|
|
|
Truly there has been no shortage of speculation regarding the life and death of the man Jesus Christ. His historical impact is well beyond measure and only becomes more amazing in light of the ambiguity surrounding his early existence. The first thirty years of his life are almost wholly undocumented, and the three years for which we are left have turned the world on end. Two millenniums later, the response to Christ is as varied as ever, but for all the arguments over who Jesus was, there is really no debate over that Jesus was. Even his crucifixion is a settled question. All the arguments, then, center on the question of resurrection and deity. Either Christ is God and rose bodily from the dead, or he is not God and is dead to this day. As is the case in most debates, there will never be consensus, but there are compelling cases to be made. In order to guarantee the most satisfactory verdict, it is imperative that we examine the evidence which history has left so as to see which account history really supports.
For my part, I will not examine the mechanism of the proposed resurrection so much as the impact which it had on those who knew Jesus best. It is my assertion that their response has monumental significance, and is perhaps the most compelling historic argument for the reality of Christ’s resurrection.
Here is what history tells us. After being crucified, Jesus was buried in the tomb of one Joseph of Arimethea, and a giant stone was rolled before the entrance. There was an assembly of Roman soldiers placed to guard the tomb, thanks to Christ’s prophecy that he would rise again. Roman governor Pontius Pilate gave the explicit order to make the tomb as secure as possible lest Christ’s disciples should steal his body and continue their “deception.” Three days later it was found that the stone had been rolled away, the tomb had been emptied and the guards were nowhere to be found. Here begins the debate.
According to scripture, the giant stone was rolled away by an angel of the Lord, which subsequently caused a massive earthquake and rendered the guards unconscious (like “dead men”). These Roman soldiers, it tells us in Matthew 28:11, were terrified because of the events which had befallen them and feared their failure to secure the tomb would cost them their very lives. After consulting with the chief priests (the very ones who had spearheaded Christ’s execution and insisted the tomb be guarded), the soldiers were given a large sum of money and a guarantee of autonomy to say the disciples had overpowered them and stolen Christ’s body. The book of Matthew, and history itself, tells us that this story has been generally accepted, while the Bible’s account of a supernatural resurrection has been relegated to the status of religious myth.
For starters, the story of the disciples stealing Christ’s body should be immediately suspect both for the reputation of the Roman guard, and for the reputation of the disciples themselves. Vocationally, they were nothing more than a collection of fisherman and tax gatherers, and it hardly seems reasonable that this small band of untrained and heretofore cowardice men would be capable of overpowering some of the most efficiently trained soldiers of the ancient world. Never mind that these soldiers were stationed at the tomb to defend against an attack in which they “knew” was coming. They were thoroughly prepared, knew exactly when the strike would occur, knew who the perpetrators would be and yet they were completely desolated just the same. Sound suspicious? As many loopholes as this account seems to have, it is my opinion that the more compelling argument for Christ’s resurrection lies ahead.
|
