I’ve been reading through David Platt’s newest book “Follow Me” recently, and I came upon some paragraphs that give arguments for the actuality of Jesus’ resurrection.
This blog, as a whole, will comprise of excerpts from Platt as well as personal thoughts that further unpack the arguments. Here are several excepts that I found especially compelling. Check ’em out:
“Think about it. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, then ultimately we don’t have to worry about a thing he said. He would be just like every other religious teacher in the world, teaching truths and imparting opinions for how to have a better life. In fact, he would actually be far worse than other religious teachers, because he promised that he would rise from the dead and then didn’t. If Jesus wasn’t resurrected, then all of Christianity is a hoax and Christians are the most pitiably stupid people on the planet (the New Testament itself teaches this in 1 Corinthians 15). And if that’s the case, then we are free to pick and choose whatever we want to take from Jesus that might be helpful for us.
But if Jesus did rise from the dead, if he did what no one else in all of history has ever done or will ever do—conquer death—then we can’t just accept what Jesus said. We must orient everything in our lives around what Jesus said. So did Jesus rise from the dead? Is he indeed Lord regardless of what you and I decide?
Some people believe that Jesus didn’t even die on a cross, much less rise from the grave three days later. Many Muslims, for example, purport that it was merely a man who looked like Jesus who was crucified that day. Never mind that this theory was invented by the prophet Muhammad six centuries after the Crucifixion occurred. Others believe that though it was Jesus on the cross, he didn’t actually die there. He was simply hurt really, really bad. He fainted and went unconscious, so people simply thought he was dead. This explanation assumes that Jesus went through six trials, no sleep, a brutal scourging, thorns thrust into his head, nails thrust into his hands and feet, and a spear thrust into his side after several hours on a cross. Then he fainted, was wrapped in grave clothes, and put in a tomb with a stone rolled over the entrance that was guarded by Roman soldiers. He subsequently regained consciousness, nudged the stone away from the darkness of the tomb, hopped past the guards who were standing by, and coolly went about his way. This is probably not the most plausible explanation.
Interjection: Besides, assuming that Jesus was beaten to the point of death but did not actually die like this theory presumes–does it seem plausible that Jesus would be physically able to roll a “very large”/”great” (Mt. 27:60, Mk. 16:4) stone away from the entrance of the tomb, from the angle of being inside the tomb, and then either stealthily elude or single-handedly take on a garrison of the best Roman soldiers stationed outside the tomb (Mt. 27:62-66), all after being crucified on a cross, beaten to the point where he looked dead, and having no food or water for the following 3 days after his crucifixion–all by himself? If so, He-man is soft.
Back to David Platt:
“Others maintain that the tomb was not empty. Some people believe what has been described as the ‘wrong tomb theory’, that when the women went to the tomb that first Easter morning, in their grief and shock over Jesus’ death, they went to the wrong tomb and mistakenly thought Jesus had risen. Ever since that day, then, everyone else has gone to the wrong tomb. If only someone would check next door. The obvious problem with this theory is that the last thing Roman (as well as Jewish) authorities wanted was a group of people claiming that their leader had risen from the dead. That’s why they posted guards at the tomb in the first place. Surely they knew which tomb to guard, and even if they didn’t, they could have shut down all of Christianity by simply pointing to Jesus’ body in the right tomb.
Still others believe that the disciples are to blame for a concocted resurrection story. Some claim that the disciples stole the body of Jesus, which would require a small group of timid Galilean men (who the night before had been scared to admit they even knew Jesus) to outmaneuver a guard of highly skilled Roman soldiers. Others allege that the disciples were merely delusional—hallucinatory at best—when they claimed they had seen Jesus alive after he died. But even the thought of resurrection from the grave was virtually inconceivable in both Greco-Roman and Jewish thought in the first century. Nevertheless, hundreds of people claimed to have seen Jesus, some of whom ate, drank, and talked with him. Hallucinations don’t normally eat and drink. Besides, it was not in the best interest of disciples for them to proclaim the resurrection of Jesus in the first century, knowing that they could (and would) die for it. In the words of Pascal, “I believe witnesses [who] got themselves killed.”[99]
To continue on the hallucination theory of the resurrection: Of course, hallucinations happen to people, and they probably occur more often after an incredible round of hardships. In this case, it might make sense for any one of the disciples to have a hallucination. But for all 11 of them to have a hallucination of Jesus at the same time, and for this corporate hallucination to last for days–as the disciples spent long mornings and afternoons with Jesus eating, drinking, talking, and traveling–is simply inconceivable.
