Nature & Significance Of Christ’s Resurrection

            Resurrection is an act of rising from the dead. Several instances of the resurrection are mentioned in the Bible.

            Christ’s resurrection is much unlike the other resurrections mentioned in the Bible. If Christ was merely raised from the dead, HIS resurrection would have been similar to that of the other resurrections e.g. the resurrection of Lazarus. But Christ’s resurrection was more than a mere rising from the dead. Sean McDowell, Professor of Christian Apologetics at Biola University, differentiates Christ’s resurrection from the other resurrections mentioned in the Bible:¹

1. Resurrection Is Not Immortality of the Soul. Greek philosophers saw the body as the prison house of the soul. The material world was considered corrupt, fallen, and evil. Thus, the goal of salvation was to escape the physical realm and to be freed from its shackles. But in Hebrew thought, the material world is considered good. The soul without the body is incomplete. A human being is a body and soul in unity.

2. Resurrection Is Not Reincarnation. Eastern religions teach reincarnation, the rebirth of the self (consciousness, soul, mind, etc.) after the death of the body…Depending on the specific tradition, the goal is to escape the cycle of reincarnation and experience nirvana or personal annihilation. In contrast, the biblical view is that human beings live one life, and then are raised to be judged by God (Hebrews 9:27).

3. Resurrection Is Not Resuscitation. …the Bible records many instances of people coming back to life. Elijah raised the widow’s son (1 Kings 17:17-24). Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 11:43-44). Peter raised Tabitha (Acts 9:36-42). And Paul raised Eutychus (Acts 20:9-12). But here is the difference between these people and Jesus: They would each die again, but Jesus was raised to immortality and glory.

4. Resurrection Is Not Translation. The Bible records at least two instances where people were taken directly to God without dying. Enoch lived 365 years and then was taken up directly to be with God (Genesis 5:21-24). The prophet Elijah was taken to heaven by a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:1). These are not examples of resurrection because there is no evidence either experienced death.

So, what is resurrection? …it is not a return to the present physical existence with all its limitations. Resurrected bodies are transformed, incorruptible, and eternal (1 Corinthians 15:20-23).

Jesus was not resuscitated, reincarnated, or translated. And his soul did not escape to an immaterial realm. Jesus was resurrected—never to die again. And since Jesus is the firstfruits of those who are yet to come, if we trust in Christ, we too will one day have transformed, resurrected bodies and be able to experience eternity with Christ and the Church in the New Heavens and New Earth (Revelation 21-22). (Emphasis Mine).

            A complexity needs to be resolved when we discuss the Lord’s resurrection. Christ’s resurrection was rather unique in the sense that HE possessed a glorified resurrected body with material properties. (A fully glorified body will not contain any material properties.)

            The post-resurrection appearance of Christ to HIS disciples (more specifically to Thomas) indicates Christ’s possession of a glorified body with material properties. Christ’s disciples embraced HIS feet when HE appeared to them after HIS resurrection (Matthew 28:9). In another instance, Christ appealed to HIS disciples to see and feel the presence of the nail marks and the spear wound in HIS body, “On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jewish leaders, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord…Now Thomas (also known as Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.” A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”” (John 20:19-20, 24-27, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            But Christ’s body was not a completely material body after HIS resurrection. It was a glorified body albeit with material properties.

            Christ appeared to HIS disciples while they were behind locked doors. So Christ may have either walked right through the locked door or HE may have walked through the walls of that house. This suggests that Christ possessed a glorified body that transcended the normal laws of physical existence.

            Why was Christ’s body not a fully glorified body even after HIS resurrection? We can resolve this complexity by bearing in mind that Christ’s resurrection and ascension were two separate events. For instance, when we, the believers of Christ, resurrect, our bodies will be transformed into a fully glorified body in one step.

            However, since Christ’s resurrection and ascension were two separate events, it is quite plausible that Christ attained HIS glorified body in a two-step process i.e. a glorified body with material properties after the resurrection and a totally glorified body sans material properties either before or during ascension.

            Christ’s resurrected body was yet to undergo a complete transformation to a glorified body prior to HIS ascension (and become the “spiritual body” that Paul speaks of in 1 Corinthians 15:44). This was necessary since Christ’s glorified body with material properties helped erase HIS disciples’ doubts as well.

            This may have been a reason as to why Christ’s body was not a fully glorified body prior to HIS ascension. Therefore, to reiterate, Christ would have attained a fully glorified body either before or during HIS ascension.

