Fact 9: Change in Day of Worship
According to Roman Law in the Modern World-Offenses
Punishable by Death
Whatever one believes about Christ and His resurrection, everyone has to
admit that something significant happened on that morning – significant enough
to alter the course of history. That
“something” was so dramatic that it completely changed 11 men’s lives, enabling
them from that time on to endure abuse, suffering and even death. That something was an empty tomb!
In the whole story of Jesus Christ, the most important event is the
resurrection. Christian faith depends on
this. It is encouraging to know that it
is explicitly given by all four evangelists and also by Paul. The names of those who saw Him after His
triumph over death are recorded; it may be said that the historical evidence
for the resurrection is stronger than for any other miracle anywhere narrated;
for as Paul said, “if
Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is
vain.” (1 Corinthians 15:14 (written 55 A.D.))
Frank Morison authored Who Moved
the Stone? Morison was a skeptic who
set out to write a book refuting Christianity but instead became convinced by
the evidence that Christianity was indeed true.
In his book, "Who Moved the Stone?”
Frank Morison, a lawyer, "tells us how he had been brought up in a
rationalistic environment, and had come to the opinion that the resurrection
was nothing but a fairy tale happy ending which spoiled the matchless story of
Jesus. Therefore, he planned to write an
account of the last tragic days of Jesus, allowing the full horror of the crime
and the full heroism of Jesus to shine through.
He would, of course, omit any suspicion of the miraculous, and would
utterly discount the resurrection. But
when he came to study the facts with care, he had to change his mind, and he
wrote his book on the opposite side. His
first chapter is significantly called, ‘The
Book that Refused to be Written.’
The rest of his volume consists of one of the shrewdest and most
attractive written assessments I have ever read...”
Josh McDowell and his son set out to write a book called Evidence for the
Resurrection…after approximately 3000 hours of research. Josh McDowell has written more than 100 books
in support of the Bible.
If you wish to rationalize away the events surrounding Christ and his
resurrection, you must deal with certain facts.
Let’s consider these historical facts:
This fact
is highly significant because it means, contrary to radical critics like John
Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar, that the location of Jesus’ burial site
was known to Jew and Christian alike. In
that case, the disciples could never have proclaimed his resurrection in
Jerusalem if the tomb had not been empty.
New Testament researchers have established this first fact on the basis
of evidence such as the following:
·
Jesus’
burial is attested in the very old tradition quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians
15.3-5 (written 55 A.D.):
“For I delivered to
you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised
on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve.”
Paul not
only uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” with regard
to the information he is passing on to the Corinthians, but vv. 3-5 are a
highly stylized four-line formula filled with non-Pauline characteristics. This has convinced all scholars that Paul is,
as he says, quoting from an old tradition which he himself received after
becoming a Christian. This tradition probably
goes back at least to Paul’s fact-finding visit to Jerusalem around A.D. 36,
when he spent two weeks with Cephas and James.
Galatians 1:18 (written 48-55A.D.) “Then
three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and
stayed with him fifteen days.”
It thus dates to within five years
after Jesus’ death. So short a time span
and such personal contact make it idle to talk of legend in this case.
·
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 (weighs)
against its being legendary.
·
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 (I Thessalonians 2:15 (written 52-54A.D.)). 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.
·
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.
For these
and other reasons, the majority of New Testament critics concur that Jesus was
buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.
According to the late John A. T. Robinson of Cambridge University, the
burial of Jesus in the tomb is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts
about Jesus.”
The Burial
"Going to Pilate he
(Joseph of Arimathea) asked for Jesus’ body.
Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb
cut into the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid" (Luke 23:52-53 (written 58-65A.D.)).
This tomb was hewn out of solid rock and had an entrance 4 1/2 to 5 feet
high. A groove or trough was cut into
the rock in front of it to hold the stone, which sealed the tomb. The trough was designed in such a way that
its lowest part lay immediately in front of the entrance. When the block holding back the stone was
removed, the stone would roll down and lodge itself in front of the
opening. This stone weighed between 1
1/2 and 2 tons!
In preparing the body for burial, the body was first washed with warm
water. Then, the corpse was clothed in
grave linen which was sewn together by women on the body (no knots were
permitted). No fewer than three separate
garments were allowed. Between each
layer of garments, aromatic spices were mixed with a gummy substance known as
myrrh (a drug that adheres so closely to the body that the grave-clothes could
not be removed). The total encasement
weight was about 120 pounds.
A
Guard and a Seal Put on the Tomb
To avoid a
political problem, it was to the advantage of both the Romans and the Jews to
make sure Jesus was put away for good.
Matthew
27:62-66 (written 40-45A.D.) “Now
on the next day, the day after the preparation, the chief priests and the
Pharisees gathered together with Pilate, 63 and said, “Sir, we remember that
when He was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I am to rise
again.’ 64 Therefore, give orders for
the grave to be made secure until the third day, otherwise His disciples may
come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’
and the last deception will be worse than the first.” 65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard;
go, make it as secure as you know how.”
66 And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard
they set a seal on the stone.”
After the
body was properly prepared for burial, the stone was rolled into place and the
Roman seal affixed to it. The
consequences of breaking the seal were severe:
automatic execution by crucifixion upside down. Even the disciples displayed signs of
cowardice and hid themselves. Even the
Apostle Peter denied three times that he knew Christ.
A
"Roman unit" was a 4-16 man security force. Each man was trained to protect six feet of
ground. The 16 in a square of four on
each side were supposed to be able to protect 36 yards against an entire
battalion and hold it! Four men were
placed immediately in front of what they were to protect. The other 12 were asleep in a semi-circle in
front of them, with their heads pointed in.
To steal what these guards were protecting, thieves would first have to
walk over those who were asleep. Every
four hours, another unit of four were awakened, and those who had been awake
went to sleep. This was one of the most
effective fighting units ever devised!
Any member
of the Roman guard unit found lax in his duty was put to death by being
stripped of his clothes, and then burned alive in a fire started with his own
garments! "The punishment for
quitting post was death, according to the laws."[1] The fear of punishments produced faultless
attention to duty, especially in the night watches”.
[1]
Dion, Hal, Antiq. Rom.VIII, 79
On Easter
morning the seal that stood for the power and authority of the Roman Empire was
broken. No one denies this fact. The penalties for breaking the seal of the
Roman Empire were very severe-death by torture.
The stone in front of the tomb could be sealed only in the presence of
the Roman guards who were left in charge.
The purpose of this procedure was to prevent anyone from tampering with
the grave’s contents.
