Did Jesus of Nazareth really rise from the dead?

In his first letter to the Corinthian church, Paul writes that ‘if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile’. He adds a bit later that if this is the case, Christians ‘are to be pitied more than all men’. In other words, if Jesus was not raised from the dead, Christianity is useless; a waste of time. Worse, we’ve lied about God and misled others.

But why is this the case? Some contend that the resurrection is difficult enough to believe: surely there must be something left for the faith if it didn’t happen? In this article I’ll try to explore why the resurrection is so central to Christianity, and why, if we look at the evidence, it isn’t as impossible as it seems.

Why worry?

What is it about the resurrection of Christ that makes the Christian faith futile without it? The full text of 2 Corinthians 15:16 is, ‘And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still dead in your sins.’ That is, if the resurrection didn’t happen, our sins have not been taken away, and, consequently, we are dead; there is no life in us. Paul explains why us being in our sins means that we are dead more fully in Romans, and it is, simply, that ‘the wages of sin is death’ (Romans 6:23). This is why it’s a serious issue whether the resurrection happened or not.

It was, of course, in dying that Jesus took the punishment (death) that was ours, because of our sin. (Read some of the other articles in this section for more.) But in the Bible, the cross is never presented alone; it is accompanied by Jesus’ resurrection. Paul summarises the message he has been preaching this way: ‘that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures…’ (1 Corinthians 15: 3–4). The Christian message must include the resurrection. It’s also striking that Paul says that Jesus rising from the dead was ‘according to the Scriptures’. In other words, God had promised that this saviour would rise again. If he does not do so, it shows God to be unfaithful.

If the cross was Jesus' saving act, the resurrection was his victory. The logic runs like this: Christ dies because death is the curse for sin. Being dead is the state of being under that curse, the penalty, for sin. If Jesus does not rise again, it means he is still under the curse for sin: the punishment is still being delivered. To put it another way, sin still has control over Jesus. That is why we would still be in our sins: because in this case the death of Jesus has not achieved the end of the punishment (death) required if the full price for sin had been paid.

Thankfully, the Bible proclaims that Jesus has risen! That he is alive again shows clearly that death does not have mastery over him. His return to life shows two things: first, that the entire punishment for sin has been taken; second, that he has entirely defeated death and has power over it! In short, the resurrection is the proof that Jesus’ crucifixion worked. It means that permanent death is no longer even an option for anyone who trusts in Jesus to save them!

So far I’ve focussed on what it is the resurrection of Jesus has done away with: death. But as much as the resurrection is a defeat of death, in the Bible it brings life. I’ll look at that in a bit more depth in the last section.

The resurrection is also important because Jesus claimed many times that he would rise from the dead; in fact, he always accompanied predictions of his death with a declaration that he would rise again (see Matthew 16:21, 17:9, 17:22–23, 20:18–19; Mark 9:10; Luke 9:22–23 for some examples). This is a very bizarre thing to say if one had no means of being sure it would happen, and it really makes the resurrection event the test for the authority of his sayings. If Jesus was right when he successfully predicted his own death, all his other teaching must stand too; if he was wrong, he was either unbelievably egotistical or a lunatic (but see this article for a more general discussion of that theory).

Is it possible?

I’ve been looking so far at what the resurrection means in terms of our salvation. It’s central to it, and without the resurrection salvation as described by the Bible just can’t happen. But in its nature, the resurrection, just like Jesus’ life, teaching and death, and the actions of the apostles, are historical events.

This is something that distinguishes Christianity from many other religions, since it is not based on philosophical propositions or an abstract list of rules, but on objective historical events. That means whether or not you agree with the teaching of Jesus, the question of the resurrection can’t be avoided, and since it is a historical event, we can look at it with the usual scrutiny to decide on the most likely explanation from the evidence we have. I apologise in advance, though, that this will hardly be a rigourous study; maybe have a look at the books listed under Further Reading for more depth.

Objections to the Resurrection

Not surprisingly, our chief source for the resurrection of Jesus is the Bible. The four gospels discuss the details of this part of Jesus’ life in great depth, for instance, the book of Acts records the sermons of the earliest followers of Jesus, and many of the letters to the early churches mention it too. In this section I’ll discuss the common alternatives suggested for the resurrection of Jesus, and see how well they fit with the Biblical accounts.

There have been many studies on the resurrection, but in general terms, the alternatives that have been suggested boil down to two:

• Jesus didn’t die on the cross
• He did die, but there was confusion about his body.

And of course, the third:

• He died, and was raised again.