            It is also quite plausible that Christ’s glorified body had material properties to indicate that Christ’s resurrection was a physical and a bodily resurrection and not a spiritual resurrection as some detractors of Historic Christianity may contend.  

            What is the significance of Christ’s resurrection?

            Christianity is relevant only because Christ resurrected. Christ’s resurrection was so significant that had Christ not resurrected, Christianity would be irrelevant. Apostle Paul emphasized that Christianity would be useless if Christ did not resurrect, “…if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” (1 Corinthians 15:14, NIV).

            Christ’s resurrection is very important because it symbolized a total victory over death. Since the wages of sin is death (Romans 6: 23), overcoming death through resurrection or death’s inability to hold Christ signified a complete annihilation of death and the forces of evil.

            Christ resurrected to judge the living and the dead. Christ’s resurrection is not merely significant to Christians, but it is of utmost significance to the non-Christians as well. Judgment of everyone who’s been in existence is intricately linked with Christ’s resurrection.

            Christ was raised from the dead to judge the living and the dead, “For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.” (Acts 17:31, NIV cf. 2 Timothy 4:1).

            Those who believe in Christ have the incomparably great power. Christ’s resurrection ensures that we, who believe in Christ, have this incomparably great power that God used to raise Christ from death (Ephesians 1:19-20). This new resurrection power is for us to gain greater victories over sin and the forces of evil so that our ministry in HIS vineyard is according to HIS will and power.  

            Since Christ was raised from the dead, we too shall be raised from the dead. So may we continue doing the Lord’s work in faith that we and those whom we, by the grace of God, bring into God’s Kingdom will be raised from the dead to live with HIM forever.

            The Lord’s risen and HE is risen indeed! Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household (Acts 16:31, RSV).

Endnotes:

¹http://seanmcdowell.org/blog/4-misconceptions-about-resurrection-and-the-truth, last accessed on 31^st March 2018. 

Why Do Scientists Believe In Christ’s Resurrection?

            Historic Christianity is predicated on Christ’s resurrection. If Christ has not been raised, our faith is futile (1 Corinthians 15: 12-17, NIV).

            Those who invigorate a war between Science and Christianity (e.g. scientists subscribing to atheism and skepticism) claim that Christ did not resurrect. Richard Dawkins - a professor at Oxford University until 2008 - is one among those who reject Christ’s resurrection, “Presumably what happened to Jesus was what happens to all of us when we die. We decompose. Accounts of Jesus's resurrection and ascension are about as well-documented as Jack and the Beanstalk.”¹

            But Christian scientists believe in Christ’s resurrection! Ian Hutchinson is one among them, “I’m a professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT, and I believe that Jesus was raised from the dead. So do dozens of my colleagues. How can this be?...We really believe in the bodily resurrection of the first century Jew known as Jesus of Nazareth. My Christian colleagues at MIT – and millions of other scientists worldwide – somehow think that a literal miracle like the resurrection of Jesus is possible…The founders of the scientific revolution and many of the greatest scientists of the intervening centuries were serious Christian believers. For Robert Boyle (of the ideal gas law, co-founder in 1660 of the Royal Society) the resurrection was a fact. For James Clerk Maxwell (whose Maxwell equations of 1862 govern electromagnetism) a deep philosophical analysis undergirded his belief in the resurrection. And for William Phillips (Nobel prize-winner in 1997 for methods to trap atoms with laser light) the resurrection is not discredited by science.”²

            Dr. John Lennox, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, cites famous contemporary Christian scientists who believe in Christ’s resurrection, “…there are eminent, scientists, like Professor William Phillips (Physics Nobel Prizewinner, 1998), Professor Sir John Polkinghorne FRS (Quantum Physicist, Cambridge) and, in the United States, the current Director of the National Institute of Health and former Director of the Human Genome Project, Francis Collins (to name just three) who…affirm their belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which they regard as the supreme evidence for the truth of the Christian worldview.”³

            Why and how do Christian scientists believe in Christ’s resurrection or the miraculous?

            Christian scientists know that science can investigate the miraculous, but science cannot prove or disprove the miraculous, “…while science can’t logically rule miracles in or out of consideration, it can be a helpful tool for investigating contemporary miraculous claims. It may be able to reveal self-deception, trickery, or misperception. If someone has been seen levitating on a supposed flying carpet in their living room, then the discovery of powerful electromagnets in their basement might well render such claims implausible…Science functions by reproducible experiments and observations. Miracles are, by definition, abnormal and non-reproducible, so they cannot be proved by science’s methods.”⁴

            Moreover, Christian scientists reject the reasons offered by non-Christian scientists. The argument employed by atheists and skeptics to reject the miraculous is grossly invalid.

