Did The Resurrection Really Happen?

The crucifixion of Jesus was especially well documented and accepted as fact. The crucial question then becomes, "Did Jesus rise from the dead, proving His claim to be God incarnate? Or did something else happen with His body? Or was He never dead at all?"

A key to this issue is the extreme local importance placed on handling this execution. Jesus' powerful, insightful speaking and many miracles had led the populace to request that He become king. This began to threaten the local political stability of the Romans and the religious power of the Jewish whom Jesus openly criticized. Both the absolute death of Jesus and the protection against a hoax were critical, since Jesus had claimed He would overcome death. Furthermore, He had already raised other people from the dead. As a result, all precautions were taken to secure His corpse (Matthew 27:62-66).

The Bible implies the cause of Jesus' death was cardiac arrest, indicated by blood and water from a spear thrust (medical experts confirm this).

To secure the body, a Roman guard was placed outside the tomb. Such a guard would have consisted of 16 soldiers, with a disciplined rotation for sleeping at night (every four hours, four would switch). The guards all faced the rigid Roman penalty of crucifixion if they slept outside of the assigned shift or deserted their post. The idea that all guards were asleep, considering the death penalty, is especially unreasonable.

To further ensure safekeeping, a two-ton stone was rolled in front of the tomb with Pontius Pilate's seal on it. Breaking the seal without the official Roman guard's approval meant crucifixion upside down.

The central issue -- unexplainable by Jewish leaders, especially in light of the many precautions -- is:

What Happened To Jesus Corpse If He Did Not Rise From The Dead As Indicated In the Gospel Accounts?

The official explanation is that the disciples stole the body while the guards were asleep (with the priests protecting the guards from the governor). This story was necessary only because no one could produce a dead body of Jesus, which would have stopped the resurrection story forever. Is a theft of Jesus body even remotely possible given that:

All 16 guards would have had to risk the penalty of crucifixion by sleeping while on duty or deserting. Surely at least one guard would be awake.

The disciples were in a state of shock, fear, and disarray, having seen their Master crucified. Is it reasonable to think they quickly created a brilliant plan and flawlessly executed it on the Sabbath day of rest?

What possible motive could the disciples have? If Jesus was not the Son of God as He claimed, stealing the body would create a lie with no apparent benefit, and death for no purpose for the disciples.

Was Jesus really dead? Crucifixion was more routine and was a longer, more visibly excruciating death than the electric chair is today. Is it likely that such professional executioners would not know death? The final spear thrust to the heart area was to ensure death. For such a political threat, they would be certain. If Jesus was not dead, what are the chances that a barely living person could move a two-ton rock from the inside of a tomb and escape a full Roman guard unnoticed?

Was the body stolen at night? Recognizing that no flashlights nor infrared sensors were available then, is it likely that a band of scared disciples carrying torches could bypass a full Roman guard, move a two-ton rock, and not be noticed? Furthermore, the Sabbath greatly limited movement. And again, for what motive?

Martyrdom for a belief is not unique. But what kind of person would die for a known lie? Someone insane? Would all the disciples face hardship and death for a known lie? The disciples were with Jesus constantly for three years. They would certainly know the truth of the resurrection. Lying would serve no purpose since Jesus' ministry would then be moot. Yet historical record and reports about the disciples indicated they all died cruel deaths for their beliefs (except John). James was stoned, Peter was crucified upside down, Paul was beheaded, Thaddaeus was killed with arrows, Matthew and James (Zebedee) faced sword deaths and other believers were crucified.

Underneath Rome lie some 900 miles of carved caves where over seven million Christians, executed for their beliefs, were buried. Other believers hid and worshiped in these caves during the height of Christian persecution. The earliest known inscriptions in the walls were dated A.D. 70. Some early occupants probably communicated directly with eyewitnesses of Jesus. Since about A.D. 400, the Catacombs were buried and "forgotten" for over 1000 years. In 1578 they were rediscovered by accident. Today they can be seen as silent memorials to many who died rather than curse Jesus or bow down to an emperor's statue. Christian martyrs differed greatly from other world martyrs in that historical facts were the foundation of their beliefs -- facts verifiable at the time -- not just ideas.

Paul, a leading executor of Christians, gave up wealth, power, and comfort upon seeing the resurrected Christ, then wrote most of the New Testament. Two Sanhedrin members (not present when the Sanhedrin sentenced Jesus to death) were secret disciples. Unbelieving natural brothers of Jesus later became believers after the resurrection.

Evidence that the people in Jesus' time believed in the resurrection is found on caskets of bones (ossuaries) discovered in a sealed tomb outside Jerusalem in 1945. Coins minted in about A.D. 50 were found inside the caskets, dating the burial within about 20 years of Jesus' crucifixion. Markings are clearly legible, including several statements reflecting knowledge of Jesus' ability to overcome death.

Examples of writings (in Greek) of hope for deceased loved ones include: "Jesus, Help" and "Jesus, Let Him Arise." The caskets also contain several crosses, clearly marked in charcoal. This is powerful evidence that early Christians believed in Jesus' ability to triumph over death. It also ties the idea of victory over death to the cross.

