Critics of the Resurrection

By Robert Myers

Of all the claims that Christianity makes, none could be more paramount than that of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Christian faith asserts that Jesus Christ “died for our sins according to the Scriptures [i.e., the historical accounts in the Bible], and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” (1 Cor. 15:3b-4) Through the death of Jesus Christ, God offers forgiveness of sin: “For Christ died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.” (1 Pet. 3:18) The resurrection of Christ is the fulfillment of His own words, and the strongest evidence of His deity.

Because the resurrection is so foundational to the Christian faith, it is important that it be historically accurate. Paul notes, “If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God, that He raised Christ...” (1 Cor. 15:14-15a). The validity of Christianity stands or falls on the historical truth of the resurrection.

But are the accounts of the resurrection in the New Testament (and the Old Testament generally) historically reliable? Was Jesus even a historical figure at all? If so, what gives credence to the Biblical claim that He rose from the dead three days after He died? Are any other explanations more reasonable? We provide evidence for the historicity of Jesus, the resurrection, and why the Biblical explanation for the empty tomb is the most reasonable one.

As a caveat to our discussion, it is important to distinguish scientific and historical proof. While scientific proof is based upon repeated observation, historical events do not lend themselves to such repetition. ‘Proving’ that the resurrection of Christ occurred is similar to ‘proving’ that Aristotle was a real person; we can only attempt to build a base of evidence which convinces beyond a reasonable doubt. This is our purpose in the following considerations.

Jesus: The Historical Figure

Some modern day scholars have proposed that Jesus Christ was a legendary figure, lacking any true historical authenticity. In addressing this accusation, we present three evidences for the historical accuracy of the Bible (and the New Testament in particular): manuscript reliability, internal historical corroboration, and external historical corroboration.

The first question that must be addressed is whether the New Testament as we possess it today is the same as the original version penned by the authors. The New Testament was written from about A.D. 50 to A.D. 90. It was originally composed in Greek, and because printing was not invented until the fifteenth century, all copies were produced by hand. While we do not possess the original copies, over 5,500 manuscripts containing some or all of the New Testament have been recovered. (This is the highest number of manuscripts of any work of antiquity. The next highest is Homer’s Odyssey with only a few hundred extant copies). The earliest fragment dates from A.D. 120, which is just thirty years after the last originals were composed. The first complete copy dates from A.D. 250 (compared to the earliest extant Odyssey manuscript, dating 2,200 years after the original composition). We also possess many early translations of the New Testament documents, as well as over 86,000 citations of the New Testament in the writings of the early Church fathers before A.D. 325. In the words of F. F. Bruce, “The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning.” (1)

Another evidence for the historical accuracy of the New Testament is the internal historical references it possesses. In many places the New Testament records specific historical figures, events, and geographical locations that are scientifically verifiable through archeology. For instance, Luke writes, “Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachnoitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene, in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John [the Baptist], the son of Zacharias...” (Luke 3:1-2). This isn’t an instance of “Once upon a time” or “Long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away”, but instead the accounts contain verifiable historical data.

One last evidence for the reliability of the New Testament is the external verification of its accounts among contemporaneous non-Christian scholars. An oft-cited source in this context is a Jew named Josephus, a contemporary of Jesus who wrote Antiquities as a Jewish history for the Romans. Therein he makes many references to a historical figure named Jesus, and gives many details of His life and death that correspond with New Testament accounts. Jesus also appears among Roman historians such as Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger. (2)

Direct Evidence for the Resurrection

Assuming the Biblical accounts are true to their original intent (from our previous remarks), we proceed to three evidences within the New Testament that corroborate the resurrection account: the empty tomb, the transformation of the apostles, and the preaching of the resurrection originating in Jerusalem. Any critic of the resurrection must address each of these evidences.

The exact location of Jesus' tomb is recorded in Matthew 27:59-60: “Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb....” Joseph is described as a “rich man from Arimathea” (Matt. 27:57), and “a prominent member of the Council” (Mark 15:43). Thus, Jesus' burial place was well known. Yet, when the disciples promptly began spreading the news in Jerusalem that Jesus had risen from the dead, the Jewish authorities were unable to produce His body. In fact, the corpse of Jesus was never found. “Not one historical record from the first or second century is written attacking the factuality of the empty tomb or claiming discovery of the corpse.” (2) The silence of history in this case seems deafening.

Second, we see that the lives of the apostles changed after the resurrection. Although the disciples fled during Jesus’ arrest (Matt. 26:56) and denied knowing Him (Matt. 26:74), a few days later they were boldly proclaiming their faith in Jesus. In fact, 10 of the 11 apostles were martyred for their belief (including Peter, who was crucified upside down). Some compelling evidence must have generated such a change in heart in these men.

