The Historicity of the Resurrection by Deryl Williams

THE HISTORICITY OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST

A Research Paper Submitted to Dr. John Mahony

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Course Introduction to Apologetics (TH 5910)

Deryl Williams October 12, 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE RELIABILITY OF THE EVIDENCE ................................................................2 IS HISTORY KNOWABLE?..............................................................................................2 THE RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLICAL RECORD .................................................................3 EXTRA-BIBLICAL RECORDS ..........................................................................................5 THE DEATH OF CHRIST...........................................................................................6 THE PRE-CRUCIFIXION SUFFERING ...............................................................................6 THE CRUCIFIXION.........................................................................................................7 JESUS WAS DEAD ..........................................................................................................9 THE RESURRECTION..............................................................................................10 THE EMPTY TOMB ......................................................................................................12 THE APPEARANCES ....................................................................................................13 CHANGED LIVES.........................................................................................................14 AN IRREFUTABLE CONCLUSION ........................................................................15

TOPIC STATEMENT: A study of the historical evidence supporting the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

THE HISTORICITY OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST The Christian faith and message hinges entirely on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. In his first letter to the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul said, “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied” (1 Corinthians 15:17-19). Popular Christian author and speaker Josh McDowell recalled, “A student at the University of Uruguay said to me. ‘Professor McDowell, why can't you refute Christianity?’ ‘For a very simple reason,’ I answered. ‘I am not able to explain away an event in history--the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’”1 McDowell has also said, “For centuries many of the world's distinguished philosophers have assaulted Christianity as being irrational, superstitious and absurd. Many have chosen simply to ignore the central issue of the resurrection. Others have tried to explain it away through various theories. But the historical evidence just can't be discounted.”2 Dr. William Lane Craig stated that Christianity “is rooted in real events of history,”3 and that “the truth of Christianity is bound up with the truth of certain historical facts.”4 This is dangerous to Christianity in that if those facts should ever be disproved, Christianity would be obsolete. Conversely, this also “makes Christianity unique 1

Josh McDowell, Evidence for the Resurrection, 1992, http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html. 2 Ibid. 3 William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith Christian Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1994), 157. 4 Ibid.

because, unlike most other world religions, we now have a means of verifying its truth by historical evidence.”5 The Reliability of the Evidence Is History Knowable? Dr. Norman Geisler argued that history is just as objective as other sciences. “For example, paleontology (historical geology) is considered one of the most objective of all sciences. It deals with physical facts and processes of the past. However, the events represented by the fossil finds are no more directly accessible to the scientists or repeatable than are historical events to the historian.”6 Although history does not lend itself to experimentation, and cannot be reproduced or observed, it is still scientific in nature. British philosopher-historian Robin G. Collingwood argues, “Every historian would agree, I think, that history is a kind of research or inquiry . . . The point is that generically it belongs to what we call the sciences: that is, the forms of thought whereby we ask questions and try to answer them”7 The kind of evidence used in the historical investigation of the resurrection is the same kind as that used in a court of law. In a legal case certain kinds of evidences are appealed to in order to determine exactly how past events transpired. Eyewitnesses and experts are questioned to determine their qualifications, reliability and motives, and all available physical evidence is analyzed. In a court of law, the standard of proof in a criminal case for the prosecution is proof beyond all reasonable doubt, which means proof to a high degree of probability but not proof beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Ibid. Norman L. Geisler, Christian Apologetics, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1976), 290. 7 R. G. Collingwood, Essays in the Philosophy of History, ed. William Debbins (Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1965), 9. 6

Of course, there will always be those who reject truth even in light of overwhelming evidence. For example, George Wald, Winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1967, admitted: When it comes to the origin of life on this earth, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance.8 The Reliability of the Biblical Record Because the New Testament provides the primary historical source for information on the resurrection, many critics during the 19th century attacked the reliability of these biblical documents. By the end of the 19th century, however, archaeological discoveries had confirmed the accuracy of the New Testament manuscripts. F. E. Peters stated, “On the basis of manuscript tradition alone, the works that make up the Christians’ New Testament were the most frequently copied and widely circulated books of antiquity.”9 Furthermore, “[there are] close to, if not more than, 25,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today. No other document of antiquity even begins to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, Homer’s Iliad is second, with only 643 manuscripts that still survive. The first complete preserved text of Homer dates from the thirteenth century.”10

George Wald, “Theories of the Origin of Life,” in Frontiers of Modern Biology (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1962), 187. 9 F. E. Peters, The Harvest of Hellenism, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971), 50 10 Josh McDowell, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999), 34.

