fbpx
Articles

5 ways to share resurrection facts in a skeptical age

Gospel conversations about the historical reality of Christianity

/
October 19, 2022

Jesus rose again. The Christian faith depends upon this truth. If it were false, the gospel would not be worth sharing. Jesus would not be the door of salvation or the way to heaven (John  10:7-9, 14:3-6); as George Eldon Ladd well understood, “. . . if Jesus is not raised, redemptive history ends in the cul-de-sac of a Palestinian grave.”1George Eldon Ladd, I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans,  1975), 144.  The resurrection matters—supremely; it is the historical hinge of our heavenly hope and the reason that we have a message of life to share with a dying world. This message has a bearing on every aspect of our lives and is our only hope for lasting change at the heart level. 

Ultimately, Christians believe that Jesus lives because the Holy Spirit has borne witness in and regenerated our hearts (Titus 3:5). Still, in evangelism, Christians should gladly offer historical evidences for the faith. To do so is to follow the apostolic example—especially that of Paul (Acts 17:30-31, 26:19-29; 1 Cor 15:6). Furthermore, a historical emphasis upon Jesus’ death and resurrection highlights the uniqueness of the gospel. In a therapeutic age that emphasizes self-improvement methods such as positive thinking and “manifesting” desired life outcomes, the gospel offers profoundly more than an idea, a self-help strategy, a life philosophy, or a worldview; in the words of J. Gresham Machem, “Christianity depends, not upon a complex of ideas, but upon the narration of an  event”—namely Jesus’ death and resurrection.2J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, new ed. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans,  2009), 60, Logos Bible Software. 

This historical foundation gives the gospel a concreteness—a material reality—that holds forth, not merely a perspective or mindset for living, but the way of life eternal, opened through Christ’s saving work nearly 2,000 years ago. Similarly, the event-centeredness of Christianity sets it apart from other major world religions, which focus on ideas such as rules, rituals, and distinctive perspectives on life. In an age filled with empty pluralistic religious ideas, we behold the empty tomb, inviting others to “Come and see what the Lord has done” (Psa. 66:5). 

Five resurrection facts

To some, the resurrection carries the credibility of any story beginning with “once upon a  time”—wishful thinking for the simple-minded. This view is misguided because this central  claim of Christianity boasts great historical evidence. In a post-Christian age where unbelief reigns, here are five basic resurrection FACTS that can be used to encourage believers and engage skeptics: 

Foretold—Jesus foretold his resurrection. 
Appearances—Jesus appeared to many, transforming lives. 
Cost—The apostles shared a costly testimony. 
Time—The apostles shared a timely testimony. 
Setting—The apostles’ testimony spread in the immediate setting of Jesus’ death. 

1. Foretold: Jesus foretold his resurrection (Mark 8:27–33). 

Many critics assume that alleged miracles always have a natural cause, even if that cause is unknown. It is true, of course, that many strange, yet natural, occurrences have wrongly been followed by the excited proclamation, “It’s a miracle!” However, a foretold miracle claim sits in a different category; and Jesus actually foretold his victory over death. 

One such foretelling occurs in Mark 8:27–33; Jesus says that he is going to be rejected and killed, but that he would “after three days rise again.” Upon hearing this, Peter has the audacity to “rebuke him.” In response to Peter, the Lord offers a severe correction, “Get behind me, Satan!” These details help to discredit the assumption that this incident, which specifically emerged in response to Jesus’ foretelling, was imagined later by the church. After all, why would the early church fabricate a humiliating story for a leader as prominent as Peter? 

In their book, Reinventing Jesus, J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace assert, “It is hard to imagine the early church inventing embarrassments for themselves . . . .”3J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace. Reinventing Jesus: How  Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications,  2006), 46. The embarrassing character of this passage supports its authenticity, which includes the foretelling of the resurrection. Jesus’ rising was foretold as the foreordained plan and purpose of God; thus, it is not a random occurrence or natural anomaly that was later embraced by ill-informed conspiracists and gullible crowds. 

2. Appearances: Jesus appeared to many, transforming lives (1 Cor 15:1–8). 

What could transform James, the skeptical half-brother of Jesus, or Saul, the persecutor of the church, into followers of Jesus? Before the resurrection, James did not believe in his brother’s ministry (Mark 6:1–5; John 7:5). Yet, after Jesus appeared to him, he became a key leader in the early church (1 Cor 15:7). Similarly, while actively terrorizing Christians, Saul of Tarsus encountered the risen Jesus (Acts 9:3–8; 1 Cor 15:8) and became an apostle to proclaim “the faith he once tried to destroy” (Gal. 1:23). Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances are correlated with radical transformations.  

