," he addresses the Resurrection, the most central important event in Christian history. With Easter right behind us, it is time to address a question that is of central importance: Did Jesus really rise from the dead?St. Paul wrote: "But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." (1 Corinthians 15: 13-14) Thus, the question is of the greatest importance to Christians, because if Jesus did not rise, then the faith is futile.
When non-believers think of the Resurrection, they surely must think it is a wild notion, rooted in mythology. Indeed, it is miraculous, that someone would be dead, and 3 days later rise from the dead. Without faith, it is difficult to prove that the Resurrection occurred, because it is not observable. However, in can be proven in that for all of the existing information, the fact that the Resurrection occurred as Christians believe is the only adequate explanation.
Kreeft says this:
"We believe Christ's resurrection can be proved with at least as much certainty as any universally believed and well-documented event in ancient history. To prove this, we do not need to presuppose anything controversial (e.g. that miracles happen). But the skeptic must also not presuppose anything (e.g. that they do not)... We need to presuppose only two things, both of which are hard data, empirical data, which no one denies: the existence of the New Testament texts as we have them, and the existence (but not necessarily the truth) of the Christian religion as we find it today.
He looks at 5 possible explanations of the Resurrection: that it happened and Christianity is correct, that the Apostles hallucinated, that Jesus' resurrection was a myth, that it was a conspiracy by the Apostles, or that Jesus was not really dead, but simply appeared to be dead. So, to take a look at the other theories, and why [I believe] they are not adequate explanations:
The Swoon Theory
- The Romans were very good at crucifixion, they did it often. Plus, the Roman soldiers had plenty of incentive to make sure the job was done right - they could face severe punishment (even death) if the prisoner escaped.
- Accounts show that blood and water poured out of Jesus' side when he was pierced, which is a sign that he would have died from asphyxiation.
- If Jesus merely resuscitate and was not resurrected, how did he get out of the tomb? He would certainly have been extremely weak, so how did he overpower the guards at the tomb? How did he inspire the disciples to spread his message and eventually die for the cause? How did he move the boulder to get out of the tomb?
The Conspiracy Theory
- If this was true, it is certainly the greatest conspiracy in human history, and laughably so far above the 2nd biggest. None of the Apostles ever told, through torture or bribe, that Jesus was not really resurrected. They were martyred for their faith, whereas if they had simply said that the resurrection was a conspiracy, they would have saved their lives. But none of them said that.
- Think about the Apostles of the Gospels... fishermen, tax collectors, meek, cowardice... and then after Jesus' death they are confident, spreading the Word throughout all of the lands, facing down powerful enemies. Would a lie and conspiracy have so transformed them all?
- There is the obvious question... why would the Apostles have done this? What motive would they have had? They got no earthly benefit out of this. Logically, it is not rational that they would have created this conspiracy.
- If it was all a conspiracy, the Romans simply could have produced the body, and it would have been proven false. Yet they never did this. Why? They would have had no motive to hide the body.
The Hallucination Theory
- It was said that Jesus appeared to over 500 people at once. Paul says this in 1 Corinthians chapter 15, including that most of the people he appeared to were still alive at the time, meaning it could have been easy to refute by asking people if they saw Jesus or not. 500 people do not all have the same hallucination.
- The Apostles needed to be won over, they did not believe that Jesus was there at first, thinking He was a ghost. They were only convinced when they were able to touch him and see him eat. A hallucination would not eat real food.
- Once again, all of this could have been put to a stop if the body of Jesus had been produced. Or if the Apostles had gone to the tomb and found His body, they would have known that it was simply a hallucination. One has to imagine that they checked.
- As CS Lewis writes, "Any theory of hallucination breaks down on the fact (and if it is indeed invention [rather than fact] it is the oddest invention that ever entered the mind of man) that on three separate occasions this hallucination was not immediately recognized as Jesus. Even granting that God sent a holy hallucination to teach truths already widely believed without it, and far more easily taught by other methods, and certain to be completely obscured by this, might we not at least hope that he would get the face of the hallucination right? Is he who made all faces such a bungler that he cannot even work up a recognizable likeness of the Man who was himself?"
The Myth Theory
- If the Gospels were simply a myth and work of fiction, then four men who are historically seen as a fisherman (John), tax collector (Matthew), doctor (Luke), and "young man" (Mark) independently created stories strikingly similar in a style that was radically different than any other myth of its time. The more plausible explanation is they observed the things that they wrote about.
- Not enough time passed between the life of Jesus and the writings of the Gospels (and letters of Paul) for this to be a myth. If it was simply a myth, it would have been easily refuted.
- All of the writings and accounts from that time period point to Jesus being resurrected. There are no other explanations or stories from that time which talk about the story of Jesus and provide a different explanation.
- Logically it would not hold true that the Gospels could be a myth, because Peter specifically said that they were not a myth. Thus it is either the truth or a lie, it cannot be a myth.
Thus, I believe, it can be proved that the Resurrection is the most adequate explanation for what actually happened.
What are your thoughts? Have you heard other arguments, or do you believe something else? I would love to hear it.
No comments:
Post a Comment