Paul wrote, "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also you have received and wherein you stand, by which also you are saved if you keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, and that he was buried and that he arose again the third day according to the scriptures." (1 Cor. 15:1-4.)

Then, Paul immediately began to enumerate the witnesses to the resurrection. He named Cephas, all the twelve, 500 brethren at once saw him with the majority still alive when Paul wrote, James and finally Paul, as one born out of due time. (verses 5-8.)

Previously, we also named the various individuals in Scripture who were raised from the dead by Jesus, Paul, Peter, Elijah, Elisha, and the many who were raised after Jesus’ resurrection who went into Jerusalem, the holy city, and appeared unto many. (Eight in number plus the many.) In addition, all will be raised at the second coming of Jesus.

The historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and the others in scripture is powerful and convincing. Even so, many over the years have doubted or denied the truthfulness of the resurrection of the dead. Among them was Thomas Jefferson, our third President. Deists deny the miraculous element in scripture. In this message, I want to state some objections and offer some explanations to them.

In the first century, the Sadducees denied the doctrine of the resurrection. (Acts 23:8.) In addition, they denied angels and spirits. They were true materialists. They would even deny that the spirit of man lives on after death. Any spiritual resurrection would be rejected. Their full-blooded materialistic nature is revealed in their argument to Jesus.

"The same day came to him Sadducees which say that there is no resurrection and asked him, saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having not issue, left his wife unto his brother. Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? For they all had her."

(Matthew 22:23-28.)

Notice that they were so void of any spiritual conceptions that they thought that if the dead were raised they must have a life just like this one. They were at least consistent in their error.

"Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine." (Matt. 22:29-33.)

Jesus himself answered the Sadducees’ argument. They were wrong because they did not know the scriptures nor the power of God. I am convinced that the majority of the objections to the idea of the resurrection of the dead can be answered by saying, You have not considered the power of God. This is the key. Remember Paul’s words to Agrippa, "Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?" (Acts 26:8.)

The Sadducees had to give up their argument because what they saw as a conflict was only an imagined one. In the resurrection the woman will not be married to any one of the seven. Their materialism got in the way and kept them from considering another possibility. God is the end of all materialistic doctrines, because God himself is a spirit. (John 4:24.) A full-blown materialistic doctrine, of necessity, denies God. He is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He is not the God of the dead but of the living. Therefore, there is a sense (a spiritual sense) in which those three patriarchs are not dead. They are alive. This does not prove the resurrection of the dead, but it does show that man is not made of just a physical body.

Some modern skeptics say that Jesus was buried in another tomb. This is a case of mis-identification. They claim that the body of Jesus is still interred somewhere in Palestine. The disciples forgot where they laid the body of Jesus.

However, note the following:

1) Jesus was buried in the tomb belonging to a wealthy man named Joseph of Arimethaea. Surely, Joseph knew the place. Could he not have easily led them to his tomb?

2) The Romans allowed Joseph to bury Jesus’ body. Pilate ordered the soldiers to set a watch and make it sure. (Matt. 27:65.) The tomb was sealed with the Roman authority. They knew the correct tomb.

3) The women knew the right place. "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome had bought sweet spices that they might come and anoint him. Very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulcher at the rising of the sun. And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulcher? And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away; for it was very great." (Mark 16:1-4.)

Does anyone really think that Mary, the mother of Jesus, would have forgotten where the body was laid? All mothers remember the exact location of their children. In their mind, they know exactly where the body is laid.

4) The Jews knew. "Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate, saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead; so the last error shall be worse than the first." (Matt. 27:62-64.)

There was a lot of interest in the tomb of Jesus because He did say that He would rise again on the third day. Everyone knew the location of Joseph’s tomb. It was not a case of mis-identification. If so, who would have mis-identified it?

The disciples would have been the only ones who would have a motive for pointing to an empty tomb claiming that He arose. If they purposefully pointed to another tomb which was empty, the Jews and Romans would have simply have corrected them and showed them the correct location with Jesus body inside.

If Jesus did not arise, the disciples and Jesus’ mother would have erected a marker and monument in his honor. Yet, it was not until Queen Helena’s visit to Jerusalem in 326 AD that the burial site was sought out. During the reign of her son, the Roman emperor Constantine, a cathedral was built over the site. Nearly 300 years had passed before any serious consideration was given to making Jesus’ burial site a shrine. What caused this apparently insensitive oversight?