Discoveries of early papyri closed the gap between the time of Christ and existing manuscripts from a later date. Those findings bolstered scholarly confidence in the reliability of the Bible. William F. Albright, one of the world's premier biblical archaeologists, said: “We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today.”11 Even many liberal scholars are being forced by the weight of the evidence to consider earlier dates for the New Testament. In his groundbreaking book Redating the New Testament, Dr. John A. T. Robinson admits that his research has led to his conviction that the whole of the New Testament was written before the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.12 Luke wrote of “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:8) verifying the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Sir William Ramsay, who is regarded as one of the most renowned archeologists ever to have lived, spent fifteen years attempting to undermine Luke’s credentials as a historian, and to refute the reliability of the New Testament. As a result of the overwhelming evidence uncovered in his research, he was forced to completely reverse his beliefs. He concluded: “Luke is a historian of the first rank, not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . . . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.”13 The overwhelming amount of evidence pointing to the reliability and accuracy of the New Testament led Ravi Zacharias to say: “In real terms, the New Testament is easily

W. F. Albright, Recent Discoveries in Bible Lands, (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1955), 136. John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1976) 13 Sir W. M. Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1915), 222. 12

the best attested writing in terms of the sheer number of documents. The time span between the events and the documents, and the variety of documents available to sustain or contradict it. There is nothing in ancient manuscript evidence to match such textual availability and integrity.”14 Extra-Biblical Records The New Testament is not the only record we have of the life of Jesus. Josephus, a Jewish historian, writing at the end of the first century A.D. had this fascinating passage in Antiquities, 18:3.3: Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him many Jews, and also many of the Greeks. This man was the Christ. And when Pilate had condemned him to the cross, upon his impeachment by the principle man among us, those who had loved him from the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive on the third day, the divine prophets having spoken these and thousands of other wonderful things about him. And even now, the race of Christians, so named from him, has not died out.15 Although attempts have been made to demonstrate that Josephus could not have written this, they have all failed. Green asserts, “we know that this passage was in the text of Josephus used by Eusebius in the fourth century,” and that it “has been reiterated by the most recent Loeb edition of his works. And it is all the more remarkable when we remember that, so far from being sympathetic to Christians, Josephus was a Jew writing to please the Romans. This story would not have pleased them in the slightest. He would hardly have included it if it were not true.”16 Nevertheless, it is highly improbable that Josephus personally accepted Jesus as the Messiah. “F. F Bruce suggests that the phrase

14 15

Ravi Zacharias, Can Man Live Without God?, (Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing, 1994), 162. Flavius Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews, (New York: Ward, Lock, Bowden & Co., 1990),

18:3.3. 16

Michael Green, Man Alive, (London: InterVarsity Press, 1967), 35-36.

‘if indeed we should call him a man’ may indicate that the text is authentic, but that Josephus was writing with tongue in cheek in sarcastic reference to the Christian belief that Jesus is the Son of God.”17 The Death of Christ The Pre-Crucifixion Suffering The Passion of Christ began hours before His arrest. Speaking of Christ’s anguish in the Garden of Gethsemane, Luke, the physician, tells us, “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Luke 22:44). Dr. Alexander Metherell, a consultant to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health of Bethesda, Maryland, and board-certified in diagnosis by the American Board of Radiology, explains what produced this phenomenon. “This is a known medical condition called hematodrosis. It’s not very common, but it is associated with a high degree of psychological stress. What happens is that severe anxiety causes the release of chemicals that break down the capillaries in the sweat glands. As a result, there’s a small amount of bleeding into these glands, and the sweat comes out tinged with blood.”18 He goes on to explain the effect this had on the body of Jesus. “What this did was set up the skin to be extremely fragile so that when Jesus was flogged by the Roman soldier the next day, his skin would be very, very sensitive.”19 The beating Christ received at the hands of the Romans was beyond brutal. John Mattingly described this horror in his book: “The adjudged criminal was usually first

