So far in this blog series we have seen that the evidence for the tomb of Jesus being empty is very strong. There is further evidence that Jesus was indeed bodily raised from the dead. There were numerous sightings of Jesus after his crucifixion which are well documented in the New Testament. The question is whether these alleged sightings of Christ were of a real, bodily Jesus? Or were they (as some suggest) simply dreams, visions or hallucinations? Some scholars suggest that Jesus' followers were simply hallucinating Some argue that while some of the New Testament figures thought they saw a bodily Jesus what they were really experiencing was some kind of 'vision'. This belief is accompanied by the idea that there were psychological reasons for why people like Paul and Peter thought they saw Jesus alive. Scholars like Goulder (in his book 'The Baseless Fabric of a Vision') suggest that Paul saw Jesus in a time of deep Crisis in his life and so imagined Jesus into being in front of him. Peter was overcome with grief and guilt after denying Jesus and so perhaps desperately wanted to see him again and so kind of hallucinated Jesus was with him again to make himself feel better. These theories are deeply problematic for several reasons 1) They are all just suspicions and guess work. They cannot be proved. 2) The New Testament reports the disciples touching Jesus (Luke 24:39, Matthew 28:9) and eating (Luke 24:43) which implies more than hallucinations. 3) The Bible itself distinguishes between 'visions' of Jesus (such as the one Stephen had in Acts 7 just before he was stoned to death) and actual physical sightings of Jesus. These 'visions' are not used as evidence for the bodily resurrection. 4) Most importantly theories that try to explain away the resurrection appearances using psychology as evidence are incredibly problematic because there is NO WAY that Biblical Scholars living two thousand years after the first Christians can attempt to perform a psycho-analysis of people like Peter and Paul! It is difficult enough for a trained psychologist to psycoo-analyse you over a period of years! Why a 'biblical scholar' believes they can perform psycho-analyse people when they have extremely limited biographical information is beyond me. 5) Such theories deal with absolutely none of the evidence available to us. They are just wild speculation. Paul says that 500 people saw Jesus all at the same time! In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul lists a whole host of people who saw a risen, bodily Jesus including 500 people who saw Jesus all at the same time. It is highly unlikely that 500 people could have all hallucinated exactly the same thing at exactly the same time. All of these people could have been interrogated about the resurrection as well. Paul would not have named them if he was lying or his testimony was false as he would have been found out! Pail is so confident that Christians resurrection bodies will be physical and bodily because he knew Jesus was bodily raised from the dead! The sightings of a bodily, real, risen Jesus make the most logical sense. They explain why there was an empty tomb. These wild psychological and hallucination theories are based on no historical evidence. They cannot explain why there was an empty tomb or why the early church exploded all over the known world in the way it did. They cannot explain why the early Christians were so adamant that Jesus' resurrection was bodily. These wacky theories do not stand up to logic, the evidence or any level of interrogation! In our next post we turn to the 1st Century Jewish view of resurrection and see if this can tell us anything about whether Jesus really was raised from the dead. Like this post on facebook or tweet it! | Missed part one, two or four of 'Was Jesus Bodily Raised from the Dead?' Read part one here Read part two here Read part four here |
0 Comments
In assessing whether Jesus was bodily raised from the dead it is of paramount importance to assess whether there was actually an empty tomb or not. If Jesus' body was still there then he was not resurrected! The women at the tomb All four Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus have an account of the resurrection. One of the most compelling arguments for the historicity of the bodily resurrection and that Jesus' tomb was empty is that the empty tomb was reported by the authors of the Gospels to have been found by women. The historian Vermes says that female testimony did 'not count in male Jewish society'. Women were not even allowed to testify legally as witnesses in trials in first century Judaism (O'Collins). The earliest Gospel that was written is the Gospel of Mark and he has no men arriving on the scene at all. The question this leaves us with is why would the writers of the Gospels have women as being present at the empty tomb if they knew the evidence of these women would not be worth much? The logical answer would not be that the Gospels have women as the primary witnesses to the resurrection because they made the story up! A made up story would not have given the primary testimony and evidence to women but rather to men, so the story would have been more convincing in that culture and time. The logical answer is therefore that the Gospel writers told the story the way they did because it actually happened that way. Because women's testimony was not worth much we must assume this story is based on sound fact and that the women really did find the tomb of Jesus empty. The Gospels seem to differ on points of detail surrounding the resurrection. Surely this is evidence AGAINST the resurrection? Those who seek to disprove Jesus' bodily resurrection point to the differences on points of minor detail among the Gospel writers. For example, Luke has the empty tomb being found at dawn while both Matthew and John say it was before dawn. Mark says the tomb was found after dawn. Mark has three women present at the empty tomb, Matthew has two. In Mark, the women tell no one about what they have seen, while the other Gospel accounts state they told people about what had happened. I want to state that rather than weakening the argument for Jesus' tomb being empty, these differences actually strengthen that argument. Think about it. Lots of the material in the Gospels appears fairly similar. Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source and it is probable they shared other sources. The fact that the different Gospels contain different details surrounding the resurrection means that there were many different sources for the story of Jesus' resurrection! If the resurrection of Jesus was fabricated and constructed by the early church then there would likely be one single source for the resurrection narratives and the details of that narrative would therefore be more likely to be identical in each of the Gospels! The fact there appears to be a number of sources regarding Jesus' resurrection can only add weight to the argument that there was in fact an empty tomb! It is hard to escape the evidence suggesting there was an empty tomb. However, there is further evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. There were many sightings of Jesus being alive and well after he died and at one time he appeared to over 500 people at once! In the next blog post we shall assess whether these sightings of Jesus can be trusted and what they can tell us about the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Read part one, three or four of this blog. Like this post on facebook or tweet about it below!