Bill Goldman well wrote:

"From the earliest times to the present, mankind has revered and made monuments of the tombs of its loved ones, heroes and leaders. However, the original disciples of the greatest and most influential man who ever lived did not do the natural thing. The failure to immediately make Jesus’ tomb a shrine was not because of the absence of those who loved him. Jesus was loved at least by a small circle of close associates who never would have been guilty of failing to honor his tomb. The neglect of Jesus’ tomb was not because of opposition of the enemies of Jesus and His original disciples. It was because they knew Jesus was not there." (Gospel Advocate, April 2, 1987, "The Tomb Was Empty," 213.)

The French skeptic, Ernest Renan, draws a beautiful picture of Mary Magdalene in her love and grief fancying that she saw her longed-for Lord. Then, he imagines that she tells the disciples in Galilee and they believe her. Renan asserts that the belief in the resurrection grew up as a myth.

One thing that we know about myths is that a story begins and over time develops into a full-blown story with all the details. But remember that Jesus foretold that he would arise on the third day. There was not a lot of time for a myth to grow. From Jesus’ death until the resurrection, less than 30 hours would have passed. The apostles being Galileans had all gone home and left Judea. Only those living nearby would have remained.

We know that Thomas did not meet with Jesus and the disciples that first Sunday after the resurrection. He doubted the resurrection saying, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." (John 20:25.) The next Sunday, Thomas had that opportunity and believed. Thomas would not have believed the story by Mary Magdalene had he not have seen Jesus for himself.

Concerning the time factors, we should also note that Jesus was seen by multitudes for 40 days after his resurrection. A myth did not grow, the list of eye-witnesses grew until it was sufficient. Then Jesus ascended into heaven. Luke wrote, "To whom (the apostles) he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." (Acts 1:3.)

We have about 5,000 fragments of New Testament documents. The four gospels are accounts of the life of Jesus by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. If you have ever wondered why we need four, it is because of the need for ample witnesses to Jesus’ life and resurrection from the dead. This fact is among the best attested events in the ancient world. There is little wonder why skeptics want us to allow them to put aside the New Testament! This is the testimony of those who saw and heard!

It is true that we have never witnessed a miracle of any kind, let alone the raising of the dead. But consider for a moment how many things we have never witnessed. I have never witnessed a murder, a battle or war, never saw a President, a space rocket launch a craft into outer space, glacier, a dinosaur or many other things. The world seems flat, but I have been given convincing evidence that the world is round. I have not seen the circle of the earth. Basil Overton tells the story about an old farmer going to the zoo for the first time. He was raised on a farm, and farm animals were all that he had ever seen. When he first saw a giraffe, he could not believe his eyes. Why would an animal need a neck that long? You cannot ride them; they do not work. What are they good for? The farmer took a long, doubting look and said to his friend, There ain’t no such thing!

This past summer, a speaker at a ladies’ conference in Richmond commented on the miracles of Jesus. She said that Jesus restored a man’s withered hand. Crippled people walked again. The dead were raised. She said humorously, This is spooky stuff!! Well, we can at least say that it is more than seeing a giraffe for the first time, or a murder, or a space launch. But my point was that there are many things that we have not witnessed in life.

Since this belief of the resurrection is so important---salvation depends upon it, we will need more witnesses than the normal. The Law of Moses required only two or three witnesses. Every word would be established by them. We have been given both infallible proofs (Acts 1:3) and numerous witnesses (1 Cor. 15:5). Paul wrote the letter to the Corinthians about 56 AD, or about 25 years after the resurrection. Even after 25 years there were many witnesses still alive who affirmed that Jesus did arise.

There have been many murders where there were no eye-witnesses. Not even one! Can you imagine a trial where more than 250 witnesses were lined up to testify? That is what Paul said to the Corinthians.

Discrepancies among the gospels. One of the favorite ways of attacking the credibility of the Gospel of Christ is to seek for contradictions. We have four gospel accounts of Jesus’ life, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension. If we had only one, then there would have been no such problem as discrepancies or contradictions. However, we would have had only one story of what happened. Perhaps, the skeptics would have objected to that!

However, if witnesses do not tell the same story then something is indeed wrong. What kind of differences are there in the resurrection accounts? Here are some of the differences:

1) Matthew is the only writer who records the first appearances to the women.

2) Only Luke records the story of Jesus with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus.

3) Only John records the appearance of our Lord in the upper room, when Thomas was absent and the appearance on the sea of Galilee.

4) Was it dark or already morning when the women arrived at the tomb? Mark has the women coming at the rising of the sun, while John states that Mary Magdalene came when it was dark. Remember it takes some time to walk from their homes in Jerusalem or Bethany. They could have left while it was yet dark and arrived at the beginning of the day.