After the
guard inspected the tomb and rolled the stone in place, a cord was stretched
across the rock and fastened at either end with sealing clay. Finally, the clay packs were stamped with the
official signet of the Roman governor.
Because
the seal was Roman, it verified the fact that Christ’s body was protected from
vandals by nothing less than the power and authority of the Roman Empire. Anyone trying to move the stone would have
broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law and power. The consequences for breaking that seal were
severe, even resulting in death! Would
Christ’s disciples have broken the seal?
Hardly! After his arrest they
showed signs of craven cowardice and hid themselves. Peter even denied that he knew Christ.
The first obvious fact was the breaking of the seal that stood for the
power and authority of the Roman Empire.
The consequences of breaking the seal were extremely severe. The FBI and CIA of the Roman Empire were
called into action to find the man or men who were responsible. If they were apprehended, it meant automatic
execution by crucifixion upside down.
People feared the breaking of the seal.
Jesus' disciples displayed signs of cowardice when they hid
themselves. Peter, one of these
disciples, went out and denied Christ three times (McDowell, 1992).
The first
thing that impressed the people who approached the tomb was the unusual
position of the two-ton stone that had previously been lodged in front of the
doorway. All of the gospel writers
mention the removal of this enormous stone.
In fact, the stone was in such a position up a
slope away from the entire massive sepulcher that John had to use a
different Greek verb, airo, which means “to pick something up and
carry it away.” This was
probably the evidence that saved the Roman Guards from being executed by their
own superiors for laxness of duty for allowing Jesus' body to be
"stolen."
If the
disciples had come and tiptoed around the sleeping guards, why would they have
moved the two-ton stone up a slope away from the entire massive grave to
such a position that it looked like someone had picked it up and carried it
away? The needless effort would have
been noisy and taken valuable time and energy.
Those soldiers would have been deaf not to have heard the commotion.
One of the
most compelling pieces of evidence showing that the tomb was empty is the fact
that it was first discovered by women.
In first-century Palestine, women had a low status as citizens or legal
witnesses. Except in rare circumstances,
Jewish law precluded women from giving testimony in a court of law. Why would those who wanted to advance
Christianity have contrived a legend that embarrassed the disciples by having
them flee during the crucifixion and yet have women discover the empty
tomb? Common sense tells us that the
only reason women were reported as the first witnesses is because it was the
Truth. This must have been an
embarrassment to the apostles. According to Jewish principles of legal
evidences, women were invalid witnesses. They did not have a right to
give testimony in a court of law. The initial reaction of the disciples
was understandably one of suspicion and disbelief. If the Resurrection
accounts had been manufactured, women never would have been included in
the story as the first witnesses.
Among the reasons which have led
most scholars to this conclusion are the following:
·
The empty
tomb story is also part of the old passion source used by Mark. The passion source used by Mark did not end
in death and defeat, but with the empty tomb story, which is grammatically of
one piece with the burial story.
·
The old
tradition cited by Paul in I Cor. 15.3-5 implies the fact of the empty
tomb. For any first century Jew, to say
that of a dead man “that he was buried and that he was raised” is to imply that
a vacant grave was left behind.
Moreover, the expression “on the third day” probably derives from the
women’s visit to the tomb on the third day, in Jewish reckoning, after the
crucifixion. The four-line tradition
cited by Paul summarizes both the gospel accounts and the early apostolic
preaching (Acts 13. 28-31 (written approximately 64 A.D.)); significantly, the third line of the tradition
corresponds to the empty tomb story.
·
The story
is simple and lacks signs of legendary embellishment. All one has to do to appreciate this point is
to compare Mark’s account with the wild legendary stories found in the
second-century apocryphal gospels, in which Jesus is seen coming out of the
tomb with his head reaching up above the clouds and followed by a talking
cross!
·
The fact
that women’s testimony was discounted in first century Palestine stands in
favor of the women’s role in discovering the empty tomb. According to Josephus, the testimony of women
was regarded as so worthless that it could not even be admitted into a Jewish
court of law. Any later legendary story
would certainly have made male disciples discover the empty tomb.
·
The
earliest Jewish allegation that the disciples had stolen Jesus’ body (Matt.
28.15) shows that the body was in fact missing from the tomb. The earliest Jewish response to the
disciples’ proclamation, “He is risen from the dead!” was not to point to his
occupied tomb and to laugh them off as fanatics, but to claim that they had
taken away Jesus’ body. Thus, we have
evidence of the empty tomb from the very opponents of the early Christians.
·
Over 100
pounds of myrrh would have been used to secure the Saviors burial
wrappings. The shellac-like solution
would have dried to a very tight enclosure.
Indeed, mummy-like. The Biblical
account when Peter and John first gazed into the tomb on resurrection day
points to these undisturbed grave cloths and is the precise reason John
immediately knew Christ arose supernaturally.
Myrrh globules
Most resin
(whether myrrh or frankincense) is obtained by tapping: making deliberate
incisions with a specially designed tool or ordinary axe, about 2 inches long,
into the bark of the tree. The milky
liquid that exudes hardens on exposure to air into droplets or
"tears," which are then easily detached by the collector about two
weeks later. New tappings are made at
the same place as old ones after removing hardened resin from the previous cut.
If the tapping interval is short, then a
light scratching of the wood is usually sufficient to cause the resin to flow
again. The particular details of the
tapping-the time of year it is undertaken, its duration, and the interval
between individual tappings-vary according to the species and the customs in
the area of production. For example, in
Somalia there are usually two periods when Boswellia is tapped, each lasting 3-4
months, involving successive tappings at approximately 15-day intervals, with
the timing of the tapping periods dependent on the onset and extent of the
rains. The resin is stored for about 12
weeks to harden. The only processing
undertaken after collection is sorting and grading of the resin globules,
usually done by the local merchant to whom it is sold rather than the collector (Dharmananda, 2003).
One could go on, but I think that enough has been said to indicate why,
in the words of Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist in the resurrection, “By
far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb.”
"After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the
week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel
of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the
stone, and sat on it. His appearance was
like lightning, and his clothes were as white as snow. The guards were so afraid that they shook and
became as dead men. The angel said to
the women, 'Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who
was crucified. He is not here; He has
risen, just as He said. Come and see the
place where He lay, then go quickly and tell the disciples: "He has risen
from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see Him....” ‘So the women hurried away from the tomb,
afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell the disciples. Suddenly Jesus met them. 'Greetings,' He said. They came to Him, clasped His feet and
worshiped Him. Then Jesus said to them,
'Do not be afraid. Go and tell my
brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me” (Matthew 28:1-10).
