Skeptics Need Facts

Since the time of the disciples, skeptics have been attempting to find the body of Jesus by formulating possible theories to explain its disappearance.  It has been supposed that Jesus only appeared to be dead.  It has been supposed that the witnesses suffered hallucinations.  It has been supposed that the body was taken.  Every conceivable possibility has been proposed at one time or another, and none of them have been able to withstand the tests of common sense, logic and evidence.  The reality of the historical event stands in tact to this very day, and the primary argument against it is the presuppositional argument of impossibility.

History is filled with accounts of people who have attempted to disprove the resurrection through factual investigation.  More often than not, these people became convinced that the resurrection is one of the most verifiable events in history, and became Christians themselves.  None ever completed a factual investigation that would disprove the historical resurrection.

Today, the only argument left to skeptics is the theory of impossibility.  The resurrection is cast aside as an obvious myth and fable, because such a thing is obviously impossible.  No “modern mind” could even begin to entertain such a thought.  I eventually found this argument to be worthless and dishonest for the reasons stated.  It appears to me to be an attempt to avoid discussion of the facts, ignore the evidence and convict the defendants without a trial.  I reached the conclusion that my former argument of impossibility was an intellectually dishonest presupposition, and a sham.

As I struggled with the issue of the existence of God during my life, I thought I should be given some sort of supernatural sign that would verify His presence.  I wanted physical evidence to prove there was a God so the step of faith would be easier for me.  For me, the historical reality of the resurrection is that proof.  What could be more of a supernatural sign than the  resurrection of a dead man?

Today, I believe the truth of God is evident to any person willing to see it, but during the early years of my God investigation it was not clear at all.  Once I could see the reality of the resurrection, however, the middle ground of agnosticism was eliminated.  It either happened or it did not happen.  When I became convinced it had happened, I was faced with compelling evidence that required an examination of the life of the man who was raised from the dead.  What did he tell the world and what did his life, death and resurrection mean?  A much greater mystery also presented itself:  Why was all of it necessary?

The resurrection appears from nowhere in the history of humanity.  There is nothing else like it, and it hits us from a blind side with the same uncanny sense of awe we feel about eternity, the universe, and the creation of life itself.  It is the manifestation of a power we cannot comprehend.  It is the power of calling forth something from nothing.  It is the same creative power we see in every part of our world, that we cannot touch, taste, or smell, yet is very real.

The reality of the resurrection is a straight-forward proposition from an historical perspective.  The theology and religion of the resurrection is another matter entirely.  I had hoped making a decision about the historical validity of the resurrection would resolve some things for me and it did.  However, the resurrection soon presented more complicated questions that related to the need for it all.  Jesus, who was raised from the dead, and the disciples who witnessed his resurrection, revealed amazing information about the nature of God, the world, and man’s position in the world.  Many of the revelations are very disturbing and include some ideas human beings do not want to accept or believe.

Jesus said he came that people might have eternal life and that he was the only way to that life.  Somehow, his life, death and resurrection were the keys to the mystery and in some way could result in a person being “born again.”  This was very hard for me to understand and the questions raised were many and complicated:

1. What was meant by eternal life?

2. Why couldn’t a person have eternal life without Jesus being a part of it?

3. Where would this eternal life be experienced?

4. What does sin have to do with all of this?

5. What does “born again” mean?

6. Why did Jesus have to die and how can his death “save” me?

7. Why did Jesus say I needed to be “saved” in the first place?

8. If Jesus was the only way to God, what was going to happen to the people who would never hear of him, and those who had lived before him?

9. Is there really a place called hell, and if so what is it like?

10. What is Christianity really about and how does it work?

I did not like these questions but was forced to try to find answers to them.  The historical reality of the resurrection required that much.  The problem was where to begin.  As I thought about it I realized that most of my doubt about the reality of the supernatural was based on “scientific” information I had been exposed to.  It involved a belief that man had evolved from the primordial ooze and that everything we see in the natural world must have a natural explanation.  The historical reality of the resurrection and the message of Jesus disrupted those ideas, but I still felt a need that they  somehow had to be resolved in harmony with each other.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the starting point for anyone examining the meaning of Christianity.  The real issue of faith in this matter involves the power of God.  If I cling to the argument of impossibility to refute the resurrection I am really saying:  “God does not have the power to raise the dead.”  But in all the debate and discussion of Christianity, the historical resurrection of Christ is not a negotiable item.  The line is drawn at the empty tomb.

I reached the conclusion that if I believed in the truth of the resurrection, I was going to have to attempt to interpret its meaning in relationship to what I could see in the natural world.  Jesus claimed to originate from a spiritual realm, but was introduced into the natural world and embraced it as reality.  He said the two (the natural and the supernatural) coexist with each other and that he was the bridge for humanity between them.  For me to understand what he meant, I had to take a look at beginnings and evaluate what we know as time within the context of his ever-present now, which we label as eternity.