Notably, these appearances were not individual hallucinations because they were experienced by multitudes—at one point even to 500 people at once (1 Cor. 15:6). Michael Licona observes that “Modern psychology . . . has not come close to confirming the possibility of collective hallucinations.”4Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (Downers Grove,  IL: IVP Academic, 2010), 509. Thus, such appearances provide strong evidence for the  resurrection. 

3. Cost—The apostles shared a costly testimony (1 Cor. 4:9–13). 

Having encountered the risen Lord, the apostles courageously shared their eyewitness  testimony—at great personal cost. Many early church leaders such as Paul, James, and Peter were martyred for the gospel. Remarkably, the apostles willingly embraced such risks (1 Cor. 4:9–13). By way of contrast, modern terrorists are sometimes willing to die for religious beliefs that they learned secondhand, but the apostles were willing to pay such a cost for their own eyewitness testimonies. The apostles were convinced that their testimony was true. They were not lying, for, as Licona succinctly puts it, “Liars make poor martyrs.”5Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus, 370. They courageously spread their resurrection testimony, whatever the cost

4. Time: The apostles shared a timely testimony (1 Cor. 15:1–8). 

Legends and myths develop over time. It is noteworthy that the news of Jesus’ resurrection was established early—within the lifetimes of multitudes of eyewitnesses. For example, this truth permeates 1 Corinthians 15:3–8. Jesus’ rising is explicitly stated in verse 4; his subsequent appearances are stated in verses 5–8. Around A.D. 55, merely 20–25 years after Jesus’s earthly ministry, Paul wrote this letter, confidently asserting that “most” of one group of “five hundred” resurrection eyewitnesses were “still alive” (1 Cor. 15:6)!6Verlyn Verbrugge, 1 Corinthians, in vol. 11 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Romans– Galatians, eds. Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008), 248.   

Significantly, before 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 was preserved in written form, this statement of faith was established as an oral formula, as evidenced by the phrase “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received” (1 Cor. 5:3). In light of extrabiblical Hellenistic literature, Richard Bauckham observes that the words “delivered” and “received” are intentionally used together to emphasize the faithful transmission of the gospel story.7Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2017), 264-65. In other words, a community containing numerous eyewitnesses guarded carefully this formal testimony of the resurrection such that it was well established in the early church—even before a single New Testament manuscript was written.  

So how early was this oral formula established? In 1 Corinthians, Paul is giving a reminder of what he had preached at the founding of the church at Corinth—around A.D. 51–52 (1 Cor. 15:1; see also Acts 18).8D. A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids,  Michigan: Zondervan, 2005) 447-48. Yet this formula originated earlier, for Paul says that he had previously “received” it from the other apostles, likely within a few years of his conversion. Consequently, the resurrection testimony was likely well established within such an official confession of faith within one decade after the crucifixion. Thus, the timely nature of the apostolic testimony indicates that the resurrection is not a legend, which characteristically requires more time to develop. 

5. Setting: The apostles’ testimony spread in the immediate setting of Jesus’ death (Acts 2).  

When you think of the idea of “setting,” think location, location, location. Where did the message of the resurrection first take root? In Jerusalem, the immediate setting where Jesus was crucified. News of his execution spread quickly; at that time, anyone who seemed unaware of it could be asked, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened . . .?” (Luke 24:18). Since Roman crucifixion was a public spectacle resulting in certain death, there is not a more unlikely setting for the resurrection message to take hold—unless, of course, it actually happened. Indeed, the tomb was empty, many saw the risen Lord, and thousands more believed on that first day of the apostles’ preaching. In Jerusalem, the church exploded in growth, confident in the One “whom God raised up, loosing the pangs of death” (Acts 2:24).  

As you engage with unbelievers, use these FACTS to remember some basic historical  evidences for the resurrection. Indeed, Jesus rose again, and the gospel is worth sharing. Perhaps the Holy Spirit will use these facts to awaken hearts to the truth of who Jesus is. And as you have conversations, do not forget that grace is the real reason why the gospel message bears such beautiful historical uniqueness. While none of humanity’s ideas—no philosophies, rules, or rituals—could merit salvation, Jesus entered human history to save sinners. As we defend the historical truth of Christianity in an age of relativism, let us not neglect to highlight the grace of God in Christ Jesus, who is “alive forevermore” (Rev. 1:18) and is still transforming lives.

Trey Meek

Trey Meek has the privilege of serving as the Lead Pastor of First Baptist Church of Rogersville, Tennessee. He holds a D.Min. in Applied Apologetics from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He and his wife, Amanda, have one daughter and two sons. Read More by this Author

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24