Did Jesus Rise again: A brief outline for the case for the resurrection
The resurrection of Jesus is the heart of the Christian faith, as without it the Christian faith becomes nothing more than a hoax.
Defending the Christian faith within many topics has become more and more needed due to the increase in attacks on the gospel. From liberal scholars such as Bart Ehrman – atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Muslims such as Zakir Naik.
I will be working on four facts to Jesus that is rarely disputed by scholars
A liberal scholar named John Dominic Crossan believes Jesus rose again spiritually, but may have been left on the cross to hang and eaten by dogs.
I first of all want to examine his statement and whether or not it can be applied to Jesus. William lance craig a philosopher and lecturer in theology at the Talbot school of theology states, If we look at what happened to the body after the cross, then yes we would have to go on the customary that the body is usually hung up on the cross, but that is not what is being explained in the bible.
1 corinth 15, which scholars date within 2 – 10 years of the risen lord, states that jesus was buried in a tomb. The gospels also confirm this early creed in there writings. If we look at without even using the burial statement from the bible, which is enough proof; we can still be certain he was buried. Due to the Sabbath being the next day he would more likely be buried as now work can be done on the Sabbath. All scholars agree even liberals that Jesus having a notice above his head saying Jesus king of the Jews is historical and can be trusted, meaning he may have been taken down due to his authority. JDC is clearly using an assumption without using any source of evidence.
JDC also argues that Jesus may have risen spiritually. In response to this we need to customise ourselves with the jewish primary objective of how they viewed the resurrection. As Dr Craig points out in the Case for Christ After the flesh rotted away they would gather the bones and store them in a box, for when God would raise the dead back to life on the final day of Israel. This would completely contradict the Jewish custom of a resurrection.
Did the Disciples steal the body?
Liberals and atheists throughout the centuries have stated the disciples may have stole the body. This has been refuted many times on the contrary that the disciples then went and preached jesus rose from the dead and were killed for this belief, yet in there heart they knew they stole the body ( makes no sense). But anyway let’s examine.
Sir William Ramsay, regarded as one of the greatest archaeologists ever, investigated the writings of Luke in an apparent effort to undermine the Gospel writer's credentials as a historian, and to discredit the entire New Testament. After 30 years of study, however, Ramsay concluded, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy... this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians
Dr Arif Ahmed who is a philosopher at Cambridge university debated Gary Habermas on the resurrection of Christ and stated it could of been a hallucination, but only because many people saw him does not mean it never happened, as they could of.
Dr Gary Collins one of the most influential and qualified psychologists with a phd and teacher for twenty years and holds the chair for the national psychologists states:
Hallucinations are individual occurrences. By their very nature only one person can see a given hallucination at a time. They certainly aren’t something which can be seen by a given group of people. Neither is it possible that one person could somehow induce an hallucination in somebody else. Since a hallucination exists only in this subjective, personal sense, it is obvious that others cannot witness it.
Gary Habermas also states in his book the case for the resurrection, hallucinations are usually caused by drugs or body deprivation. With the sceptics’ of James and Thomas it also so slim for the chance of a hallucination, as the person needs to be expecting or anticipating a resurrection. On this point The disciples never got to grasp who Jesus was and not for once did they believe he would actually come back to life, they even questioned Mary when she told them.
The facts that point to a resurrection
Using liberal arguments to prove the resurrection
Many liberal scholars and even some conservative use many methods to get the historical Jesus. The most reliable method used in terms of the liberal perspective is the multiple attestation, which is used by D.B Martin and Bart Ehrman, who believe jesus to be an apocryphal prophet.
Multiple attestation. When two or more independent sources present similar or consistent accounts, it is often the case that oral accounts pre-date written sources. Multiple attestation is not the same as independent attestation. If one account used another account as a source, then a story present in all of these is in fact attested in only one independent source. Some scholars think that Mark's account was used as a source for one or more of the other accounts.
Now by using this sequence both Bart and D B martin believe that is more than source that is from Mark and John that is two sources, but is mark and matthew that is one source, as they believe matthew and luke copied mark and gospel q along with L for luke and M for Matthew, which is what is contained by oral tradition that is not in Q or Mark.
