Thursday, January 5, 2012

How Do We Know that Jesus Rose from the Dead?

Did Jesus actually rise from the dead? That Jesus did so is probably the most extraordinary claim of Christianity, and not surprisingly, it is the claim that has elicited the most skepticism on the part of unbelievers.

    But how do we know that the resurrection actually took place? Perhaps the most detailed account that we have of it is contained in The Gospel According to John. John describes the death of Jesus on the cross, noting in particular that one of the Roman soldiers pierced the dead body of Jesus with a spear (John 19:34). John then tells of how the body was wrapped in strips of linen and placed in a nearby tomb.

    John then goes on to tell how he discovered that Jesus had risen from the dead. He and Peter were informed by Mary Magdalene that the tomb was empty. Both men ran to the site and saw the empty tomb for themselves. John even describes the position of the linen wrappings that were still lying in the tomb. After Peter and John returned to their homes Jesus Himself appeared to Mary and addressed her by name. Thus Mary Magdalene became the first person to see Jesus alive after the crucifixion.

    John goes on then to record three separate instances in which Jesus appeared to the disciples as a group. The first of these took place in the evening of that first Sunday. The disciples were meeting behind locked doors when Jesus suddenly appeared in the room. He spoke with them and showed them the obvious identifying marks, the wounds on His hands and side.

    John then tells us the famous story about "doubting Thomas." Thomas was not present at the first appearance and found it hard to believe that any such thing as a physical resurrection could actually take place. Whatever the other disciples had seen, they did not see Jesus. "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe" (20:25; NKJV). In other words, he said exactly the same thing that modern skeptics, versed in naturalistic science, would have said.

    Jesus provided exactly the kind of proof that Thomas demanded. A week later He appeared again in the same room, and this time Thomas was there. Jesus challenged him to touch the wounds. We do not know that a modern atheist such as David Hume or Bertrand Russell would have been convinced, but Thomas certainly was. His response was, "My Lord and my God!" (v. 28).

    John then goes on to describe another incident that apparently happened sometime afterward. Several of the disciples were fishing in the Sea of Tiberias in northern Palestine when Jesus appeared on the shore preparing breakfast for them. He invited them to join Him. They all ate and engaged in conversation.

    How do we know that John is telling us the truth? There is corroborating evidence. All four gospels contain accounts of the resurrection. The apostles all claimed to have been eyewitnesses, and they made the resurrection a key point of their preaching. And the apostle Paul, writing in about A.D 55 to the church in Corinth in Greece made this interesting comment: Christ "rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and . . . was seen by Cephas [i.e., Peter], then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also . . ." (I Cor. 15:4-8).

    The gist of the matter is this: Jesus appeared on several different occasions; He appeared to several different people at the same time; He interacted with them; they could physically touch them; and on one occasion He ate the same food that they were eating. What all of this does is eliminate the possibilities of optical illusion, hallucination, temporary insanity, or conspiracy and fraud. A large number of people saw something, and it was enough to convince them that Jesus, Whom they had seen hanging lifeless on the cross, had actually risen from the dead. That was the unanimous testimony of the First Century church. The resurrection is one of the best documented events in ancient history.

    C.S. Lewis described his shock at hearing a friend of his, "the hardest boiled of all the atheists I ever knew," say that say that the evidence for the historicity of the gospels was surprisingly good. "'Rum thing' he went on. 'All that stuff of Frazer's about the Dying God. Rum thing. It almost looks as it if had really happened once.'" (Surprised by Joy; Harcourt, Brace & World, 1955, pp. 223-224). The comment shook Lewis' own faith in Atheism, and led to his eventually becoming a Christian. It is a comment well worth pondering.

4 comments:

  1. John describes...

    He does? How do you know?

    John then tells...

    He does? How do you know?

    John then goes on to tell...

    He does? How do you know?

    John even describes...

    He does? How do you know?

    John goes on then to record three separate instances...

    He does? How do you know?

    John then tells us...

    He does? How do you know?

    John then goes on to describe...

    He does? How do you know?


    How do we know that John is telling us the truth?

    How do you know that it's some guy called John at all? Do you even know when he was writing?

    There is corroborating evidence.

    Corroborating evidence. Wow. Sounds exciting!
    Let's have it.

    All four gospels contain accounts of the resurrection.

    Oh. So you are using one part of your bible to corroborate...other parts of the bible.
    Hmm.
    Spot the problem.

    The apostles all claimed to have been eyewitnesses.

    They did? Really? Who claimed to be eyewitnesses? Is there anyway to verify that claim? It's a nice claim but...

    The gist of the matter is this: Jesus appeared on several different occasions; He appeared to several different people at the same time; He interacted with them; they could physically touch them; and on one occasion He ate the same food that they were eating. What all of this does is eliminate the possibilities of optical illusion, hallucination, temporary insanity, or conspiracy and fraud.

    Let's take that again.

    The gist of the matter is this: Jesus appeared on several different occasions (according to a text); He appeared to several different people at the same time (according to the same text); He interacted with them (according to the same text); they could physically touch them (according to the same text); and on one occasion He ate the same food that they were eating (according to the same text). What all of this does is eliminate the possibilities of optical illusion, hallucination, temporary insanity, or conspiracy and fraud.

