Comments? Questions? email [email protected]

Every Easter, Christians around the world celebrate the resurrection of their Lord Jesus Christ. Churches preach the message that Jesus has risen form the dead, and through this great emiracle, one can rest assured that Christ was the Son of God. The apostle Paul once wrote to blievers that if jesus was not raised from the dead, then the preaching of the Gospel¹ and the entire Christian faith is in vain (1. Corinthians 15.14). However, an event such as the resurrection is hard to believe. Skeptics ask: Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Don't believers in Christ have to take a giant leap of faith to hold such an incredulous belief? Can such a claim even be proven? This paper will show that believers do not have t oleave their brains behind when they become Christians, and there is evidence to prove such a miracle did happen. What this paper will not be is an argument on the theological aspects of the resurrection. Instead, it will focus on real, historical data, that would be accepted in any court of law today. Therefore any open-minded person, Christian or non-Christian that will analyze the evidence objectively, will be able to acknowld=edge that jesus did rise from the tomb.

A few significant events have happened in history that support the resurrection of Jesus Christ. First there is the Christian Church, which is worldwide in its scope. The ones that first called themselves Christians referred to the resurrection as their basis for teaching, living, and most importantly, dying(Little 50). Second, there is the Christian day of worship, which is Sunday. The Jewish Sabbath was on Saturday. What would have caused such a change in the day the Sabbath was observed? Even the first Christians were Jews. The motive behind the change was the Christians' desire to celebrate the resurrection of Christ. Third, there is the historical document of the New Testament, which refers to the resurrection as a widely known event. The original manuscripts are in existence, with authorship of the books basically confirmed authentic.²

Even with these three significant facts, such a miracle is still hard to believe. Therefore, through the ages, non-Christian scholars have come up with different theories to explain away the resurrection. But to have a clearer understanding of the arguments against the resurrection, some background information needs to be disclosed. Jesus underwent both Jewish and Roman trials and was sentenced to death by crucifixion. He was flogged and made to carry the crossbar to the site of His crucifixion (Edwards, et. al 1455). After Jesus was taken from the cross, he was buried in a tomb. The tomb was guarded by a Roman guard unit (Evidence 211), with the entrance to the tomb covered by a two ton stone. The entrance was affixed with the roman seal. (More than a Carpenter 91). Yet three days, later, the tomb was empty. The fact of the empty tomb is agreed upon by both enemies and advocates of the resurrection (Reasonable Faith 278). Therefore, the theories against the resurrection attempt to explain away the empty tomb as the result of natural causes. The body of Jesus Christ was gone. Therefore there are only five reasonable hypotheses that can explain the empty tomb: (1)Either Jesus didn't really die, but swooned, (2)the apostles were deceivers and created a conspiracy, (3) the disciples were decieved and experienced a hallucination, (4) the New Testament writings were myth, or...(5)Jesus actually did rise from the dead. Of course there are other reasons, but these are the only serious ones that critics against the resurrection have set forth as having any merit. Do any of these theories hold?