            Miracles are rejected on the premise that they go against the laws of nature. But this argument, as Dr. John Lennox explains, is invalid, “Hume denies the miraculous, because miracle would go against the uniform laws of nature. And yet elsewhere he denies the uniformity of nature. He famously argues that, just because the sun has been observed to rise in the morning for thousands of years, it does not mean that we can be sure that it will rise tomorrow. This is an example of the Problem of Induction: on the basis of past experience you cannot predict the future, says Hume. But if that were true, let us see what follows.

            Suppose Hume is right, and no dead man has ever risen up from the grave through the whole of earth's history so far; by his own argument he still cannot be sure that a dead man will not rise up tomorrow. That being so, he cannot rule out miracle. What has become now of Hume's insistence on the laws of nature, and its uniformity? He has destroyed the very basis on which he tries to deny the possibility of miracles.

            In any case, if according to Hume we can infer no regularities, it would be impossible even to speak of laws of nature, let alone the uniformity of nature with respect to those laws. And if nature is not uniform, then using the uniformity of nature as an argument against miracles is simply absurd.”⁵

            Dr. Lennox posits God’s intervention into nature as a reason for the miraculous, “…from the theistic perspective, the laws of nature predict what is bound to happen if God does not intervene; though, of course, it is no act of theft, if the Creator intervenes in his own creation. It is incorrect to argue that the laws of nature make it impossible for us to believe in the existence of God and the possibility of his intervention in the universe. That would be like claiming that an understanding of the laws of the internal combustion engine makes it impossible to believe that the designer of a motor-car, or one of his mechanics, could or would intervene and remove the cylinder head. Of course they could intervene. Moreover, this intervention would not destroy those laws. The very same laws, that explained why the engine worked with the cylinder head on, would now explain why it does not work with the head removed.

            It is, therefore, inaccurate and misleading to say with Hume that miracles "violate" the laws of nature. We could, of course, say that it is a law of nature that human beings do not rise again from the dead by some natural mechanism. But Christians do not claim that Christ rose from the dead by such a mechanism. They claim that he rose from the dead by supernatural power. By themselves, the laws of nature cannot rule out that possibility.

            When a miracle takes place, it is the laws of nature that alert us to the fact that it is a miracle. It is important to grasp that Christians do not deny the laws of nature, as Hume implies they do. It is an essential part of the Christian position to believe in the laws of nature as descriptions of those regularities and cause-effect relationships built into the universe by its Creator and according to which it normally operates. If we did not know them, we should never recognise a miracle if we saw one…

            …To suppose, then, that Christianity was born in a pre-scientific, credulous and ignorant world is simply false to the facts. The ancient world knew the law of nature as well as we do, that dead bodies do not get up out of graves. Christianity won its way by dint of the sheer weight of evidence that one man had actually risen from the dead.”⁶

            Therefore, the reasons offered by the non-Christian scientists to reject miracles are weak and invalid.

            There are, however, compelling evidences that persuade Christian scientists to believe in Christ\s resurrection, “Most of our evidence comes from the New Testament and it may surprise many that, in comparison with many other ancient works of literature, the New Testament is by far the best-attested document from the ancient world…It is the constant and unvarying testimony of the Gospels that the tomb was found to be empty when the Christian women came early in the morning of the first day of the week, to complete the task of encasing the body of Jesus in spices. And when the apostles went to investigate the women's report, they likewise found the tomb empty…But it was the way in which the grave-cloths were lying that convinced St. John of a miracle. So, could someone have taken the body and rewound the cloths deliberately to give the impression that a miracle had happened? But who could this have been? It was morally impossible for the followers of Christ to have done it. It was also psychologically impossible, since they were not expecting a resurrection. And it was practically impossible, because of the guards. It would be absurd to think of the authorities doing anything remotely suggestive of a resurrection. After all, it was they who had ensured that the tomb was guarded, to avoid anything like that!

            The early Christians did not simply assert that the tomb was empty. Far more important for them was the fact that subsequently they had met the risen Christ, intermittently over a period of forty days. According to Paul's list in 1 Corinthians 15, there were originally well over five hundred people who at different times saw the risen Christ during that period…To anyone who knows anything about the ancient laws regarding legal testimony, it is very striking that the first reports mentioned in the Gospels of appearances of the Risen Christ were made by women. In first-century Jewish culture, women were not normally considered to be competent witnesses. At that time, therefore, anyone who wanted to invent a resurrection story would never have thought of commencing it in this way. The only value of including such a story would be if it were both true and easy to verify. Its very inclusion, therefore, is a clear mark of historical authenticity.