McDowell, Verdict, 57. Dr. Alexander Metherell, interviewed by Lee Strobel, in The Case for Christ, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1998), 195. 19 Ibid. 18

forcefully stripped of his clothes, and then tied to a post or pillar in the tribunal. Then the awful and cruel scourging was administered by the lictors or scourgers. Although the Hebrews limited by their law the number of strokes in a scourging to forty, the Romans set no such limitation; and the victim was at the mercy of his scourgers.”20 Noted third century church historian Eusebius described the Roman scourging by saying: The sufferer’s “veins were laid bare . . . the very muscles, sinews, and bowels of the victim were open to exposure.”21 Metherell stated that many people would die from the scourging alone. “At the least, the victim would experience tremendous pain and go into hypovolemic shock [which] means the person is suffering the effects of losing a large amount of blood . . . Because of the terrible effects of this beating, there’s no question that Jesus was already in serious to critical condition even before the nails were driven through his hands and feet.”22 The Crucifixion Having endured one of the most extreme forms of human torment, Christ was forced to carry the beam of his cross up the hill to Golgotha where he faced the most horrific mode of execution ever devised by man. Crucifixion was so brutal and detestable that the famous Roman orator, Cicero, said, “Even the mere word, cross, must remain far from not only from the lips of the citizens of Rome, but also from their

John P. Mattingly, Crucifixion: Its Origin and Application to Christ. (Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1961), 21; quoted in McDowell, Evidence, 221. 21 Ibid., 73. 22 Metherell, 196.

thoughts, their eyes, their ears.”23 The pain of the cross was so severe it has its own adjective, excruciating, which literally means “from the cross.” Before Pilate would allow Christ’s body to be removed from the cross, he required verification of death. Michael Green comments: Four executioners came to examine him, before a friend, Joseph of Arimathea, was allowed to take away the body for burial. These soldiers were experienced at their grisly task: crucifixions were not uncommon in Palestine. They knew a dead man when they saw one—and their commanding officer had heard the condemned man’s death cry himself and certified the death to the governor, Pontius Pilate (Mark 15:39, 44).24 An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association entitled “On The Physical Death of Jesus Christ” concluded that Jesus was indeed dead prior to being removed from the cross: Clearly, the weight of historical and medical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead before the wound to His side was inflicted and supports the traditional view that the spear, thrust between His right ribs, probably perforated not only the right lung but also the pericardium and heart and thereby ensured His death. Accordingly, interpretations based on the assumptions that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.25 The apostle John gives his detailed eyewitness account of the events on Calvary. He tells us that when the soldier pierced the side of Jesus that “blood and water came out” (John 19:34). John clearly thought this to be highly important and unusual, if not miraculous, and emphatically declares in the next verse that he wrote exactly what he observed.

Mattingly, Crucifixion, 26. Green, Man Alive, 32-33. 25 William D. Edwards, MD; Wesley J. Gabel, MDiv; and Floyd E Hosmer, MS, AMI, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association 255:11. March 21, 1986, 1463. 24

Dr. Samuel Houghton, the renowned physiologist from the University of Dublin noted: Death by crucifixion causes a condition of blood in the lungs similar to that produced by drowning and strychnia; [a copious flow of water, succeeded by a copious flow of blood, following the wound] would occur in a crucified person who had previous to crucifixion suffered from pleuretic effusion; and [a copious flow of blood, succeeded by a copious flow of water, following the wound] would occur in a crucified person who died upon the cross from rupture of the heart . . . That rupture of the heart was the cause of the death of Christ is ably maintained by Dr. William Stroud; and that rupture of the heart actually occurred I firmly believe . . . The importance of this is obvious. It [shows] that the narrative in St. John xix. could never have been invented; that the facts recorded must have been seen by an eyewitness; and that the eyewitness was so astonished that he apparently thought the phenomenon miraculous.26 Green comments that John’s account “is all the more impressive because the evangelist could not possibly have realized its significance to a pathologist. The “blood and water” from the spear-thrust is proof positive that Jesus was already dead.”27 Jesus was Dead The fact that Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross is both a historical and medical certainty. There is absolutely no way Christ could have faked his death or merely swooned. Metherell reminds us, “that he was already in hypovolemic shock from the massive blood loss even before the crucifixion started. He couldn’t possibly have faked his death because you can’t fake the inability to breathe for long. Besides, the spear thrust into his heart would have settled the issue once and for all. And the Romans weren’t about to risk their own death by allowing him to walk away alive.”28

Samuel Hougton, M.D., quoted in Frederick Charles Cook, Commentary on the Holy Bible (London: John Murray, 1878), 350. 27 Green, Man Alive, 33. 28 Strobel, Case for Christ, 201.

