Loading...Do you yourself think there can be empirical proof that Jesus was raised from the dead? There’s not a right answer – I’m just asking, so you can express your opinion.
Last week I held a live Q&A for the Gold Members of the blog (if you’re not familiar with the perks that go along with being a Gold member, check the options out here: https://ehrmanblog.org/register/ ) There were lots of intriguing questions on a range of topics. One that I found particularly, well, intriguing was about an argument sometimes used to show that Jesus must have been raised from the dead and that the Christian claims are therefore demonstrably true.
The questioner asked what I thought of the argument made by William Lane Craig that the amazing expanse of Christianity, as it began to grow into the world’s largest religion, shows that the resurrection of Jesus must have happened. How else would one explain the incredible success of the Christian claims? It must have
A miracle is something positive that occurs because of divine intervention which cannot be explained by scientific or natural laws. In other words, a miracle cannot be proven true by any logical explanation or any rational tools currently at our disposal. Again, to emphasize my point, there is no way to prove a miracle; there simply is no proof. When I was a theist and I expressed doubt to the elders of my church about demon possession, raising the dead (Lazarus), making the earth stop rotating, or parting the sea I was given the simple answer “miracles must be accepted on faith alone.” It is perfectly fine to believe, in faith, that Jesus bodily rose from the dead but there is no way to “prove” that this actually happened. Faith does not equal reason, that is why it is called faith. I used to waste a lot of mental energy attempting to prove the unprovable to eliminate my own skepticism about something I was struggling to accept on faith. However, there is no way to actually prove the resurrection. This is just my opinion and I do not wish to offend anyone.
Occams razor. Its a story.
Or, its part of a larger story in which you are asked to believe that the triune God who is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of all sent himself to earth as a human to suffer and die to atone for the sins of everyone else. Everyone else that he also created in forms that would sin, knowing they would sin (he’s omniscient) when, being omnipotent, he could have created them without sin. And, this was his plan all along to change his relationship with his creations and bring salvation to them from himself. Rather than just forgiving them for sinning, or forgiving himself for creating the sinners..
I think your points are absolutely valid. It seems to me what EVIDENCE we have, i.e., there were claims/reports he was resurrected, does not constitute proof. I think it’s a matter of faith. I’d go further and say the understanding of his life and teachings must have seemed remarkable to some after his death, enough so that they decided to follow his teachings. Perhaps the resurrection stories/accounts resulted from their belief in what they thought was unique about him. So, for me, while I’m willing to believe he was resurrected, I can’t prove it, nor do I worry about being unable to do so. And fundamentally, I don’t think it matters what is true about it. I’m pretty confident that his life as portrayed by those who knew him or claimed to know him, is enough for me. If I’m wrong and blink out of existence when I die what harm has come to anyone, including me, from my following what I think is the normative principle of love for others?
Bart,
This also comes down to words and definitions. ‘Raised from the dead’ — by raised, what do we mean? What qualifies as a ‘resurrection’? If a ‘physical’ resurrection is to be proved that would certainly be much more difficult than a ‘spiritual’ resurrection. Can anyone even be sure that Lazarus was ‘physically’ raised from the dead or was it a metaphor? Mormons claim to spiritually ‘raise’ us from the dead via a post-mortem baptism (occasionally without permission!)
We hear of ‘raising’ people up via prayers…with a feeling that the prayers succeeded (were answered by God) – might that was also an abstract form of resurrection in antiquity?
“This also comes down to words and definitions. ‘Raised from the dead’ — by raised, what do we mean?”
A good question. According to the scriptures, Jesus was crucified, arose from the dead, met with his followers, and then ascended to heaven. How would this differ from Jesus being crucified, ascending to heaven, then coming back as an angel and meeting with his followers?
And if Jesus physically arose from the dead and then ascended to heaven, what happened to his body when he did so? Did it stay on earth, or did he take it to heaven?
First-century Christianity based their entire religion on the death and resurrection of Jesus. For them, it symbolized the death of The Word (the “first covenant”). With the resurrection of The Word, Paul and the author of Hebrews regarded that event as the process for transitioning to the new covenant. It may have even been more literal for them than symbolic, based on the wording of Hebrews 9:15, Ephesians 2:15, and Colossians 2:14. This doesn’t necessarily mean he was resurrected — an idea opposed by Muslims — nor does it mean he was necessarily crucified. Yet, the reports of numerous appearances of Jesus in the flesh, and not as a spirit (Luke 24:39), lend credibility to his existing as a human being, for forty days according to Acts 1:3, whether having resurrected, recovered, or escaped. If they did not encounter him after the crucifixion, the Christian messianic movement could not have survived. Paul accurately expressed the necessity of the belief that Jesus was raised as essential to their faith — “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14).
