1 Corinthians 15 New International Version
(NIV)
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to
remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you
have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you
hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in
vain.
3 For what I received I
passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was
raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that
he appeared to Cephas and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he
appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same
time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then
he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of
all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
Christianity is the
only religion that can point to a time on the calendar and place on the map and
say “It started here.” The reason
Christianity can say that is because of the resurrection. As the letter of Paul
points out … this is of first importance. Without the resurrection Jesus was either
wonderful teacher who met an untimely end or a failed revolutionary with
delusions of grandeur. It was the resurrection that proved Jesus was who He
always said He was and why He came to dwell amongst us.
More and more these
days people say that they don’t believe in God. People have been making these
kinds of statements pretty much ever since language was invented. Even Thomas,
one of Jesus disciples, refused to believe that Jesus had been resurrected. He
changed his mind when Jesus appeared to Him personally.
I doubt any of us will
be visited life this but since this was an event rooted in history we can
examine it like any other event. First we look at the witness statements and
their reliability, second we take proof or evidence, and then we take a look at
the aftermath.
1.
The witness statements
If we were in a court
of law the witness statements to an event could be the difference between life
and death. When it comes to the resurrection we could say the same thing. As
such reliability of the statements about the resurrection is key.
Written by eyewitnesses.
All
NT writers were either apostles or associated with the apostles as eyewitnesses
and/or contemporaries. Matthew and John were disciples of Jesus. Mark was a
contemporary and associate of the apostle Peter (1 Pet 5:13). Luke was a
companion of Paul (2 Tim 4:11) who interviewed many eyewitnesses to produce his
account (Luke 1:1-4). James and Jude were closely associated with the apostles
in Jerusalem and were Jesus' brothers. Paul received his apostleship by a
revelation from Jesus. In each case there is a definite link between the writer
and the apostles who gave them information.
Written accounts circulated during time of eyewitnesses
(other than NT writers).
The
dates of the NT documents indicate that they were written within the lifetime
of contemporaries of Christ. People were still alive who could remember the
things he said and did. This includes hostile eyewitnesses who would
have served as a corrective if false teachings about Jesus were going around.
The date of original writing is extremely close to the
actual events.
The
timing between the events occurring and the writing of the events is far too
short for the Gospels to be legends. The Gospel accounts were written at the
very most forty to sixty years after Jesus' death. Paul's letters, written just
ten to fifteen years after the death of Jesus, provide an outline of all the
events of Jesus' life found in the Gospels (his miracles, claims, crucifixion,
and resurrection). The two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were
written more than four hundred years after Alexanders' death, yet historians
consider them to be generally trustworthy. Why? Because legendary material only
began to emerge in the centuries after the early writings, i.e. five hundred
years later. So whether the Gospels were written forty or sixty years after the
life of Jesus, the amount of time is negligible by comparison. It is therefore
very unlikely that those writings would have fallen victim to legend or faulty
memories. Professor Sherwin-White, a respected Greco-Roman classical historian
from Oxford University established that the passage of two generations was not
enough time for legend to develop in the ancient world and wipe out a solid
core of historical truth. In the case of Jesus, we have reliable information
about his divinity and resurrection that falls safely within that span.
Corroborated by non-Christian accounts.
There
are numerous references to Jesus as a historical figure who died at the hand of
Pontius Pilate. Some even noted that He was reported to have risen from the
dead. Tacitus, a Roman historian, made at least three references to Christ.
Josephus, a Jewish historian working for the Romans in the first century,
mentioned Jesus, His death and reports of His appearance after death. The fact
that neither Josephus nor any other contemporary of the apostles made any
attempt to refute the resurrection is significant. Also, the Talmud, a
rabbinical commentary on the Torah, mentions Jesus and the Gospels are cited in
other first-century works, including The Epistle of Barnabas, The Didache,
Clement’s Corinthians, and Ignatius’ Seven Epistles. The Nazareth Inscription
is one of the most powerful pieces of extra-biblical evidence that the
resurrection of Christ was being preached right from the earliest beginnings of
Christianity.