The Romans, Jews and
Christians were all in agreement that the tomb was empty on Sunday
morning. The guards could not actually
testify that the disciples stole the body, because their alleged testimony is that
the body disappeared "while they slept." They could hardly be "eyewitnesses"
to anything if they were sleeping. To
suggest that the disciples could discretely sneak past the guards, roll away a
2 ton stone from the door without making a sound, take the time to unwrap the
body and rewrap the bandages, then carry out the carcass without awakening any
of the guards, only to later claim Jesus was resurrected and suffer martyrdom
for what they would know to be a lie is absurd.
By the way, are you aware of
the Nazareth Inscription? This marble
tablet discovered circa AD 41 is an edict by a Roman Emperor introducing a new
Roman law carrying capital punishment for stealing bodies just less than 10
years after the Resurrection. In the
marble tablet, there is a comment forbidding the moving of sepulcher-sealing
stones. These stones were only used in
Israel, so something had happened there concerning a missing body that caused
enough ripples to merit the attention of the emperor (Waliczek,
2013) .
THE BODY STOLEN?
Consider the theory that the body was stolen by the
disciples while the guards slept. The
depression and cowardice of the disciples provide a hard-hitting argument
against their suddenly becoming so brave and daring as to face a detachment of
soldiers at the tomb and steal the body.
They were in no mood to attempt anything like that.
The theory that the Jewish or Roman authorities
moved Christ's body is no more reasonable an explanation for the empty tomb
than theft by the disciples. If the
authorities had the body in their possession or knew where it was, why, when
the disciples were preaching the resurrection in Jerusalem, didn't they
explain: "Wait! We moved the body,
see, He didn't rise from the grave"?
And if such a rebuttal failed, why didn't they
explain exactly where Jesus' body lay?
If this failed, why didn't they recover the corpse, put it on a cart,
and wheel it through the center of Jerusalem?
Such an action would have destroyed Christianity--not in the cradle, but
in the womb! (McDowell, 1992).
Some Skeptics Claim the Apostles
Stole the Body
But, why was the body never found?
Some Will Argue “The Disciples stole the body” but
consider this:
1. How
could anyone have moved the extremely large stone up and away from the whole
tomb without waking the entire Roman Guard unit? And, why not just open the tomb enough to get
in and get the body out?
2. If
the Roman Guard had fallen asleep (as claimed), how could they have known it
was "the disciples" who had stolen His body?
3. Is
this lie not contrary to everything written about the high moral standards and
honor of the disciples' lives?
4. Would
the Disciples of Christ have died martyrs' deaths for a lie?
If the body was stolen before the guards got to the
tomb, the guards would have seen the stone rolled away and reported it. Evidently, the tomb must've still been
shut. You have to keep in mind that the
disciples were hiding in fear after Jesus' death with all of their hope
lost. Even when they met the risen Jesus
in Galilee, some doubted. Would fearful
and doubting disciples really have thought of stealing the body - especially if
they didn't understand Jesus' claim? (Waliczek, 2013) .
The Apostles Arrive at the Empty
Tomb
"So Peter and the other disciple
started for the tomb. Both were running,
but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. He bent over and looked in at the strips of
linen lying there but did not go in.
Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the
tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying
there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate
from the linen. Finally the other
disciple who had reached the tomb first also went inside. He saw and believed" (NASB, John 20:3-8).
THE WRONG TOMB?
A theory propounded by Kirsopp Lake assumes that the
women who reported that the body was missing had mistakenly gone to the wrong
tomb. If so, then the disciples who went
to check up on the women's statement must have also gone to the wrong
tomb. We may be certain, however, that
Jewish authorities, who asked for a Roman guard to be stationed at the tomb to
prevent Jesus' body from being stolen, would not have been mistaken about the
location. Nor would the Roman guards,
for they were there! (McDowell, 1992)
If the resurrection-claim was merely because of a geographical mistake,
the Jewish authorities would have lost no time in producing the body from the
proper tomb, thus effectively quenching for all time any rumor resurrection.
Fact #5: The Roman Guards
Went AWOL
"While the women were on their way, some of the guards went
into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had
happened. When the chief priests had met
with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of
money, telling them, ‘You are to say, "His disciples came during the night
and stole Him away while you were asleep.”
If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you
out of trouble.’ So the soldiers took
the money and did as they were instructed" (Matthew 28:11-15 (written
40-45A.D.)).
The Roman
guard fled and left their place of responsibility. This is a very odd fact that must be explained. With all their rigid discipline and the penalty of
death hanging over their heads they left their post and reported to the priests
instead of their military leaders--something must have really scared them!
According
to the ancient Roman law, a soldier who left his post faced the death
penalty. To avoid such a severe
punishment, the soldiers were particularly attentive to their duties,
especially during the night watches[1]. The custodian was the most disciplined
military unit of the ancient world, making it unlikely that a soldier would
have fallen asleep while on duty.
Dr. George Currie, who carefully studied the military discipline of the
Romans, reports that the death penalty was required for various duty failures
such as desertion, losing or disposing weapons, betraying plans to the enemy,
and leaving the night watch. To the
above, one can add “falling asleep.”
One way a guard was put to death was by being stripped of his clothes,
and then burned alive in a fire started with the garments. The history of Roman discipline and security
testifies to the fact that if the tomb had not been empty the soldiers never
would have left their position. Fear of
the wrath of their superiors and the ensuing death penalty meant they paid
close attention to the most minute details of their job.
Dr. Bill White, formerly in charge of the Garden Tomb in Jerusalem, makes
several critical observations about the Jewish authorities bribing the Roman
guard:
“If the stone were simply rolled to one side of the tomb, as would be
necessary to enter it, then they might be justified in accusing the men of
sleeping at their posts, and in punishing them severely. If the men protested that the earthquake
broke the seal and that the stone rolled back under vibration, they would still
be liable to punishment for behavior which might be labeled cowardice.
But these possibilities do not meet the case. There was some undeniable evidence which made
it impossible for the chief priests to bring any charges against the
guard. The Jewish authorities must have
visited the scene, examined the stone, and recognized its position as making it
humanly impossible for their men to have permitted its removal. No twist of human ingenuity could provide an
adequate answer or a scapegoat and so they were forced to bribe the guard and
seek to hush things.”
