Resurrection Of Christ

Resurrection of Christ - Answering Objections
Many objections have been set forth against the veracity of the resurrection accounts. Although a few of them have been dealt with in this article, albeit briefly, there is at least one more that is common enough to warrant a closer look.

The resurrection accounts contradict each other. If this is an objection you've heard, or have wondered about yourself, can you think of one or two specific contradictions off-hand? If not, keep in mind that an objection without specific support, is merely an assertion! Intellectual honesty requires that a claim such as this, if it is to be used in debate, must be supported with examples at the very least.

Assuming that such examples have been provided, a closer look is necessary. The primary passages in question are Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21, with supplementary accounts in Acts and 1 Corinthians. A useful exercise, whether or not you have concerns regarding the harmony of these accounts, is to attempt a reconciliation on your own after careful comparison of each passage. It should become clear that, while the accounts may differ in minor details, they do not contradict each other in any objective sense of the word. In fact, they are complementary, and seem to agree and disagree in much the same way any set of independent accounts would, if produced by troubled eyewitnesses of such a traumatic occurrence. Hopefully one example will suffice to show this complementary nature. Matthew 28:1 lists Mary Magdalene as the first to see the resurrected Christ, whereas Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15:5, lists Peter as the first witness to the resurrection. This apparent contradiction is easily reconciled when the purpose of Paul's account is properly understood. In this particular letter, he is defending the resurrection from an official and legal standpoint, and so gives an official list of witnesses (women would not be included in this particular cultural setting, since their testimony was not allowed in court). It makes sense, then, that he would mention Peter as the first official witness to the resurrection.

Resurrection of Christ - Conclusion
The preceding discussion is but a brief treatment of the evidences for, and the objections against, the physical, historical resurrection of Christ. We hope we've presented a useful approach for dealing with any additional objections that might surface (such as a non-physical resurrection, or the resurrection appearances as mere visions). Remember, the first response should be an honest, objective look at the historical accounts themselves. Perhaps such an approach will take you one step closer to "believing in your heart that God raised him from the dead"!

Learn More Now!