They
died for their story.
With the exception of John,
every one of the apostles died horribly violent deaths. Yet they did this
without ever denouncing their faith. Andrew
was scourged, and then tied rather than nailed to a cross, so that he would
suffer for a longer time before dying. Andrew lived for two days, during which he
preached to passersby.
As French mathmetition Blaise
Pascal put it, “I believe those witnesses that get their throats cut.” All the
disciples who ran away in fearful flight (John 20:19) following Jesus’ arrest
and crucifixion were so convinced of the resurrection that they were willing to
risk their lives testifying to it. What gave these cowards the backbone to do
this? All the apostles and early Christian leaders died for their faith,
and it is hard to believe that this kind of powerful self-sacrifice would be
done to support a hoax. People might live with a lie if it brings them money or
power, but people won’t die for a lie. In short, we must ask, what caused these
remarkable transformations? The fact that all of the apostles were willing to
die horrible deaths, refusing to renounce their faith in Christ, is tremendous
evidence that they had truly witnessed the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
2.
The Proof or Evidence the
Resurrection Happened
Under this section we
will take a look as to what the proof was that the resurrection really
happened.
Jesus was Killed
Obviously there cannot be a resurrection unless
someone was killed.
Mark 15:44-47 New International Version
(NIV)
43 Joseph of
Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the
kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus’ body.44 Pilate was surprised to hear that he was
already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. 45 When
he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. 46 So
Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen,
and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the
entrance of the tomb. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of
Joseph saw where he was laid.
The
way Mark (Mark 15:44-47) reports the burial is significant: He is “certifying”
that Jesus was really dead. Joseph of Arimathea is named here as an identified
witness who actually had Jesus’ body wrapped up and sealed it in a tomb. A
Roman centurion (who would be an expert) bore witness of Jesus’ death to Pilate
(who would be the legal authority on the matter). Finally, two women are cited
as eyewitnesses to the burial. So multiple experts and witnesses prove He was really
dead. Anyone at that time could go and track down witnesses to see what had
happened.
The
Empty Tomb
This
fact is supported by four considerations. First, Jesus was buried in a
well-known tomb. This is important, because if the location of Jesus’ tomb was
uncontroversial, the claim by the early Church that Jesus had vacated His tomb
could have been easily verified (or, for that matter, discounted).
That Jesus’ tomb was well known is attested by material both early and
non-legendary. Mark’s gospel, written no more than 30 years after Jesus’
crucifixion and itself based on even earlier sources, mentions that Jesus was
buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:43). This early detail can’t
be a fictitious insertion by later Christian authors. After all, Joseph was a
member of the Jewish Council (or Sanhedrin; Mk 15:43). In other words, why
would later Christians invent a story about a Jewish Sanhedrist helping Jesus?
Had the early Christians created this detail, the Jewish authorities could have
disproved it easily. They could have checked the records to find out whether or
not Joseph had been a member of the Council and/or whether or not his tomb had
been used, not to mention vacated, by Jesus.
Second,
not only was Jesus’ tomb well known, it was also found empty. This
detail is also found in very early sources, this time not only in Mark’s
report (16:1–8) but also in Paul’s (implied in 1 Cor 15:4). In fact, many
scholars date the tradition Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians 15:3 to within five
or six years after Jesus’ death. Moreover, Mark’s report that the tomb was
found empty by women. Celsus, a Greek philosopher who lived in the second
century A.D., was highly antagonistic to Christianity and wrote a number of
works listing arguments against it. One of the arguments he believed most
telling went like this: Christianity can’t be true, because the written
accounts of the resurrection are based on the testimony of women—and we all
know women are hysterical. And many of Celsus’ readers agreed: For them, that
was a major problem. In ancient societies, as you know, women were
marginalized, and the testimony of women was never given much credence.
Do
you see what that means? If Mark and the Christians were making up these
stories to get their movement off the ground, they would never have written
women into the story as the first eyewitnesses to Jesus’ empty tomb. If Mark
and the early Christians were inventing stories, it would have been fine,
upstanding, reliable male witnesses being first at the tomb. The only possible
reason for the presence of women in these accounts is that they really were
present and reported what they saw.