'If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain'. -Paul to the Church in Corinth. One of the most outrageous claims of Christian doctrine is that Jesus Christ was bodily raised from the dead. Many people find this a difficult thing to believe in and objections have been raised to Jesus' resurrection for two thousand years. However, many people all over the world do believe that Jesus Christ was bodily raised from the dead. There is overwhelming evidence that Jesus' bodily resurrection is something that really did happen. If Jesus really was raised from the dead it has huge consequences and implications for all of us. Over my next few blog posts I shall be looking at what this evidence is. There are two popular arguments against the bodily resurrection that are often put forward to dismiss the historicity of the resurrection. Neither of them stand up to logic but in this introductory post I shall review them briefly. Objection 1 - Jesus was seen after his time on the cross because he never really died Some people suggest that if Jesus was alive on Easter Sunday it is because he never really died in the first place. The theory is widely discounted. It is almost certain that Jesus, who was flogged, beaten and then executed was not alive when he was buried. Even if we even entertain the idea that Jesus was not dead when he was buried it is impossible to conceive that Jesus could fool hundreds of people that he was alive and well such a short time after enduring such an ordeal, let alone escape a sealed tomb. There is also early evidence that reveals Jesus really was dead when he was executed. The early historian Tacitus talks of Christ being executed by Pontius Pilate. The Babylonian Talmud also talks of the death of Jesus. Furthermore, in the Gospels, Jesus' side is pierced and water and blood flow out of his body which is a medical sign that Jesus was dead. The author of the Gospel was not to have this medical knowledge when he reported this detail. This theory, on the basis of evidence and logic can be discounted. Objection 2 - Jesus' body was stolen from his tomb by the authorities or his disciples If the disciples had really stolen the body, they were all risking their lives for a lie and something they knew not to be true and it is highly likely that the body would have been found. If the authorities had stolen Jesus' body they would have produced it when rumours that Jesus had risen from the dead began to circulate. The story of Jesus' resurrection was causing them enough trouble! The theory that Jesus' body was stolen is also widely discarded and is very weak. In my following few blog posts we shall get on to the real meaty stuff. We shall look at the evidence for an empty tomb, assess whether people were seeing a bodily Jesus, were hallucinating or believed in some kind of 'spiritual resurrection' over and against a bodily one and we shall see what the Jewish view on resurrection can tell us about the resurrection of Jesus. Read part two, three and four of 'was Jesus bodily raised from the dead?' Like this post on facebook and share it on twitter below.
I believe that women should be Bishops in the Church of England and have believed this ever since I became a Christian.
The General Synod voted yesterday not to pass legislation that would allow women to serve as Bishops in the church. The overwhelming majority of synod voted in favour of the motion. Six votes made all the difference. I am, of course, disappointed that women will not be able to be Bishops as soon as I (and many others) had hoped. There will be much hurt, anger and disappointment in the days, weeks and months to come. It is good to acknowledge this and to let people feel it. We must remember that this was not a 'no' against women becoming bishops (although I understand it will feel like that to many) it is but a 'no' against the current legislation. Archbishop John Sentamu said this morning that we will have women bishops - and we will. In the meantime it is important to remember that Churches will be open as usual on Sunday and the Gospel will continue to be preached by faithful men and women. Jesus is still Lord, he did rise from the dead, he is alive and His Holy Spirit is still at work. The Gospel will continue to transform and change lives. People become Christians because of Jesus and what he did for them, not because of one vote in Synod. Archbishop Rowan Williams said this morning that "God remains God, our call remains our call, our church remains our church". Amen to that. My good friend Lee Kirkby, a youth leader in York, tweeted this last night: "After tonight's amazing Youth, the only thing that needs to be relevant is Jesus. And he certainly is". Jesus is still in the business of changing lives, saving people, healing people and seeing communities transformed. That has not changed because of a vote in synod. The message of Jesus is as relevant now as it was before the vote. If the church keeps holding out the life changing message of Jesus we will continue to be relevant. There is already much pain and hurt. The story of the church in the past two thousand years is that God uses people who are hurt and confused to bring the message of Jesus to the world. We must not deny the hurt, pain and confusion that people are feeling but when the dust settles a little on this current debate, and when women are bishops in the very near future, we shall see that this story has not changed. I have been blessed by the ministry of some inspiring women. I pray that women will very soon be able to be involved in leadership at all levels of our wonderful church. In the meantime, let's do what the church should do best... being united and speaking and showing the love of Jesus to this hurting world. Pray for all the Anglican churches in this land and the work of fantastic Anglican organisations like Church Army, that they will continue to show and speak of that love to the communities around them. |