Technically, the guards are
not witnesses to the Resurrection. The
text states the guards "shook for fear of him (the angel) and became like
dead men". There is no mention of
Jesus walking out or being seen by anybody, let alone the fainted guards (a
detail that would naturally be expected to appear in a fictitious account so
its absence here suggests the integrity of the text). The rolled stone could have just served as a
visual for witnesses of Christ leaving the tomb empty while Christ Himself could
have exited in the same manner in which He appeared to the disciples behind
locked doors (His resurrected and glorified body no longer limited by natural
laws and able to dematerialize and re-materialize at will). It seems the women would have seen the
fainted guards as the angel commanded them what to do. When the guards came to and went into the
city, the women were on their way. Since
the body disappeared under their watch, they would have been naturally afraid
of suffering the consequences of failing in their task.
Note that the Jewish
authorities did not doubt that Jesus' body was indeed missing, or that
something out of the ordinary had taken place that was beyond the ability of
the guards to prevent. Otherwise they
would have had them punished. If they
had really believed the story of theft by the disciples which they paid the
guards to spread, they would have had the disciples arrested. Once again, the guards only saw the angel and
fainted. You also mistakenly assume that
if someone saw a miracle, they would believe.
This assumption is naive. The
Jewish leaders knew that Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead, yet they did
not believe. Pharaoh saw 10 miracles
from Moses yet he did not repent either.
If the heart is not prepared to accept the truth, it will be rejected in
favor of an alternative explanation (no matter how implausible) or even in the
absence of one.
I am not aware of any
documents which said that taking bribes was punishable by death. A soldier abandoning their post or sleeping
while on watch was a different matter. That
would incur the death penalty, or at least a severe beating. They appeared willing to testify that they
were sleeping on the job, but only on the assurances from the Jewish
authorities that they would protect them from retribution by the governor.
In addition, that the guards
fully understood the implication of Jesus' resurrection and what that event
meant for mankind in general (or them personally) is doubtful and merely
assumed. If the disciples had a problem
wrapping their minds around it, how would the guards understand what they just
witnessed (which was just a missing body)? On the other hand, they were offered tangible
protection and money by the Jewish leaders if they merely spread a false rumor.
If they were Roman guards who had no understanding
or interest in the beliefs of their conquered Jewish subjects, there would be
even less reason for them not to accept the pragmatic deal they were offered. Using the presumption that they saw God
resurrecting as an excuse to deny what the text does tell us - that they saw no
such thing - merely indicates an unwillingness to believe (Waliczek,
2013) .
(Despite their having every predisposition to the
contrary.)
It is
significant that after the resurrection, the suddenly emboldened disciples of
Christ did not go off to Athens or Rome to preach a risen Christ; They went
right back into the city of Jerusalem where their message easily could have
been disproven had it been false. The resurrection claim could not have been
maintained for a moment in Jerusalem if the tomb had not been empty. The official explanation for it--that the disciples
had stolen the body--was an admission that the tomb was indeed vacant. This admission is the strongest kind of
historical evidence. If a source admits a fact decidedly not in its
favor, then the fact is genuine!
Think of the situation the
disciples faced after Jesus’ crucifixion:
·
Their
leader was dead. And Jews had no belief
in a dying, much less risen, Messiah.
The Messiah was supposed to throw off Israel’s enemies (Rome) and
re-establish a Davidic reign—not suffer the ignominious death of criminal. (ignominious: deserving or causing public
disgrace or shame)
·
According
to Jewish law, Jesus’ execution as a criminal showed him out to be a heretic, a
man literally under the curse of God (Deut. 21.23). The catastrophe of the crucifixion for the
disciples was not simply that their Master was gone, but that the crucifixion
showed, in effect, that the Pharisees had been right all along, that for three
years they had been following a heretic, a man accursed by God!
·
Jewish beliefs
about the afterlife precluded anyone’s rising from the dead to glory and
immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world. All the disciples could do was to preserve
their Master’s tomb as a shrine where his bones could reside until that day
when all of Israel’s righteous dead would be raised by God to glory.
Despite
all this, the original disciples believed in and were willing to go to their
deaths for the fact of Jesus’ resurrection.
Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar from Emory University, muses,
“some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the
sort of movement earliest Christianity was . . . .” 4N. T. Wright, an eminent British scholar,
concludes, “that is why, as a historian, I cannot explain the rise of early
Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.”
In
summary, there are several facts agreed upon by the majority of scholars who
have written on these subjects which any adequate historical hypothesis must
account for: Jesus’ entombment by Joseph of Arimathea, the discovery of his
empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples’
belief in his resurrection, among other facts.
Now the
question is: what is the best explanation of these facts? Most scholars probably remain agnostic about
this question. But the Christian can
maintain that the hypothesis that best explains these facts is “God raised
Jesus from the dead.”
In his
book Justifying Historical Descriptions, historian C. B. McCullagh lists six
tests which historians use in determining what is the best explanation for
given historical facts. The hypothesis
“God raised Jesus from the dead” passes all these tests:
·
It has
great explanatory scope: it explains why the tomb was found empty, why the
disciples saw post-mortem appearances of Jesus, and why the Christian faith
came into being.
·
It has
great explanatory power: it explains why the body of Jesus was gone, why people
repeatedly saw Jesus alive despite his earlier public execution, and so forth.
·
It is
plausible: given the historical context of Jesus’ own unparalleled life and
claims, the resurrection serves as divine confirmation of those radical claims.
·
It is not
ad hoc or contrived: it requires only one additional hypothesis: that God
exists. And even that needn’t be an
additional hypothesis if one already believes that God exists.
·
It is in
accord with accepted beliefs. The
hypothesis: “God raised Jesus from the dead” doesn’t in any way conflict with
the accepted belief that people don’t rise naturally from the dead. The Christian accepts that belief as
wholeheartedly as he accepts the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the
dead.
·
It far
outstrips any of its rival hypotheses in meeting conditions (1)-(5). Down through history various alternative
explanations of the facts have been offered, for example, the conspiracy
hypothesis, the apparent death hypothesis, the hallucination hypothesis, and so
forth. Such hypotheses have been almost
universally rejected by contemporary scholarship. None of these naturalistic hypotheses
succeeds in meeting the conditions as well as the resurrection hypothesis.
GRAVE-CLOTHES TELL A TALE: In
a literal sense, against all statements to the contrary, the tomb was not
totally empty--because of an amazing phenomenon. John, a disciple of Jesus, looked over to the
place where the body of Jesus had lain, and there were the grave clothes, in
the form of the body, slightly caved in and empty--like the empty chrysalis of
a caterpillar's cocoon. That's enough to
make a believer out of anybody. John
never did get over it. The first thing
that stuck in the minds of the disciples was not the empty tomb, but rather the
empty grave clothes--undisturbed in form and position (McDowell, 1992).
REAL
PROOF: THE DISCIPLES' LIVES
But the most telling
testimony of all must be the lives of those early Christians. We must ask ourselves: What caused them to go
everywhere telling the message of the risen Christ?
Had there been any visible
benefits accrued to them from their efforts--prestige, wealth, increased social
status or material benefits--we might logically attempt to account for their
actions, for their whole-hearted and total allegiance to this "risen
Christ."
As a reward for their efforts,
however, those early Christians were beaten, stoned to death, thrown to the
lions, tortured and crucified. Every
conceivable method was used to stop them from talking.
Yet, they laid down their
lives as the ultimate proof of their complete confidence in the truth of their
message (McDowell, 1992).
On multiple occasions and under various
circumstances, different individuals and groups of people experienced
appearances of Jesus alive from the dead.
This is a fact which is almost
universally acknowledged among New Testament scholars, for the following
reasons:
·
The list
of eyewitnesses to Jesus’ resurrection appearances which is quoted by Paul in I
Cor. 15. 5-7 guarantees that such
appearances occurred. These included
appearances to Peter (Cephas), the Twelve, the 500 brethren, and James.
·
The
appearance traditions in the gospels provide multiple, independent attestation
of these appearances. This is one of the
most important marks of historicity. The
appearance to Peter is independently attested by Luke, and the appearance to
the Twelve by Luke and John. We also
have independent witness to Galilean appearances in Mark, Matthew, and John, as
well as to the women in Matthew and John.
·
Certain
appearances have earmarks of historicity.
For example, we have good evidence from the gospels that neither James
nor any of Jesus’ younger brothers believed in him during his lifetime. There is no reason to think that the early
church would generate fictitious stories concerning the unbelief of Jesus’
family had they been faithful followers all along. But it is indisputable that James and his
brothers did become active Christian believers following Jesus’
death. James was considered an apostle
and eventually rose to the position of leadership of the Jerusalem church. According to the first century Jewish
historian Josephus, James was martyred for his faith in Christ in the late A.D.
60s. Now most of us have
brothers. What would it take to convince
you that your brother is the Lord, such that you would be ready to die for that
belief? Can there be any doubt that this
remarkable transformation in Jesus’ younger brother took place because, in
Paul’s words, “then he appeared to James”?
Even Gert
L¸demann, the leading German critic of the resurrection, himself admits, “It
may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had
experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen
Christ.”
"On the evening of
that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors
locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace
be with you!’ After He said this, He
showed His hands and side. The disciples
were overjoyed when they saw the Lord" (John 20:19-20 (written 58-65A.D.)).
“After that He appeared to
more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but
some have fallen asleep; 7 then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles;
8 and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also.” (1
Corinthians 15:6-8 (written 55 A.D.)).
Jesus was
seen by as many as 500 people at one time, who were alive at the time of the
New Testament writings, and could be questioned about the facts. He also
appeared to those who were hostile, or unconvinced. Saul of Tarsus
despised Christ and persecuted His followers mercilessly until Christ appeared
to him. He then became one of the
greatest witnesses for the truth of the Resurrection.
HOSTILE
WITNESSES
Another factor crucial to
interpreting Christ's appearances is that He also appeared to those who were
hostile or unconvinced.
Over and over again, I have
read or heard people comment that Jesus was seen alive after His death and
burial only by His friends and followers.
Using that argument, they attempt to water down the overwhelming impact
of the multiple eyewitness accounts. But
that line of reasoning is so pathetic it hardly deserves comment. No author or informed individual would regard
Saul of Tarsus as being a follower of Christ.
The facts show the exact opposite.
Saul despised Christ and persecuted Christ's followers. It was a life-shattering experience when
Christ appeared to him. Although he was
at the time not a disciple, he later became the apostle Paul, one of the
greatest witnesses for the truth of the resurrection.
If the New Testament were a
collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded
as beyond all doubt.
F. F. Bruce
Manchester University
The argument that Christ's
appearances were only to followers is an argument for the most part from
silence, and arguments from silence can be dangerous. It is equally possible that all to whom Jesus
appeared became followers. No one
acquainted with the facts can accurately say that Jesus appeared to just
"an insignificant few."
Christians believe that
Jesus was bodily resurrected in time and space by the supernatural power of God. The difficulties of belief may be great, but
the problems inherent in unbelief present even greater difficulties.
The theories advanced to
explain the resurrection by "natural causes" are weak; they actually
help to build confidence in the truth of the resurrection (McDowell, 1992).
HALLUCINATIONS?
Another
attempted explanation claims that the appearances of Jesus after the
resurrection were either illusions or hallucinations. Unsupported by the psychological principles
governing the appearances of hallucinations, this theory also does not coincide
with the historical situation. Again,
where was the actual body, and why wasn't it produced? (McDowell, 1992).
Fact 8: Radical Change in
2 Skeptics and 1 Enemy
The two skeptics were
Thomas (aka Doubting Thomas) and James (Jesus’ ½ brother).
When Jesus came back to
his friends after the Resurrection, he found that it was hard to get them to
believe in him. On Easter Sunday evening
when he visited his disciples, they were terrified. As Augustine observes, they "saw"
him but did not really see him (Sermon 237, 1).
Thomas was not there. When he
heard that Jesus had appeared, he would not believe. It was simply "too good to be true"
and Thomas could not stand to be crushed again by supposedly "good
news" that would eventually turn out to be false. "Once burned; twice cautious" is a
principle all of us understand. It is
hard to believe that there are any heroes, once the hero we have depended on
turns out to be as weak as we are. As
Augustine observed long ago:
Sometimes righteous
people emerge and we rejoice over them.
But when (as it not infrequently happens) some disgraceful thing is
discovered about them. Then our grief at
their failure is as deep as was our earlier delight in them. After our disappointment, we are afraid of
being too joyful or being unreservedly glad about anyone or anything again,
lest something again go wrong and cause a chagrin as intense as our previous
enjoyment (Commentary on Psalm 76:6 (written 1440-586 B.C.)).
Probably this was the
fear of Thomas, now hearing about the resurrection. Thomas had spent many good days with Jesus
and loved him deeply. He was one of the
first apostles selected. It was Thomas
who, when Jesus was about to make the trip to Jerusalem and his death, said
bravely, “Let us also go, so that
we may die with Him”.