            The evidence of the empty tomb, the character of the witnesses, the explosion of Christianity out of Judaism and the testimony of millions today are inexplicable without the resurrection. As Holmes said to Watson: "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"” (Emphasis Mine).⁷

Endnotes:

¹http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/richard-dawkins-you-ask-the-questions-special-427003.html

²http://www.veritas.org/can-scientist-believe-resurrection-three-hypotheses/

³http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/04/16/3986403.htm

⁴http://www.veritas.org/can-scientist-believe-resurrection-three-hypotheses/

⁵http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/04/16/3986403.htm

⁶http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/04/16/3986403.htm

⁷Ibid.

Websites cited were last accessed on 25^th November 2017.

The Shroud of Turin Is The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ

            The Shroud of Turin was believed to have been wrapped around Jesus Christ as a burial cloth when HE was taken down from the cross. The shroud is a 14½ foot long and 3½ foot wide linen cloth bearing the image of a crucified man. The image is widely believed to be that of the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The shroud is the single most studied religious artifact ever.¹

            Controversy rages over this shroud. Many scientists and evangelical Christians dispute the historical veracity of the shroud. They claim it is a medieval forgery or a hoax perpetrated by the Church.

            Are there reasonable evidences to indicate that the image of the man in the shroud is that of Christ? If so, the shroud should be the burial cloth of Christ.

Historicity

            Some detractors of the shroud claim that there is no historical data of the shroud prior to the 13^th century. If this claim is true, the chance that the shroud was the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth is rather slim.

            But Professor Gary Habermas cites a number of historical references to the shroud prior to the 13^th century:²

            1. There are records of a second century historical citation of the shroud by St. Braulio of Seville, a sermon about the shroud by a church official, and painting of Jesus’ face based on the shroud.

            2. An early Christian tradition asserts that a mysterious cloth with the imprint of Christ’s face was carried by Christ’s disciple Thaddeus to Edessa, the modern day Turkey, subsequently this cloth was moved to Constantinople and then to Turin.

            3. At least 6 species of pollen was found by Swiss Botanist Max Frei in the cloth which was limited exclusively to Israel.

            4. The images of coin placed over the eyes of the man in the shroud, a Jewish practice in the first century, were identified as the lepton (coin) of Pontius Pilate, minted from AD 29-32.

            5. The linen material and the weave have been dated by the textile experts as being from the time of Jesus (plus or minus 100 years).

Radiocarbon Dating

            The shroud’s website disputes the claim of the radiocarbon dating in 1988 that declared the shroud as a fake, “Although substantial scientific data now exists that indicates the sample chosen for dating was anomalous and not representative of the main cloth, most of the world and the media still ignore the massive amount of published science that points to the Shroud's authenticity and accepts instead that single dating test as proof of the Shroud's medieval origin. What very few people know about are the events that occurred behind the scenes that further disqualified the 1988 results. Two new videos that reveal just that are now available online from David Rolfe and Francesca Saracino that deal specifically with those issues and we thought they were important enough to let you know immediately via this Special Update.”³

            A video titled “A Grave Injustice” on the website, www.shroudenigma.com reveals that the C14 labs (that determined the shroud as fake) were themselves severely flawed in their dating protocols. 

Jewish Burial Practice & the Gospels

            If the Gospel account of Christ’s burial contradicts that of the shroud, then the shroud cannot be the actual burial cloth of Jesus. Gary Habermas offers insights into this aspect to assert the authenticity of the shroud.⁴

            Some object that the facial image in the shroud could not be that of Jesus since there would have been a napkin placed flat over the face of Jesus during HIS burial. Hence, the image of Jesus’ face would be on the napkin and not on the shroud.

            But careful investigation reveals that the napkin was folded up and tied around the head to keep the jaw closed (cf. John 11:44 & John 20:7). Interestingly, the image of the man in the shroud reveals that he had a cloth tied around his jaw!

            The man in the shroud was not washed before the burial, hence there were blood stains. Was not Jesus washed before the burial? If Christ was washed before HIS burial, how could there be blood stains on the shroud?

            The code of Jewish law states that people killed by the government would not be washed before burial so to allow the blood to remain on the body as a payment for the person’s acts against the state. John 19:40 states that Jesus was buried according to the Jewish burial customs; hence HE could not have been washed.

