May 25, 2008

The Resurrection of Jesus is Real! - Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

A lot of Christians are not aware that there is a ton of evidence that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is very real.

There is a really great article on this topic on the Xenos Christian Fellowship website and I wanted to share it with you all:


Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ:

by Christopher Louis Lang


The Evidence: A Brief Survey

Approaching the Bible

In order to examine the evidence for the resurrection we must place ourselves in the historical situation. The events surrounding the life and death of Christ didn't occur at a place where we can gain no knowledge of them. Rather, they occurred in history, on earth, and were recorded by men who witnessed the events.

When we approach an ancient document such as the Bible or another ancient document such as Tacitus' History of Rome (115 A.D.) we must come to the text with an understanding attitude. This does not mean that we assume the text to be 100 per cent true. But we need to be able to ask the right questions. In the first century much less writing took place than does in our time. Many were illiterate, few could read, much less write, and paper or parchment (leather) to write on was expensive. The incentive to fabricate was not as it is today. In other words, The National Enquirer, could never have been published at this time. A high regard was given to writing and the luxury to create fictional material was virtually non-existent, for instance there was no such thing as a novel or a newspaper, although there were artistic writings such as poetry. The Bible however, is a much different kind of literature. It was not written as a poem or story, although it also contains poetry. It was for the most part written as history and is intended to communicate truth throughout.

The gospel of Luke begins:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word [Paul, Peter, etc] have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught. (Lk 1:1-4)

Luke was not an apostle, he was however the companion of Paul and probably dictated some of his letters. Luke tells us that he is writing in consecutive order because the other gospels, Matthew, Mark and John, are written more by topic than chronologically.

How do we know anything historically? There is no "scientific" proof that Lincoln was the president. We cannot recreate him in a laboratory or bring him back to life. We cannot reproduce the experiment. We cannot calculate an equation that tells us that he was. But we can assert with a high degree of probability that Lincoln was indeed our president and was assassinated in 1865. We do this by appealing to historical evidence. Many people saw Lincoln. We have some of his writings and even his picture, not to mention his likeness on our pennies. But none of this "proves", in a scientific sense, that Lincoln ever lived or was the president.

The kind of evidence used in historical research is the same kind as that used in a court of law. In a courtroom case certain kinds of evidences are appealed to in order to determine what exactly happened, eyewitnesses are questioned, motives are examined, and physical evidence is scrutinized such as fingerprints or journal writings.

It is the same kind of evidence that we appeal to in order to establish Christ's life, death, and resurrection.

(You can read the rest of the article at the link posted above)


  1. False. This is scientifically false. Apparently reason does not apply to Christians. What's the point of having your own brain?

  2. Incorrect. The Bible was written as a belief book. Not a history book. It was written to provide insight as the why christians do what they do and why they believe what they believe. If the Bible were to be taken literally as a history book. It would be filled with many contradictions. One such being God is almighty and all powerful. That right there is a contradiction in itself. If God is almighty, then he should be able to create a mountain that even he cannot lift. However, if he does such, then he has proven himself to be all powerful. But, if he is able to lift the heaviest mountain he can create, then he is not almighty and cannot create, for lack of better words, whatever he wants.

    And please do not state your evidence from the exact idea you are trying to prove. That is just plain illogical.

    1. My response is that God can both create a mountain that He cannot lift and also lift it. Contradictory, but so is the fact that photons are both particles and waves. Your argument is simplistic and invalid. Go away.

  3. It was written as a document of recollection, not a science book with exact definitions.

  4. Enough with the logical talk. Not everything is logical. That's what faith is for. Christian beliefs ( NOT RELIGION ) all center around faith. Why does a person contract cancer ,is given a few months to live , and still walks the earth 10 years later? Certainly not because of belief in the logical.

  5. If what you say is true and the standard for determining historical truth then everything anyone has ever said or put in a historical record is true also, not completely but including: the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, astrology, alchemy, what Mohammed wrote about Allah, cryptozoology, Mithras, UFOs, alien abductions, the lost city of Atlantis, the world on the back of a turtle, Santa Claus, and the easter bunny. Surely there is a better way to determine historical truth.