Proving The Resurrection

Did the disciples think they saw Jesus after his death on the cross as the result of hallucination or did they really see a resurrected Christ?

Theologian Mike Licona, leader of Risen Jesus Ministries, gives an answer to this question in a short video that is part of the 'Top 10 Myths About The Resurrection' series that features his teachings on the subject. The ten video clips are available online through apologetics websites, including Credo House Ministries.

“The most common myth pertaining to Jesus’ resurrection is the earliest Christians had visions of Jesus exalted in heaven and the visions were hallucinations,” Licona recently told The Christian Post via email.

Most Christians “don’t have a clue” how to not only explain the resurrection, but how to defend their Christian faith, he said. Licona's ministry is dedicated to making theology more accessible in order to deepen the faith of Christians.

I pray this video here will help you do just that the next time you find yourself challenged about the resurrection. Perhaps even as early as tomorrow.

What I love about that brief presentation is that it just takes the facts without assumption of the Bible -- proving that the resurrection really happened.

There are many more debates and lectures by him on YouTube so if you would like to go deeper with this subject, then I encourage you to do so by starting there.

Reasons To Believe had this, which I think is a fitting conclusion...

As Easter approaches, now is the time to address the most familiar escape route from the biblical account of Jesus’ resurrection and its profound implications: the myth hypothesis. Perhaps this alternative gains support from the eventual debunking of popular stories long held as truths—such as the myth that Columbus’s contemporaries believed the Earth to be flat—but it doesn’t withstand these three (among other) tests of evidence and logic.

Notes on the “Myth” Hypothesis

Oxford scholar A. N. Sherwin-White, a specialist in ancient Greek and Roman history, observes that myth and legend require time to develop. Typically, distortions accrue over the span of two full generations or more. Legend cannot replace fact so long as eyewitnesses remain alive to set the record straight. No such time gap exists in this instance.

Manuscript evidence indicates the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), which report Jesus’ bodily resurrection from the dead, were written within 30 years—less than one generation—from the date of the event’s occurrence. Source criticism suggests that oral and possibly written accounts predated the early Greek Gospels. This source material bridges the gap even more tightly between the resurrection and its documentation.

As for the reasoning that typifies arguments against the resurrection, it may best be described as circular: myth hypothesis advocates reject the resurrection because they reject the divinity of Christ, and they reject the divinity of Christ because they reject the accuracy of the Gospels, which they reject because the Gospels report miracles, such as the miracle of the Incarnation (i.e., the divinity of Christ). This circle reveals an underlying anti-supernatural bias. The problem is one of presupposition, not of historicity.

Final Observations

The Gospel accounts stand apart from mythical literature in both content and style. Jesus’ miracles, unlike the bizarre and sometimes frivolous “miracles” of myth or legend, meet legitimate human needs and glorify God the Father. Resurrection myths about pagan deities (Osiris, Adonis, Mithras, etc.), often associated with fertility rites, bear no resemblance to the account of Jesus’ resurrection, nor do they have even a modicum of the Gospels’ historical foundation.What’s more, the apostles staked their very lives on the truth of the resurrection. No amount of torture could shake the certainty of what their eyes had seen. It seems reasonable to base our confidence on theirs.

Share|