Some antagonists of the resurrection account for the empty tomb by saying that Jesus did not actually die, but that He swooned. Then, in the coolness of the tomb, He revived. He then traveled on foot to where His disciples were staying, and in their ignorance, they thought they had seen a resurrected Christ (Little 53). However, there are many problems with this theory. First, it was basically impossible that Jesus was buried alive. Soldiers were very familiar with the sight of death upon crucifixion. Four executioners came to examine the body to make sure Jesus was dead before being taken down from the cross (Evidence 198). In addition John records seeing blood and water flow out from Jesus' pierced side (John 19.34). This flow of blood and water can only occur if the person had died by exhaution asphyxia³ (Edwards, et. al 1455). Even the academic medical journal JAMA supports the fact that Jesus died when He was taken from the cross (Edwards, et. al 1455). However, let's say that Christ did not die and that He merely swooned. Could Jesus have survived in that tomb for three days without water, food, or medical attention? Probably not. After the body was taken down from the cross, it was prepared in the original Jewish burial custom, where the body was bound in linen cloths covered with about 100 pounds of spices, (Evidence 220) forming a gummy substance (More than a Carpenter 90). If Jesus did not die, the 100 pounds of spices upon his body would have stopped his already weak breathing, or the overriding fumes of the spices would have surely killed Him. Even if Jesus was able to get up, He probably had no strength to free Himself from the grave clothes, which were stuck together due to the cross-stitch pattern of the bandages (Evidence 205) along with the gummy substance formed from the spices. Let's say he was able to free himself from the grae clothes. How in the world could He have moved the two ton stone that covered the entrance to the tomb, that twenty men could not even move? (Evidence 208). Let's say He was even able to move the stone away from the entrance. The Roman guard unit would surely have seen jesus coming out of the tomb. The argument that the unit was sleeping is highly unlikely for the punishment for sleeping on duty, or leaving one's post was death (More than a Carpenter 92). And even if jesus was able to overcome the Roman guards, there would be no way that the disciples would believe their leader as the resurrected Christ. Even the critic to the resurrection David Strauss comments:

It is impossible that One who had just come forth from the grave half dead, who crept about weak and ill, who stood in the need of medical treatment, of bandaging, strengtheneing, and tender care, and who at last succumbed to suffering could even have given the disciples the impression that he was a conqueror over deadth and the grave; that he was the Prince of Life...Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which he had made upon them in life and in death... [and] could by no possibility have changed their worrow into enthusiasm or elevated their reverence into worship (Anderson 17).

Another theory that attempts to explain away the resurrection is that the disciples stole the body. Critics advance the story that the disciples stole the body while the guards slept, and then started preaching that Christ had resurrected from the dead. This theory also has many flaws within it. First of all, as explained in the previous paragraph, the guards would not be sleeping. Even if some of the guards were sleeping, surely not every single one of them fell asleep. In addition, the disciples became depressed and cowardly after jesus was crucified (Reasonable Faith 278). The disciple name Peter denied Jesus three times. They had no desire to go to the tomb, face the guards and break the Roman seal placed upon the tomb, which meant automatic upside down crucifixion (More than a Carpenter 91), just to steal the body. The disciples did not even know that Jesus was supposed to resurrect. The disciples were wholly surprised to find the tomb empty as were the authorities. It also would not explain the change within each of the disciples that caused them to preach the gospel message with authority even when threatened with death. One logical reason why the disciples did not steal the body is that there was no incentive for them to do so. All that the disciples received from preaching the gospel message was resistance (Little 52). Each disiple was later tortured and martyred for preaching the gospel message. "People will die for what they believe to be true, though it may actually be false. They do not, however, die for what they know is a lie" (Little 52). There is no way the disciples stole the body.

In addition to explaining the empty tomb, there needs to be an explanation of the ten recorded appearnces of Christ⁴ (Little 54). These recording are "testimony given by eyewitnesses...fully convinced of the truth of their statements" (Little 55). The New Testament writings testify that jesus appear from the morning of the resurrection up to forty days later. These recorded appearances showed great variety in times, places and people. Scholars against the resurrection try to overlook these observances by regarding them as hallucinations. However, modern medicine has given certain laws with regard to psychological phenomena (Anderson 20). Hallucinations are usually attributed to those "vividly imaginative and of a nervous makeup" (Little 55). However, christ appeared to all different types of people, which included fishermen, a tax collector, women, and others (Anderson 21). Hallucinations are also subjective and individual because "their source is the subconscious mind of the recipient" (Anderson 21). No two have the sam experiences. But 500 people claimed to have seen Christ at the same time and place. Twelve of Jesus' disciples also claimed to have seen him at one time (1 corinthians 15.5). Hallucinations aonly occur at particular times and places. The appearnaces of Christ were ubiquitous: "in a upper room at evening, near the tomb in the early morning, during an afternoon walk in the country, after a morning's fishing on the lake, on a mountain in galilee" (Anderson 22). Hallucinations occur regularly and over a long duration. The appearances of Christ started after the resurrection and stopped abruptly 40 days later (Reasonable faith 260). No one claimed to have seen Christ out of this time span. The laws set forth by modern medicine with regard to hallucinations thoroughly refutes the hallucination theory.

