This is an article written 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. "
I claim to be an historian. My approach to Classics is historical. And I
tell you that the evidence for the life, the death, and the resurrection of
Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of ancient history . . .
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.
There exists no document from the
ancient world, witnessed by so excellent a set of textual and historical
testimonies . . . Skepticism regarding the historical credentials of
Christianity is based upon an irrational bias.
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.
If the New Testament were a collection of secular
writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt.
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,
For the New Testament of Acts, the confirmation of
historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even
in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken
it for granted.
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.
©1992
Josh McDowell Ministry
