Is There Historical Evidence For The Resurrection Essay

Luke 23.50-24.53. Is there historical evidence for the resurrection? Is it necessary for faith?

In the Gospel according to Luke, the narrative is arranged, supposedly in chronological order, to portray the lead up to the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The resurrection of Christ is the confirmation of his position as the messiah (Luke 24. 6-7); therefore, without the resurrection, the Christian faith’s reasoning diminishes: If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have died in Christ have perished (1 Corinthians 15.12-18). Thus belief in the resurrection is fundamental, because without it Christianity would have no access to salvation, which is the ultimate goal
In the Enlightenment period David Strauss developed a radical new approach to the resurrection of Jesus, explaining it was a “subjective conception in the mind” of the disciples (McGrath, 2001, 399). Strauss’ theory suggests the disciples did not witness a life physically restored but saw a projection of Jesus living in the presence from their memories (Luke 24.39-49). As a result of this, he referred to the Biblical account of resurrection as “a reflection of the gospel writers’ social conditioning and cultural outlook” (McGrath, 2001, 399). Therefore, the apostle Matthew can be viewed as the authority figure in which Luke and Mark took the concept of resurrection from because they were socially conditioned to believe the apostles account of resurrection (Luke 24.6). Thus providing evidence for the two-source hypothesis in the synoptic problem: Matthew was the original source Luke and Mark used when writing their
A historic event is reputable when there are numerous independent resources validating one another (Pannenberg, 2002, P.88). In this case Luke, Mark and Matthew all have an account of the resurrection of Jesus; thus, making it a historical event, which is seen as necessary for the existence of the Christian faith. Because the account of resurrection was written in the 1st Century, the Christian faith is reliant upon the authority of others (Luke 24.8), rather than their own individual experience. McGrath notes to be obligated to accept the testimony of others is compromising of human intellectual autonomy (McGrath, 2001, 398); especially when the testimony is approximately two thousand years old. However, without the occurrence and account of Jesus’ resurrection, the Christian faith would, arguably, not exist (Wright, 2003, P.625). Therefore, the creation and continuation of the Christian faith can be viewed as the historical evidence for the Biblical account of the resurrection of Christ.

Following on from this, many religious events are challenging to prove but if all Biblical events could be historically proven religion would be fact, not faith. Therefore, the lack of logical explanation regarding the resurrection of Jesus provides believers with the opportunity to take a leap of faith, which is what makes religion unique: it