The Truth of the Resurrection
Concerning the heading above –
I want to tell you I know that Jesus is Lord and
I know from and through the Holy Spirit Jesus raised Himself from the dead and
I know I am saved.
Romans 10:9
9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Luke 24:
1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb.
2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb,
3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.
5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead?
6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee:
7 ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ ”
8 Then they remembered his words.
To this point, this study has referenced Holy Scripture. I have now included detailed examination of the deity of Jesus and the truth of the resurrection acknowledging the work of other authors.
Davis reminds me of Jesus’ true deity with comments on the resurrection and final judgement with the wonderful truth (Job 19:25-27) “I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end He will stand upon the earth …” He also quotes wonderful references (Mt 22:29-32; Jn 6:39-40; Rom 6:5) along with the truth of 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4. He concludes with references on judgment (e.g. Mt 13:39-42; 25:32-33, 46). I marvel at the truth of this last reference (Jn 12:47-48) which confirms the truth that Jesus (Jn 3:17) that He did not come to condemn but to save. Those who do not accept Him condemn themselves (Jn 3:36). I conclude with the simple comment on Davis’ discussion about the eternal state – the joy of being “with Christ” (Phil 1:23). When mentioning the word “joy” I am also reminded of the awesome truth that only believers have true “joy” as joy is a fruit of the Spirit – a condition of true belief in Jesus now and for all eternity. I also add that the believers’ election and adoption, that state of belonging to Jesus is a great comfort and success for eternity.
I am also encouraged by Davis here as he discusses Jesus’ obedience which I suggest gives practical understanding about wisdom. In addition to faithfulness and therefore righteousness, one of the most important characteristics of Jesus as mentioned by Davis is that of obedience. He always obeyed God’s will (Jn 6:38), indeed He did exactly what His Father had commanded (Jn 14:30-31). Already mentioned is Jesus’ authority to lay His life down and take it up again (Jn 10:18). Davis mentions God’s command authorizing the Lord to do this (Jn 15:10). Jesus saves us from our sins by being our substitute and being obedient to death “even death on a cross” (Phil 2:8).
Referring to “our substitute” above I know some Liberal scholars have urged all Christians to be tolerant of differences in basic beliefs. However, this would be compromising the ultimate sacrifice of Jesus. One would be acknowledging all belief systems must be correct. This is compromise at its worst for scripture teaches “salvation is found in no-one else…” (Acts 4:12). If one person’s “truth” is diametrically opposed to another person’s “truth” how can both be correct?
Following on from this truth, I note Davis comments on the resurrection and ascension. He explains that “the resurrection was God’s vindication of Christ’s teaching and earthly ministry …”[1] and that by His death and resurrection, death and sin were defeated. This is the wonderful evidence that Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords deserving of our worship (Mt 28:9; Lk 24:36-39). Of great importance is the reality as Davis explains that Jesus’ body was a “real body that could be seen and touched.[2] (Again Lk 24:36-39). Davis also highlights the wonderful truth that Jesus continues in His ministry that the “ascended Christ is now actively continuing His work through the ministry and mission of the church”[3] (Acts 1:1-2). I also add the wonderful joy for Christians of the guidance of His Holy Spirit (Rom 8:9). Further it is marvellous how the Holy Spirit guided Paul when he wrote the wonderful words concerning Jesus (Phil 2:9-11) and Davis notes the Hymn “Of Obedience and Humble Service”[4] which in my mind exemplifies the humility of Jesus (Mt 20:28) and also his exaltation as King of kings and Lord of lords with the Father now. Thus Jesus is the only Saviour (Acts 4:12) and thus the author of the believers’ calling and salvation.
Frame begins briefly outlining miracles that “throughout the Scriptures God does wonderful works so that people will know that He is the Lord (Ex 6:7; 7:5, 17; 8:22; 9:14; 10:2; 11:7; 14:4, 18; 16:12; 29:46)”[5] to mention the beginning of God’s works. He explains that during the ministry of Jesus that Jesus Himself made many miraculous signs but that they rarely allowed people to soften their hearts and believe. Even the enemies of Jesus admitted to the miraculous but did not believe. Frame further explains that even the resurrection itself failed to “convince many”.[6] He continues with comments of Jesus’ rebuke to those who only wanted signs (Mt 12:39; Jn 4:48). I am aware of the many New Testament references concerning miraculous signs and their “epistemological function” and, with respect to apologists many will say – well there are strange happenings. However, concerning the resurrection, already noted above with the appropriate references, I am greatly encouraged by Frame’s words, except for the use of the word “story” in the passage which follows:
“The story of the Resurrection was related too soon after the fact to be the product of legendary development. The ornamentation and elaboration characteristic of legends is not there. The story of the women discovering the empty tomb bears remarkable marks of authenticity. No-one inventing such a story would have placed women in this role, because they were not acceptable witnesses in Jewish courts of law.
Attempts to explain the Resurrection as something other than a supernatural event have always fallen flat. Some have said that Jesus did not actually die on the cross, but only fell into a coma, from which he was roused in the tomb. But in such a weakened condition, Jesus could not have rolled away the heavy stone and appeared to the disciples as the triumphant Lord of heaven and earth. Some have said that the disciples engaged in a conspiracy, but that has been dealt with above. Some have explained the post-Resurrection appearances as hallucinations or ‘visions’. But hallucinations do not work that way. They do not produce the same images in many persons, who then report that they have all seen the same thing.
