great, but the problems inherent in unbelief present even
greater difficulties.
-
- The theories advanced to explain the
resurrection by "natural causes" are weak; they actually help
to build confidence in the truth of the resurrection.
-
-
- THE WRONG TOMB?
- A theory propounded by Kirsopp Lake assumes
that the women who reported that the body was missing had mistakenly gone
to the wrong tomb. If so, then the disciples who went to check up on the
women's statement must have also gone to the wrong tomb. We may be certain,
however, that Jewish authorities, who asked for a Roman guard to be stationed
at the tomb to prevent Jesus' body from being stolen, would not have been
mistaken about the location. Nor would the Roman guards, for they were
there!
-
- If the resurrection-claim was merely
because of a geographical mistake, the Jewish authorities would have lost
no time in producing the body from the proper tomb, thus effectively quenching
for all time any rumor resurrection.
-
-
- HALLUCINATIONS?
- Another attempted explanation claims
that the appearances of Jesus after the resurrection were either illusions
or hallucinations. Unsupported by the psychological principles governing
the appearances of hallucinations, this theory also does not coincide with
the historical situation. Again, where was the actual body, and why wasn't
it produced?
-
-
- DID JESUS SWOON?
- Another theory, popularized by Venturini
several centuries ago, is often quoted today. This is the swoon theory,
which says that Jesus didn't die; he merely fainted from exhaustion and
loss of blood. Everyone thought Him dead, but later He resuscitated and
the disciples thought it to be a resurrection. Skeptic David Friedrich
Strauss--certainly no believer in the resurrection--gave the deathblow
to any thought that Jesus revived from a swoon: "It is impossible
that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulchre, who crept about
weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening
and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to His sufferings, could
have given to the disciples the impression that He was a Conqueror over
death and the grave, the Prince of Life,
- For the New Testament of Acts, the confirmation
of historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity,
even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have
long taken it for granted.
-
- A. N. Sherwin-White
- Classical Roman Historian
-
- an impression which lay at the bottom
of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened
the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the
most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility
have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence
into worship."
-
-
- THE BODY STOLEN?
- Then consider the theory that the body
was stolen by the disciples while the guards slept. The depression and
cowardice of the disciples provide a hard-hitting argument against their
suddenly becoming so brave and daring as to face a detachment of soldiers
at the tomb and steal the body. They were in no mood to attempt anything
like that.
-
- The theory that the Jewish or Roman authorities
moved Christ's body is no more reasonable an explanation for the empty
tomb than theft by the disciples. If the authorities had the body in their
possession or knew where it was, why, when the disciples were preaching
the resurrection in Jerusalem, didn't they explain: "Wait! We moved
the body, see, He didn't rise from the grave"?
-
- And if such a rebuttal failed, why didn't
they explain exactly where Jesus' body lay? If this failed, why didn't
they recover the corpse, put it on a cart, and wheel it through the center
of Jerusalem? Such an action would have destroyed Christianity--not in
the cradle, but in the womb!
-
-
- THE RESURRECTION IS A FACT
- Professor Thomas Arnold, for 14 years
a headmaster of Rugby, author of the famous, History of Rome, and appointed
to the chair of modern history at Oxford, was well acquainted with the
value of evidence in determining historical facts. This great scholar said:
"I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times,
and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them,
and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by
better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair
inquirer, than the great sign which God bath given us that Christ died
and rose again from the dead." Brooke Foss Westcott, an English scholar,
said: "raking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say
that there is no historic incident better or more variously supported than
the resurrection of Christ. Nothing but the antecedent assumption that
it must be false could have suggested the idea of deficiency in the proof
of it."
-
-
- REAL PROOF: THE DISCIPLES' LIVES
- But the most telling testimony of all
must be the lives of those early Christians. We must ask ourselves: What
caused them to go everywhere telling the message of the risen Christ?
-
- Had there been any visible benefits accrued
to them from their efforts--prestige, wealth, increased social status or
material benefits--we might logically attempt to account for their actions,
for their whole-hearted and total allegiance to this "risen Christ
."
-
- As a reward for their efforts, however,
those early Christians were beaten, stoned to death, thrown to the lions,
tortured and crucified. Every conceivable method was used to stop them
from talking.
-
- Yet, they laid down their lives as the
ultimate proof of their complete confidence in the truth of their message.
-
-
- WHERE DO YOU STAND?
- How do you evaluate this overwhelming
historical evidence? What is your decision about the fact of Christ's empty
tomb? What do you think of Christ?
-
- When I was confronted with the overwhelming
evidence for Christ's resurrection, I had to ask the logical question:
"What difference does all this evidence make to me? What difference
does it make whether or not I believe Christ rose again and died on the
cross for my sins!' The answer is put best by something Jesus said to a
man who doubted--Thomas. Jesus told him: "I am the way, and the truth,
and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6).
-
- On the basis of all the evidence for
Christ's resurrection, and considering the fact that Jesus offers forgiveness
of sin and an eternal relationship with God, who would be so foolhardy
as to reject Him? Christ is alive! He is living today.
-
- You can trust God right now by faith
through prayer. Prayer is talking with God. God knows your heart and is
not so concerned with your words as He is with the attitude of your heart.
If you have never trusted Christ, you can do so right now.
-
- The prayer I prayed is: "Lord Jesus,
I need You. Thank You for dying on the cross for my sins. I open the door
of my life and trust You as my Savior. Thank You for forgiving my sins
and giving me eternal life. Make me the kind of person You want me to be.
Thank You that I can trust You."
-
- Josh McDowell, according to a recent
survey, is one of the most popular speakers among university students today.
He has spoken on more than 650 university and college campuses to more
than seven million people in 74 countries during the last 21 years.
-
- ©1992 Josh McDowell Ministry
|
