By Robert Mann
The resurrection of Christ is the foundation event of the Christian faith. It is not only the existence of Christ that gave rise to a world religion, but his resurrection. If the resurrection was a myth, then the entire Christian faith would be based upon an event that did not happen and the whole New Testament could equally be fiction. If, however, his death on the cross and subsequent resurrection were historical facts, then the teachings of Christ should be learned and acted upon because of who he undoubtedly was.
Many people believe that the resurrection did not happen, and point to four of the five theories regarding it as proving them right. These arguments have been refuted, however, and the experts doing so have used the same four theories as proof that they are right. So what is the truth?
Theory 1: Eyewitness accounts have confirmed the death of Christ on the cross, and the Gospels present the written accounts of the events of the three days, including the crucifixion and the resurrection, as recorded by the disciples. Those denying the resurrection claim that all who saw Jesus after his death were hallucinating out of a desire for him to be back amongst them, but if that was true then would the Jewish or even the Roman authorities not have produced the body, saying "Here he is - he is not resurrected"? They did not because they could not: his body had been resurrected and he was walking amongst them.
Theory 2: It has been suggested that the Gospels are myths, and were written as such, not as factual accounts. They were representational and not historical. Anybody reading the Gospels can see that to be wrong: the Gospels are presented as well-written eyewitness accounts of factual events. The disciples did see Jesus after his resurrection, and wrote in such a way as to leave no doubt about what and who they saw. There is nothing allegorical there, and certainly not the mythical way of writing that can be taken as fact after years of misinterpretation. The Gospels were written not long after the events and can be taken as accurately presenting what the writers saw with their own eyes.
Theory 3: The disciples were deceivers. They stole Christ's body, made up the resurrection story, and lied to people over and over again. This theory doesn't hold up very well when you consider that no one ever confessed that the resurrection was a deliberate deception. Christ's disciples were martyred because of their faith in Jesus and not one recanted in order to save his life. Many believers broke under torture and denied Christ to once again worship Caesar, but no one ever said that the resurrection was a conspiracy.
Theory 4: Christ did not die but was taken down unconscious and entombed while he was alive, later recovering consciousness and being found by his followers and disciples. This cannot be because of the body of historical evidence of both blood and water flowing from his wound. The water is physiologically correct due to the accumulation of fluid that would have occurred in his lungs during the crucifixion. He would have bled to death while in his tomb, and would have had no strength to move the stone blocking it.
Theory 5: The final possibility is that the story of the resurrection is completely true - that Jesus did actually die on that cross, he rose from the dead three days later, and this became the basis of Christianity as we know it.
Many people and bodies, both secular and temporal, have set out to disprove the resurrection and so declare Christianity is based on a lie. Many of these have become Christians after studying the evidence, because they learned not only to think logically, but also spiritually, and came to the only possible conclusion: that the death of Christ and his resurrection are historical fact.
About the Author:
Robert Mann is a prolific writer centering on topics related to teaching, religion and Christianity. For more faith-based information, select these links for Christian news (http://www.echristiannews.com) and ministry jobs (http://www.eministryjobs.com) .
The resurrection of Christ is the foundation event of the Christian faith. It is not only the existence of Christ that gave rise to a world religion, but his resurrection. If the resurrection was a myth, then the entire Christian faith would be based upon an event that did not happen and the whole New Testament could equally be fiction. If, however, his death on the cross and subsequent resurrection were historical facts, then the teachings of Christ should be learned and acted upon because of who he undoubtedly was.
Many people believe that the resurrection did not happen, and point to four of the five theories regarding it as proving them right. These arguments have been refuted, however, and the experts doing so have used the same four theories as proof that they are right. So what is the truth?
Theory 1: Eyewitness accounts have confirmed the death of Christ on the cross, and the Gospels present the written accounts of the events of the three days, including the crucifixion and the resurrection, as recorded by the disciples. Those denying the resurrection claim that all who saw Jesus after his death were hallucinating out of a desire for him to be back amongst them, but if that was true then would the Jewish or even the Roman authorities not have produced the body, saying "Here he is - he is not resurrected"? They did not because they could not: his body had been resurrected and he was walking amongst them.
Theory 2: It has been suggested that the Gospels are myths, and were written as such, not as factual accounts. They were representational and not historical. Anybody reading the Gospels can see that to be wrong: the Gospels are presented as well-written eyewitness accounts of factual events. The disciples did see Jesus after his resurrection, and wrote in such a way as to leave no doubt about what and who they saw. There is nothing allegorical there, and certainly not the mythical way of writing that can be taken as fact after years of misinterpretation. The Gospels were written not long after the events and can be taken as accurately presenting what the writers saw with their own eyes.
Theory 3: The disciples were deceivers. They stole Christ's body, made up the resurrection story, and lied to people over and over again. This theory doesn't hold up very well when you consider that no one ever confessed that the resurrection was a deliberate deception. Christ's disciples were martyred because of their faith in Jesus and not one recanted in order to save his life. Many believers broke under torture and denied Christ to once again worship Caesar, but no one ever said that the resurrection was a conspiracy.
Theory 4: Christ did not die but was taken down unconscious and entombed while he was alive, later recovering consciousness and being found by his followers and disciples. This cannot be because of the body of historical evidence of both blood and water flowing from his wound. The water is physiologically correct due to the accumulation of fluid that would have occurred in his lungs during the crucifixion. He would have bled to death while in his tomb, and would have had no strength to move the stone blocking it.
Theory 5: The final possibility is that the story of the resurrection is completely true - that Jesus did actually die on that cross, he rose from the dead three days later, and this became the basis of Christianity as we know it.
Many people and bodies, both secular and temporal, have set out to disprove the resurrection and so declare Christianity is based on a lie. Many of these have become Christians after studying the evidence, because they learned not only to think logically, but also spiritually, and came to the only possible conclusion: that the death of Christ and his resurrection are historical fact.
About the Author:
Robert Mann is a prolific writer centering on topics related to teaching, religion and Christianity. For more faith-based information, select these links for Christian news (http://www.echristiannews.com) and ministry jobs (http://www.eministryjobs.com) .