The Replies

Advocates of the first explanation suggest that those who thought Jesus had died were mistaken. They point to the speed with which he died, emphasised by Pilate’s surprise on hearing of his death so soon. There are several problems with this theory. The first is that Pilate’s surprise caused him to seek further assurance that Jesus was really dead. He called the centurion in charge of his crucifixion to question him, before he would certify Jesus as dead (Mark 15:44–46). John tells us of the mixture of ‘blood and water’ which flowed when Jesus’ side was pierced (John 19:34–35), and modern medicine has confirmed that this would be the result of death by crucifixion and rupture of the heart (yet John would not have known its medical significance). It is also worth pointing out that the Roman soldiers who carried out Jesus’ crucifixion were experts at execution; they knew when a man was dead. All four gospel accounts are in no doubt that Jesus died on the cross.

The disciples fled. Those who had been closest to Jesus during his life left him now and it was Joseph of Arimathea who sought permission to bury Jesus’ body (recorded in all four gospels). It was not usual, of course, for those executed as condemned criminals to receive a burial, and at least one scholar has suggested that this would have been no different for Jesus. This disregards, however, the narrative of all four gospel accounts and has found no evidence to support it. Even the Jewish leaders, who had encouraged Pilate to condemn Jesus, called for guards to be posted about the tomb, lest the body be stolen (Matthew 27:62–66).

Perhaps the disciples and the women went to the wrong tomb? This seems unlikely. For one thing, the women had watched Joseph bury Jesus (Luke 23:55), and surely could not have forgotten in the space of two days! Peter and John also visited the tomb on the morning of the third day. Both John and Luke report that they saw there some grave clothes (Luke 24:12 and John 20:3–8), which suggests the tomb they visited (following Mary’s report) was the one which Jesus’ body had recently inhabited.

The largest problem with the theories about the missing body of Jesus is, though, that the actions of the disciples and the Jewish leaders are not consistent unless Jesus really was risen. The disciples could not have stolen the body of Jesus, since we have already seen that it was closely guarded, and that the guards were placed at the time of burial. The disciples simply did not have the power to steal the body. As for the Jewish authorities, they opposed the disciples’ teaching, and it would have been the easiest thing in the world to produce the body to demonstrate that Jesus was dead. Yet they did not do so, and neither do we hear of them openly refuting the disciples’ teaching on this matter.

The final point concerns the disciples. They had given their lives to Jesus, so perhaps they simply couldn’t face the fact that he was dead. This is inconsistent with, first, what we know about the disciples. Many times in the gospels the disciples appear as men not easily persuaded. That they did flee at Jesus’ crucifixion suggests that they thought the game was up. That was it; he was not the expected Messiah. Furthermore, in the accounts of Jesus’ appearance there is not the sense that they were easily convinced. Such accounts are difficult to dismiss as hallucinations—Jesus appeared to as many as 500 on one occasion.

The transformation in their behaviour is also startling unless there were something behind it: they went from people defeated and dejected, locking themselves in their houses, to a group confident and preaching that Jesus had been raised. And they preached as eyewitnesses to the events, but also to those who had been around. Unless their claims were true, they could easily have been refuted. Not only this, but the disciples went on to endure all manner of persecution—for something they knew to be a lie?

Christ is Risen

There are many other possibilities to explore, but it’s worth pointing out that none of the theories against the resurrection have ever stood up to scrutiny. Christianity would have been dealt a death blow a long time ago had the disciples been wrong. There is an abundance of evidence in favour of the empty tomb of Jesus, and it has never been refuted. That it is a historical reality means Christian faith has always rested on a rational belief: that the most reasonable explanation is that Jesus rose from the dead, and is still alive. But why not read the accounts for yourself? Explore them, weigh them the same as you would anything else. Are the accounts consistent with themselves and external evidence?

Paul says this about the resurrection: Christ was ‘declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead’ (Romans 1:4). The resurrection puts the seal on the claims Jesus made about himself: he was the Son of God. In Acts 2, Peter preached in Jerusalem about the resurrection, and that it fulfilled prophesies David had made about the coming messiah, who would save the people from their sins. People there asked him, ‘what shall we do?’ (Acts 2:37). This was his reply: “Repent and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” (Acts 2:38).

For the Christian, the resurrection of Jesus is great news, as Paul explains in Romans 6. He says,

‘If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin…. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For if we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him.’ (Romans 6:5,6–9).

As I mentioned at the beginning, Christ’s resurrection shows that death has been defeated. When we say that we take Christ’s punishment on our behalf, we share in that death. Just the same, Paul says, we now share in his life!

Further Reading:

• Books: J. McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict; J. Stott, The Cross of Christ.
  
• Online: A. McGrath, ‘The Resurrection’; W.L. Craig, ‘Contemporary Scholarship and the Resurrection of Jesus’