• THE RESURRCTION OF CHRIST WAS A PHYSICAL RESURRECTION.
Some skeptics have tried to solve their dilemma of not being able to explain away the resurrection by suggesting it was a “spiritual resurrection.” Dr. Wilbur M. Smith wrote of the nonsense of this view.
"There is no such thing as the ‘resurrection of a spirit.’ Resurrection means being raised again. The spirit never has to be raised from the grave, because it never enters the grave; a spirit can know no resurrection from the dead, because a spirit never dies! The New Testament continually insists that it was a BODY which was placed in the tomb, so it was a body which came forth from the tomb . . . it is sheer nonsense to talk about believing in a SPIRITUAL resurrection of Christ. There is no such thing. If it were a spirit that was being raised, there would be no sense in insisting on the third day. A spirit could manifest itself at any time after death." - The Supernaturalness of Christ, (Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1940), pp. 193-4, quoted by Tim Lahaye, Jesus: Who Is He? (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Books, 1996), pp. 227-8.
Norman Geisler points out several facts as evidence that the resurrection was physical, not spiritual.
"The physical or bodily nature of the resurrection is proven by the fact that Jesus was ’seen’ by over five hundred people (1 Cor. 15:1-7), that he claimed to ’have flesh and bones’ (Luke 24:39), that he ate fish to prove he was physical (Luke 24:42-43), and that he challenged the doubters to look at his wounds—’handle me and see’ (Luke 24:39). Doubting Thomas was challenged thus: ’Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put your hand, and place it in my side’ (John 20:27). John, who recorded this event, wrote later of Christ: ’That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, . . . this life was made manifest . . .’ (1 John 1:1-2). The repeated contact with the bodily Christ after the resurrection by ear, eye, and touch leaves only one conclusion—they were in physical contact with a bodily resurrected Jesus of Nazareth."- Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), p. 350.
• IS THE NEW TESTAMENT RELIABLE?
1. It agrees with the records of secular historians.
Flavius Josephus was a Pharisee and priest living in Jerusalem. Born in A.D. 37, following the death of Christ, he witnessed first-hand the events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. He fought as a general of the Jewish rebel forces in Galilee in the war against Rome. Josephus was captured by the Romans at the fall of the city of Jotapata and became friends with the Roman general Vespasian. As a historian, with access to both Roman and Jewish governmental records, he described the events in Israel during the turbulent decades of the first century. In A.D. 94, Josephus published in Rome his definitive study of the history of the Jewish people called Antiquities of the Jews. One of the most fascinating passages in his important history concerned the events in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." - Josephus: The Complete Works (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998), p. 577.
Josephus was a Jew writing to please the Romans. This story would not have pleased them in the slightest. He would hardly have included it if it were not true.
2. It agrees with the records of sacred literature.
Josh McDowell uses the writings of Ignatius as evidence for the reliability of the New Testament accounts:
"Ignatius (c. 50-115 A.D.), Bishop of Antioch . . . a native of Syria, a pupil of the Apostle John, . . . is said to have ’been thrown to the wild beasts in the colosseum at Rome. His Epistles were written during his journey from Antioch to his martyrdom.’ At a time when he would have undoubtedly have been very sober of mind, he says of Christ: ’He was crucified and died under Pontius Pilate. He really, and not merely in appearance, was crucified, and died, in the sight of beings in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth. He also rose again in three days. . . .’” - Evidence that Demands a Verdict: Historical Evidences for the Christian Faith (Campus Crusade for Christ, 1972), p. 192, quoted from Who Was Who in Church History, Ed. By Elgin Moyer (Moody Press, 1962).
3. The early date of its writing would not allow for lies.
The tremendous advances in historical research and biblical archaeology in the last century have given us strong evidence that the Gospels and Epistles were written within thirty-five years or less of the events which they describe. Since these records were written so soon after the death and resurrection of Christ, it would be impossible to distribute a blatantly false story about Him while thousands of His followers and observers were still alive to dispute it. Grant Jeffrey illustrates this:
"Imagine that some writer wanted to create a false story in the 1990s about President Kennedy performing miracles and being raised from the dead for forty days after his tragic assassination in November, 1963. To succeed with his plan the writer would have to accomplish two impossible things: (1) He would have to simultaneously acquire every one of the millions of books and newspaper reports about the president and insert his counterfeit passages in this material without being detected by a single reader. (2) He would have to simultaneously convince millions of people around the world to accept his forgery as true, despite the fact that these people who were alive when Kennedy lived have independent recollections that contradict his invented story. It is obvious to anyone who considers the problem carefully that it is impossible for anyone to successfully produce such a forgery about President Kennedy’s life that would convince anyone, let alone the whole population of the world. However, liberal scholars who suggest that the Gospel records were altered to introduce new doctrines and statements about Christ’s virgin birth and resurrection are proposing something that is just as ridiculous as the above example." - Grant R. Jeffrey, The Signature of God: Astonishing Biblical Discoveries (Toronto: Frontier Research Publications, 1996), p. 89.
4. The nature of its accounts proves its truthfulness.
John writes in his gospel that when the soldier pierced Jesus’ side, blood and water came out. Emery H. Bancroft asks, “Why is this told? Modern physiologists tell us that the physical explanation of this is that Jesus suffered from . . . ‘a broken heart.’ . . . But John knew nothing of modern physiology. Why did he insert a detail that has taken hundreds of years to explain? Because he is recording things as they occurred and as he saw them.” - Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), p. 141.
Furthermore, in the New Testament accounts Jesus is said to have appeared only to His friends. If the story had been made up years later, Jesus would certainly have been represented as appearing to His enemies.
• FALSE THEORIES OF CHRIST’S RESURRECTION
1. He never really died on the cross.
Before it can be established that Jesus really rose from the grave it must be established that He actually died. Some skeptics have adopted a “swoon theory” wherein Jesus appeared dead but was revived later in the tomb. Along with this can be categorized the “drug” hypothesis that Jesus was only doped and appeared dead but that He recovered later. Against any such view that Christ did not really die the following evidence can be offered.
(a) Jesus refused to take the common pain-killing drug offered crucifixion victims.
"And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not" (Mark 15:23).
There is no evidence that Jesus was drugged; both the obvious agony and death cry do not befit a man who is drugged.
(b) The heavy loss of blood indicates Jesus was dead. He had five wounds and was on the cross from nine in the morning until just before sunset (cf. Mark 25:25, 42).
(c) Jesus was heard to have uttered a death cry by those standing by.
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost" (John 19:30).
(d) When pierced in the side by the soldiers blood and water flowed out.
"But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water" (John 19:34).
Samuel Houghton, M.D., the great physiologist from the University of Dublin believed that Jesus actually died on the cross and gave his view on the physical cause of His death: “There remains, therefore, no supposition possible to explain the recorded phenomenon [the flow of blood and water] except the combination of the crucifixion and rupture of the heart.” - Quoted by Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict: Historical Evidences for the Christian Faith, p. 207.
(e) The experienced Roman soldiers examined Jesus and pronounced him dead without even breaking his legs to hasten death as was their usual practice.
"But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs" (John 9:33).
(f) Jesus was hurriedly embalmed in about one hundred pounds of spices and bandages and laid in a guarded tomb.
"And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first come to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight. Then took they the body of Jesus ,and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury" (John 19:39-40).
Today any medical person would admit that if the crucifixion hadn’t killed Jesus, the tightly wrapped grave clothes, the cold, damp, sealed tomb and three days without treatment certainly would have. And even if Jesus had resuscitated, he could not have rolled back the heavy stone, overcome the guards, and escaped.
(g) Pilate inquired to make sure that Jesus was dead before he gave the body to Joseph of Arimathea for burial.
"And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph" (Mark 15:44).
(h) After all of this, if Jesus were somehow miraculously still alive, his appearances would have been more those of a resuscitated wretch than of a resurrected and triumphant Savior. It would scarcely have transformed the disciples, led to the conversion of thousands a few weeks later, or ultimately turned the world upside down.
(i) The undisturbed appearance of the grave clothes—apparently like an empty cocoon—is further indication that He was dead.
"And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself" (John 20:7).
Why were the grave clothes undisturbed if there had not been a miraculous rising through them? If it was a mere physical resuscitation or revival of a swooned or drugged body, then Christ would have had to break out of the grave clothes.
2. Someone stole His body.
If Jesus’ body was stolen then who stole it?
(a) Joseph did not remove the body. When could he have done it? If in the dark with torches, he would have been seen. If in the morning at dawn, the women were already there (Luke 24:1). The truth of the matter is that the character of Joseph [he was a “good man” (Luke 23:50)], the anxiety of the Jewish leaders, and the inability of anyone to find any corpse of Jesus are strong negative arguments against this theory.
(b) Roman or Jewish authorities did not remove the body of Jesus. If the authorities had the body, they could have easily produced it and disproved the Christian claims.
(c) The disciples did not steal the body of Jesus. This is the lie that the Jewish authorities came up with (Matthew 28:11-15). But this story does not agree with the known facts. The disciples were fearful men who had fled the scene for fear of being caught (Mark 14:50). Furthermore, the tomb was heavily guarded (Matt. 27:64). And the story of the guards is highly implausible, since they were not reprimanded for falling asleep on duty. The normal penalty for this was death.
3. People looked for Jesus in the wrong tomb.
Norman Geisler refutes this false theory:
"Some have suggested that the women went to the wrong tomb while it was yet dark and that, seeing it empty, they reported that Jesus had risen. . . . If it was so dark, why was the gardener working (John 20:15)? If they went to the wrong tomb, why did not the authorities go to the right tomb, produce the body of Jesus, and disprove the disciples’ claim? Further, why is it that Peter later made the same ‘mistake’ in broad daylight (John 20:6)? How is it that both the women and Peter saw the empty grave clothes, if they were at the wrong tomb? Finally, how can we account for the numerous subsequent appearance of Christ to others in broad daylight over a forty-day period (Acts 1:3)?" - Chistian Apologetics, pp. 350-1.
4. People hallucinated when they thought they saw the risen Christ.
The accounts of Jesus post-resurrection appearances make this theory impossible:
(a) Jesus was seen by a sufficient number of people—over five hundred—to verify the reality of the event.
(b) This was spread over a sufficiently long period of time—forty days.
(c) He was seen on a sufficiently large number of different occasions—about ten—to provide ample independent testimony as to His reality.
(d) Jesus appeared for a sufficiently long enough duration each time to make the identity unquestionable.
(e) Finally, the witnesses were sufficiently skeptical of His appearances to eliminate the possibility of hallucinations.
5. Wild dogs ate Jesus’ body.
Some modern skeptics dismiss the gospel accounts that Jesus was buried in a tomb and think it more likely that He was buried in a shallow grave which wild dogs immediately dug up in order to consume the body. Dr. Tim Layhae points out several immense problems with this theory:
"First among [the problems] is that it was never suggested by anyone until almost 2,000 years after the events in question! Had this been a real possibility, is it likely Jesus’ enemies would have missed it? Second, why would the Jews have claimed that Jesus’ disciples stole His body from a ’tomb’ if they suspected it had been buried in a shallow grave? Why give new faith a boost? The story they paid the Roman soldiers to tell makes no sense—unless, of course, His body really had been burried in a tomb, it was now missing, and a desperate explanation immediately had to be concocted. The ’wild dog’ theory is nothing but a wild exercise in desperation." - Jesus: Who Is He?, p.274.
Quoting Tim Lahaye once again, he states that there is actually some good that comes from all of these false theories:
"The Bible tells us that “God uses the wrath of man to praise Him.” That is what these false theories do: They make it easier to believe that the greatest Man who ever lived would have the greatest death on record and be one-of-a-kind in resurrection. The preceding theories are the best the skeptics have to offer—but they all have the same, fatal problem. They are harder to believe that the real story!" - Jesus: Who Is He?, p. 281.
jonathanrmcleod@yahoo.com
