Evidence for the Resurrectionby Josh McDowell
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 19th 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
|
