The resurrection of Jesus Christ: Fact or Fiction?

One of the most controversial claims of Christianity is the resurrection of Christ. Some Christians and non-Christians do not believe it. One of the reasons is that, in our current dispensation, we do not see people coming back from death, much more to talk about the person living forever.

Christians claim that Jesus died, was raised from the dead and lives forever. Based on this they believe that when someone believes in Jesus, the person is saved and will not perish after death. The very foundation of Christianity is built on the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This implies that any form of logic or presentation of facts that prove the resurrection false will render Christianity useless.

What is the Implication if the Resurrection of Jesus is False?

Why False Beliefs Stick | Spirituality & Health

This is what the Apostle Paul said about the resurrection of Christ and the Christian faith:

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 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. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied. But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
1 Corinthians 15:12-20.

From the above verse, the Apostle Paul makes very profound statements. It is a logical argument that is easy to follow. I would highlight a few implications of the statement here. That is if Christ did not rise:

The Apostles’ preachings were useless, why? Because they will be making false claims.
The faith of the early believers was useless, why? Because their faith will be based on false claims.
Anything they say about God is false, why? Because they said God raised Jesus from the dead and if that claim proved to be false, it cast doubts about the other claims they make about God.
The believers’ hope in Christ is useless and they are to be pitied, why? Because they spend their entire life believing a lie and acting on that.

He ends by making a bold claim that Jesus had been raised from the dead. How true is this? Should we believe this because Paul says so or because it is written in the Bible? No.

A lie regardless of the number of people that believe in it does not become truth.

In this write-up, I am going to lead you through some presentations of facts to prove to you why the resurrection of Jesus is probably true.

The Coherent Report of The Four Gospels (Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John).

The primary record of the resurrection of Jesus is the New Testament. Note that the New Testament is not a single book. It is a collection of individual books. Like any record or eyewitness testimony, each individual gives a common description of the situation that is collaborated by others. Also, people include a unique account of the situation because of their point of view. This means that minor differences in individual accounts of common situations are to be expected as long as it adds new information to the story but does not contradict it. These differences occur because people hardly give a full account of situations. As such they only include information they think is relevant for the purpose of their narration.

In short, the individual accounts should supplement but not contradict each other: the accounts should give new information to fill the gaps left by the testimony of other witnesses.

Now let us look at the major details given in the accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (reference Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20).

All the books agree that the resurrection occurred after the Sabbath (Saturday by Jewish custom), that is on the first day of the week (Sunday).
All of them agree that it was women who discovered that the tomb was empty: Impling Jesus had risen. All the books agree that Mary Magdalene was at the tomb. Matthew, Mark, and Luke added that Mary the mother of James was also with Magdalene at the tomb (Matthew does not specify the specific Mary). Mark wrote that Salome was also there and Luke says that other women were with them but he did not give additional names.
They all reported that the women got to the tomb very early in the morning before sunrise. The women then saw that the stone covering the entrance of the tomb had been rolled. Matthew attributed this to the work of an angel.
All of them reported that the women saw angels who told them that Jesus had been raised. Matthew and John added that Jesus appeared to the women at the tomb.
All of them reported that Jesus appeared to the eleven apostles and some other individuals.

Someone may say, “Okay these stories agree with each because those who put the books together intended them to be so”. This argument is debatable because, in academia when a researcher is doing a metanalysis, all they do is put together what other researchers have done, they have no control over the content of the work they extract the information from. In the same way, the books were put together by people. However, those who put them together did not write the contents: the books were already in circulation during the 1st century AD. Therefore it was not their intention for the accounts to agree with each other.