Furthermore, Jesus would never have been able to inspire his disciples to proclaim His victory over death at the cost of their own lives. Even the skeptic David Friedrich Strauss—who did not believe in the resurrection—recognized that it was implausible to assert that Jesus was revived from a swoon: It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to his sufferings, could have given to the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror over death and the grave, the Prince of Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which he had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship.29 If Jesus had merely been revived from a swoon, his disciples would not have been transformed from frightened, defeated men into world-changing champions of the Gospel that Jesus was raised from the dead. Merrill Tenney concludes, “A consideration of the evidence leaves no room for doubt that Jesus died. The skilled observer, the physical results of the spear-thrust, the official pronouncement of the government, the obvious intention of the women who came to the tomb, and the committal by His aristocratic friends remove any possibility of illusion or deceit.”30 The Resurrection The New Testament witnesses were fully aware of the circumstances surrounding the resurrection. The body of Jesus, in accordance with Jewish burial custom, was

David Friedrich Strauss, The Life of Jesus for the People, 2d ed. Vol I. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1879), 412. 30 Merrill C. Tenney, The Reality of the Resurrection, (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1963), 108.

wrapped in a linen cloth and covered with approximately 100 pounds of aromatic spices. Tenney explains the grave clothes as follows: In preparing a body for burial according to Jewish custom, it was usually washed and straightened, and then bandaged tightly from the armpits to the ankles in strips of linen about a foot wide. Aromatic spices, often of a gummy consistency, were placed between the wrappings or folds. They served partially as a preservative and partially as a cement to glue the cloth wrappings into a solid covering . . . John’s term “bound” (Gr. edesan) is in perfect accord with the language of Luke 23:53, where the writer ways that the body was rolled (literal translation of enetulixen) in linen . . .On the morning of the first day of the week the body of Jesus had vanished, but the graveclothes were still there.31 After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, the tomb was secured. An extremely large stone, called a golel, was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. These stones were rather large, weighing approximately two tons, and were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance. A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to prevent any attempt at vandalism. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law. G. W. Clark concluded: “So everything was done that human policy and prudence could, to prevent a Resurrection, which these very precautions had the most direct tendency to indicate and establish (Matt. 27:65).”32 Three days later the tomb was empty. The followers of Jesus said He had risen from the dead. They reported that He appeared to them during a period of 40 days, showing Himself to them by many “infallible proofs.” Paul the apostle recounted that Jesus appeared to more than 500 of His followers at one time, the majority of whom were

31 32

1896).

Ibid. 117. G. W. Clark, The Gospel of Matthew. (Philadelphia, PA: American Baptist Publication Society,

still alive and who could confirm what Paul wrote. So many security precautions were taken with the trial, crucifixion, burial, entombment, sealing, and guarding of Christ's tomb that it becomes very difficult for critics to defend their position that Christ did not rise from the dead.33 The Empty Tomb All four Gospels give detailed information about the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea where Jesus was buried. Concerning the burial of Jesus, Wilbur Smith comments: We know more about the burial of the Lord Jesus than we know of the burial of any single character in all of ancient history. We know infinitely more about His burial than we do the burial of any Old Testament character, of any king of Babylon, Pharaoh of Egypt, any philosopher of Greece, or triumphant Caesar. We know who took His body from the cross; we know something of the wrapping of the body in spices, and burial clothes; we know the very tomb in which this body was placed, the name of the man who owned it, Joseph, of a town known as Arimathaea. We know even where this tomb was located, in a garden nigh to the place where He was crucified, outside the city walls. We have four records of the burial of our Lord, all of them in amazing agreement, the record of Matthew, a disciple of Christ who was there when Jesus was crucified; the record of Mark, which some say was written within ten years of our Lord’s ascension, the record of Luke, a companion of the apostle Paul, and a great historian; and the record of John, who was the last to leave the cross, and with Peter, the first of the Twelve on Easter to behold the empty tomb.34 William Lane Craig commented on the Jewish custom of carefully preserving the graves of holy men: During Jesus’ time there was an extraordinary interest in the graves of Jewish martyrs and holy men, and these were scrupulously cared for and honored. This suggests that the grave of Jesus would also have been noted. The disciples had no inkling of any resurrection prior to the general resurrection at the end of the world, and they would therefore not have allowed the burial site of the Teacher to go unnoted. This interest also makes plausible the women’s lingering to watch the burial and their 33 34

