by Lim Shimron
“But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.” (1 Peter 3: 14 – 16)
These words by Peter to the Christians fleeing persecution sets for us the approach we are to take in answering those who have questions about what we believe in; and what better topic to look at this Easter season than the Resurrection itself? The Apostle Peter calls us to be prepared to make a defense for the reason for our hope, and we can only do this when we can put forth evidence for the Resurrection in a way that is concretely rooted in real time history. When an event is rooted in real time history, there is evidence, and where there is evidence, the event can be investigated, and when investigated it will be shown to be either true or otherwise.
A prime early example (circa 35AD) of a defense for the Resurrection can be found in 1 Corinthians 15, where Paul puts forth with no compromise that the events of the Resurrection are in fulfillment of Old Testament scriptures. Paul then also goes on to provide eyewitness testimony for the risen Jesus. This draws together the natural and supernatural world under one comprehensive worldview for investigating the Resurrection.
Key evidences for the Resurrection
For someone to be resurrected, they would have to first die. You find that all four gospel accounts describe for us in varying degrees of detail, the trial and crucifixion of Jesus(1). The Roman crucifixion, which Jesus was sentenced to, is a method of execution so horrible that Roman citizens were never executed in that fashion, but rather, beheaded(2). The process of crucifixion itself guarantees the death of the executed as their bodies are usually left on the crosses to rot. Only one person is known to have survived a crucifixion, only because it was interrupted at the intervention of Josephus(3). Consequently, Jesus dies and is then placed in a guarded and sealed tomb(4).
Three days later, the first witness on the scene is a woman, Mary Magdalene(5), whom by the cultural standards of the day, is inadmissible as a witness in court by virtue of being a woman(6). Mary finds that the tomb is empty of Jesus’ body and reports it to the disciples who naturally disbelieve her(7). The very inclusion of this in the accounts fulfills the criterion of embarrassment(8), thus adding to the corroborating evidence for the Resurrection. The tomb is also confirmed to be empty not only by the disciples, but by the local officials(9). The resurrected Jesus then appears to many over the span of 40 days before he ascends into heaven(10). We therefore have both the circumstantial evidence of the empty tomb (evidence that was not disputed even by the opponents of Christianity at the time) as well as the eyewitness evidence of those who saw the risen Jesus and were willing to give their lives to affirm it.
Objections to the resurrection
It is not uncommon to find today that many oppose the Resurrection, and it is not entirely surprising to find those people even within the fold of the church. However, we are reminded to “always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have(11)”, and so we will take a look at several common objections to the Resurrection and see how we can best answer them with the evidence we have at hand.
- Jesus was not crucified
The most pervasive objection is that it was not Jesus who was crucified, but rather, a twin or lookalike. “And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.(12)” The Gospel of Barnabas, the earliest estimated time of writing being at least 1600 years after Jesus, also puts forth a similar idea(13).
This theory very cleverly attempts to eradicate Jesus’ resurrection by removing Jesus’ death. It, however, does not account for the empty tomb; should someone else have died in Jesus’ place, then there would still be a body lying in the tomb. Jesus’ own disciple, Thomas, who was himself a twin(14), refused to believe the resurrection until he could put his very own hands on Jesus’ wounds(15). There was no way for Jesus to have been hiding with a bunch of people who were convinced that he was dead. - The stolen body
This theory is by far the oldest, and is in fact the first alternative to the Resurrection, that Jesus’ body was stolen by the disciples themselves. It is said that men would die for a lie, but no man will die for something they know is a lie; the tenacity in which the disciples held on to the message that Jesus rose from the dead, even in the face of severe persecution only serves to rule out this possibility. - Weird Stuff Happens
‘All religions have miraculous stories like this.’ This opposition simply dismisses the factual evidence for the Resurrection without considering them. It is after all one thing to tell tall stories, and another to substantiate your claims with evidence.
The Wrap-up
The evidence from within the accounts provided in the pages of the New Testament build a very strong case for the bodily resurrection of Jesus. This is the very same Jesus that the Apostles preached to the Jews and Gentiles for their forgiveness of sins. As such, we too can put our faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus for our justification, with good reason for our faith, regardless of whether we feel Jesus in our heart or not.
Further reading
Given that the Resurrection is the cornerstone for Christianity, there are still many different kinds of objections to the Resurrection, as well as defenses which are not drawn out here in this article. Here are some resources which you may want to look up: The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel
- Web
http://www.whitehorseinn.org/images/whiresurrectionobjections.pdf
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/white-horse-inn/read/articles/can-we- still-believe-in-the-resurrection-14139.html
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/deathjesus.pdf - Books
Is the New Testament Reliable?, Paul Barnett
The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, Craig Blomberg
The Missing Gospels, Darrel Bock
(1) Matt 26-27; Mark 14:43-15:47; Luke 22:47-23:56; John 18-19
(2) http://www.tribunesandtriumphs.org/roman-life/rights-of-roman-citizens.htm
(3) http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/autobiog.htm no. 75
(4) Matt 27:62-66; Mark 15:46
(5) John 20:11-18
(6) http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0021_0_21003.html
(7) Luke 24:10-11
(8) The criterion of embarrassment is a critical analysis of historical accounts in which accounts embarrassing to the author are presumed to be true because the author would have no reason to invent an embarrassing account about himself.
(9) Matt 28:11-14
(10) Acts 1:3
(11) 1 Peter 3:15
(12) Al-Quran Surah 4:157-158
(13) http://sabr.com/index.php/downloads/file/20-the-gospel-of-barnabas
(14) John 11:16
(15) John 20:24-30