Apologetics Bible Study: The Passion and Resurrection of the Christ
Campus Crusade for Christ
C.S. Lewis writes,
A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great
moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a
poached egg – or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either
this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a mad man or something worse. You can
shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His
feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronizing nonsense
about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not
intend to.
- C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
Read through the following:
(a)
It came to pass, while Fadus was procurator of Judea, that a certain charlatan, whose
name was Theudas, persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them,
and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would,
by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it. Many
were deluded by his words. However, Fadus did not permit them to make any advantage
of his wild attempt, but sent a troop of horsemen out against them. After falling upon them
unexpectedly, they slew many of them, and took many of them alive. They also took
Theudas alive, cut off his head, and carried it to Jerusalem.
- Flavius Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews Book 20, Chapter 5, Section 1
(b)
A medieval Jewish Rabbi from Spain, Moses ben Maimon, writes of an
anonymous Messianic claimant from Yemen who was taken before the local ruler
before whom he repeated his claim to be the Messiah. He added that he could
prove it by being beheaded and subsequently coming back to life. The ruler,
pleased by the opportunity for such a quick and definitive test, had this man
beheaded, but alas, the person in question failed to resurrect.
(c)
In the seventeenth century, a Jewish man named Sabbathai Zwi claimed to be the
Messiah, believing his mission was to restore the twelve tribes of Israel. On a trip
to the capital of the Ottoman Empire in Istanbul, he was arrested by the sultan and
given the choice of proving he was the Messiah by performing a miracle,
converting to Islam or being executed. His followers were shocked and
disappointed to hear that he chose to become a Muslim. And then he died.
Using the trilemna of C.S. Lewis, liar, lunatic or Messiah, how would you classify the
three Messianic claimants just mentioned? Now discuss the trilemna in relation to Jesus
of Nazareth. What do these three men have in common that stands in stark contrast to
what the Scriptures teach concerning Jesus?
Read 1 Corinthians 15:12-19. In light of these words of Paul, how important is the
Resurrection of Christ to our faith?
(1) Did Jesus Really Die?
Saying that Jesus rose from the dead presupposes that He really did die. Some critics
have made the claim that he didn’t really die on the Cross, but instead merely faked death
or otherwise was only made temporarily unconscious (these ideas are sometimes known
as the swoon theory). Discuss how would you respond to claims of this nature?
(2) Invoking the Supernatural
Clearly, belief in the resurrection of Christ presupposes belief in that a supernatural event
could (and did) happen in history. Some people would take issue with this and claim that
if one invokes a miracle to explain one event, then that opens the door to arbitrarily
invoking the miraculous and the supernatural to explain all sorts of things. Discuss how
we as Christians can understand divine intervention in human history in light of this
objection.
(3) Are the Gospels Reliable?
As the four Gospels obviously figure prominently into the discussion about the
resurrection, it is important to consider the question of their reliability. There are two
aspects to consider here – manuscript and testimonial.
(a) Manuscript Evidence
 125 A.D. – small papyrus fragment of John’s Gospel (p52)
 170 A.D. – composition of Diatessaron (harmony of four Gospels) by Tatian
 Late 2nd century – papyri of Matthew’s Gospel (p104; perhaps p77 and p103)
 Late 2nd century – translation of Gospels into the Syriac and Old Latin
versions
 3rd century – papyri fragments and sheets covering all four Gospels
 4th century – complete manuscript copies of all four Gospels (codices
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus)
(b) Testimonial Evidence
 Late 1st century: Numerous quotations of Matthew within the Letter of
Pseudo-Barnabas and the Didache. The former also has one clear example of
a quotation from Mark.
 120s A.D. - Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, writes about the Gospels; although
his works have not survived, quotations concerning Matthew, Mark and John
have survived in Eusebius of Caesarea’s Ecclesiastical History.
 140s A.D. – Luke’s Gospel is well attested to as a result of a controversy
sparked by Marcion.
 170 – 200 A.D. – Muratorian fragment speaks of all four Gospels
 180 A.D. – Irenaeus speaks of and quotes from all four Gospels
What is the importance of this evidence in terms of the reliability of the Gospels,
particularly in reference to the resurrection accounts?
(4) The Discovery of the Empty Tomb
As some preliminary historical background, consider the following statement from a
work by a Jewish historian named Flavius Josephus written near the end of the first
century. It is very patriarchal, but nonetheless it reflects the thinking and cultural reality
of the first century Jewish culture that Josephus represents.
But let not a single witness be credited, but three, or two at the least, and those such whose
testimony is confirmed by their good lives. But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on
account of the levity and boldness of their sex.