            Furthermore, the gospels speak of Jesus buried in more than one strip of linen; the gospels speak of graveclothes in both the singular and the plural. But the shroud is just one piece of cloth, if so, how could the shroud be that of Christ’s?

            Scientific testing of the shroud indicates that the man buried in the shroud was buried in at least four strips of linen. Apart from the single piece of shroud cloth, his head was wrapped around in a napkin as well as having his wrists and ankles tied together (cf. John 11: 44).

            Therefore, the gospel accounts of Jesus’ burial, the Jewish law and the Mishna do not contradict with that of the man in the shroud.

Identity of the Man

            The image of the man in the burial cloth reveals amazing data that’s so remarkably similar to the suffering of Jesus Christ:⁵

            1. The man in the shroud was beaten severely by the Roman flagrum. There were number of blows to the face, large bruises on the cheeks, twisted nose, one eye swollen half shut and a cut upper lip. He suffered more than 120 whipping wounds.

            2. The large rub marks in the shoulder blades of the man in the shroud indicates that he was forced to carry a heavy object (cross) across his shoulders. There are five major wounds associated to death by crucifixion – puncture wounds through the wrist and through the top of both feet, and a pierce wound in the right side of the chest.

            Therefore, we cannot be absolutely certain that the man in the shroud was Jesus, but we can reasonably infer that this burial cloth is probably that of Jesus, for there are many minute points of agreement and the absence of contradictions.

Evidences for Christ’s Resurrection

            The shroud provides strong evidences for resurrection, asserts Dr. Gary Habermas, who is an expert in the study of Christ’s resurrection, “The man buried in the shroud did not remain in it for more than a few days, since no decomposition is present. Yet the body was not removed or unwrapped because, among other reasons, the blood clots and borders of the stains are intact. And as a grand climax, there is a probable burst of radiation from the dead body. What makes all of this data even more exciting is that it is empirical, scientific evidence that is repeatable.”⁶

Extent of the Shroud’s Relevance

            Should the authenticity of the Shroud validate Christianity, the Bible, and Christ’s historical existence? No!

            Alternatively, if the shroud is authentic, would the Bible be deemed infallible? No!

            The Bible is inspired, inerrant and infallible. However, the authenticity of the shroud is not a necessary factor to validate the Bible. The Bible and Christ’s existence are validated by other means. The garments or the vessels that Christ used are neither the validating factors of the Lord’s existence nor that of the Bible.  

Conclusion

            The shroud is a fascinatingly miraculous artifact.

            Absolute certainty is impossible when we contend with historical data. If we need absolute certainty of any historical event, we ought to take a time-machine, go back in history to ascertain the validity of that event. But we cannot go back in time. So we can only be reasonably certain about any historical event with the evidences at hand.

            Was the shroud Christ’s burial cloth? Given the plethora of evidences why should we not believe that the shroud belongs to Christ? The shroud is consistent with the biblical data. It is also highly probable that the man in the shroud is Jesus. Furthermore, the shroud has been preserved in history as that of Christ’s burial cloth.

            Given the availability of the evidences, we can be reasonably certain that the shroud was the Lord Jesus’ burial cloth.

Endnotes:

¹https://www.shroud.com/

²http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_Evangelical_Theological_Soc/Habermas_JETS_Shroud-of-Turin-and-significance.htm

³ https://www.shroud.com/latebrak.htm

⁴http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_Evangelical_Theological_Soc/Habermas_JETS_Shroud-of-Turin-and-significance.htm

⁵Ibid.

⁶Ibid.

Why Should We Believe Christ’s Resurrection (Evidences For Christ’s Resurrection)

            Easter is commercialized into eggs and bunny. Although the bunny and eggs are oft associated with pagan connotations such as Eastre (or Eostre), better evidences suggests the contrary. History.com reports that German immigrants were the source of Easter bunny and the eggs were a depiction of Christ’s resurrection.¹

            Significantly, if Christ did not resurrect, our faith is useless, says the Bible, “If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” (1 Corinthians 15: 13-14, NIV).

            How could we be reasonably sure that Christ rose from the dead?

Historical Basis Affirming Christ’s Resurrection

            Mike Licona, associate professor in theology at Houston Baptist University, offers reasons as to why historians consider Christ’s resurrection as a credible historical event. Historians consider confirmations by independent sources, unsympathetic sources and eyewitnesses as objective and reasonable evidences for Christ’s resurrection: ²

            Confirmation by Independent Sources: The gospels and Paul’s letters are independent of each other, yet they affirm Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. The gospels and the Pauline letters were authored by different people from varied contexts.

