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. "
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.
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 would 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.
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,
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 hath 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.
http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html