My favorite sayings (whether accurate quotes or not) are “The plural of “anecdote” is not “evidence”: and “If 50 million people say a wrong thing, it is still a wrong thing”.
Islam is currently the fastest-growing major religion. If Islam is actually growing faster than Christianity, then would that be grounds for arguing that Islam (rather than Christianity) must therefore be true?
If Islam eventually eclipses Christianity in sheer population numbers, displacing Christianity as the world’s largest religion (which prognosticators see as likely to occur later this century), would that then constitute evidence for Islam being (or — even more problematically — suddenly becoming) the one true faith?
(Would Christians today who argue that Christianity’s current status as the world’s largest religion is proof of its truth then be prepared to follow that same line of logic, and duly covert to Islam as soon as it surpasses Christianity in size?)
Bart, I agree with the reasons you delineated for why the argument purportedly made by William Lane Craig is unconvincing.
Bart,
I would agree. How many people once thought the world was flat and the center of the universe? Most? From one perspective that seemed reasonable & rational to the majority of people. That did not make it correct of course & as time went on was found could not be more wrong. Crowd psychology is self reinforcing and tends to remove or dissuade doubts one might have thinking critically as an individual. Many people NEED that crowd reinforcement to do that very thing but are unaware of it. Eh, just what I think.
Jesus got raised from the dead on Sunday morning. Went out to brunch with the Apostles. Walked through a few walls. Told the Apostles to keep the Resurrection on the down low until after he ascends into outer space…
I don’t buy it. Sounds made up.
For working reason, i had to often study subjects related the human body; anatomy, physiology, biology and many others. When i study how we function i constantly have the same thoughts in my head that go like this: ” This is unbelievable”, “the reality we represent is more fantastic than any fantasy our imagination is capable of conceiving”. And i end up thinking the same with pretty much everything that surrounds me of the natural world both when i observe it and especially when i study it.
I don’t know if Jesus really raised from the dead, but I don’t consider the idea preposterous at all because i look at natural world we’re into, that we are part of and i know that it is already something miraculous and mysterious and powerful and unique and beautiful, on the same level of a resurrection if not higher, right under my nose.
I don’t know if Jesus really raised from the dead but i would love he did
“Do you yourself think there can be empirical proof that Jesus was raised from the dead?”
The only possibility of an empirical proof would be if Jesus were to come in person today. But then he would have to prove that he was killed 2,000 years ago. As for myself, however, I cannot provide an empirical proof that he either did or did not rise from the dead, nor can anyone living today.
Bart,
I agree with you. Your arguments are logical and spot on. If you have faith in Christianity, in my opinion, you do not need to prove anything. Your faith is your faith and more power to you.
Proof is in the Second Coming. The fulfillment of Matthew 24 and 25 and the Nicene Creed. (Future tense). Preterism interpretations are not proof because the Nicene Creed is not Preterism.
I myself, have a strict interpretation that it was a prophecy to be fulfilled before the first generation of disciples and the original 12 apostles of Jesus had died.
The promise of a happily ever after could also explain the growth of Christianity. Living forever, in heaven, with God, streets of gold, no illness/hunger/disease/sadness/death… That’s about as powerfully positive a thought that a human can have. Seriously. Can you think of anything more positive? And no circumcision!!
The foundation of cognitive behavioral therapy is that feelings follow thoughts. Happy thoughts lead to happy feelings, and negative thoughts lead to negative feelings.
Christianity spread because it offers the ultimate happy thoughts and thus happy feelings. Though one could argue 72 virgins might be right up there with it.
The story could have ended with Jesus remaining in the grave like everyone else, but with heaven waiting, Christianity still could have spread just the same.
Dr. Ehrman, from Jesus’ crucifixion until Constantine, did any other religion offer an infinite reward like Christianity did?
Some of the Mystery Religions in the Greek and Roman worlds guaranteed a happy afterlife for those who were initiated into them.
I agree that it would need to be argued in a larger case.
I think the idea would be that we would take the fact that Christianity grew the way it did and we ask if we would expect that if 1. God raised Jesus from the dead and if 2. Jesus stayed dead. I think the idea is that if he stayed dead, why did his followers think he had a singular resurrection event? Why did they continue to follow a dead man instead of abandon the belief? etc. etc. I won’t really get into it because I am more interested seeing if this can be applied to other religions and their growth as you point out in Mormonism.
Whether Joseph Smith was lying or telling the truth about the plates, I don’t see how that changes the number of followers or the fact that he creates a movement. I don’t think it makes him more or less persuasive whether he peddles the truth. For Christianity, it seems that the resurrection itself is a central part of the new belief that grows. It’s not like Jesus claimed he was resurrected and Christianity is about whether you believe him.