Thirdly, think about where Christianity started: Jerusalem.
The disciples went out and preached the message
of the risen Jesus in the same city where Jesus was publicly crucified and
buried. It would have been easy to crush this movement of unruly fishermen by
simply going to Jesus' tomb, pulling out the body, and exposing the followers
of Jesus as liars. Both the Romans and the Jews were fed up with this new group
of Jesus followers, and they could have easily produced the remains of Jesus'
body to quench the Christian movement had the tomb not been empty. But this
never happened. The body of Jesus was never produced from the tomb in an
attempt to undermine the movement of Jesus followers, nor were there any
counter-narratives arguing that the tomb was still occupied.
Fourthly The Jews were claiming that the
disciples had stolen the body.
Matthew
28:11-15 says:
[S]ome of the guard went into the
city and told the chief priests everything that had happened. After the priests
had assembled with the elders, they devised a plan to give a large sum of money
to the soldiers, telling them, “You must say, 'His disciples came by night and
stole him away while we were asleep.” If this comes to the governor's
ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” So they took the money
and did as they were directed. And this story is still told among the Jews to
this day.
Why would the Jews circulate the story of Jesus'
body being stolen by the disciples if the tomb was not empty? Thus, there would
be no need to propagate the idea that the disciples stole Jesus's body from the
tomb if the tomb were not empty! In short, the
earliest Jewish response was itself an attempt to explain why the body was
missing and the tomb was empty.
The
Resurrection Appearances
Paul’s
early account speaks of hundreds of witnesses who claim to have seen Jesus
risen (1 Cor 15:5–9). Paul indicates in this text that the risen Jesus not only
appeared to individuals and small groups but he also appeared to five hundred
people at once, most of whom were still alive at the time of his writing and
could be consulted for corroboration. Paul’s letter was to a church, and
therefore it was a public document, written to be read aloud. Paul was inviting
anyone who doubted that Jesus had appeared to people after his death to go and
talk to the eyewitnesses if they wished. It was a bold challenge and one that
could easily be taken up, since during the pax Romana travel around the
Mediterranean was safe and easy. Paul could not have made such a challenge if
those eyewitnesses didn’t exist. There are many instances of sightings of
Jesus’ resurrection but I like to go to Paul where he says that Jesus appears
to 500 people. I like this one because
it flies in the face of the argument that these were just hallucinations of
distraught people. If it was just one or two that would be one thing, but 500
at a time is unheard of.
3.
The Aftermath
When
something happens there are always consequences. If a man gets caught cheating
on his wife there are consequences. If you leave the tub running and go to town
to do shopping, there are consequences. If you pull the pin on a hand grenade,
there are consequences. If something so monumental as a resurrection took
place, there would be monumental consequences. Let’s take a look at some of
them.
Belief
in Resurrection
Matthew
27
8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet
filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 Suddenly
Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and
worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid.
Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”
16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the
mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him,
they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to
them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore
go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to
obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the
very end of the age.”
Quite
often I hear “Well, people back then believed in the supernatural so they
believe people could come back from the dead.” The trouble with this statement
is that if there is one thing that modern day atheist and 1st century Jews hold
in common is that they didn’t believe in the resurrection. The resurrection was
as inconceivable for the first disciples, as impossible for them to believe, as
it is for many of us today. Granted, their reasons would have been different
from ours. The Greeks did not believe in resurrection; in the Greek worldview,
the afterlife was liberation of the soul from the body. For them, resurrection
would never be part of life after death. As for the Jews, some of them believed
in a future general resurrection when the entire world would be renewed, but
they had no concept of an individual rising from the dead. The people of Jesus’
day were not predisposed to believe in resurrection any more than modern day
atheists. Even today with global communications at our finger tips, it takes at
least 20 years for a new idea to take hold and start to be accepted. In the
case of the resurrection it went from not being believed to widely accepted
overnight. The letter from 1 Corinthians 15 has been dated back by some experts
to about 4 or 5 years form the resurrection of Jesus. Therefore, we must ask,
from whence did this belief in a bodily resurrection come from, if not from the
reality of Jesus’ Resurrection appearances?