Below I highlight why the multiple records about the resurrection are good:

It is not just the account of one book but four. Two witnesses are better than one and five are better than two. More importantly, these witnesses should have existed closer to the time the events occurred. If an event occurs in 1900, we are more likely to believe reports of it in 1903 than in the 1990s. All the accounts were written before AD 100
At the time of the writings, if it was a lie, a careful writer would have put the testimony in the mouth of men not women. At that time, in the Jewish culture, the testimonies of women compared to men were not taken seriously. Put differently, men’s testimonies were viewed as more truthful compared to women’s. In the instance of the resurrection, when the women told the disciples that the tomb was empty, they did not believe it. This was not because it was false but because the report came from women. Luke noted, “But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense” (Luke 24:11). Peter and John had to go and confirm what the women had said (John 20:3-8).

Someone will ask “Should we believe the account because Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John said it?” No! you should believe only authentic stories, not just the messenger.

The Authenticity of Their Message

Get real! Authenticity will rule in 2020 QSRs marketing | QSR Web

Paul in his writing to the Corinthians gives us insight as to how authentic the message of the resurrection of Christ was. Keep in mind, the Corinthians were very educated and curious people. It takes a great level of intellect and persuasion to convince them. Paul said:

“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 15:3-8, Emphasis mine

From the above, Paul makes mention of the fact that Jesus appeared to the disciples and over five hundred people all at once and lastly to him. This letter by Paul was in circulation during the first century AD and its authenticity could have been verified. He referred his readers that most of the witnesses of the risen Jesus were still alive and could testify to the veracity of his message. The confirmation of this was possible and if it was found not to be true, people would have written counter letters, or there would have been in circulation other information disproving it. Luke also reported that about 120 people saw the resurrected Jesus as he was taken up into heaven (Acts 1:15). From this, we can see that it was not only the disciples who saw the resurrected Jesus or a few people who reported their encounters but rather a substantial number of people (i.e. over five hundred) who could have testified to the accounts.

The information challenging the authenticity of the resurrection story at that time was that the disciples had stolen the body of Jesus (Matthew 28:11-15). Let us consider why this account is probably false:

The chief priest knew what Jesus had said about his resurrection. He knew that probably the disciples could take his body. He then went to the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate to request soldiers to secure the tomb. The governor then gave him permission to take the number of soldiers he wanted to make the tomb secure (Matthew 27:62-66). Apart from the soldiers at the post, the chief priest put a seal at the entrance of the tomb. This was to make sure that no one tampered with the stone. The Romans were one of the most powerful nations in the world at that time and they had well-trained soldiers. Just imagine this, if the entire Jewish nation could not overcome this army and been colonized by them, how could a group of eleven men mostly trained as fishermen? Note, after Jesus was captured, all his disciples were scattered. Peter had to even deny knowing him three times. If they could not save him while he was alive, why will they risk their lives to capture a dead body? Even if they had taken the body, they would have been arrested or the body would have been found somewhere. On the contrary, there is no dead body to prove otherwise.

Two strong arguments can be used to refute the resurrection of Christ: 1) Producing the dead body, which is not possible if the person is alive; 2) Proving that Jesus never existed, that is a person needs to exist before they can die and resurrect. This argument is also not supported by facts. There are countless pieces of evidence available to prove his existence. This evidence includes the writings of his critics in the first century AD who doubted that he could be the Messiah. One needs to exist before he can be criticized.

The Transformation of Paul and His Account.

The Life of the Apostle Paul | ReasonableTheology.org

The next line of argument for the resurrection of Christ is the life of Paul. From the Acts of the Apostles, one will read that Paul was one of the principal people who persecuted the believers. He caused the arrest of the believers and even witnessed the killing of Stephen (the first Christian martyr, see Acts 7:54 to 8:1). Luke wrote of the radical change in the life of Paul, who suddenly became a Christian (Acts 9). He wrote that Paul was on his way to Damascus to arrest Christians when he met Christ. Even when he became a Christian, the believers never trusted him because of how he treated them: they thought he had come to spy on them. Nothing could convince them of his conversion, but the Apostles gave him their approval and Peter acknowledged that the writings of Paul were instructions from God (2 Peter 3:15-16). Nothing can explain Paul’s conversion except these words:

