In our last post we considered the world’s rejection of Christ’s resurrection. Historically, there are three basic ideas that skeptics have used to try and explain away the resurrection: 1) Jesus really didn’t die, the disciples just thought He did, 2) The disciples made the whole thing up, and 3) Jesus died but the disciples hallucinated. These three theories, in various combinations, have formed the basis for most of the world’s arguments against the resurrection. They may be tweaked and repackaged from time to time, but they all find their roots in one or more of these premises.
Why do serious skeptics go to so much trouble to try and refute the historical reality of Christ’s resurrection? There are certain historical facts that can’t be ignored. How do you explain the most the fact that a man who is claimed to have risen from the dead is the most influential person in the history of the world? You have to say something about it. How do you account for the disciples tenaciously preaching His resurrection less than two months after His death and doing so within walking distance of Golgotha and His tomb? That’s chutzpah! How do you explain the mass conversions to Christianity? 3000 came to faith in one day. Within a few months it became clear that Christianity was no fluke. Its converts were here to stay. How do you account for the disciples’ willingness to die for this story with no accolades or earthly glory? Most of the disciples died torturous deaths separated from their companions, often by thousands of miles. I suppose a person might die for a lie in the presence of his peers. Then he would at least receive their praise. But why stick to some tall tale when there was nothing to gain and everything to lose? Why continue the lie when your fellow conspirators would never know you had given them up?
How do you explain the most the fact that a man who is claimed to have risen from the dead is the most influential person in the history of the world?
Finally, how do you explain the phenomenal growth of a movement that was despised from the very beginning? Christianity is a movement that offers no tangible rewards in this life. In fact, the founder of Christianity promised hatred from the world (John 15:18). Throughout history, Christianity has been repeatedly targeted for extinction by multiple world leaders and governments. Being a Christian can be very dangerous. Nonetheless, not only has it survived, it continues to flourish and grow. The Christian faith is something the world’s best PR firms could never sell.
Despite such opposition, there is an unbroken line of Christians reaching all the way back to the infamous event itself. Granted, over the centuries there have been many doctrinal disagreements and organizational differences. Even so, for over 18 centuries, the literal resurrection of Jesus is something that united all those claiming to be followers of Christ. Until the rise of modern liberalism, there were no groups bearing the name “Christian” that didn’t believe in the actual bodily resurrection of the Savior.
The skeptic has a lot of explaining to do. Those who deny Christ’s bodily resurrection go to such great lengths to formulate an alternative explanation because the historical evidence for the resurrection is so overwhelming. The evidence notwithstanding, many dismiss the resurrection simply because it is miraculous, and miracles just don’t happen. To their way of thinking, any other explanation must be more plausible than Christ emerging from the tomb on the third day. Some readily admit the implausibility of their theories, but they would rather believe a lie because the consequences are far less severe. For those without eyes to see, they would rather rest their faith on the most ridiculous theory than accept the truth of the resurrection.
In our next post we will consider how liberal Christians have compromised the truth of the resurrection in order to appease unbelievers.
