Theism.net Options: home | articles
| books | search | webmaster
.gif){kind=small}
e-mail: j
From:
http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html
If
the tomb where Jesus was laid was indeed empty, could his body have been stolen
away by someone? To assume that the body was stolen one must first of all
disregard the story of the guard posted at the sepulchre
(Matt. 28:65, 66) . We need then to ask, Who would have stolen the body and why? The Romans had no
reason to do so; they had surrendered the body to Joseph of Arimathea.
It is illogical to suppose that the Jews stole the body, since they could
easily have suppressed the nascent Christian movement and exposed the
Christians' claim of Christ's Resurrection by simply producing his body.
Hermann
Reimarus, whose works were published posthumously by Gotthold Lessing in the
eighteenth century, did suggest that it was the Christians who removed the body
and hid it somewhere. But this is psychologically incredible since the
disciples would not only be perpetrating a fraud but also be dying for a
deliberate deception. The neatly deposited graveclothes
and napkin observed by Peter and John (John 20:7) are evidence against tomb
robbery by ordinary thieves, as they would not have taken the time to tidy up
the sepulchre.
G.
The Impact of the Resurrection
Not
even the most skeptical can deny the historical attestation of the faith of the
early Christians in the Resurrection of Christ. This simple fact is of
importance if we accept as genuine the numerous predictions of Jesus concerning
his death and resurrection (Matt.
Something
earth-shaking must have transformed the despairing disciples. A. M. Ramsey (The
Resurrection of Christ, 1946) reminds us: "It must not be forgotten that
the teaching and ministry of Jesus did not provide the disciples with a Gospel,
and led them from puzzle to paradox until the Resurrection gave them a
key" (p. 40).
It
should be obvious that the early Christians were completely convinced of the
Resurrection. If this were not so, they had everything to lose and nothing to
gain. By preaching the Resurrection of Christ they further antagonized the Jewish
authorities and in effect accused them of slaying the Messiah (Acts
The
effect of the belief in Jesus' resurrection on the early Christian belief in
the wider resurrection experience can hardly be overestimated. It was the kind
of assurance, contemporary and concrete, that the most ardent though
speculative convictions of Pharisees or other non-Christian Jews could not have
equaled ["Intimations of Immortality in the Thought of Jesus," in T.
T. Ramsey et al., The Miracles and the Resurrection, 1964, p. 84].
Professor
Lillie concludes:
The
followers of a religious group do not preserve traditions of their leaders
forsaking their master and behaving in a cowardly and despairing fashion unless
these traditions happen to be true. The fact that the Gospel was boldly and
successfully preached by these same followers is attested not only by the New
Testament record, but by the historical fact of the growth of the Christian
Church. It is indeed one of the few New Testament facts for which we have
independent evidence outside the Christians' own traditions. The Roman
historian Tacitus (Annals XV. 44) states that "a
most mischievous superstition thus checked for the moment (by the crucifixion
of Jesus) again broke out" [in D. E. Nineham et
al., op. cit.].
I
would argue that only the appearance of the risen Christ can satisfactorily
explain how Jesus' skeptical brother James (John 7:5) became a leader in the
early Church (I Cor. 15:7; Acts 15), how despondent
Peter became a fearless preacher at Pentecost, and how a fanatical persecutor
of Christians became Paul, the greatest missionary of the Gospel.
A
Concluding Challenge
I
have tried to show that theories attributing the Resurrection of Christ to the
borrowing of mythological themes, to hallucinations, or to alternative
explanations of the empty tomb are improbable and are also inadequate to
explain the genesis and growth of Christianity. To be sure, the Resurrection of
Jesus is unprecedented, but Jesus himself is sui
generis, unique. As Tenney remarks, "Although the resurrection was without
precedent. it was not abnormal for Christ....
He rose from the dead because it was the logical and normal prerogative of the
Son of God" (op. Cit., p. 133).
The
historical question of the Resurrection of Christ differs from other historical
problems in that it poses a challenge to every individual. Christ said (John
e-mail: j
Theism.net Options: home | articles
| books | search | webmaster