-- The Antiquities of the Jews, Book 4, Chapter 8, Section 15.
Read Mark’s account of the discovery of the empty tomb (Mark 16:1-8). Do you see
anything noteworthy about it?
Now compare Mark’s account with that of Matthew, Luke and John. Take note of the
number and names of the women listed in each (i.e. compare Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1,
Luke 24:10 and John 20:1). Also take note of the way in which the time of day at which
the women came to Jesus’ tomb is reported (i.e. compare Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2 and
John 20:1). What do you think the origin of these sorts of minor variants is? How do
these minor variants relate to the number of independent sources of information used by
the authors of the Gospels?
Now compare the biblical accounts of the discovery of the empty tomb in Matthew, Mark,
Luke and John with the following from a second century work falsely ascribed to the
apostle Peter called the “Gospel of Peter.” What overall differences do you see? What
factors do you think account for these differences?
And Pilate gave them Petronius the centurion with soldiers to watch the tomb. And the elders and
scribes came with them unto the tomb. All who were there with the soldiers rolled a great stone to
the entrance of the tomb and plastered seven seals on it. Then they pitched a tent there and kept
watch.
Early in the morning, as the Sabbath dawned, there came a large crowd from Jerusalem and the
surrounding areas to see the sealed tomb. But during the night before the Lord's day dawned, as
the soldiers were keeping guard two by two in every watch, there came a great sound in the sky,
and they saw the heavens opened and two men descend shining with a great light, and they drew
near to the tomb. The stone which had been set on the door rolled away by itself and moved to
one side, and the tomb was opened and both of the young men went in.
Now when these soldiers saw that, they woke up the centurion and the elders (for they also were
there keeping watch). While they were yet telling them the things which they had seen, they saw
three men come out of the tomb, two of them sustaining the other one, and a cross following after
them. The heads of the two they saw had heads that reached up to heaven, but the head of him
that was led by them went beyond heaven. And they heard a voice out of the heavens saying,
"Have you preached unto them that sleep?" The answer that was heard from the cross was,
"Yes!"
(5) The Range of Testimony to the Resurrection
Paul himself provides perhaps the earliest written testimony of the resurrection. Writing
to the church in Corinth in the middle of the 50’s, he makes the following statement:
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our
sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third
day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then
he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still
alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as
to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8)
The Greek word for “handed on” is paradidomi, a compound formed of two parts: para
(from/beside) + didomi (to give). The Greek word for “had received” is paralambano,
again a compound formed from para + lambano (to take). These terms are used in the
rabbinic literature as technical terms for the transmission of sacred tradition; in essence
Paul is stating here that he is conveying to the Corinthian church a set of truths just as he
himself had learned them. In essence, this suggests that Paul is quoting a standard
creedal statement of faith. Other indications of this include the use of structural
parallelism (note the repetition of “and that” which extends to the base Greek text – “kai
hoti”) and the use of primitive terms that are not typically used in Paul’s writing such as
the “twelve” in reference to the apostles who walked with Christ and the “third day”
(instead of the “Lord’s Day” as in later works). What is the significance of this creedal
statement as a witness to the truth of the resurrection of Christ?
(6) Was the Resurrection Physical?
To provide some preliminary historical background, read Isaiah 26:19, Ezekiel 37:1-12
and Daniel 12:2. What do these passages say about Jewish belief in the resurrection
before the advent of Christ?
Some have suggested that the resurrection appearances of Jesus really were nothing but
mass hallucinations. How would you respond to these claims?
Others have suggested that the earliest belief in the resurrection of Christ was purely
spiritual (or perhaps that His words resonated so strongly in the minds of His disciples
that He continued to live metaphorically in their hearts and minds). These people would
further claim that the appearances spoken of in 1 Corinthians 15 are not physical, but
“spiritual” and that the account of the empty tomb as recorded in the Gospels arose at a
somewhat later time. Discuss the problems involved in these suggestions.
Furthermore, those Christians who followed in the footsteps of the Apostles maintained
very firmly that Christ truly died and truly was bodily resurrected. For example, Ignatius,
bishop of Antioch, wrote the following to the church in Smyrna around 107 A.D.
As for me, I know that even after His resurrection He was in the flesh, and I believe this to be true.
For, when He came to those who were with Peter, He said to them: ‘Take hold on me and handle
me and see that I am not a spirit without a body.’ And, as soon as they touched Him and felt His
flesh and pulse, they believed. It is for this reason that they despised death and even showed
themselves superior to death. After His resurrection He ate and drank with them like any one
else with a body, although in His spirit He was one with the Father.
- Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 3