Is Christianity true? (the Resurrection - Part 5)
This blog is part of my series titled “Is Christianity true?” The series addresses four common objections to the truthfulness of the Christian worldview, namely concerns about: (1) the trustworthiness of the Bible; (2) the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection; (3) the compatibility of faith in God with modern science; and (4) the incompatibility of Christian truth claims with those of other worldviews.
HISTORICAL FACTS CONCERNING THE RESURRECTION - FACT #1
The next few blogs will argue in favor of the physical resurrection of Jesus. For purposes of this exercise, I will draw (with permission, see Appendix C, “More Than Your Business Card”) upon the work of noted scholar Dr. William Lane Craig. Craig holds a PhD in philosophy from the University of Birmingham and a Doctor of Theology degree from the University of Munich.
Craig argues that the broad spectrum of New Testament critics who teach at secular universities and non-evangelical seminaries have come to regard as historical four basic facts which support the resurrection of Jesus.
JESUS WAS BURIED IN A TOMB BY JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA
“New Testament researchers have established this first fact on the basis of evidence such as the following:
1. Jesus’ burial is attested in the very old tradition quoted by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:3–5: For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: . . . that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. Paul…uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” with regard to the information he is passing on to the Corinthians…This has convinced all scholars that Paul is, as he says, quoting from an old tradition which he himself received after becoming a Christian… It thus dates to within five years after Jesus’ death.
2. The burial story is part of very old source material used by Mark in writing his gospel. The gospels tend to consist of brief snapshots of Jesus’ life which are loosely connected and not always chronologically arranged. But when we come to the passion story, we do have one, smooth, continuously-running narrative. This suggests that the passion story was one of Mark’s sources of information in writing his gospel. Now most scholars think Mark is already the earliest gospel, and Mark’s source for Jesus’ passion is, of course, even older. Comparison of the narratives of the four gospels shows that their accounts do not diverge from one another until after the burial. This implies that the burial account was part of the passion story. Again, its great age militates against its being legendary.
It is therefore highly improbable that Christians would invent a member of the court that condemned Jesus who honors Jesus by giving him a proper burial instead of allowing him to be dispatched as a common criminal.
3. As a member of the Jewish court that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention. There was strong resentment against the Jewish leadership for their role in the condemnation of Jesus (1 Thess. 2:15). It is therefore highly improbable that Christians would invent a member of the court that condemned Jesus who honors Jesus by giving him a proper burial instead of allowing him to be dispatched as a common criminal.
4. No other competing burial story exists. If the burial by Joseph were fictitious, then we would expect to find either some historical trace of what actually happened to Jesus’ corpse or at least some competing legends. But all our sources are unanimous on Jesus’ honorable interment by Joseph…”
Next week, Fact #2 - the empty tomb!
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash
