The resurrection of Jesus is undoubtedly the lynchpin of the Christian faith. Paul writing to the Christian community in Corinth, Greece, is bold in proclaiming this:
“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”
1 Corinthians 15:14
From Paul’s writing, it’s clear that he understands the significance of this event, and as a testifying eyewitness to the risen Jesus, he is also happy to acknowledge this. So, Paul is convinced, but why should we trust any of the disciple’s eyewitness reports to the resurrected Jesus? Couldn’t they just be lying or conspiring? We will dig into the circumstantial evidence and context surrounding the eyewitnesses at the time, and examine what this means for their trustworthiness.
What would be the motive to lie?
Detective and Christian case-maker Jim Warner Wallace has been investigating and solving cold-case homicides in California for over 25 years. According to his experience, there are usually only three reasons why someone would want to conspire: Financial benefit, passion (often sexual), or to gain power. None of these motives applied to the apostles, in fact, they experienced the opposite – and they knew they would. There are around 6 ancient sources confirming that the disciples lived lives of deprivation and suffering for their proclamation of Jesus as the resurrected son of God.
Historically, 10 of the 12 apostles were confirmed to have been horrifically martyred for their claims that they had seen the risen Christ and that he was Lord, denying allegiance to the emperor and the Roman gods. Apostle John was exiled to the island of Patmos by the Roman Emperor Titus Flavius Domitianus in 95 AD, where he died of old age. Their Roman torturers and executioners threatened with the option of recanting and sparing their life (which would quickly put an end to the early Christian faith) or die, yet not a single record of a recant has been found, but rather all were willing to suffer or die for what they claimed to have witnessed. It is quite reasonable to say that people do not undergo deprivation, torture, and agonising death for what they know to be a lie based on first-hand eye witnessing – not now, not back then.
The apostle’s first-century religious context
An incredibly significant piece of contextual case-making for the reliability of the apostle’s resurrection claims as well as the reports of Jesus’ previous miracle-working and deity, is the disciples' pre-existing faith and religious beliefs before Jesus’ ministry. The majority of the disciples were committed Jews, from generations of God-fearing Israelites and tradition - they already saw themselves as God's chosen people. It is simply irrational to suggest that they would be the source of any kind of God-related, super-natural intervention conspiracy or manufacturing (particularly a suffering and humbled Messiah even until death on a cross - which was not expected by the Jews), as they would see themselves as worthy of condemnation from God from the perspective of their Jewish faith. They would be abandoning generations of law-keeping, God-fearing tradition, and risking societal abandonment for blasphemy. Paul writing to Corinth also brings attention to this detail:
“More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead.”
1 Corinthians 15:15
It is clear from the transformation of the apostles that their newfound faith in Jesus as the Christ, and that God had raised him from the dead must indeed have resulted from an experience of the resurrected Jesus to warrant their infallible conviction and conversion. In light of their religious backgrounds and faith in God, it is not reasonable to suggest that they would manufacture such an account. With this in mind, on top of the extreme amount of pressure, persecution, and suffering they endured until death, it is only reasonable to conclude that they were simply stating what truly happened on that third day; Jesus had truly risen from the dead. As a result of Jesus being raised, a dejected set of disciples were able to overcome the fear of death (as they knew Jesus had overcome it) in order to preach what they had witnessed.
The empty tomb and the Jerusalem factor
After Jesus had died on the Cross, his body was taken down and buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, the tomb was guarded and sealed:
“Take a guard,” Pilate answered. “Go, make the tomb as secure as you know how.” So they went and made the tomb secure by putting a seal on the stone and posting the guard.”
Matthew 27 65:66
We know as a historical fact that preaching of the physical resurrection to the masses occurred in Jerusalem where Jesus was publicly crucified and buried very soon after the event took place. This preaching would have occurred at a time where the apostles claims and message would have easily been falsified in revealing and parading the body of Jesus; the Jews or Roman authorities would have been first to do so in renouncing the disciples’ claims, being enemies of the Gospel message. Yet, we see the Jewish population admitting the tomb was empty by falling back on the false explanation spread by those in power, that the disciples stole the body. Today almost all critical NT scholars – Christian and non-Christian – accept the empty tomb as fact.
The tomb location would have been well-known at the time, belonging to Joseph of Arimathea – a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, as well as being know to the Romans (hence the guard ordered by Pilate). No naturalist explanation can reasonably account for the empty tomb in light of the evidence and context in which it was guarded. The fact that the empty tomb is admitted even by the enemies of the resurrection preaching makes the accounts evermore trustworthy, they could have easily been falsified. We know it is simply illogical for the disciples to have stolen the body; it would have physically been impossible in light of the Roman guard, and we know that they would not die for what they knew to be a lie based on what they claimed to have seen, particularly with their religious backgrounds. It is clear that they were indeed telling the truth - Jesus had physically risen from the dead.
July 17, 2022
Comments