5. Always Looking for a Way Out: Of Legends, Lies, and Lapses
Introduction to Part 3
Is Jesus' Resurrection the Only Explanation?
r ince the first reports of Jesus' resurrection, critics have formulated oppos1 ing theories to account for the known data. These are commonly referred
to as naturalistic explanations, because they appeal to a natural cause for the
event rather than a supernatural one. Interestingly, liberal scholars of the nineteenth century both rejected Jesus' resurrection and provided refutations of
most of these theories.' Neoorthodox scholar Karl Barth was perhaps the most
influential theologian of the twentieth century.'- Barth pointed out how each
opposing theory to Jesus' resurrection suffers from many inconsistencies and
concluded, "today we rightly turn up our nose at this."3 Raymond Brown, a
moderate New Testament scholar respected by liberals and conservatives alike,
echoed Barth, writing that twentieth-century critical scholars had rejected existing theories that oppose the Resurrection. He added that contemporary thinkers both ignore these theories and even treat them as unrespectable.a
Of course, this does not prohibit our unbelieving friends and colleagues from bringing up these alternative theories. Most are unaware that these opposing theories were refuted and dismissed years ago by other critical scholars. Even some modern critics occasionally attempt to put a different spin on an old theory and present it as a new possibility.' Inevitably, each attempt falls prey to the same refutations that caused the demise of their predecessors.
Today, the prevalent view among sophisticated critics is that the disciples seem to have experienced something. But what it was may not be known, and the general bias is against resurrections. As Charles Hartshorne articulated in his comments pertaining to a public debate on Jesus' resurrection between Gary Habermas and prominent atheist philosopher Antony Flew, "I can neither explain away the evidences to which Habermas appeals, nor can I simply agree with Flew's or Hume's positions.... My metaphysical bias is against resurrections."
In chapter eight, we will see that this type of response is inadequate as well.
It is fair to raise questions regarding an opposing theory to Jesus' resurrection. Aside from the faith factor, when it comes to reports of miracles, the historian must seek a natural explanation before considering a supernatural one.' Christians do this continually in examining reports of miracles in other religions. Our own faith is not exempt from similar investigation. When no plausible natural explanation is available-as is the case with Jesus' resurrection-and a historical context with obvious religious implications exists where a resurrection is at home-for example if Jesus performed miracles and claimed divinity'-there then are no reasons why a supernatural cause cannot be considered.
It is important to note that the existence of several opposing theories to Jesus' resurrection should not be seen as a threat to our Christian faith. If all of the theories fail to account for the known data, they cease to be anything more than unsuccessful attempts to explain what occurred in natural terms. A collection of unsuccessful attempts does not add up to one good one. Not only do these alternative theories have their own problems, but some are mutually incompatible with others. For example, the "apparent death theory" is incompatible with the "fraud 2 theory."
In your conversations with skeptics, you will find that sometimes their skepticism goes far beyond what is merited. At times, the skeptic demands that an explanation be so strong that no questions can be raised against it. If something cannot be proved with 100 percent certainty, they will not accept it as true. Others would reject the data under any circumstances. Their position is rarely stated so bluntly, but the extent of their prejudice becomes clear in practice. If historians took this approach we could know very little about history.
It is also worthwhile to note that, just as the Christian can be expected to provide facts to support her claim that Jesus rose from the dead, the critic must do likewise for his opposing explanations. It is not good enough merely to state, for example, that Jesus' disciples hallucinated what they thought were actual appearances of the risen Jesus. The critic must provide good reason why the theory that the disciples hallucinated offers a better explanation for the facts than does Jesus' actual bodily resurrection."
Let's look at the major opposing theories to Jesus' resurrection: Was Jesus' resurrection merely a legend or a lie? Could the disciples have experienced grief hallucinations or delusion, as do many in various cults? Is it possible that Jesus never actually died, and that his disciples mistook him as risen when he had merely come out of an unconscious state? Has science proven that a resurrection is impossible and, therefore, not a credible belief?
We will examine these major theories and others in chapters 5-8 and see why they fail to account adequately for the known facts. Since we have already seen that excellent evidence exists for Jesus' resurrection, if it can be demonstrated that all opposing theories fail to account for the known facts, Jesus' resurrection will be the only plausible explanation. Our objective is to arrive at the most plausible explanation of the data.
As you read through the various opposing theories and their refutations, you may be inclined to feel overwhelmed by the thought of having to know so much.10 Relax. In a discussion with a skeptic, you will probably only need to know one or two refutations to answer your rather skeptical colleague. In many instances, simply remembering the five facts we have discussed in the two previous chapters is often enough, with the understanding that any theory must account for all five of them. This will be an invaluable and simple manner of refuting most theories. Although a theory may account for one or two of the five facts, the unexplained data will reveal the weaknesses of the theory. Charts have been included throughout in order to help you better understand and remember the data.