McDowell, Resurrection. Wilbur Smith, Therefore Stand, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1945), 370-71.

subsequent intention to anoint Jesus’ body with spices and perfumes (Luke 23:55, 56).35 Concerning the historical reliability of the empty tomb of Jesus, Craig says: “Once regarded as an offense to modern intelligence and an embarrassment to Christian theology, the empty tomb of Jesus has come to assume its place among the generally accepted facts concerning the historical Jesus.”36 The Appearances C. S. Lewis, in speaking of the importance of Christ’s post-resurrection appearances writes: “The first fact in the history of Christendom is a number of people who say they have seen the Resurrection. If they had died without making anyone else believe this ‘gospel’ no gospels would ever have been written.”37 The apostle Paul, relates an early creed of the church in 1 Corinthians 15: For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). Craig Bloomberg, commenting on the significance of this creed, said: Here you have the key facts about Jesus’ death for our sins, plus a detailed list of those to whom he appeared in resurrected form, all dating back to within two to five years of the events themselves . . . this is enormously significant. Now you’re not comparing thirty to sixty years with the five

William Lane Craig, “Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?” Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus. Ed. By Michael J. Wilkins and J.P. Moreland, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995, 148-49. 36 Craig, “Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ,” Truth 1 (1985): 89-95, electronic version, http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth22.html 37 C.S. Lewis, Miracles, (New York: Macmillan, 1960), 149.

hundred years that’s generally acceptable for other data—you’re talking about two!38 John Warrick Montgomery makes a strong case for the reliability of the eyewitness testimonies concerning the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. Note that when the disciples of Jesus proclaimed the resurrection, they did so as eyewitnesses and they did so while people were still alive who had had contact with the events they spoke of. In 56 A.D. Paul wrote that over 500 people had seen the risen Jesus and that most of them were still alive (1 Corinthians 15:6 ff.). It passes the bounds of credibility that the early Christians could have manufactured such a tale and then preached it among those who might easily have refuted it simply be producing the body of Jesus.39 Changed Lives John R. W. Stott commented, “Perhaps the transformation of the disciples of Jesus is the greatest evidence of all for the resurrection.”40 Speaking of the transformation of the disciples, Harvard attorney Simon Greenleaf remarked, “The annals of military warfare afford scarcely an example of the like heroic constancy, patience, and unflinching courage. They had every possible motive to review carefully the grounds of their faith, and the evidences of the great facts and truths which they asserted.”41 Concerning the doubts of Thomas prior to witnessing the risen Christ for himself, George Matheson said: The skepticism of Thomas comes out in the belief that the death of Jesus would be the death of His kingdom. “Let us go, that we may die with Him.” The man who uttered these words had, at the time when he uttered 38 39

Craig Bloomberg, interviewed by Strobel, Case for Christ, 35. John W. Montgomery, History and Christianity, (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press,

1971), 78. 40

John R. W. Stott, Basic Christianity, 2nd ed., (Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press, 1971),

58-59. 41

Simon Greenleaf, The Testimony of the Evangelists, Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1965), 29.