In addition, in 1 Corinthians 15:6, Paul writes that Jesus “appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive”. Sure, a situation where 11 disciples all had the exact, same, days-on-end hallucination is far-fetched. But even still, they were really close friends who were all in this thing together, so let’s just say they all thought they had the same hallucination, or agreed that they all had it. You know how it works: you and your buddies just get lost in the momentum and excitement of it all, and construe a wild tale. The 8-inch fish that was caught soon becomes the 15-foot shark that was hooked, which was then put back into the sea…such that everyone on the boat–all 11 of you–can conveniently ‘verify’ the tale about the massive shark catch.
Not biting that bait. In 1 Corinthians, it is more than 500 men who all saw Jesus at once. Paul seems to respond to the skeptics of his day like this: “don’t believe me? Fine, ask them about it. In fact, most of them who saw Jesus are still alive.” A hallucination shared by 11 people that is exactly the same and lasts for days is insanely inconceivable. But a hallucination shared by more than 500 men is not a hallucination; it’s a reality. A reality so scary that the religious leaders of the day (who were also powerful in society and politics) tried paying off the garrison that witnessed the whole thing to lie and say “the disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep” (Mt. 28:13-14).
Even so, regardless of Jesus’ resurrection, the religious leaders’ attempt of a story still wouldn’t add up: The disciples moved a massive stone without waking one of the soldiers? The disciples stole Jesus’ body, but before they left the tomb, they made sure to fold his mummified linens…?…ya know, since they were in such a big hurry to get out of there all along? (Jn. 20:6-7). I don’t think so.
Women Witnesses Argument
I also hear a lot of people say that “the resurrection of Jesus was made-up by disciples who had a political agenda”. But that too seems odd given some details concerning the resurrection account. One, for instance, is that each of the gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all recount that women were the first to discover Jesus’ tomb to be empty. Now, at first glance, this detail might seem insignificant. But, given the time frame of authorship, including this detail in each of the gospel accounts would be a ridiculously stupid thing to do if you are trying to convince people to believe your made-up story. In that day, women were discriminated and viewed with such inequality that three women’s testimonies were considered equal to one man’s testimony. Why include that women were the first witnesses of the resurrection if you are trying to build a logically-solid and culturally-convincing story in the context of an era where women’s testimonies basically didn’t count? That would be culturally idiotic. Indeed, you would only include such a detail unless it actually happened that way.
+++
These arguments are, of course, certainly not an exhaustive list of arguments for Jesus’ resurrection, but I thought that Platt’s passages served as a good starter for conversation as well as further discussion.
============================================================
[99] Blaise Pascal, Pensées, section 592. In addition, Gary Habermas, probably the most renowned contemporary scholar on the resurrection of Jesus, who has studied volumes of research on the Resurrection and has debated numerous scholars on each side of this issue, concludes, “When the early and eyewitness experiences of the disciples, James, and Paul are considered, along with their corresponding transformations and their central message, the historical resurrection of Jesus becomes the only plausible explanation of the facts.” At the end of N. T. Wright’s exhaustive treatise on the Resurrection, he writes, “The early Christians did not invent the empty tomb and the meetings or sightings of the risen Jesus. Nobody was expecting this kind of thing. No kind of conversion experience would have invented it. To suggest otherwise is to stop doing history and enter into a fantasy world of our own.”Excerpt From: Platt, David. “Follow Me.” // pages 122-124
