As those who have been committed to the Christian faith know very well, without the resurrection of Christ, our faith is in vain and we are pitiful. So, the Apostle Paul takes the occasion (I Corinthians 15:4-11) to mention to us that the risen Christ was not only seen by the disciples and a few others, but that "he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time" (I Cor. 15:6). It should be readily apparent why this fact was so important that Paul felt the need to mention it: there was a bombing on the Moscow metro system recently and the mounted cameras in the train stations captured some of the trembling and the destruction in the aftermath. At the time of our Lord's resurrection, there were no cameras, and no newspapers. Unless one physically was present, word of mouth was all that was left, so the fact that many of those five hundred brothers were still alive (not counting women and children) was important to the testimony of His victory over the grave.
Any of the Corinthians could go to one of those witnesses and receive a first-hand account of the events of that day. Surely those who saw Him after the resurrection all knew about His death, so how overwhelming it must have been to actually see Him in the flesh!
As theologians tell us today, it would have been easy to corroborate if there had been deception in this event, because so many were still alive who had seen Him. Certainly if it weren’t true, at least one of those five hundred brothers would have broken rank and stated that in fact, His resurrection appearance was a lie or a deception.
During His life, logically, one might conclude that if anyone saw Christ and the miracles that He did, then one would be led to the conclusion that this was indeed a man who possessed deity, and there is considerable evidence for the risen Christ, so why don’t more believe?
I think we have the answer to that in verse 10 of this passage when Paul says "But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain." People don’t believe anything they don't want to believe, because they are blinded by their sin, as Paul was before he believed (and even persecuted the church).
The evidence of the bodily resurrection of Christ, though essentially important to historical Christianity, will not convince people to believe the claims of the living Christ. Thank God that we have the witness of the Apostle Paul to the fact of His resurrection; Paul was the last one to see Him on the road to Damascus. However, let's not forget that it is by grace alone that we have been saved as God opens our eyes to the truth of His word. All manner of historical evidences mean nothing if one either refuses to see or simply doesn't care.
by Rich Cromwell
Great point Rich, in the parable of the the rich man and Lazurus, the rich man in hell asks "Father Abraham to send one from the dead to convince his family lest they fall into the same demise. Abraham, or really, God says, they have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them. In Apologetics, we always need to be careful not to develop an extra Biblical approach. Dr. VanTil in his "Defence of the Faith" and his mentor Herman Bavinck, mentions in his "Dogmatics" on Theology proper, that the Bible no where tries to prove the possibility of the existence of "a" god, but everywhere assumes the existence of "the God". When confirming a believer in the faith, these evidences can be useful. When approaching an unbeliever, we must always assume that the role of conscience is at work, as seen in Romans chapter 1. Truth suppressors are not interested in evidences. Well have you said, "The evidence of the bodily resurrection of Christ, though essentially important to historical Christianity, will not convince people to believe". Great work Rich. Dead people require a resurrection prior to performing any activity besides decomposition.
ReplyDeleteMy Thoughts.....
JR
"All manner of historical evidences mean nothing if one either refuses to see or simply doesn't care." why personal testimony usually says more than a slew of doctrine and/or proofs, however true/valid they may be. at least...that has been my experience...
ReplyDeleteThanks Rich! I was reminded of this passage:
ReplyDeleteActs 17:2 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ." 4 And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women. 5 But the Jews were jealous, and taking some wicked men of the rabble, they formed a mob, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the crowd.
It is still necessary to "reason" and "prove", but it is obvious, as you already pointed out, God is the one who has to draw us in.
That inference can be seen in this passage. All heard the same message, but all did not receive it the same way.