So lets continue
All gospels agree with Jesus claiming to be the son of man, the lord of the Sabbath and feeding the 500, proving jesus deity as the son of man is a messianic passage of Daniel 7 and claiming to be lord of the day of god, which is for him not man is blasphemy.
Other things that also should therefore be taken into consideration is if we are going to use this as finding the saying o the historical Jesus, why can’t we show consistency and use it for everything else. The gospels all quote joseph of aromethia, the king of the Jews above Jesus head, both Bart and D B Martin say this is historical. Both mark and john use jesus saying I AM in mark 14 and John 8, which is ego eima in greek, which is the name used by Yahweeh in exodus 3 14, in Hebrew meaning esher or esher eyer esher (I AM who I AM). Therefore jesus is claiming to be GOD.
Now how we can use this for the resurrection by using consistency, as William Lane Craig says we must therefore accept the core belief to be true, as all gospels show the death, burial, empty tomb and resurrection of Jesus, therefore this must also be historical when being consistent.
Even the skeptic Michael Grant in his book a historians review of the gospels, true, the discovery of the empty tomb is described somewhat different as it may seem, but if we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient source, the evidence for the empty tomb is plausible and that the tomb was indeed found empty.
We can also be sure it wasn’t legendary due to the amount of manuscripts we have, the dating of the new testament to the 1st century and 1 corinth 15 , which date so early. As the Greco – roman scholar A.N Sherwan White from Oxford University puts it: it would have been without preceding dent in history for any legend to have grown up that fast and significantly disort the gospels.
Even with this brief review for the case of the resurrection, we can be sure that Jesus rose again; as it is by grace we have been saved.
To conclude as N>T Wright of Durham university puts it, if Jesus never rose again, Christianity would not be here Period.
May God bless you all
The resurrection of Jesus is the heart of the Christian faith, as without it the Christian faith becomes nothing more than a hoax.
Defending the Christian faith within many topics has become more and more needed due to the increase in attacks on the gospel. From liberal scholars such as Bart Ehrman – atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Muslims such as Zakir Naik.
I will be working on four facts to Jesus that is rarely disputed by scholars
1. Jesus was sentenced to be crucified by Pilate
2. 1. On the Sunday morning after his crucifixion, Jesus' tomb was found empty by a group of his female followers.
3. 2. Various individuals and groups of people experienced appearances of Jesus alive after his death.
4. 3. The original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe that God had raised Jesus from the dead despite having nearly every predisposition to the contrary.
I first of all want to examine his statement and whether or not it can be applied to Jesus. William lance craig a philosopher and lecturer in theology at the Talbot school of theology states, If we look at what happened to the body after the cross, then yes we would have to go on the customary that the body is usually hung up on the cross, but that is not what is being explained in the bible.
1 corinth 15, which scholars date within 2 – 10 years of the risen lord, states that jesus was buried in a tomb. The gospels also confirm this early creed in there writings. If we look at without even using the burial statement from the bible, which is enough proof; we can still be certain he was buried. Due to the Sabbath being the next day he would more likely be buried as now work can be done on the Sabbath. All scholars agree even liberals that Jesus having a notice above his head saying Jesus king of the Jews is historical and can be trusted, meaning he may have been taken down due to his authority. JDC is clearly using an assumption without using any source of evidence.
JDC also argues that Jesus may have risen spiritually. In response to this we need to customise ourselves with the jewish primary objective of how they viewed the resurrection. As Dr Craig points out in the Case for Christ After the flesh rotted away they would gather the bones and store them in a box, for when God would raise the dead back to life on the final day of Israel. This would completely contradict the Jewish custom of a resurrection.
Did the Disciples steal the body?
Liberals and atheists throughout the centuries have stated the disciples may have stole the body. This has been refuted many times on the contrary that the disciples then went and preached jesus rose from the dead and were killed for this belief, yet in there heart they knew they stole the body ( makes no sense). But anyway let’s examine.
Sir William Ramsay, regarded as one of the greatest archaeologists ever, investigated the writings of Luke in an apparent effort to undermine the Gospel writer's credentials as a historian, and to discredit the entire New Testament. After 30 years of study, however, Ramsay concluded, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy... this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians
. The large stone was moved, in spite of the Roman guards and seal
Jesus' tomb was secured in three ways:
(a) A large stone was rolled against it. It was customary to roll big stones against tombs; the stones were generally too big to be moved by just a few men, so levers were used to move them. Some have estimated that the stone that sealed Jesus' tomb weighed 1-1/2 to 2 two tons (1,361-1,814 Kilograms), which is the approximate weight of a midsize car.
(b) A Roman guard unit--which usually consisted of four soldiers--was stationed at the tomb. Roman guards were strictly disciplined fighting men held to the highest standards. Failure often required death by torturous and humiliating methods.
(c) The Roman seal was affixed to the stone that secured the tomb. The seal stood for the power and authority of the Roman Empire. Breaking the seal meant automatic execution by crucifixion upside down. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law.1
On resurrection Sunday morning, the first thing that impressed the people who approached the tomb was that the large stone was moved.3 Certainly the entire guard unit would not have fallen asleep with torture and death as the consequences. But even if the guards did fall asleep, how could thieves have sneaked by the guards and moved the massive stone without waking them up?
2. The tomb was empty
Jesus' tomb was near Jerusalem (John 19:42). Had the tomb not been empty, claims of the resurrection, which were first made in Jerusalem, could not have been maintained for even one hour-- people in Jerusalem could have gone to the tomb to check for themselves.3
Both Jewish and Roman sources and admit an empty tomb. Those resources range from Josephus to a compilation of fifth-century Jewish writings called the "Toledoth jeshu."3
3. Jesus' burial wrappings were in the tomb
The linen wrappings in the tomb amazed the disciples. Jesus had simply moved through the wrappings, apparently without a struggle, and laid the face cloth aside. Had Jesus' body been stolen, the thieves would not have taken the time to remove the wrappings or fold the face cloth.
4. There were many witnesses to Jesus' appearances
In studying an event in history, it is important to know how many participants or eyewitnesses were still alive when reports about the event were published. If the number was substantial, the event can be regarded as fairly well established, because the eyewitnesses could have refuted an inaccurate report. For instance, if several people witness a murder, and the police report about it contains numerous lies, the eyewitnesses can refute it.3
The apostle Paul wrote that Christ had been seen by more than 500 people at one time. What's more, most of the 500 were still alive when Paul was proclaiming the resurrection, so skeptics could simply question the eyewitnesses:
1 Cor 15:3-6 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep
5. New Testament accounts were circulated among people who were alive at the time of the resurrection
Archaeological discoveries have confirmed that New Testament accounts of the resurrection were written within the lifetimes of people who were alive at the time of the resurrection. Those people could certainly have denied the accuracy of the Gospel writers' accounts
6. The followers of Christ were persecuted and killed for proclaiming the resurrection
Jesus' disciples fled when Jesus was arrested and taken away for trial prior to being crucified. They were apparently afraid that they would be imprisoned or killed for of their association with Jesus. Peter even denied that he knew Jesus. After Jesus was crucified and buried, they remained in hiding, afraid and depressed, until Mary and others came to tell them that Jesus had risen from the dead. Why would these men, who had displayed such cowardice, risk their lives in going from city to city proclaiming the resurrection, if they did not truly believe that Jesus had risen from the dead? They certainly gained nothing for doing so. The disciples did not receive wealth or prestige for preaching the resurrection; there were no material benefits whatsoever. In fact, they were beaten, stoned to death, thrown to lions, tortured, and crucified for their preaching.3
Was jesus resurrection a hallucination? Dr Arif Ahmed who is a philosopher at Cambridge university debated Gary Habermas on the resurrection of Christ and stated it could of been a hallucination, but only because many people saw him does not mean it never happened, as they could of.
Dr Gary Collins one of the most influential and qualified psychologists with a phd and teacher for twenty years and holds the chair for the national psychologists states:
Hallucinations are individual occurrences. By their very nature only one person can see a given hallucination at a time. They certainly aren’t something which can be seen by a given group of people. Neither is it possible that one person could somehow induce an hallucination in somebody else. Since a hallucination exists only in this subjective, personal sense, it is obvious that others cannot witness it.