“Brothers and fathers, listen now to my defence.” When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet. Then Paul said: “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today. I persecuted the followers of this Way to their death, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison, as the high priest and all the Council can themselves testify. I even obtained letters from them to their associates in Damascus, and went there to bring these people as prisoners to Jerusalem to be punished. About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me. I fell to the ground and heard a voice say to me, ‘Saul! Saul! Why do you persecute me?’ ‘Who are you, Lord?’ I asked. ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,’ he replied. My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me. ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ I asked. ‘Get up,’ the Lord said, ‘and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.’ My companions led me by the hand into Damascus, because the brilliance of the light had blinded me.
Acts 22:1-11

From the above, there should have been something much more convincing to have turned the enemy of the Christians to become a Christian himself. In his writing, Paul noted “For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers.” (Galatians 1:13-14). Paul, like most Jews of his time, didn’t believe in Jesus as the Messiah. The only thing that can explain the radical change in the life of Paul, is the visions of Christ he had. He wrote that people referred to him as “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” (Galatians 1:23). For someone so intellectual to desert a tradition he was so zealous for and follow a way he detested to the point of defending it with his life, this shows how convinced he became about the resurrection and the message of Christ.

The deaths of the Apostles.

Lastly, I would talk about how the Apostles died. All the Apostles but John did not die a natural death. They died as a result of what they believed to be true. Even John was fried in boiled oil. When they saw he would not die, they exiled him to the island of Patmos where he wrote his last book, the Book of Revelation. Before Constantine, Christians were always under constant attack in the first three centuries: they were rejected by their families and society; they could neither buy nor sell; and they had to hide before they could meet. Their lives became miserable all because they chose to hold onto the belief that Jesus was alive. The zeal with which they were willing to die for the truth cannot be explained by normal logic. If the resurrection was a lie definitely at least one of them would have deserted the group and confessed that it was false. It is believed that the Apostles Peter and Paul were all killed in Rome during the time of Emperor Nero. One apostle who caught my interest and was very much critical of the resurrection of Jesus was Thomas. After His resurrection, Jesus appeared to all the disciples but Thomas (of cause Judas was dead). When the other disciples told Thomas that Jesus was alive, he doubted. He reasoned, “How can it be possible for the dead to come back to life, it has never happened before, so it couldn’t be possible”. To be more specific he said, “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 it.” (John 20:25) A week later Jesus appeared to him and said “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” (John 20:27). Thomas was told a truth but he did not believe it. He wanted facts. His doubts and unbelief did not make the truth any less true, but when he saw the fact before his very eyes, he believed. It is recorded that Thomas died in India for converting people to Christianity. He was not willing to deny Christ because he saw him alive, saw the nail marks, and even touched them. Things become so popular and die quickly. For Christianity to have withheld all these hardships and lasted for over 2000 years shows that there is something stronger that is not based on a lie. I am not saying that because it has existed for a long time it must be true. What I am saying is that the necessity of truth is longevity, put differently if it is true something is true then it must be able to stand for a long. One of the Jewish leaders who trained the Apostle Paul, Gamaliel, said this about Christianity “… For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” Acts 5:38-39.

In conclusion, I have presented to you what convinced the early believers about the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the extent to which they were willing to defend it. One thing we have to understand is that the Christian faith is not just about believing but is also based on facts. If there are facts to these claims, then by looking back in time we should be able to discover them. We should constantly test what we believe about something, if it proves to be false we should lay it aside but if it is true we should hold on to it. If the resurrection is true, let us hold to it.

Photo credit

appreciation

I would like to express my profound gratitude to Onyina Andrews Frimpong for taking the time to help in the proofreading of the manuscript of this write-up and making important additions. I say God richly bless and increase him. I do however take responsibility for any typographical errors, omissions, and grammatical mistakes in this document.