Therefore Thomas, who is
called Didymus, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go, so that we may
die with Him” John 11:16 (written
58-65A.D.)
After the Ascension of
Jesus Christ into Heaven and the descent of the Holy Spirit, the apostles cast
lots amongst themselves to determine where each of them should go to preach the
Word of God. To Thomas fell the lot to
go to India, to the Brahmans and the other diverse and obscure peoples of those
parts, to enlighten lands benighted by paganism and to teach the true Faith to
the Parthians and Medes and the Persians, Hyrcanians and Bactrians.
Thomas was dismayed to
be sent to such savage peoples; but the Lord appeared to him in a vision,
strengthening him and commanding him to be valiant and not to be afraid; and He
promised to abide with him Himself. And
soon He showed him a way to enter those lands.
James-1/2 brother of Jesus
James was a son of Mary
and Joseph and therefore a half-brother to Jesus and brother to Joseph, Simon,
Judas, and their sisters (Matthew 13:55
(written 40-45A.D.)). In the Gospels, James is mentioned a couple
of times, but at that time he misunderstood Jesus’ ministry and was not a
believer (John 7:2-5 (written 58-65A.D.)).
James becomes one of the earliest witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection (1
Corinthians 15:7 (written 55 A.D.)). He
then stays in Jerusalem and forms part of the group of believers who pray in
the upper room (Acts 1:14 (written approximately 64 A.D.)). From that time forward,
James’ status within the Jerusalem church begins to grow.
James is still in Jerusalem when the recently
converted Saul arrives to meet with him and Peter (Galatians 1:19 (written
48-55A.D.)). Several years later, when
Peter escapes from prison, he reports to James about the miraculous manner of
the escape (Acts 12:17 (written approximately 64 A.D.)). When the Jerusalem
Council convenes, James is the apparent chairman (Acts 15:13, 19 (written
approximately 64 A.D.)). He is also an elder of the church, called a
“pillar” in Galatians 2:9 (written 48-55A.D.).
Later, James again presides over a meeting in Jerusalem, this time after
Paul’s third missionary journey. It is
believed that James was martyred about A.D. 62, although there is no biblical
record of his death.
James is the author of
the epistle of James, which he wrote somewhere between A.D. 50 and A.D.
60. James identifies himself by name but
simply describes himself as “a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ”
(James 1:1 (written 50-60A.D.)). His
letter deals more with Christian ethics than Christian theology. Its theme is the outworking of faith—the
external evidence of internal conversion.
A study of James’ life provides some important
lessons for us. His conversion gives
testimony to the overwhelming power that came from being a witness of Jesus’
resurrection: James turned from being a skeptic to a leader in the church based
on his meeting the resurrected Christ.
James’ speech at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:14-21 (written
approximately 64 A.D.) reveals his reliance on Scripture, his desire for peace
within the church, his emphasis of grace over the law, and his care for Gentile
believers, although he himself ministered almost exclusively to Jewish
Christians. Also worthy of note is
James’ humility—he never uses his position as Jesus’ blood relative as a basis
for authority. Rather, James portrays
himself as a “servant” of Jesus, nothing more.
In short, James was a gracious leader through whom the church was richly
blessed.
Saul of Tarsus-Enemy of Christians
Remember Chapter 2? The story of Saul’s conversion is in Acts
chapter 8 (written approximately 64 A.D.).
Read it for yourself and see the great change it made in his life. He was hunting down, arresting, and approving
of even the death of Christians. After
his salvation he became a powerful preacher of the faith, a wonderful blessing
to the Church. Paul (Saul) recounts his
conversion before king Agrippa in Acts chapter 26 (written approximately 64 A.D.). Robert Morgan (Beyond Reasonable Doubt) asked,
“How can you explain that the greatest destroyer of Christianity became its
greatest defender? How can you explain
his metamorphosis, as he gladly endured a lifetime of shame, suffering, and the
executioner’s sword to spread the faith he had once labored to ruin? The mind of Saul of Tarsus was
brilliant. His training was superb. His passion was unquenchable. His background and heritage flowed with the
Jewish blood of a hundred generations.
Yet in one moment he was transformed from the greatest enemy the early
church ever faced into the greatest missionary the world has ever known. What power could so change a life? The Gospel!
The Gospel’s chain of witnesses from the days of Saul of Tarsus to our
own is unbroken, and it grows stronger still.” In the end, Paul (Saul) even died for Truth!
Most
scholars place the conversion of Paul one to three years after the
Resurrection. Paul wrote that three
years after his conversion, he met with Peter, the lead apostle, and returned
to Jerusalem 14 years later to run the Gospel message past the apostles. They extended their assurance of him
preaching the same message. Even in the
letters of Peter and John's own disciples, Clement of Rome and Polycarp, they
refer to him as the "blessed Paul" on par with Peter and that he
"accurately and reliably taught the message of truth" and recognize
his letters as part of the "sacred scriptures", respectively. This verification by Paul means the detail of
the guard account could have easily been preserved as well by the time the
first Gospel was written (Waliczek, 2013).
Fact 9: Change in Day of
Worship
A common
but mistaken teaching is that the first-century apostles and Christians changed
the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday in honor of Christ’s
resurrection. But this change did not
originate with the apostles and is not taught by the New Testament.
Later,
however, Sunday worship did spread to many churches. Around 150 A.D. Justin Martyr wrote: “On the
day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together in
one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are
read. Sunday is the day on which we all
hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having
wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ
our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.”[1]
Other
church historians document the fact that by the middle of the second century
Sunday had become the predominant day of worship. Based upon these secular writings, some have
mistakenly concluded that the New Testament must include accounts of worship on
Sunday. To see the proper explanations
of some of the passages commonly proposed as supporting Sunday, see “Was the
Sabbath Changed to Sunday?”
No one will argue that the
resurrection didn’t cause some dramatic changes in the lives of Jesus’
followers. It’s undeniable. One of those
changes, which might not appear significant to many, is how the disciples changed
the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday.
The Sabbath day was Saturday, the day God rested after six days of
creation. Honoring the Sabbath was a
part of Mosaic law, the fourth of the Ten Commandments: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your
work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God” (Exodus 20:8–10 (written 1445-1405 B.C.)). And yet Sunday, rather than Saturday, became
the Sabbath for the early church.
Jesus had already indicated His
own authority over the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made for
man, and not man for the Sabbath.
Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27–28 (written approximately 65A.D.)). He centered the Sabbath on Himself, and by so
doing He extended the Sabbath from just a Jewish practice to something
experienced by the entire world—Gentiles included.