Explosion
of the Christian Church
If
you were a gambler in the 1st century and someone came up to you and
said “Which do you think will last longer, a religion started by a guy who was
just killed and his 12 (or now 11) disciples OR the Roman Empire who is the
unchallenged superpower of this Earth.” I am pretty sure you would take the
Roman Empire. However, after the death of Jesus the entire Christian community
suddenly adopted a set of beliefs that were brand-new. Their view of
resurrection was absolutely unprecedented in history. They believed that the
future resurrection had already begun in Jesus. There was no process or
development. His followers said that their beliefs did not come from debating
and discussing philosophical ideas; they were just telling others what they had
seen themselves. Even if you propose the highly unlikely idea that one or two
disciples did get the idea that He was raised from the dead on their own, they
would never have got a movement of other Jews to believe it unless there were
multiple, inexplicable, plausible, repeated encounters with Jesus.
How
could a group of first-century Jews have come to worship a human being as
divine? It was absolute blasphemy to propose that any human being should be
worshipped. Yet thousands of Jews began worshipping Jesus literally overnight.
The hymn to Christ as God that Paul quotes in Philippians 2 is generally
recognised to have been written just a few years after the crucifixion. What
enormous event broke through all of that Jewish resistance? If they had seen
him resurrected, this would certainly account for it.
Changed Lives
There
were hardened skeptics, like James, Jesus’ brother, and Saul who didn't believe
in Jesus before his crucifixion-and were to some degree dead-set against Christianity-who turned around and adopted the Christian faith
after Jesus' death. There's no good reason for this apart from them having
experienced the resurrected Christ.
The
gospels tell us Jesus' family, including James, were embarrassed by what he was
claiming to be. They didn't believe in him; they confronted him. In ancient
Judaism it was highly embarrassing for a rabbi's family not to accept him.
Therefore the gospel writers would have no motive for fabricating this skepticism
if it weren't true. Later the historian Josephus tells us that James, the
brother of Jesus, who was the leader of the Jerusalem church, was stoned to death
because of his belief in his brother. Why did James' life change? Paul tells
us: the resurrected Jesus appeared to him. There's no other explanation.
Saul
as a Pharisee, hated anything that disrupted the traditions of the Jewish
people. To him, this new countermovement called Christianity would have been the
height of disloyalty. In fact, he worked out his frustration by executing
Christians when he had a chance. Suddenly he doesn't just ease off Christians
but joins their movement and ends up dying for the movement. There's no good reason
for this apart from them having experienced the resurrected Christ.
Also,
as mentioned above, all of the apostles except John died horribly violent
deaths in service of spreading the Good News of the Gospel. These are men who,
on that Good Friday, ran into the night afraid of being caught. Peter who
denied Jesus three times was crucified upside down rather than deny Jesus
again. What would change the character of these men so much that they would
rather leave their homes and suffer horrible deaths rather than run and hide
ever again? The fact that they had witnessed the truth of the resurrection.
My
Conclusion
Most
people think that, when it comes to Jesus’ resurrection the burned of proof is
on believers to give evidence that it happened. That is not completely the
case. The resurrection also puts a burden of proof on its nonbelievers. It is
not enough to simply say “I don’t believe that Jesus rose from the dead.” You
must come up with a reason why, overnight, history changed course and the
Christian Church was born. Yet no reasonable answer has ever been given. Every
account flies in the face of everything we know about 1st century history,
religion, and culture.
I can
sympathize with a person who says “I don’t know history and culture but I just
can’t believe the resurrection happened.” But you know what, the 1st
Century Jews and gentiles felt exactly the same way. They found the resurrection
just as inconceivable. The only way anyone embraced the resurrection back then
was by letting the evidence challenge their preconceived notions of life and
the world and their views as to what is possible. The evidence points to
an empty tomb, a missing body, multiple eyewitness accounts of a risen Jesus,
and many changed lives as a result … and
the evidence was overwhelming.