Prior to the resurrection, "grave robbing" was not considered a serious offense. The resurrection changed that. An inscription found on a tomb in Nazareth warns that anyone found stealing from the tombs would receive the death penalty. Scholars believe the inscription was written as early as Tiberius (circa 37 B.C) or as late as Claudius (A.D. 41-54). In the latter case, it would have been shortly after the crucifixion. Naturally, Jesus' hometown of Nazareth would be an obvious city of "interest" to officials.

Has anyone considered that there was a back exit to the cave?

Maybe to those who looking for an excuse not to believe:)

From my understanding it was not a cave, but an alcove that had been carved out. I believe people of means did that back then.

Becky

This is a good refutation of all theories against resurrection. It's from a Catholic website, but because the Resurrection is a unifying belief between Catholics and Protestants, that Protestants would be interested in these scripturally based arguments.

Resurrection of Jesus Christ

To put in my two cents, the New Testament was written by eyewitnesses, who wrote what they saw and heard, including the words of Jesus Christ. This is an historical account of this period of time, in this place. This is also the Word of God. Non-believers might says that "this is a good book, teaches good values" but discount the authenticity of the history; on the contrary, much archeological "proof" has been found to support what is written both the OT and the NT.

Yesterday began Holy Week, the most important time for Christians. In may ways, the Resurrection is the most important event in History, a triumph or life over death, a fulfillment of the OT Scriptures, the salvation of mankind. While Christmas and the incarnation is indeed Holy and a very special and sacred event, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ fills us with hope that we, too, can share in the Kingdom of God, and concur death with eternal life.

Anyway, I just had to throw in my two cents. I hope the non-believers can put aside their doubts for a time, and truly open their hearts. Perhaps the Holy Spirit will touch them and they will know the Truth.

God bless.

Can either side offer any proof, other than 2000yr old testimony?

Can you offer any proof - besides 2000yr+ old testimony - that:
* Hammurabi compiled a systematic code of law;
* A real man named Socrates inspired generations of Greek thinkers;
* Plato wrote a book named "The Republic" which expressed his dualistic philosophy;
* A young general known as Alexander conquered vast portions of the known world;
* Emporor Caligula grew into a cruel and demented individual;

If the historical record is not enough to prove this fact, then the entire breadth of history is meaningless drivel.

I did'nt want to believe. I thought people that believed in the Bible were ignorant simpletons that wanted life wrapped into a nice little ball so they did'nt have to think their way through it.

Some answers to your questions can be found in Romans and I Corinthians. There are those that find the whole idea of something that can't be measured or scientifically tested unacceptable. I know I did.

If you are really serious about finding some answers, first ask yourself if you would be willing to submit to God's will, no matter how humbling, if the answers point to a certain direction. If your answer is yes, then Freepmail me, and we can discuss.

> > What would persuade you - if it existed?
> Probably nothing less than it happening in an age where events such as this can be recorded and viewed by a majority.

So you're saying there's no proof that the Pilgrims fled Europe and landed in Massachussetts.
Or that Thomas Jefferson had any part in writing the Declaration of Independence.
Or that the Federalist Papers have anything to do with what the Founding Fathers intendede the Constitution to mean.
Or that George Washington was the first constitutionaly elected president.

Tacitus. Josephus. Pliny the Younger. Scipio. The Jewish Mishnah. One other name that will drive me nuts until it occurs to me, or I get home to my materials.

If you believe that Julius Ceaser was assasinated in the Roman Senate March 15, 44 B.C. on three sources, it is intellectually dishonest to doubt Jesus' resurrection on 6 ancient exo Biblical references.

".......then believers would no longer need "Faith".

In a sense, you are correct, for faith is the fuel that energizes the believer to work towards the object of their belief.

One can believe without acting upon it. Faith is in evidence only when the believer ACTS upon their belief.

After the laborer receives pay for work completed, it is not necessary to continue to labor for wages already earned. So, upon payment of wages, the laborer no longer is required to believe they will get paid -- having the fruits of their labor (faith) in hand.

One who has received wages has received proof that their labors (faith) were justified, and are henceforth, 'knowers,' -- having passed beyond the 'belief' stage.

It is difficult for one to share 'proof,' but easier to share the fruits.

how is one to interpret any differently the historical accounts of witnesses to the miracles attributed, for example, to the buddha?
Would they not be every bit as valid?

You'd use the same methods you'd use for judging the validity of any other historical claims / texts.
* Who makes the claim and what is their proximity to the event? The closer one is to the event, the more reliable.
* What incentive / disincentive would there be for someone to be accurate / inaccurate? If someone would probably be killed viciously for making their claims, it's more likely the claims are accurate.
* How many claim witness to the event, and how do their stories harmonize? The greater the number of non-contradictory claims, and the fewer the number of cantradictions, the more likely it is to be valid.
* How many extant versions of the texts/claims exists, in how many languages/translations, from how many geographic regions, with how much difference between the texts? The more widespread the text, and the fewer variations/errors, the more likely it is to be accurate to the original.

You should try reading the bible with the mind set that it is true and see what happens:)Try starting with the Gospel of Luke. Some facts about Luke. While Luke was not himself an eyewitness of the gospel events he had access to writings about and eyewitnesses to them. He had sifted sources carefully. Some have accordingly stressedhis contribution as a historian, a discovereer and preserver of facts. Then read Acts which is written by Luke also.

Becky

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.