            Since the gospels and the Pauline letters, being independent of each other, affirm Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, historians trust the authenticity of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Historians term this process of validating a historical account as the “Criterion of Multiple Attestation.”

            Confirmation by Unsympathetic Sources: Publius Cornelius Tacitus, historian of the Roman Empire, was not a friend of Christianity. In his work Annals (15.44), Tacitus referred to Christianity as an evil and a mischievous superstition. However, at the same time, he attested to Christ’s crucifixion by Pontius Pilate (crucifixion was an antecedent event to resurrection).

            When antagonistic sources confirm Christ’s crucifixion, historians trust that Christ was indeed crucified. While Christ’s disciples may have an innate bias to affirm the crucifixion, Tacitus, as the unsympathetic source, had no reason whatsoever to affirm Christ’s crucifixion. This process of validating a historical account is termed as the “Criterion of Unsympathetic Sources.”

            Confirmation by Eyewitnesses: Historians trust both the reports of eyewitnesses and reports written closer to the event described. This is termed as the “Criterion of Early Attestation.”

            Therefore, historians trust that Apostle Paul preserved an oral tradition about Christ’s resurrection that goes back to the early Christian church or the Jerusalem apostles, who were eyewitnesses to Christ’s resurrection. Paul’s letter to the Corinthian church narrates Christ’s resurrection from the perspective of the eyewitnesses and also as a written record of Christ’s resurrection closer to the time of Christ’s resurrection, “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 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. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.” (1 Corinthians 15: 3-7, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

Minimal-Facts Affirms Christ’s Resurrection

            Furthermore, Dr. Gary Habermas, Distinguished Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and Chairman of the Department of Philosophy and Theology at Liberty University, who specializes in the study of Resurrection-of-Jesus research, states five highly credible historical facts a.k.a. “Minimal Facts” that almost every historian accepts:

            “1) Jesus died due to crucifixion.

            2) His disciples had experiences that they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus.

            3) Their lives were transformed because of this conviction.

            4) As a result, they proclaimed this message very soon after Jesus’ death, actually within weeks…

            5) A man named Saul of Tarsus was converted to Jesus Christ by what he also concluded was a personal appearance of the risen Jesus to him.

            These are five tough facts that virtually everyone is going to grant as historical, especially the scholars who have studied this area.” ³

            Moreover, Habermas includes the conversion of Apostle James, brother of Christ Jesus and a skeptic, who became a follower of Christ after HE appeared to him. These historical facts are sufficient to conclude that Christ’s resurrection was factual.

Defeating Objections to Resurrection

            Christ’s Disciples Hallucinated: The detractors of Christianity may argue that Christ’s disciples hallucinated and that they did not see the real Jesus.

            Habermas offers reasonable refutations to defeat the hallucination hypothesis: ⁴

            1. Hallucinations do not occur to groups. On the contrary, the risen Christ appeared to groups of people (1 Corinthians 15: 5-7).

            2. Those that experienced the risen Jesus were different genders and different personalities – the hardhearted Peter, tender-hearted John, soft-hearted Marys. It is rather implausible for people that are so different (personality, gender, time and place of sighting the risen Jesus) to hallucinate the same risen Jesus. They would not have been in the proper frame of mind to hallucinate.

            3. Hallucinations do not change people, whereas the apostles were thoroughly changed when they saw the risen Jesus. These disciples were so changed that they were gave up their lives for Christ’s sake.

            4. The conversion of Apostle Paul and James, the brother of Jesus, also defeats the hallucination hypothesis. Paul was actively persecuting Christians. James was a skeptic. Neither of them would have longed to hallucinate the risen Jesus. So both these men would not have been in the proper frame of mind to hallucinate the risen Christ.

            Given these reasonable evidences, we could reasonably conclude that those who posited the hallucination hypothesis probably hallucinated this hypothesis.

            Jesus Did Not Die At The Cross (Swoon Theory):⁵ The Quran states that Jesus did not die on the cross. Other detractors of Christianity state that Jesus merely swooned or lost consciousness at the cross.

            Medical science strongly suggests that Jesus died of asphyxiation. The heart wound inflicted by the soldier upon the crucified Christ confirmed Christ’s death. The sucking chest condition (Piercing of the spear into Christ’s upper thoracic area would have prevented effective breathing and produce sucking sound from the wound. This would have certainly killed Christ) is an added affirmation for Christ’s death on the cross.

