Let's say we assume that the New Testament accounts of the resurrection do date to the First Century. Likewise, let's assume that the writers were indeed writing what they believed to be true. That still doesn't actually establish the resurrection as a historical fact.
Many skeptics accept the basic facts as presented, but dispute that they indicate a resurrection. They argue that there is an alternate explanation which explains the events as recorded in the New Testament. Just because I saw David Copperfield apparently make an airplane disappear doesn't mean I should believe in his ability to disintegrate objects.
Even in the Gospels, there is no
eyewitness account of the resurrection itself. No one actually sees
Jesus tearing off the grave clothes and getting out of the tomb.
He dies, he's buried, and on Sunday Morning the tomb is empty. Could
there be an explanation other than resurrection which is plausible and
accounts for the facts as recorded in the Gospels?
Let's look at that question in this article. First, though, let's deal with
an argument which is really a non-argument..
I
am borrowing a term from C.S. Lewis' book Miracles: A Preliminary Study.
The "red herring" he refers to is a belief among modern intellectuals and
citizens in general that people could believe in miracles in ancient times
because they didn't have the benefit of modern science. For instance,
someone might say, "Well, they could believe in miracles like the
resurrection in ancient times because they didn't have medical science to
explain the processes of death and decomposition."
Ironically, it is medical science which has called into question the
permanency of death. Today, we agonize over turning off life support
wondering if the person is really dead and we are just keeping the heart
pumping or if they are somehow alive and might regain consciousness.
The ancients had no such doubts. Breathing stopped and you had no heartbeat and you were dead.
However, having scientific knowledge says nothing about the possibility of a miracle occurring. Science tells us what will happen according to natural laws. Science tells me that my car will perform in such and such a way when I depress the gas pedal so much. However, it cannot tell me that someone else will run a stop sign and hit my car.
Likewise, science can tell me that a human
body put under a certain type of stress like crucifixion will die
according to natural law. However, it cannot tell me anything about
some intelligence outside of the natural world bringing that person back to
life.
Lack or abundance of scientific knowledge about how the world works does not
affect whether or not a miracle occurs. To investigate the
resurrection, we must look not to science but to the evidence of history,
the eyewitness accounts, and whether or not they
were properly interpreted.
So with that out of the way, let's get on with looking at the alternate explanations of the resurrection.