Evidence for the
Resurrection
by
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 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."
|