            But the supreme defeater to the objection that Christ did not die on the cross comes from the German liberal scholar, David Strauss.

            Strauss asserted that the swoon theory was self-contradictory. If swoon theory was accurate, then Jesus would have been alive. The disciples then would have no reason to preach the gospel, for there need be no forgiveness, no church, and no eternal hope in Christ.

            Finally, we can safely bury the swoon theory for we also have the affirmation of Christ’s crucifixion by non-Christian historians such as Thallus (52AD), Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD), Josephus (93AD), Pliny the Younger (112AD), Cornelius Tacitus (116AD), and Phlegon (140AD).

            Jesus Was Buried Elsewhere: ⁶ Absence of authentic evidences placing Jesus’ body elsewhere and the earlier source that Mark used for his gospel narrative are sufficient for the historians to believe that Christ was buried in Joseph of Arimathea’s family burial cave.

Conclusion

            Be assured that every objection against resurrection could be reasonably defended with the evidences already at hand.

            Habermas’ words constitute the most appropriate conclusion, “Now, if you’re sitting there wondering, “Look, I don’t know. I’m a Hindu. I’m a Buddhist. I’m an agnostic. I’m an atheist.” Sure, you can walk away and not believe in Jesus, but do you know what? I don’t think you can walk away and say there’s no data. I don’t think you can walk away and say that there are no facts. I really wonder if you want to throw out or to ignore these facts because we can get to each one of them independently and for multiple reasons.

            But do you know where all this is going? Paul says that it’s because of the resurrection that death has no sting. It’s because of the resurrection that the grave has no victory. Because of the resurrection of Jesus we have the precious opportunity for eternal life. But we need to say “I do” to Jesus. It’s all in whether we make that commitment…If you don’t say “I do” to Jesus, what do you have? You still haven’t trusted his teachings. “O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory?” [1 Cor. 15:55] I leave you with the words of Jesus: “Because I live, ye shall live also.” [John 14:19]” ⁷

Endnotes:

Websites cited were last accessed on 27^th March 2016.

¹ http://www.history.com/topics/holidays/easter-symbols

² http://www.risenjesus.com/assessment-present-state-historical-jesus-studies

³ http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/EvidenceBook/GaryHabermas_Evidence-for-the-historical-Jesus-Release_1point1.pdf, p54.

⁴ Ibid, p57-58.

⁵ Ibid, p65-66.

⁶ Ibid, p68-70.

⁷ Ibid, p87.

Is Christianity Fake? (Defeating Doubts)

            Doubt kills. Without a doubt, doubt has massacred individuals, marriages, families and their environment.  

            The title question is a religious doubt. There are personal doubts as well. Without entering into the exhaustive science of doubt, let’s endeavor to understand the cause and cure of this complex killer.  

            Author and social critic Os Guiness in his work God in the Dark defines doubt as a divided heart. Os defines belief and unbelief as being “in one mind.” The believer is in one mind about trusting something or someone as true; the unbeliever is in one mind to reject something or someone. So both the believer and the unbeliever are in one mind about their belief.

            The doubter is not in one mind. The doubter believes and disbelieves at once and so is in “two minds.” Hence the doubter’s heart is divided. Os Guiness adds, “at its most basic, doubt is a matter of truth, trust and trustworthiness.”¹

            The doubter doubts because he does not doubt his doubt. The doubter doubts because he believes his doubt. So a misguided belief is at the heart of the doubt.

            Why is there a doubt or a misguided belief in doubt? Os Guiness, through his appropriately worded subtitles in God in the Dark highlights the following as reasons for doubt:

            1. Ingratitude

            2. Faulty view of God

            3. Weak foundations

            4. Lack of Commitment

            5. Lack of Growth

            6. Unruly Emotions

            7. Hidden Conflicts

            8. Impatience

            9. Inquisitiveness

            So if we doubt the veracity of our Christian faith or if we doubt anything or anyone, it could well be due to some or all of the reasons stated above.

            How do we kill our doubts?

            Os Guiness reminds us of our own experience. We may, at some point in time, have been frustrated while striving to solve a jigsaw puzzle. While being frustrated, we may have been certain that the pieces do not fit the picture on the box i.e. we would have sincerely doubted the jigsaw puzzle. But upon rearranging the wrong pieces into the right places, we would have realized that the fault was with us and not with the picture.

            The fault is with the doubter. Blame ourselves; this is the most appropriate starting point to cure us of our doubts.