Finally, there is the myth theory. This says that the disciples based their writings on the historical Jesus, but embellished their stories with such things as miracles and the resurrection. However, the text of the New Testament books are not characteristic of myths. The accounts of the crucifixion, the empty tomb, and the later appearances of Christ are simple and concise, not typical of the long, exaggerated works of mythical writing. One example that discards the myth theory is the fact recorded in the gospels that women discovered the empty tomb. Back in jesus' day, women were regarded as total incompetents. They could not even testify in court for they were ineligible as witnesses (Kreeft and Taceli 192). A myth would have men discover the empty tomb. At one point, one of the Gospel writers noted that Jesus wrote on the ground. However, nothing became of this fact. It was written there because it happened. The writers were simply reporting what they saw. To get a better picture of the difference between the New Testament writings and later mythical writings, here's the resurrection account of the mythical book of St. Peter as described by Dr. William Craig:

In this account, the tomb is not only surrounded by Roman guards but also by all the Jewish Pharisees and elders as well as a great multitude from all the surrounding countryside who have come to watch the resurrection. Suddenly in the night there rings out a loud voice in heaven and two men dscend form heaven to the tomb. The stone over the door rolls back by itself, and they go into the tomb. the three men come out of the tomb, two of them holding up the third man. The heads of the two men reach up into the clouds, but the head of the third man reaches beyond the clouds. Then a cross comes out of the tomb, and a voice from heaven asks, "Have you preached to them that sleep?" And the cross answers, "Yes." (Apologetics 189)

On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! (Luke 24.1-6a)

What other possibility is left? Though it may still seem hard to believe, the only explanation of the empty tomb that makes sense is that jesus did resurrect from the dead. There are thousands of people that testify of the change Christ has made in their lives. Dr. Simon Greenleaf was the Royall Professor of Law at Harvard. H. W. H. Knotts writes that through his efforts, along with a colleague, Harvard law School has come to know its eminent position among legal schools in the United States. he "observed that it was impossible that the apostles 'could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not Jesus actually risen from the dead, and had they not known this fact as certainly as they knew any other fact'" (More Than a Carpenter 97). Greenleaf concludes that the resurrection of Jesus is on of the most best supported events in history, "according to the laws of legal evidence administered in courts of justice" (More Than a Carpenter 97). A lawyer by the name of Frank Morison set out to do the world a favor and prove that Jesus' resurrection was a hoax. He felt that with his legal background and training, he would be able to admit only the evidence that would be admitted in a court of law. After ending his reserach, he wrote the book Who Moved the Stone? His first chapter is titled "The Book that Refused to be Written" and the rest of the work deals with the evidence for the resurrection.

The evidence has been set forth. It is now up to the reader to weigh the evidence and decide whether the resurrection is truth or falsehood. If the resurrection was false, then it is the biggest hoax that has "been foisted upon the world," where thousands of Christians have wasted their lives, some to the point of death to spread the good news of Jesus' resurrection. However, if this event is fact, then the claims of Christ were true and He is the only way to the kingdom of heaven. If one does not hold any prior biases in regard to the resurrection, then, based on the tangible evidence, he/she must hold that christ rose from the dead. Lord Darling, former Chief Justice of England concludes that "there exists such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true" (More Than a Carpenter 99). As college students, i would suspect that we are both reasonbale and intelligent. Would you believe Christ rose from the dead? The evidence is overwhelmingly for it.

Works Cited