Today is a very special day for Christians throughout the world, a day on which the resurrection of Jesus Christ is commemorated. This is either the most extraordinary event in human history or the most ridiculously absurd story ever told, depending on whether you believe it or trash it. I have met people with both views in my life. While most of the people I know have no problem whatsoever accepting the resurrection as historical fact, there are a few isolated individuals who cast doubt over the possibility that the resurrection ever happened.
Last year I dealt with the historicity of Jesus, meaning that it is a reasonably established fact that He existed and walked this earth. Most of what we know about him is from the New Testament, especially the four Gospel books. The epistles also present some aspects of Him. If the Bible were the only source of the story of Jesus, His historicity would indeed be cast in doubt. But Jesus is mentioned by other non-Biblical sources. Some of the most ancient documents to mention Jesus were originated by His sworn critics who were trying to explain away His miracles or in some way discredit Him. Thallus, for example, acknowledged in his writing in 52 AD that there was darkness in Palestine during the time of Jesus’ death but was quick to attribute it to an eclipse of the Sun. Another ancient writer, Cornelius Tacitus, who was a senator under Emperor Vespasian, wrote the following in connection with the great fire that gutted Rome during Emperor Nero’s time:
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
Many other ancient writers, including the celebrated Jewish (but non-Christian) historian, Josephus, also mention Jesus in their writings, lending credence to His historicity. Most scholars have no problem accepting that Jesus was a real person who was born in Bethlehem to a couple from Nazareth and died a death that had been sanctioned by Pontius Pilate. Only those with ulterior motives deny the historicity of Jesus.
It is one thing to accept Jesus was a historical figure. It is another to believe that the resurrection actually happened. The reader’s attention is respectfully drawn to the careful examination of the resurrection matter to be presented hereunder.
Resurrection is such a lofty claim that Jesus would either be the Lord, or a liar or a lunatic. We will proceed to examine this claim in light of what we know about Jesus, and shall do so within the framework of the three L’s (Lord, liar or lunatic).
Let us start with the last one. Was Jesus a lunatic, a mentally deranged person? There is not any suggestion to that effect from what we know. The twelve-year-old Jesus is presented as a sober, calculating boy as he meets the elders in the Temple. In the days of His ministry, in His early thirties, he is presented as a sober young man, who confounds his critics with his well thought through answers to their crafty questions. He in fact is seen helping the lunatics of His time. The lunatic option therefore falls off.
Perhaps He was a liar, and the whole resurrection thing is one big lie. It never happened. It is only a figment of the imaginations of over enthusiastic fanatics, propagated by Jesus himself. Careful examination of what has been recorded about Jesus shows that his lifestyle does not even begin to show signs of somebody acquainted with lying. Even where telling the truth would have put Him in serious trouble, He sided with it. When he was asked by his captors whether He was the Jesus of Nazareth, for example, the told them the whole truth that He indeed was the one, even though He knew that revealing His identity would plunge Him in serious trouble. In fact, Jesus lived his whole life seeking and promoting truth. To label Him a liar for the sake of explaining away the resurrection seems to be grossly unfair and untruthful.
The only option left is that Jesus was actually Lord. He was Lord over life and also over death.