The fact is, then that the Resurrection is as well established as any fact in history – indeed better than most, for it is attested by the Word of God itself.”[7]
I am further encouraged by Frame’s comments that the resurrection was credibly absolutely certain and that it is the word of God Himself and deserves “the highest standard of credibility.”[8]
McDowell, in his discussion on Jesus as Lord, comments on the resurrection in his Chapter “Support of Deity: The Resurrection – Hoax or History?” He begins by stating “the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted upon the minds of men, OR it is the most fantastic fact of history.”[9] He continues about Jesus’ credentials and explains:
“(1) The impact of His life, through His miracles and teachings, upon history;
(2) fulfilled prophecy in His life; and
(3) His resurrection.”[10]
McDowell highlights the record of the resurrection (Mt 28:1-11; Mk 16; Lk 24; Jn 20, 21), and cites W L Craig concerning the importance of the physical resurrection of Christ – “Without the belief in the resurrection the Christian faith could not have come into being. The disciples would have remained crushed and defeated men. Even had they continued to remember Jesus as their beloved teacher, His crucifixion would have forever silenced any hopes of His being the Messiah. The cross would have remained forever the sad and shameful end of His career. The origin of Christianity therefore hinges on the belief of the early disciples that God had raised Jesus from the dead.”[11]
McDowell continues with the significance of the resurrection and that of the four world religions based on personalities that “only Christianity claimed an empty tomb for its founder.”[12] He continues further with the true comment that “the resurrection is propounded as being:
(1) the explanation of Jesus’ death;
(2) prophetically anticipated as the messianic experience;
(3) apostolically witnessed;
(4) the cause of the outpouring of the Spirit, and thus accounting for religious phenomena otherwise inexplicable; and
(5) certifying the Messianic and Kingly position of Jesus of Nazareth… without the resurrection the Messianic and Kingly position of Jesus could not be convincingly established.”[13]
Concerning historic fact McDowell cites W J Sparrow-Simpson who wrote “If the resurrection is not historic fact, then the power of death remains unbroken, and with it the effect of sin; and the significance of Christ’s death remains uncertified, and accordingly believers are yet in their sins, precisely where they were before they heard of Jesus’ name.”[14] McDowell explains that the “resurrection turned disaster into victory and without the resurrection Christianity would never have happened … that without faith in the resurrection there would be no Christianity at all … Christianity stands or falls with the truth of the resurrection.”[15] McDowell highlights the reference (1 Cor 15:7).
In addition to the New Testament witness above in the previous comments about the deity of Jesus, McDowell continues with the claims of Jesus that he would be raised from the dead – indeed His own predictions of His own resurrection (Mt 12:38-40; 16:21; 17:9; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:32; 27:63; Mk 8:31-9:1; 9:10; 9:31; 10:32-34; 14:28, 58; Lk 9:22-27; Jn 2:18-22; 12:34; and also Chapters 14-16).
McDowell also spends considerable time in explaining the historical approach to the resurrection of Jesus as an event in history. He cites Wilbur Smith who commented “the meaning of the resurrection is a theological matter, but the fact of the resurrection is a historical matter; the nature of the resurrection body of Jesus may be a mystery, but the fact that the body disappeared from the tomb is a matter to be decided upon by historical evidence.”[16] I comment here concerning the word “mystery” cited by Smith and is reminded that the Greek equivalent “mysterion” as discussed in the section “Sovereignty of God – God’s Responsibility and Ours” has to do with something that was concealed but is now explained and revealed – and this is exactly true when examining the predictions that Jesus made in Scripture concerning His own resurrection. McDowell continues looking at the legal ramifications of the resurrection as fact and comments on the forensic aspects of Scripture noting Bernard Ramm who said “In Acts 1, Luke tells us that Jesus showed Himself alive by many infallible proofs (en pollois tekmeriois), an expression indicating the strongest type of legal evidence.”[17] McDowell further cites Ernest Kevan concerning eyewitnesses which have been discussed by La Haye. However, Kevan also adds concerning the Epistles of the New Testament that they “constitute historical evidence of the highest kind …”[18] In addition to the above authors McDowell cites J N D Anderson who discussed Moule who explained “from the very first the conviction that Jesus had been raised from death has been that by which their very existence has stood or fallen. There was no other motive to account for them, to explain them … at no point within the New Testament is there any evidence that the Christians stood for an original philosophy of life or an original ethic. Their sole function is to bear witness to what they claimed as an event – the raising of Jesus from among the dead … the one really distinctive thing for which the Christian stood was their declaration that Jesus had been raised from the dead according to God’s design …”[19] Thus as Sparrow-Simpson adds to his previous citation, “the resurrection of Christ is the foundation of apostolic Christianity …”[20] I add (and this can also apply to the unbelief of liberal scholars who reject Paul and Peter’s letters, and also John’s Revelation as Scripture) that “those who deny His resurrection consistently deny as a rule His divinity and His redemptive work in any sense that St Paul would have acknowledged.”[21]
I have noted that McDowell has much more to say on this marvellous foundational truth and concludes this section on the resurrection with McDowell’s comment that “it may be said that the historical evidence for the resurrection is stronger than for any other miracle anywhere … as Paul said, if Christ is not risen from the dead then our preaching is in vain and your faith is also vain.”[22]
I acknowledge that McDowell has presented evidence for the resurrection of Christ in such a manner that would be acceptable in a modern day courtroom setting. This is not to deny the role faith plays in accepting the historical fact as part of God working in the lives of humankind.
May our One True LORD God Almighty of the Bible bless you in this study.
[1] John Jefferson Davis, Basic Bible Texts. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), p 81
[2] Ibid, 82
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid, 83
[5] John M Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God. (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: R & R Publishing, 1994), p 143
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid, 146
[8] Ibid, 147
[9] Josh McDowell, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Evidence I and II. (Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson, 1999), p 203
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid, 204
[12] Ibid, 205
[13] Ibid, 206
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid, 208
[16] Ibid, 211
[17] Ibid, 213
[18] Ibid, 214
[19] Ibid, 215
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid.