Evidence Supporting The Trustworthiness Of Jesus’ Resurrection And Some Speculations We Can Debunk

Evidence Supporting The Trustworthiness Of Jesus’ Resurrection And Some Speculations We Can Debunk

Isn't Jesus' resurrection fiction? Is there any evidence that supports the trustworthiness of the resurrection? Today I am offering 4 lines of evidence that support the honesty of the historical narrative of the Gospels' accounts of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Difficult Starting Point

The whole idea of resurrection is a hard point to start for an attractive testimony. The attraction to stories of ghosts and spirits was much higher compared to that of a physical body resurrection in the bigger ancient Mediterranean world. In the first century, ghosts were feared and demons were thought to be the wicked dead. The popular belief was that improper or non-ceremonial burial caused the departing spirits to enjoin with wickedness, haunting, and even killing.

In Matthew 14 the disciples saw Jesus walk on water, and they were sorely afraid because they had thought they saw a spirit or illusion. The Greek word used is Phantasma, where we derive our English word for phantom or ghost. (Matthew 14:22-33)

In Luke 24:39 Jesus was appearing post-resurrection and had to prove himself to be real, as a spirit does not have flesh and bones, he told them to touch him and see that he is real. More surprisingly in verse 41, he asks if they have anything to eat, and then proceeds to chow on some fish in front of them. Imagine the astonishment as his disciples saw Jesus alive and well, eating a snack, just days after he was brutally beaten and executed before their very eyes.

The early church could not have chosen a more difficult starting point than to claim to the Mediterranean world that their convicted criminal of Rome had indeed risen, and not just spiritually, but physically. It would have been much easier and more attractive if they started with Jesus reviving as a ghost or spirit because that would have made more sense to the people of the time.

Women as First Witness

It was women who first noticed Jesus’ burial (Mark 15:47). And Luke identifies at least 5 women along with his added “Other women” (24:10). Known objectors to the resurrection are Celsus (wrote 175-181 AD) and Porphyry (Wrote 234-303 AD), philosophers who ridiculed the testimony of the church because “it was based on the weak foundation of the confused and contradictory testimony of frightened women” (i will go over how there are no contradictions in a later post)

 We must be careful not to induce our modern views on ancient text, doing so will thus get you a totally wrong interpretation, we must read with the time, literary style, and mindset of the people at the time in mind. In the 1st century, women were not seen as reliable sources of testimony (among other things). The claim of women being the first witnesses to such an important event would have been embarrassing to the 1st-century Mediterranean world, yet it still spread.

Body Stolen or Moved?

 Could the body have been stolen? Well, the evidence in the text points to a body not being stolen. The Gospels are EyeWitness Testimony and Historical Documents whether you want to admit it or not.

In John 20:6 Peter enters the tomb “Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloth lying there”. The linen on Jesus’ wrapped body was nicely folded where he lay, this is a big indicator that the body wasn't stolen because it would have been unnecessary to unwrap the dead, and decaying body. In the same verse, we read “the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself”. Even the cloth on his head was nicely folded but in a different location in the tomb related to the linen on his body.

Rapid Spread

 How did Christianity even spread if it was a fake account based on false testimony? I mean their savior was a criminal who was embarrassingly crucified, whipped till his skin was torn and shredded, and his closest friends, the disciples even fled in fear. Peter denied even knowing Jesus. If the claims really were false, the movement would not have gotten far, people of the time would have rejected it, and you wouldn't have martyrs dying left and right based on a lie. In Luke chapter 24, two disciples are walking on the Emmaus road when they stumble upon a stranger. The stranger asks about their conversation and long faces. They explain Jesus’ execution and even said “But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel”, here we see the utter defeat the followers of Jesus faced after his execution, they knew he was dead, and they thought they knew he would stay dead. In the verses following, the two disciples even bring up the women's testimony and how Jesus’ body was missing.

 Christianity should not have survived if it was false, when Jesus died, everyone thought he would stay dead and that it was over, a waste of time. But when Jesus returned they claimed he had risen and even went to gruesome deaths to stand by their claims. There is more evidence and more details about the ones mentioned, but this is just a short informative so no further elaboration is done in this article. God Bless and you all have a wonderful day!