So when the Christians of the
early church chose Sunday as their day for gathering to worship, the choice was
centered on Christ’s resurrection and its universal message.
Constantine, at the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, was reported by the
historian Eusebius as saying, “It appeared an unworthy thing that in the
celebration of this most holy feast [Passover] we should follow the practice of
the Jews … Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish
crowd.” Thus, since Christians wanted
nothing to do with Jews, they wanted to have a different day for rest and
worship: Sunday (Foster, 2015).
The
biblical record for this change for the Sabbath is found in 1 Corinthians 16:2
(written 55 A.D.), where Paul gave instructions on gathering “on the first day of the week” in order to collect an offering, and in Acts 20:7 (written approximately
64 A.D.), which mentions “the first day of the week,
when the disciples came together to break bread.”
Whereas
the Jews functioned under the Law, believers in Jesus now live in grace. Grace and truth came in the person of Jesus,
and through His resurrection we now live this new life. Resurrection day, Sunday, is now the day of
worship for those who have put their faith in Christ.
Here from the current U.S. Uniform Code of Military
Justice [UCMJ]:
"ARTICLE 113.
MISBEHAVIOR OF A SENTINEL OR LOOKOUT"
"Any sentinel or look-out who is found drunk or
sleeping upon his post, or leaves it before he is regularly relieved, shall be
punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other
punishment as a court-martial may direct"
You can receive the death penalty in wartime, for
sleeping on guard duty, EVEN IF NOTHING UNTOWARD OCCURS DURING YOUR WATCH!!
The death penalty for a military man falling asleep
while standing watch is an ancient "tradition"?
The ancient Romans for instance, applying their
severe, authoritarian and draconian military penal code, almost always, perhaps
without exception, meted out death for sentries and guards
"misbehaving" while standing watch!!
"the standard penalty in the Roman legions for
falling asleep while on guard duty was death"
Indeed so strict was the military penal code of the
ancient Romans, Christian scholars have pointed to the "faultless
attention to duty, especially during the night watch," as an indication
that SOMETHING MIRACULOUS OCCURRED TO THE BODY OF JESUS AFTER HIS CRUCIFIXION!! The Roman soldiers noted for their extreme
diligence would not have allowed the body of JESUS to be whisked away while
under their guard!! So goes the
argument, believe it or not!!
"First, consider the Roman guard the Jewish
authorities so thoughtfully placed around the tomb, complete with the imperial
seal (Matthew 27:62-66 (written 40-45A.D.)).
The Roman guards were extremely capable soldiers. The death penalties threatened upon soldiers
sleeping while on guard duty produced discipline and a 'faultless attention to duty,
especially during the night watch.’
Read for
yourself the Early Imperial Roman law-This is the law of the Empire from
Augustus to Diocletian, 27 B.C.-A.D. 284.
Included in the Early Imperial law is the so-called classical Roman law
or the epoch of Roman law from Trajan to Severus inclusive, A.D. 98-244.
According
to Roman law in the Modern World, those offenses punishable by death included:
Treason-the
graver acts of treason; otherwise the person might be subjected to torture.
Counterfeiting,
adulterating the coinage-death or deportation
Misconduct
by state officials who unlawfully cause a citizen to be beaten, tortured, or
killed while an appeal is pending-death or deportation
Perjury-death
or deportation
Bribery-made
a crime by Roman law: death…and if the receiver of the bribe was a magistrate-
they too were put to death
Adultery
(under Constantine)-death
Murder-death
Homicide-death
Suicide-death
Murder of
a parent or grandparent- criminal was sewn up in a sack with a dog, cock,
viper, and ape, and then thrown into the sea or a river
Murder of
other relatives-death
After
Christianity had become the established religion of the Empire, the offering of
a child as a sacrifice was made murder-death
Rape-death
Abduction-death
False
imprisonment-death
Kidnapping-death
Libel-death
Blackmail-death
Arson-death
Theft-death
Highway
robbery-relegation to the mines-death
Assembling
armed persons for the purpose of robbing a house-death
Sacrilege-deportation
or death
Theft of
sacred or public property-mines, deportation, or death
Embezzlement-deportation
or death
Offenses
against religion, practice of martial arts, violation of burial
places-deportation or death
(To
introduce a new religion of an irrational and disturbing character was punished
with deportation or death.)
Fortune-tellers-whipping
or imprisonment or deportation
Practicing
magical or diabolical arts-death
Interference
with the proper sepulcher of the dead was known as the crimen sepulcri violate;
this crime included the mutilation of inscriptions, the demolishing a statue or
column or the removal of any part of the tomb, and the robbing of dead bodies
or their removal. The punishment was
death or the mines or deportation (Sherman, 1917).
WHAT IF?
Please
ask yourself: If all the historical, scientific, and prophetic statements
in the Bible are true and accurate, then what about what the Bible says
about your having eternal life (or death) and about the choices you make (or do
not make) now that can affect your eternal future? It is in your best interest to study it and
find out what God requires of those who would be His children:
Romans
8:14-16 (written 56-58A.D.) “For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of
God. 15 For you have not received a
spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of
adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba!
Father!” 16 The Spirit Himself
testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,”
Do you not think it is worth examining the Bible to
see if it is, in fact, the Word of God, and to see what you must do to receive
eternal life from God?
Professor Thomas Arnold,
for fourteen years the famous headmaster of Rugby, author of the famous
three-volume "History of Rome," appointed to the chair of Modern History
at Oxford, was certainly a man well-acquainted with the value of evidence in
determining historical facts. This great
scholar said in his work, "Sermons on the Christian Life--Its Hopes, Its
Fears, and Its Close" (Arnold, 1859):
"The evidence for
our Lord’s life and death and resurrection may be, and often has been, shown to
be satisfactory; it is good according to the common rules for distinguishing
good evidence from bad. Thousands and
tens of thousands of persons have gone through it piece by piece, as carefully
as every judge summing up a most important cause. I myself have done it many times over, not to
persuade others, but to satisfy myself.
I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times,
and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and
I know of no one in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller
evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great
sign which God has given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead."
Is There Scientific Evidence for the
Resurrection of Jesus Christ?
(Newcombe, 2012)
I believe the
resurrection of Jesus Christ is an historical reality. The resurrection is on
solid historical grounds, independently of what I am about to talk about. Jesus
appeared to His disciples---the original skeptics of the resurrection---over a
period of 40 days, offering them "many infallible proofs.” They in turn went out and turned the Roman
Empire upside down with the message of the cross and resurrection.