    See what I mean?
    Or perhaps you need something a little stronger?
    Ok.

    The gist of the matter is this: James Bond appeared on several different occasions (according to a text); He appeared to several different people at the same time (according to the same text); He interacted with them (according to the same text); they could physically touch them (according to the same text); and on one occasion He ate the same food that they were eating (according to the same text). What all of this does is eliminate the possibilities of optical illusion, hallucination, temporary insanity, or conspiracy and fraud.

    That was the unanimous testimony of the First Century church.

    The what?

    The resurrection is one of the best documented events in ancient history.

    Yes...um...you have these copies of texts of copies of texts written by unknown authors at unknown times yet all gathered together by a religion. Solid.

    ReplyDelete
  2. C.S. Lewis described...

    Oh please.

    (...deep sigh...)

    Ok, I'm ready.

    The comment shook Lewis' own faith in Atheism, and led to his eventually becoming a Christian. It is a comment well worth pondering.

    Yes but did it really happen that way?

    First, you can't have "faith" in Atheism.
    Atheism is not a faith in the same way that health is not a disease.
    That dog will not hunt.
    It's an embarrassment to read.

    Second, how do we know that Lewis isn't using the shop-worn Christian ploy of "I was a terrible sinner until Jayzoooz saved me! He SAVED ME! Can I have an "Amen"?"

    (.."Amen" dutifully intones the audience...)

    "I said can I have an "AMEN"?

    (.."Amen" intones the audience, a tad less anemically)

    It's happened many times before. Lewis is possibly just climbing on the bandwagon. You see, we all know about Lewis the firebrand Christian writer but where's his work on Lewis the firebrand atheist writer?
    Lewis was happy to talk about when he was an atheist (it made for good copy) but...did he ever write anything about his atheism while he was still actually an atheist? You know, like Christopher Hitchens did all the time.

    Besides, aren't you just a little bit uncomfortable using an argument from authority? Surely, Lewis's Christianity or lack thereof or gulliblilty or lack thereof is not very useful to you establishing if somebody rose from the dead?

    No. 192: ARGUMENT FROM C.S. LEWIS

    (1) C.S. Lewis had a lot of good arguments in favor of Christianity ... at least that’s what all my Christian friends tell me.
    (2) C.S. Lewis wrote some popular books too!
    (3) So anything C.S. Lewis said must be right!
    (4) Therefore, God Exists.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The subject of who the real author of the fourth gospel was is too involved to discuss in detail here. Suffice it to say that the author of the work clearly identifies himself with the anonymous "beloved disciple" mentioned throughout the book (John 21:24), and this disciple is almost certainly John, a member of Jesus' inner circle. Early Christian tradition confirms the identification. The book was widely received and accepted as an authentic apostolic writing almost as soon as it was written. Moreover, the book's style and content point to someone with a Palestinian Jewish background. Thus, unless it was an atrocious fraud that somehow managed to deceive the entire church, when there were persons still alive who actually knew John, it has to be authentic.
    As for C.S. Lewis, I did not quote him because he is somehow an "authority." I simply relate an incident in which a hardened skeptic was forced to admit that the evidence for the resurrection is actually quite good.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Suffice it to say that the author of the work clearly identifies himself with the anonymous "beloved disciple"

    So he's clearly identified anonymously.
    Priceless.
    How can anybody "clearly" identify themselves anonymously?
    That's so...cringe-worthy.

    ...and this disciple is almost certainly John...

    Almost certainly. How do you know that it's "almost certain"? What does that even mean?

    Early Christian tradition confirms the identification.

    Oh, it's traditional?
    I see. Well, mustn't argue with tradition.
    Tradition is tradition after all.

    (..facepalm...)

    The book was widely received and accepted as an authentic apostolic writing almost as soon as it was written.

    It was? Well, that's joyful.
    Um, when was it written? And who "accepted it"? Why should anybody even care?

    Moreover, the book's style and content point to someone with a Palestinian Jewish background...

    It's impossible to make that sound more silly. I will let it stand by itself.
    In fact, I will repeat it.

    Moreover, the book's style and content point to someone with a Palestinian Jewish background...

    Yep, that was a genuinely silly thing to say.

    Thus, unless it was an atrocious fraud that somehow managed to deceive the entire church...

    You mean like the book of Mormon, perhaps?

    As for C.S. Lewis, I did not quote him because he is somehow an "authority."

    Oh really? You just happened to quote C.S. Lewis by accident or something?

    I simply relate an incident in which a hardened skeptic was forced to admit that the evidence for the resurrection is actually quite good.

    Yes, and...?

    (...awkward silence...)

    Why did you relate the incident? What was the point?

    (...more awkward silence...)

    It was an argument from authority. That's what arguments from authority are. That's how they work. People don't quote famous people when they are making an argument at random.

    "Look! This is a famous guy!
    He's really famous. He wrote books and everything.
    And well, he was really impressed by somebody else being really impressed.
    And well, he stopped being an atheist and became a Christian!
    Wow.
    AMAZING!
    Just, um, thought I'd mention it. I'm not making an argument from authority or anything. (It's more of a conversation topic you can you at parties. Just thought I'd pass it on.)

    Book of Mormon: An Introduction
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-35gtKuWrD4

    ReplyDelete