5) How many angels were appeared to the women at the tomb? One or two? Matthew and Mark speak of one; Luke and John refer to two. They do not contradict one another because Matthew and Mark do not say that there was only one angel.

Note the kind of differences that critics point out! There are no contradictions in the accounts. All report that Jesus arose from the dead and appeared unto many. It happened early on the first day of the week. All the important aspects of the testimony are found to be in harmony.

What would constitute a contradiction? a) If one said that Jesus arose on the Sabbath and another on the first day of the week. b) If one said that Jesus arose from the dead and another said that he did not arise. c) If one said that Jesus was in a spirit form and another claimed a bodily resurrection. These kind of differences would constitute serious contradictions in the basic account. This we do not have in the gospels.

What we have in the four accounts is what we should expect to find. There are some differences because four different people are writing an account of Jesus’ whole life---from birth to death, to resurrection, to the ascension. What if they were exactly the same wording, word for word?? Would that not be strange and useless? Some think of inspiration and revelation in just that way. Why did they not just make one copy and all four sign it? God used men and women in the telling of the Gospel. Human language, perspectives, and even purposes (to whom written) are allowed. This is human testimony, not divine revelation. They saw what happened; they are not reporting what was revealed to them.

There are many, even among religious teachers, who deny the physical resurrection of the body. They say that the body that was seen was some sort of a spiritual body, but not the raised body of Jesus.

The disciples who first saw him perhaps thought the same thing. When they saw Jesus walking on the water, they thought that they had seen a spirit of some sort that looked like Jesus. (Matt. 14:26.) It would be almost unbelievable if we saw someone alive that we knew had been dead. We would think, Is this real? Are we seeing visions or dreams?

The Bible answers plainly the charge of a "spiritual resurrection of Jesus." Remember that Thomas wanted to see the scars in his hands and side. He said, I will not believe until I do. When he appeared to the disciples after the resurrection, they were frightened.

"And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me and see. For a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish and of an honeycomb. And he took it and did eat before them." (Luke 24:38-43.)

Jesus ate with his disciples and showed them his hands and feet. A spirit does not stay around for forty days, eating, sleeping, drinking, teaching! No, it was a bodily resurrection from the dead. The grave was empty.

Among the powerful evidence for the resurrection of Jesus are these: 1) the empty tomb, 2) the eye-witnesses, and 3) what they suffered. Winfred Clark put it simply: I have what they said, what they saw, and what they suffered. If they had not suffered for the faith, we might doubt what they said.

One skeptic put it this way. There is a scale with testimony one side and the strong inclination to say all things are natural. Since the scales are evenly balanced between the two, the weight of the final decision must come down on the side of nature. He believed that strong arguments can be made for both sides and nothing can ever finally settle the issue.

Here are some things that do settle the issue.

1) One must decide if God is. (Heb. 11:6.)

2) The context in which the miracles of Jesus and his resurrection occur is convincing. They are not a side-issue, but the heart of it. They are not added on for entertaining the audience, but rather what one would expect if God were in our midst. The resurrection answers the long awaited question of Job 14:14. We now know what happens to us at death and what will happen in the future. Without this information, we would still be asking.

3) The suffering and convictions of the apostles and eye-witnesses. Jesus said that they would be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with.

4) The conversion of Saul of Tarsus. The interesting account of Saul’s conversion says much about the resurrection of Jesus. It was that fact which changed Saul’s life. Since we know much about Saul, the evidence is telling. Why did he begin to preach the faith that he once opposed unto death?? The only logical answer is what Saul saw on the Damascus Road. (Acts 9, 22, 26.)

A Christian woman once asked brother Guy Woods to speak to her son who had left the church. He had become a skeptic. Brother Woods said that he would present the conversion of Saul of Tarsus for his defense of Christianity and the truthfulness of the resurrection of Jesus from the grave.

5) Let me tell you the story of the conversion of Frank Morrison, an agnostic journalist, who set out to write a book refuting the resurrection of Christ. He wrote,

"This study is in some ways so unusual and provocative that the writer thinks it desirable to state here very briefly how the book came to take its present form. In one sense it could have taken no other, for it is essentially a confession, the inner story of a man who originally set out to write one kind of book and found himself compelled by the sheer force of circumstances to write another.

"It is not that facts altered, for they are recorded imperishably in the monuments and in the pages of human history. But the interpretation to be put on the facts underwent a change." (Who Moved The Stone?, preface, Zondervan, 1971, Frank Morrison.)