them, no hope of Christ’s resurrection. No man would propose to die with another if he expected to see him again in a few hours. Thomas, at that moment, had given up all intellectual belief. He saw no chance for Jesus. He did not believe in His physical power. He had made up his mind that the forces of the outer world would be too strong for Him, would crush him.42 However, we know that Thomas’ skepticism and hopelessness did not survive his encounter with the risen Jesus. After seeing Jesus with his own eyes, and feeling of his Master’s wounds, Thomas exclaimed, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Tradition says that Thomas traveled to India where he died a martyr’s death spreading the Gospel of the Risen Christ. Jesus Christ has continued to transform the lives of men and women for the past two thousand years, just as he transformed the lives of His disciples. McDowell said, “The established psychological fact of changed lives, then, is a credible reason for believing in the resurrection. It is subjective evidence bearing witness to the objective fact that Jesus Christ arose on the third day. For only a risen Christ could have such a transforming power in a person’s life.”43 An Irrefutable Conclusion Professor Thomas Arnold, for 14 years a headmaster of Rugby, and author of the well-known, History of Rome, and appointed to the chair of modern history at Oxford, knew very well the importance of evidence in determining historical facts. This eminent scholar said: “I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every

George Matheson, The Representative Men of the New Testament, (London: Holder and Stoughton, 1905), 146. 43 McDowell, Verdict, 253.

sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead.â&#x20AC;?44 Brooke Foss Westcott, an English scholar who was appointed regius professor of divinity at Cambridge, said, â&#x20AC;&#x153;taking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say that there is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the resurrection of Christ. Nothing but the antecedent assumption that it must be false could have suggested the idea of deficiency in the proof of it.â&#x20AC;?45 In summation, the following words from J. N. D. Anderson seem appropriate: Lastly, it can be asserted with confidence that men and women disbelieve the Easter story not because of the evidence, but in spite of it. It is not that they weigh the evidence with open minds, assess its relevance and cogency and finally decide that it is suspect or inadequate. Instead, they start with the a priori conviction that the resurrection of Christ would constitute such an incredible event that it could not be accepted or believed without scientific demonstration of an irrefutable nature. But it is idle to demand proof of this sort for any event in history. Historical evidence, from its very nature, can never amount to more than a very high degree of probability. It is on such evidence that virtually all our knowledge of the past depends.46

44 45

Arnold, as cited in Smith, Therefore Stand, 425-426. Westcott, as cited in Paul Little, Know Why You Believe, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press,

1987), 70. 46

J. N. D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History, (London: Tyndale Press, 1969), 106.

WORKS CITED Albright, W. F. Recent Discoveries in Bible Lands. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1955. Anderson, J. N. D. Christianity: The Witness of History. London: Tyndale Press, 1969. Clark, G. W. The Gospel of Matthew. Philadelphia, PA: American Baptist Publication Society, 1896. Collingwood, R. G. Essays in the Philosophy of History. Edited by William Debbins. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1965. Cook, Frederick Charles. Commentary on the Holy Bible. London: John Murray, 1878. Craig, William Lane. Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1994. ________. “Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Truth 1 (1985): 89-95. electronic version. http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth22.html Edwards, William D., Gabel, W. J., and Hosmer, F. E. “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” Journal of the American Medical Association 255:11. March 21, 1986, 14551463 Geisler, Norman L., Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1976. Green, Michael. Man Alive. London: InterVarsity Press, 1967. Greenleaf, Simon. The Testimony of the Evangelists, Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1965. Josephus, Flavius. The Antiquities of the Jews. New York: Ward, Lock, Bowden & Co., 1990. Lewis, C.S. Miracles. New York: Macmillan, 1960. Little, Paul. Know Why You Believe. Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press, 1987. Matheson, George. The Representative Men of the New Testament. London: Holder and Stoughton, 1905. Mattingly, John P. Crucifixion: Its Origin and Application to Christ. Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1961. Quoted in Josh McDowell, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999.

McDowell, Josh. Evidence for the Resurrection. Leadership U, 1992. http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html. ________. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999. Montgomery, John W. History and Christianity. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1971. Peters, F. E. The Harvest of Hellenism. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1971. Ramsay, Sir W. M. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1915. Robinson, John A. T. Redating the New Testament. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1976. Smith, Wilbur. Therefore Stand. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1945. Strauss, David Friedrich. The Life of Jesus for the People, 2nd edition. Volume I. London: Williams and Norgate, 1879. Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1998. Stott, John R. W. Basic Christianity. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press, 1971. Tenney, Merrill C. The Reality of the Resurrection. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1963. Wald, George. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Theories of the Origin of Lifeâ&#x20AC;? in Frontiers of Modern Biology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1962. Zacharias, Ravi. Can Man Live Without God?. Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing, 1994.