Did Jesus rise from the dead? (Part 5)

This is the fifth part of my series based on the booklet Verdict On The Empty Tomb by Val Grieve.

Click here for part 1.
Click here for part 2.
Click here for part 3.
Click here for part 4.

Chapter 5: Circumstantial Evidence

The witness of the disciples is extremely strong direct evidence for Christ’s Resurrection, and it would be accepted in any court of law.

As we saw in the last chapter, this is certainly untrue. Plagiarised accounts based on oral traditions and stories hardly constitute firm evidence, or indeed any evidence. The only thing this is evidence for is the way that religious believers are so able to compartmentalise their minds that they don’t realise they are applying hugely different standards of evidence and intellectual integrity to their religious beliefs than to every other area of life.

Few, if any, religious believers are persuaded that their beliefs are true because of evidence. Rather, they are conditioned to believe from the cradle by the same ongoing process of indoctrination by which we all absorb our native culture and language. As such, religious beliefs usually go without any form of critical examination because they are “obviously” and “self-evidently” true. This is the case whichever religious community one belongs to. It is possible to break through this protective layer of culture to examine one’s beliefs critically, but it is certainly not easy. Indeed, most believers are unable to do so.

Although few believers are aware of it on a conscious level, the fact that their starting-point is the assumption that their religion is true means that they are predisposed to disbelieve or ignore contradictory evidence. At the same time, any “evidence” that seems to reinforce their beliefs, however flimsy, is generally seized upon and not examined too critically. So we have seen in the last chapter with the supposed “direct” and “eye-witness” accounts found in the Gospels (which, as we have seen, are nothing of the sort).

The author now moves on to what he claims is circumstantial evidence, which he places in four categories: The life of Jesus, change in the disciples, the existence of Christianity and the experience of Christians.

1. The Life of Jesus

In any court of law, favourable evidence … by witnesses from the other side would carry great weight. By common consent Christ was unique, the greatest man who ever lived. This being so, it is not so difficult to believe that he rose from the dead. Christ’s teaching and life demand the miracle of his Resurrection.

We could discuss the author’s mischaracterisation of Einstein and others as he quote-mines their recorded sayings to make it seem as though even atheists think Jesus was special, but the juiciest fruit in this section is so low-hanging that there is no need to pick the other fruit.

It is certainly not a matter of common consent that Jesus was either unique or the greatest man who has ever lived (except, of course, among Christians), but even were we to concede, for the sake of argument, that such was the case, the author’s claim that his supposedly exemplary life and teaching therefore make it more likely that he would rise from the dead is simply absurd. A good man, even a great man, is no more likely to rise from the dead than a criminal. The character and life of Jesus do not constitute even circumstantial evidence for the resurrection; the author really is clutching at straws in claiming otherwise.

Even though there are indeed some atheists (myself not included) who think that the teachings of Christ are extraordinary and that his life was exemplary, as the author claims, this also is not evidence that he was any more likely to rise from the dead. The most that can be gained from such “evidence”, even if it is taken at face value, is that Jesus may have been an extraordinary man. This evidence can in no way be deduced to infer that Jesus is not, in fact, dead.

2. Change in the disciples

Jesus’ crucifixion was shattering to his disciples. It left them stunned, leaderless and in complete despair. All their hopes were ended. But then something happened. Suddenly these same disciples were utterly changed. They became completely different. Peter, their leader, on the night before the crucifixion had three times denied with oaths and cursings that he ever knew Jesus. Yet some 50 days later on the Day of Pentecost this same Peter risked his life by boldly telling the whole of Jerusalem that he had seen Jesus risen from the dead. Shortly afterwards peter was imprisoned because of his stand, and eventually died for his faith in Christ. What changed Peter from the coward that he was to the great disciple that he became? Peter’s answer is that he met the risen Christ. Nothing short of this will do.

The stories we have about Peter and the other disciples come from the same unreliable oral sources as the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life (as discussed in the last chapter), so we cannot rely upon their historical accuracy. However, even if we grant for the sake of argument that the story as outlined above is indeed true, and that there was indeed a great change in Peter’s attitude towards Jesus, the only thing that proves is that he thought Jesus had risen from the dead. This has no bearing on whether or not it actually happened.

It is also undeniably true that people change all the time. Previously quiet, unassuming, moderate Muslim students have become radicalised and ended up as suicide bombers or gone on the rampage with automatic weapons in the name of Islam, for example. Yet I doubt that there are very many believers in Jesus’ resurrection who would argue that this points towards the claims of radical Islam being in any way true. As with these young suicide bombers, so with Peter – the change in his lifestyle, ways of operating and level of radicality in no way form evidence that Jesus was alive again after he had died. It simply demonstrates that people can change.

3. The existence of Christianity

The existence of Christianity is a historical fact which demands an explanation.

The explanation is not that difficult to come by. Christianity began as a tiny minority sect of Judaism and was spread to the non-Jewish, Greek-speaking populace of the eastern Roman Empire by Paul of Tarsus and his followers. It continued to be a minority sect, though of increasingly non-Jewish character, until it was adopted by the Roman emperor Constantine as his religion and, in 313 CE it began to gain popularity after Constantine proclaimed that this previously reviled and persecuted minority sect would now be officially tolerated. In 380 CE, Emperor Theodosius I made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, then in 392 he banned all pagan worship. Later in the fourth century, pagans were persecuted ruthlessly by Christians as a result of this legislation.

Without the official backing of the Roman establishment and the consequent semi-official (and official) persecution of those who followed other religions, it is doubtful that Christianity would have survived to the present day, let alone become a major world religion. It is a fact that is too often ignored by Christian believers who criticize Islam for its violent beginnings, but from the fourth century onwards Christianity was often spread by the sword.

How is the existence this historically interesting but morally bankrupt religion in any way evidence, even loose circumstantial evidence, that Jesus rose from the dead? It is not, any more than the existence of Islam proves that Muhammad flew on a winged horse to Jerusalem and from there ascended into heaven. The very idea is ridiculous.

4. The experience of Christians

From the first Easter Sunday until today there is an unbroken succession of millions who can witness that their lives have been revolutionized by contact with the living Christ. Rich and poor, educated and uneducated, people of different backgrounds, nationalities, cultures and temperaments unite in uniform testimony to the Resurrection … Evidence like this, which could be multiplied a million times, cannot be ignored; it is contemporary and personal testimony to the power of the living Christ. The experience of Christians all down the ages endorses the miracle of the Resurrection of Christ.

Inner feelings and personal experiences count for little. Our minds are easily fooled and our emotions are easily swayed by suggestion, group dynamics and the expectations of our peers. In addition, such personal testimonies of changed lives and conviction of the truth of religious beliefs occur in nearly all religions. Is that evidence that they are all true? Hardly. It is simply evidence that we humans are easily fooled, and not nearly as objective about reality as we imagine ourselves to be.
Click here for part 6.