On Easter Sunday I find myself reflecting on the resurrection of Jesus of
Nazareth, the event that started the Christian faith. The Christian message of
God being born as a man, dying for our sins, and coming back to life before
ascending to Heaven to rule until the final judgment is, and offering a free pardon and adoption into God's family with eternal joy for true believers is, if true, evidently the
most important thing that has ever happened or will ever happen in the history of the Universe. If
Jesus is who he said he was, it would be insane not to follow him. And as Paul
wrote in 1 Corinthians 15, it all hinges on whether or not Jesus was in fact
raised from the dead with a new glorified body.
Deciding whether all this is true or proving beyond doubt that it is not would seem an absolute imperative. So it is surprising that people often merely shrug off or ignore the resurrection, or perhaps even more strangely, say that it may have happened but not doing anything about it.
So is it true? Did Jesus really rise from the dead? And if
not, then what? If the resurrection did not happen, we require an alternative explanation for the origin of the Christian church.
Several things are quite literally not in doubt. For a start, the
Christian church exists. Like other movements, e.g. Islam, Marxism, Nazism, it had to have had a reason to start existing.
Christianity began in Jerusalem around 50 AD and then spread worldwide, and
despite persecution, misrepresentation, corruption and internal conflicts due
to error, greed and treachery, has survived. The men who started the church and
spread it worldwide despite persecution insisted that they had seen the risen
Christ. The very earliest Christian documents and the testimony of secular/pagan
historians puts the testimony of the church founders to the risen Jesus beyond
doubt. So we require an explanation for this belief.
The world has offered several alternative explanations for the
disciples’ story that they had seen the risen Christ.
1)
Jesus didn’t die, he passed out and came round
later in the tomb. He escaped and went into hiding, managing to persuade the
disciples that he had risen again.
2)
They had stolen and hidden his body and were
deliberately lying.
3)
They had hallucinated.
4)
The whole story was invented by the Romans (e.g.
Emperor Constantine) as a means of rule.
I have heard several further alternative explanations that
are just too daft to be worth discussing, but the above 4 are the ones I find come
up most often. Do they bear rational examination?
Before going any further, I note that I just introduced the
term ‘rational’. This term is often claimed by materialists as their own. Not
so. Being rational means using reason. To investigate a matter rationally means
to assemble and evaluate the relevant evidence, consider alternative
possibilities, applying logic, trying to rule mistakes out and establish the
truth of a matter. The assertion that being rational means ruling out
supernatural explanations is ‘the philosophical assumption of materialism’. I
will return to this logical error later, but meanwhile let’s apply a process of
reason to the resurrection of Jesus.
1) Did
Jesus swoon and come round later? No. The Romans were good at killing people.
Jesus was speared through the heart and blood and water gushed out-this was probably
pulmonary oedema fluid from extreme heart failure. There is no prospect of him
having survived crucifixion. Even if he had, he would probably have succumbed
in the cold tomb later. Even if he had survived, he would have been a broken
man and could not possibly have persuaded the disciples that he had risen with
a new glorified body. Mega fail. I can hardly believe that people still come
out with this tripe.
2) Did
the disciples steal the body and then lie about it? This is the story the Jews
put out. Seems unlikely, especially given the demoralised state of the
disciples and the Roman guard on the tomb. But even if it were so, we are then
left with a group of men who were, in the name of truth, willing to stand up
and lie-and die rather than admit they were lying. People will die for a lie
they believe in, like Muslim suicide bombers, but who will die for what they know
is a lie? The apostles all died under persecution, none of them got rich. This
story is unbelievable.
3) Did
the disciples hallucinate that Jesus was risen? This is essentially what the
heretic bishop John Shelby Spong proposes in his book ‘Resurrection: Myth or
Reality?’ It’s a very weird book and never comes near to proving its case.
Spong goes further than the weasel words of bishop Jenkins of Durham who gave
the notorious quote about ‘a conjuring trick with bones’, Spong asserts that
Jesus would have been buried in a common grave and his bones turned to dust. I
don’t want to say much more about Spong here beyond saying that he has made a
set of statements of personal belief which are generally agreed to contradict
every element of historic and biblical Christian faith. Hallucinations do
occur, but there is no record of an enduring mass movement having begun or been
sustained by hallucinations. This really makes no sense. The likeliest
explanation of Spong asserting that the Christian
religion was started by hallucinating disciples is that he insists on a naturalistic explanation and made one up to suit his
preferences. He is one of the false teachers that the New Testament warns us
about, e.g. in 2 Peter 2: 1-3.
4) ‘It
was all made up’. Well they would say that wouldn’t they. Because if it wasn’t ‘all
made up’ then it would have to be true, in which case the only rational
response we can make is to fall at Jesus’ feet and worship and obey him.
OK, so where does this tie in with evolution and
intelligent design hypothesis? Simple. The exact same line of reasoning is
taken in dismissing the Resurrection as in dismissing evidence against molecules
to man evolution,.-the evidence points to a conclusion we don’t like, so we’ll
fix the rules of debate so that any evidence pointing to the conclusion we don’t like
will be stifled, ignored, misrepresented and forbidden. Supernatural explanations are ruled out even if they fit the facts best. We will apply the assumption of materialism and call it
science.
The philosophical assumption of materialism rules out miracles and is also typically used
to rule out rational discussion of the intelligent design (ID) hypothesis. ID proponents
look at the known facts of biology and rationally evaluate the evidence for Darwinian
gradualism (natural selection acting on naturally occurring variations) and
ALSO discuss the observable characteristics of things that we know have been
designed.
The ID proponent essentially uses a process of reason to attempt to
falsify Darwinism, and succeeds. He also studies the observable process of
design, and finds that living things and their systems (e.g. photosynthesis,
protein synthesis, Krebs cycle, the immune system etc) demonstrate features
that point strongly to design. The ID proponent therefore adduces to the most reasonable
explanation, which is design. However (and this is one of the key lessons of the
notorious Dover mis-trial, which also violated the US constitution by
pronouncing on a matter of religious belief) this is ruled out by the Darwinist
since it amounts to saying ‘God did it’ which is philosophically ruled out. Design
implies a designer, who may be God, and the secularist revolutionaries who have
seized control of most of our government, media and education systems are
radically opposed to the idea of God, at least the idea of a demanding, Sovereign Creator Lawgiver God. Their agenda is not God's agenda, he stands in the way of their earthly humanist Utopias. This is why there is no intelligent
discourse about ID in the media and discussion of it is actually outlawed in our schools and colleges.
Its the same for the facts about the Christian faith,
including the fulfilled prophecies that validate Jesus, the absolutely foundational importance of biblical Christianity to our liberty and prosperity, the growing power of the State to control thought, and the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. They don't want you to know about these things. However, the truth is still what it is and will be
what it will be.
There is still time to
make diligent enquiry into Jesus. I would if I were you. There is too much at stake to just drift along with the spirit of the age, a spirit that has been created and applied by people who do not necessarily have your best interests in mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment
feel free to comment, good manners and lucidity are appreciated.