Did Jesus Rise from the Dead

Historical Proofs of the Resurrection of Jesus and the Implications of the Resurrection

The historical proofs of the resurrection are actually quite compelling and numerous. However, one must adopt a logical perspective if one is going to approach these proofs, because they require a rational mind and one that is objective rather than speculative or theoretical. The historical proofs include the fact that Christ did die, that he was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin, which was “the highest Jewish ruling body in the time of Jesus, and was therefore a public figure” (Habermas, Licona, 68); and the fact that the demeanor and attitude of the disciples changed drastically following the resurrection: where they had broken up and fled before the resurrection, after they were united and instilled with a special sense of purpose and mission, which would not have been possible had the resurrection never really happened. This paper will discuss each of these historical proofs of the resurrection in order to show that the evidence is insurmountable in proving that the resurrection happened.

First of all, there is the evidence that Christ died. This evidence is given even by ancient historians such as Josephus, who noted plainly that “Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified” (Josephus). The record was clear: Christ lived and was condemned to death under Pontius Pilate. He was crucified, died and was buried.

Second, the place of burial is significant because it was in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, who was a very important person in the Jewish religion: he was a member of the Sanhedrin and carried considerable importance among the Jewish public. That is one reason he followed Christ only distantly. However, he never disputed the fact that Christ was placed in his tomb. Had Christ not been buried there, Joseph surely would have disputed it and there would be a record of that dispute—but there is none (Habermas, Licona). Instead, there is only the charge, given by the Jews, that the body of Christ was spirited away by His disciples—yet there is no evidence to back up the charge and instead there is the eye witness testimony of many that Christ was seen again.

Thirdly, the biggest miracle of all is the fact that the disposition of Christ’s disciples changed so drastically. Following His arrest and death, the disciples scattered. Peter himself denied he even knew Christ. Others were going back to their old lives. There is no reason in the world that any of them would have turned back and renewed their faith in Christ and preached Him to the world even unto their own persecution had He not truly risen—it just makes no logical sense. He would have really had to have risen and appeared to them in order to change their disposition so drastically: nothing else could have possibly done it—surely no elaborate ruse (McGrew, McGrew). The fact is that the Christian faith was always predicated on truth—not fiction—and were it not true, the faith would not have flourished; it is as simple as that (Mueller).

The consequences of this evidence naturally lead one to the issue of faith. Faith is the ultimate stumbling block for many—not evidence. As Scripture says, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1). The evidence of God’s existence is there to be seen in the fact of creation, for nothing can come from nothing—which means God must be there as the Supreme Being with no beginning and no end: the spark of the universe can have no other logical source. Yet people still refuse to believe that God exists.

It is the same with the Resurrection. The evidence is there to be seen: the fact of the Christian Church’s existence in the first place is the strongest proof of evidence. Christianity spread through the miraculous. It did not spread through the sword the way Islam did in many cases. It spread because people were confronted with the miraculous—such as the Resurrection—and they were compelled to deal with the issue of faith that now stared them in the face. Doubting Thomas refused to believe that Christ had risen; he was not going to remain with the disciples or consent to any missionary activity for the sake of a church in which its divine leader had just been crucified and buried. He was not going to have any part in it and even when the resurrection was reported to him, he refused to believe unless he could physically put his hands in the wounds of the living Christ. Such was the extent of his skepticism (John 20:25). Yet Thomas did remain with them and did die for the faith—going all the way to the foreign land of India, where he was martyred, to preach Christ crucified and Christ Resurrected. This change in Thomas did occur and it is recorded in history. One can go to the tomb of Thomas the Apostle in India to see where he is buried and where his memory is kept alive by the generations of Thomas Christians there. But one has to realize that this change in Thomas—this adamant belief—this willingness to die for the faith—would not have taken root in Thomas had he not seen the risen Christ just as he had asked to see. The fact is that he did not have the faith before; but after seeing he did have it and he became alive with it.

That is the meaning of the Resurrection and what it should mean to humanity and to me. It is all about recognizing the importance of faith and the role of the resurrection in overcoming death (Siniscalchi). Faith and reason go together as Siniscalchi points out, and they always have. People come to faith because they see the evidence in front of their eyes—even if the evidence surpasses the limits of human reason. For instance, Christ raised Jairus’s daughter from the dead: everyone was astonished; no one doubted the fact that she was risen—but no one could explain it either because no one has power to do such a thing; only God has such power. Yet how do you explain God as Man? You cannot. But one sees and has faith because one cannot deny what one has seen or what one sees even today. Even today the miracle of Christianity makes sense only if perceived from this same perspective of the miraculous. This religion cannot be explained away; its existence for 2000 years is only capable of being understood if understood from the standpoint of the miraculous. It would not exist today if the Resurrection had not occurred.

So what does it all mean? For one, it means that people today can take hope, including me. I can take hope in the fact that Christ really did overcome death as it is said that he did. Christ used Thomas as an example when He said, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29). Scripture says plainly that what is needed from people is faith. God wants us to use our reason, our understanding to see that He is real; He wants us to understand innately, to sense that the truth of the Gospel is the real truth because it could not be any other way; He wants us to see that it is the Father of Lies—Satan—who tries to deceive and tear at the heart and mind and make it so that one moves away from God instead of toward God. Yet God is there waiting for all, hands outstretched, and all it takes is that one act of faith—that one, “I believe.” That one prayer—like that which the penitent thief made, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom!” (Luke 23:43). Had the thief seen any miracles? No—and yet he understood, obtained faith, and prayed to God—and was saved.

Summary

The proof of the Resurrection is in the pudding, so to speak. It is in the fact that the Church exists and has existed for 2000 years. The claims of the Church are so unbelievable that without the actual proof of the miraculous, no one would have embraced faith. Yet even the miraculous surpasses our understanding and people can believe through some innate sense of things, through some special gift of grace that makes the truth known to them in their heart the way it was made known to the penitent thief, who gave testimony to God there on the cross just before he died.