Third, we see that the apostles began their proclamation of Jesus' resurrection within Jerusalem. While other religions often cite events in far-off and unknown lands, the disciples begin the spread of Christianity in the very center of the events in question. Peter states, “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know...” (Acts 2:22). Each of the claims the disciples made was readily verifiable to their immediate audience.

Alternate Theories to the Resurrection

In spite of some compelling reasons to believe the resurrection, scholarship has developed several theories over the years to attempt to explain it away. We will address the main objections and see whether they hold any validity.

The Wrong Tomb Theory

Proponents of this first argument state that according to the Gospel accounts, the women visited the grave early in the morning while it was dark. Due to their emotional condition and the darkness, they visited the wrong tomb. Overjoyed to see that it was empty, they rushed back to tell the disciples Jesus had risen. The disciples in turn ran into Jerusalem to proclaim the Resurrection.
There are several major flaws with this explanation. First, John records how he and Peter ran to the tomb after hearing the news from the women to check for themselves (John 20:3ff). Second, the tomb site was known not only by the followers of Christ, but also by their opponents. As previously noted, all that was necessary was for one person to produce Jesus' body in order to discredit the testimony of the disciples. Third, it does not account for the large number of people who claimed to have seen Jesus in bodily form after burial (Paul records over 500 at one point; see 1 Cor. 15:6).

The Hallucination Theory

This second theory holds that the resurrection of Christ occurred only in the minds of the disciples. Dr. William McNeil articulates this position in his book, A World History, in which he describes how the disciples confused heartwarming nostalgia for their master with a historical resurrection event. (2)

This position is untenable for several reasons. Again we see that if the disciples were mistaken about the empty tomb, the actual evidence lay a mere 15 miles away to be personally examined. The Jewish authorities would gladly have produced a body. Second, mass hallucination is not a viable explanation for appearances of Jesus that occur on different days, in different environments, to different individuals. Neither do the individuals recall differing experiences. As previously noted, over 500 people at one point saw Jesus. Finally, hallucinations are usually accompanied by an intense desire for the event to occur. However, both Thomas and James (the half-brother of Jesus) expressed doubt at the news of the resurrection (John 20:24ff), and later believed because of an appearance of Christ.

The Swoon Theory

A third theory espouses that Jesus never died on the cross but merely passed out and was mistakenly considered dead. After three days He revived, exited the tomb, and appeared to His disciples who believed He had risen from the dead. This theory was developed in the early nineteenth century, but today it has been abandoned for several reasons.

It is a physical impossibility that Jesus could have survived the tortures of the crucifixion. Additionally, the soldiers who crucified Jesus were experts in executing this type of death penalty. They took several precautions to make sure He was actually dead. They thrust a spear into His side. When blood and water come out separately, the blood cells had begun to separate from the plasma, which will only happen when the blood stops circulating (John 19:33-34). After being taken down from the cross, Jesus was covered with eighty pounds of spices and embalmed. It is unreasonable to believe that after three days with no food or water, Jesus would revive. Even harder to believe is that Jesus could roll a two-ton stone away from the tomb entrance, overpower the guards, and then walk several miles to Emmaeus. Even if Jesus had done this, His appearing to the disciples half-dead and desperately in need of medical attention would not have prompted their worship of Him as God.

The Stolen Body Theory

This fourth argument holds that someone stole the body of Jesus from the tomb. If so, we must ask ourselves who would be responsible? If we answer the Jewish and Roman authorities, why did they need to accuse the disciples of stealing it? (Matt. 28:11-15) Why not produce the body themselves and condemn the disciples’ story? Would they even want to encourage the spread of a faith they detested? If we answer the disciples, we must note that they went to death for their faith. Would stealing the body elicit the change in behavior we noted earlier? If someone else stole the body, the question still remains of the sightings of Jesus by so many people in the few days after His supposed resurrection. This theory also holds no merit.

Conclusion

The conclusion must be that the historical accuracy of the resurrection accounts in the New Testament is the only reasonable explanation for all the facts presented. This means that Jesus was, in fact, who He claimed to be: “I am the way, the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me.” (John 14:6) “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies.” (John 11:25) Eternal life can come only by placing your complete faith in the death of Christ as payment for your sin, turning over your life completely to Christ. “If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.” (Rom. 10:9)

Foot notes:

(1) McDowell's and Don Stewart's book Answers to Tough Questions Skeptics Ask About the Christian Faith. Tyndale House Publishers: Wheaton, Ill. 1990. pp. 21-24. All

(2) Portions of this article were adapted from an article written by Patrick Zukeran entitled The Resurrection: Fact or Fiction?, which can be found on the Probe Ministries web site at www.probe.org.

(3) Scripture references were taken from the New American Standard Bible.

Robert Myers, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics and Chair of the Mathematical Sciences Department at Bethel College in Mishawaka, IN.  In addition to his mathematical research, he is currently writing a biography of the French mathematician and philosopher, Blaise Pascal.  He lives in Mishawaka with his wife Michelle and three sons.