In addition to the
massive historical evidence for the resurrection, I believe there is scientific
evidence for the resurrection, and it is to be found in the Shroud of Turin, a
linen cloth 14 feet by 3 feet, that purports to be the actual burial cloth of
Jesus Christ.
The Man in the Shroud
was badly scourged, was crucified, wore a crown of thorns, and was stabbed in
the chest with a Roman spear.
Here's what the late
Dr. D. James Kennedy once remarked when he first heard about the Shroud:
"I should confess that when I first heard about the so-called Shroud of
Turin my attitude was one of great skepticism. I have never been impressed with relics. There
are enough pieces of the 'genuine' cross of Christ to build the ark, and there
are at least forty other shrouds which are claimed to be the Shroud of Christ.
Was this thought to be any different? I
must confess that I, for one, did not think so at all. But it should be
required of every honest person-certainly of every Christian-to have an open
mind and to examine the evidence. Christianity is based upon evidence. What
does the evidence say?" As Dr. Kennedy studied the evidence, he became
convinced that the Shroud really was the burial cloth of Jesus.
One of the great
experts on the Shroud in our day is Dr. Alan Whanger, a retired professor from
Duke Medical Center who has spent his life studying medicine. Since the late
1970s, he has studied intensely the Shroud of Turin.
Although the Shroud
was dismissed by some as a fake because of the carbon-dating in 1988 of a
single specimen (divided into three tiny parts) that was said to date from 1260
to 1390 A.D., Dr. Whanger says that test was not valid. He and his wife Mary
(co-authors of the book The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery,
Franklin, Tenn.: Providence House Publishers, 1998) say that the problem was
not with the dating per se. It was with the sample. It was from the very corner
of the cloth, from a part rewoven in the Middle Ages. And so he concludes,
"the carbon dating was totally invalid and has no scientific merit to it
at all."
Furthermore, Dr.
Whanger notes, "The Shroud is the most intensely studied single object in
existence. There are probably 67 different fields of scientific and academic
interests that have looked into the Shroud in one way in another. So, there's
been a huge amount of research gone in on it. It is our conviction that the
Shroud is, indeed, the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. And we feel that we
can date it to the spring of 30 A.D. in the Middle East, and that what we see
on the Shroud with the various wounds that this is entirely consistent with the
scriptural account of the crucifixion of Jesus. And traditionally, this has
been known as the image of Jesus." In other words, observes Dr. Whanger,
what we think Jesus looked like is based on the Shroud of Turin and not vice
versa.
We know where the
Shroud has been since 1357, when it showed up in Lirey, France in the home of a
French crusader. Knowing it dates from 1357 or earlier, consider all these
details:
•The human anatomy
represented on the Shroud is 100% correct. Knowledge about anatomy on the
Shroud includes details that weren't known until the 20th century. In contrast,
14th century knowledge of anatomy was quite limited. If the cloth were the work
of a medieval forger, he knew things that weren't to be known until centuries
later.
•The Shroud was
photographed for the first time in 1898, and it was discovered to be photographic
negative---hundreds of years before photography was invented.
•The faint image on
the Shroud was not painted on. It was lightly burned on. It's as if at the
moment of the resurrection, Christ's body let off a burst of radiation, as His
body changed from mortal to immortal. The image on the Shroud is created by
some sort of scorching process. Yet it is only lightly scorched. The image is
only 5/1000's of an inch thick. Although there are a few traces of pigment on
the Shroud (because as a holy relic, they put paintings in contact with it,
presumably to receive a blessing or the like), the image is not comprised of
pigment or paint.
•The blood on the
Shroud is real human blood---with all the wounds corresponding with the passion
of Jesus in the Gospels. The blood did not see decay (He was sandwiched inside
that cloth for less than 72 hours). Yet the blood was undisturbed, which means
He somehow went through the cloth; it was not yanked off Him.
•What we think Jesus
looked like is based on the Shroud of Turin. People have a universal picture of
how they think Jesus looked. That image is based on the Shroud.
•While leading
evangelicals are often silent about the Shroud, and I respect that, I still
think people should look into it for themselves because the evidence is there,
on yet another front, declaring the Easter message: Jesus is risen.
•In the Middle Ages
(and even sometimes today) artistic representations of the crucifixion place
the nails in the palms. Yet the Shroud of Turin places the nails in the wrists.
It has now been medically proven that nails in the palms would not suffice to
hold a crucified man. (The Greek word for "hand" can also mean
wrist.)
•The image of the
Shroud is three-dimensional. When ordinary photos or paintings are studied
through a specific NASA, space-age machine (a "VP 8 Image Analyzer"),
the image always becomes distorted. However, the Shroud has been proven to have
three-dimensional properties. It could not have been a painting.
•The theories of
skeptics put forward to explain away the Shroud pay indirect homage to its
awesome properties. For example, one recent book proposed that no less a genius
than Leonardo de Vinci produced the Shroud-and that he had to secretly crucify
a man in the process. However, Leonardo lived a hundred years after the Shroud
appeared. So there goes another theory. Everyone that studies the Shroud of
Turin agrees that this is a mystery not easily explained away.
If it's a hoax, this
is no ordinary hoax. The greater evidence argues for its authenticity. As some
scientists put it, the Shroud is, if you will, a "snapshot of the
resurrection." At the very moment Christ rose from the dead, something
happened-a burst of radiation perhaps-that left a permanent mark on the front
and back of the burial cloth that sandwiched the Man who wouldn't stay buried
for long. In short, the best theory is that the Shroud of Turin provides
scientific evidence for the resurrection of Christ. He is risen. He is risen indeed!
DID
JESUS SWOON?
Another theory, popularized by Venturini several centuries ago, is often
quoted today. This is the swoon theory, which says that Jesus
didn't die; he merely fainted from exhaustion and loss of blood. Everyone thought Him dead, but later He
resuscitated and the disciples thought it to be a resurrection. Skeptic David Friedrich Strauss--certainly no
believer in the resurrection--gave the deathblow to any thought that Jesus
revived from a swoon: "It is impossible that a being who had stolen
half-dead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical
treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still
at last yielded to His sufferings, could have given to the disciples the
impression that He was a Conqueror over death and the grave, the Prince of
Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a
resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon
them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac
voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm,
have elevated their reverence into worship."
For the New Testament of Acts (written approximately
64 A.D.), the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity,
even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for
granted. ~A. N. Sherwin-White, Classical
Roman Historian (McDowell, 1992).
No comments:
Post a Comment