Gary Habermas also states in his book the case for the resurrection, hallucinations are usually caused by drugs or body deprivation. With the sceptics’ of James and Thomas it also so slim for the chance of a hallucination, as the person needs to be expecting or anticipating a resurrection. On this point The disciples never got to grasp who Jesus was and not for once did they believe he would actually come back to life, they even questioned Mary when she told them.
The facts that point to a resurrection
1. The disciples died for this belief and a risen Jesus and risked there lives preaching and gave up everything. They even died for there faith. People may say so did muhammads followers or muslims today. But the fact is these muslims have never seen Muhammad and muhammads followers followed a man who did no miracles and stated he seen an angel in a cave, when they never witnessed it themselves.
2. Many people sceptics such as paul and james converted and preached and died for their faith. James and paul have not been questioned on being people who never lived, as we find james in the jewish Talmud and Pauls expansion of writings.
3. Many people from many nations left their faith in rabbinic Judaism and paganism to follow jesus even to death.
4. 1 corinth 15 is an early creed that dates to within a decade of jesus, making it the most historical fact to the belief in early Christianity to jesus.
5. The change in social structure, as J P Moorland reports the jewish life was a way of life to a jew and to leave the Sabbath, jewish customs, the law, circumcision and believe in monotheistic but Trinitarian god, which the nature of GOD. The jews were tortured by hitler and crusades, they wouldn’t leave the law for anything but many did and fled the persecution of jews and romans in the first century for this carpenter boy from Nazareth, makes no sense.
6. The sudden eruption of the church proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus.
Using liberal arguments to prove the resurrection
Many liberal scholars and even some conservative use many methods to get the historical Jesus. The most reliable method used in terms of the liberal perspective is the multiple attestation, which is used by D.B Martin and Bart Ehrman, who believe jesus to be an apocryphal prophet.
Multiple attestation. When two or more independent sources present similar or consistent accounts, it is often the case that oral accounts pre-date written sources. Multiple attestation is not the same as independent attestation. If one account used another account as a source, then a story present in all of these is in fact attested in only one independent source. Some scholars think that Mark's account was used as a source for one or more of the other accounts.
Now by using this sequence both Bart and D B martin believe that is more than source that is from Mark and John that is two sources, but is mark and matthew that is one source, as they believe matthew and luke copied mark and gospel q along with L for luke and M for Matthew, which is what is contained by oral tradition that is not in Q or Mark.
So lets continue
All gospels agree with Jesus claiming to be the son of man, the lord of the Sabbath and feeding the 500, proving jesus deity as the son of man is a messianic passage of Daniel 7 and claiming to be lord of the day of god, which is for him not man is blasphemy.
Other things that also should therefore be taken into consideration is if we are going to use this as finding the saying o the historical Jesus, why can’t we show consistency and use it for everything else. The gospels all quote joseph of aromethia, the king of the Jews above Jesus head, both Bart and D B Martin say this is historical. Both mark and john use jesus saying I AM in mark 14 and John 8, which is ego eima in greek, which is the name used by Yahweeh in exodus 3 14, in Hebrew meaning esher or esher eyer esher (I AM who I AM). Therefore jesus is claiming to be GOD.
Now how we can use this for the resurrection by using consistency, as William Lane Craig says we must therefore accept the core belief to be true, as all gospels show the death, burial, empty tomb and resurrection of Jesus, therefore this must also be historical when being consistent.
Even the skeptic Michael Grant in his book a historians review of the gospels, true, the discovery of the empty tomb is described somewhat different as it may seem, but if we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply to any other ancient source, the evidence for the empty tomb is plausible and that the tomb was indeed found empty.
We can also be sure it wasn’t legendary due to the amount of manuscripts we have, the dating of the new testament to the 1st century and 1 corinth 15 , which date so early. As the Greco – roman scholar A.N Sherwan White from Oxford University puts it: it would have been without preceding dent in history for any legend to have grown up that fast and significantly disort the gospels.
Even with this brief review for the case of the resurrection, we can be sure that Jesus rose again; as it is by grace we have been saved.
To conclude as N>T Wright of Durham university puts it, if Jesus never rose again, Christianity would not be here Period.
May God bless you all