            As a case in point, let’s consider a religious doubt, “What if Christianity is false?”

            New Testament scholar Mike Licona offers four action points to defeat our religious doubts. ²

            1. Doubting is normal: The Bible is replete with instances of doubters. Abraham doubted God’s promise. The psalmist doubted God. John the Baptist and Thomas doubted Jesus. None of them were condemned for their doubts, although some doubts were rebuked as in the case of Job and Thomas.

            Sincere doubters who are open to reasonable answers grow during the process of their doubts. Job, Abraham and Paul grew in their faith through their doubts, “Religious doubt is very common and affects almost everyone at some time. It is not necessarily sin, nor must it be the opposite of faith. It can even produce some good results. But it can also lead to serious situations that need to be treated,” says Dr. Gary Habermas, Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Dept. of Philosophy and Theology at Liberty University.³

            2. Good Evidence Supports the Truth of Christianity: Resurrection of the Lord Jesus is the bedrock of Christianity. Apostle Paul asserted the futility of our faith if Christ had not been raised, “if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (1 Corinthians 15: 14, NIV).

            Strong evidence exists for Christ’s resurrection, “Without question, the chief verification of Christian theism comes from the resurrection of Jesus. This extraordinary event can be shown to be historical even when only a bare minimum of historical facts is used, each of which is both admitted by unbelieving critical scholars today, as well as being strongly attested by the known data…In the New Testament, both Jesus (Matt. 12:39-40; 16:4) and His apostles (Acts 2:22-24; 17:31) pointed to the resurrection as the chief sign that He was God’s messenger.”⁴

            3. Absolute Certainty is an Unreasonable Expectation: Be it religious doubt or personal, expecting absolute certainty is an unreasonable expectation. We could be absolutely certain of certain things in life but not everything.

            I am absolutely certain that I exist. You could be absolutely certain that you exist. Provided we meet, I could be certain of your existence and you could be certain of mine. This certainty is predicated on sight i.e. we see ourselves and others in action. 

            But in matters pertaining to religion, we cannot travel back in time to affirm the existence of Abraham or Jesus Christ. We should be content with reasonable explanations of that which cannot be seen. Therefore reasonable certainty is sufficient for a contented life.

            To live with reasonable certainty is neither abhorrent nor aberrant. We are quite comfortable to live in reasonable certainty.

            It is with reasonable certainty we believe in man’s excursions to Moon and Mars. It is with reasonable certainty we believe that 9/11 is an outcome of Islamic terrorism. It with reasonable certainty we believe in medical reports. We can go on and on. 

            Similarly, reasonable certainty is sufficient to keep us in Christ.

            4. Faith is a Commitment: Faith is not the absence of doubts. Faith is a commitment to the Lord Jesus, since we know HIM to be real. Despite our doubts, we should continue to believe in Christ.

            But how is it possible to continue to believe in Christ if we doubt Christianity?

            After having known Christ, where do we go to? Is there a better alternate to Christ and Christianity?

            Consider these verses, “From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him. “You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve. Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.” (John 6: 66-69, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            The key to Peter’s response was his belief in Christ and his knowledge that Christ alone offers eternal life to those who believe in HIM.

            No! There is no better alternate to Christ and Christianity.

            Gary Habermas thus describes the uniqueness of Christianity, “Surprisingly, Jesus has no real challengers among the founders of the major religious faiths. None of the others even claimed to be God, let alone teaching that they were a unique, one-of-a-kind, divine manifestation of the Almighty. Buddha was very possibly an atheist! Confucius and Lao Tzu were teachers of ethics, not theologians. Abraham, Moses, and David never came close to teaching that they were deity. Neither did Mohammed, who is believed by the Muslim faithful to be Allah’s chief prophet, but under no condition to be compared to deity.”⁵

            Christians are in the best possible place that can ever be. There is none better and no place better than the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ.

            Finally, defeat your doubts by fervently seeking Christ. Outside of the triune God, there is no other means to defeat your doubts.

            You could follow the principles described in Philippians 4: 6-9:

            1. Pray (speak and listen to God)

            2. Give thanks and praise God

            3. Exchange anxious thoughts and doubts with God’s Word

            “To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy —  to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen” (Jude 1: 24-25, NIV).

Endnotes:

¹ God in the Dark, p14.

² http://www.reasonablefaith.org/dealing-with-doubt1

³ http://garyhabermas.com/books/thomas_factor/thomas_factor.htm, chapter 1

⁴ Ibid, chapter 5

⁵ Ibid.