Easter Meditation

With so many challenges these days being leveled against the Resurrection of Christ, most recently the resurgence of interest in the finding of "the Jesus family tomb," I think it worthwhile to take some time to outline the reasons why Christians should, and do indeed, believe in this essential miracle. Most non-believers treat the subject as a matter of faith, but in reality, believing in the Norman conquest or the death of Socrates requires no less faith. How do we know about Socrates? We know of him because of his writings, other people's writings about him, and the oral passage of information about him between generations. How do we know the Norman conquest happened, and that it happened like it did? We rely, again, on writings about it and by people who were a part of it, as well as the oral tradition. One hundred percent of scholars believe in Socrates and in the Norman conquest of Great Britain. Why is the Resurrection somehow different?

The key piece of evidence that Christians cite for belief in the Resurrection is the testimony of Scripture. Most non-believers shun such proof, but it remains proof nonetheless. Not only did the disciples see the resurrected Christ, but so did hundreds of others. There's also the small issue of all the dead who were resurrected and entered the city of Jerusalem, and of all the people who saw that take place. Again, the temple curtain was split in two, and people saw that as well. The temple curtain being torn is no little deal. We are talking about a rather large and rather thick piece of cloth. So, in spite of the first hand accounts, the numerous written records, and the oral legacy, some people still refuse to believe, even though it is as historically proven as the Norman conquest!

Conspiracy theorists will argue that Christ's body was stolen from His tomb to merely give the appearance of a Resurrection. I don't know how they could explain the eyewitness accounts and the other events detailed above, but it is very illogical to come to the conclusion that His body was moved. After all, who would benefit from it? The Jews of the time certainly would not have done it, because they wanted to discredit Christ's claim as being the Messiah, remember? Relocating His body would not help to discredit their claims, it would work violently against them. The Romans would not have stolen His body. For a long time the Roman empire viewed Christianity as a dangerous sect that needed to be controlled and squelched. If they had Christ's body, they could have openly destroyed the church's foundations before the early Christians even got started. The only group of people remaining is the apostles themselves. Most of the apostles died very painful and shaming deaths because they would not denounce their faith. If they had known Christ really was not resurrected from the dead, why would they be so bold about their beliefs in the face of an oppressive empire and suffer such painful deaths over a lie?

The only logical conclusion that anyone can draw from all of this is that Christ really did raise from the dead like He said He would. If this is the case, He really is who He said He was, and everything He said is the truth. If everything He said is the truth, then, why do we treat it as something that is not important? C.S. Lewis argued it best. Either He is who He said He is, He is just some mentally crazy man (on the level of a "poached egg" I believe Lewis says), or He is a liar. Many praise Him with, "Well, I believe He was a good moral teacher, but I don't believe He was the Son of God." There can be no middle ground. A man cannot be a liar or a lunatic and be history's greatest moral teacher. He would either be crazy, an absolutely evil person, or God. If He is God, doesn't that mean we should devote one hundred percent of ourselves to Him? I pray that each and every one of you has an amazing Easter, and that we can all reflect on our faith and take it a little more seriously.

~Tribal