Monday, April 21, 2014

Proving the Resurrection

Last night I listened to a television preacher giving seven reasons why the resurrection is true. It was good, but I wish that we lived as if Jesus is risen. The power that raised Jesus from the dead and seated him at the right hand of the Father is the same incomparable great power that is at work in us through the Spirit (Eph 1:19-20). If the Holy Spirit were free to do his stuff, we would not need any proofs of the resurrection. The world would see that Jesus is risen.

On Saturday, I heard a secular radio interviewer talking to a Christian author. After talking about his books, she turned to his Christian faith. Instead of being abrasive, as she would usually be with a Christian, she just said, “Help me with the resurrection!” It seemed like she would like to believe the resurrection, but the evidence is just not there. For a scientific mind, it is just too hard to believe. The Christian author did not seem to know what to say, so he parried with a question, “What is your problem with the resurrection?”

Actually, the resurrection is our problem. If the body of Christ was moving in the power of the Spirit and living as Jesus lived, healing the sick, casting out demons, cleansing lepers and raising the dead, it would be easy to believe that Jesus is risen.

7 comments:

David Coufal said...

“Help me with the resurrection!”

1. The scientific mind accepts eye-witness testimony of events. This means that as long as copies of the New Testament can be proven to be written within 30-50 years after the event, then we can be sure it was written by someone who actually witnessed the events, and not by someone just making up a story.

2. Anyone who views the world through the lens of naturalism will have a problem with miracles, whether they be a scientific person or not. Naturalism states that although a god/goddess may or may not exist, this being cannot interfere with the natural order. This is the underlying philosophy of Darwinian evolution. But I would like to repeat that the naturalistic world view is not unique to scientists, in fact there are many scientists who do not hold to the naturalistic philosophy.

3. Although 'healing the sick, casting out demons, cleansing lepers and raising the dead' are indeed signs that Jesus is risen, one cannot escape Jesus words in Luke 16:31 "they will not be convinced even if someone were to rise from death." Jesus also replied to some in Luke 22:67 "Tell us," they said, "are you the Messiah?" He answered, "If I tell you, you will not believe me;" This means that there are two things that faith relies upon: The shoulders of the church to reveal Christ to the world, and the shoulders of the world to believe in Jesus.

Christine said...

You're so right its happening in the third world from reports I hear but not so in the Western world sadly.

Ron McK said...

David, reports of witness accounts from 2000 years ago do not carry much weight, for a modern observer. Especially, when the events reported do not seem plausible.

David Coufal said...

Yes, but...

As in your post you said "For a scientific mind" I addressed the point from a scientific perspective, seeing that the Oxford English Dictionary defines the scientific method as: "a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."

A scientific mind will accept eyewitness testimony as long as the claims can be proven to come from a source that was close enough in time to the alleged events.

But now you are talking about the "modern observer" so I will address that:

As I mentioned earlier, naturalism is "the idea or belief that only natural (as opposed to supernatural or spiritual) laws and forces operate in the world; (occas.) the idea or belief that nothing exists beyond the natural world." (Wikipedia, Naturalism (philosophy)) This philosophy is quite well spread these days.

There are at least two ways one can challenge this world view: Miracles (in other words you and I are saying the same thing) and discussing the authenticity (or lack thereof) of the philosophy of naturalism.

Ron McK said...

David, I do not disagree you. I can believe in the resurrection and trust the New Testment because I have experience God working in my life. I just dont think it is fait to expect scientific or ordinary people to accept what is an implausible event on the basis of mostly indirect reports of eyewitness from 2000 years ago. I think that they are entitled to some more current evidence.

David Coufal said...

Neither am I saying that we should not seek miracles.

Perhaps I should clarify my original comment.

Your post was about a conversation that happened between a Christian and a non-Christian. The Christian was asked to explain the resurrection and did not know how to answer.

It is my belief that many Christians do not understand that naturalism is at the root of not believing things such as the resurrection, as it excludes all unnatural events. It is also this philosophy that gives rise to Darwinian evolution. When Christians do not understand this they argue against evolution, without addressing the underlying philosophy.

When a naturalist is directly confronted with a miracle, then they are forced to re-evaluate their world view (so that puts me in favour of miracles).

You seem to think I am arguing with you, I am just trying to present that miracles are not the only answer.

Neither do we have to present evidence based upon reliable eyewitnesses at the exclusion of present-day miracles, nor do we have to present miracles at the exclusion of evidence based upon reliable eyewitnesses of the events.

Anonymous said...

Ron,
John 17:23 is the solution on how the body will be able to prove the resurrection. John 17:23b that they (The Body) may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me. Currently, we (The Body) are still in John 17:21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. The different between verse 21 and verse 23 is one has the world believing the Father has sent Jesus and the other has the world knowing that the Father has sent Jesus. The latter verse has the Body becoming one the former verse has individuals in the Body becoming one with the Father, Son and the Holy Spirits as they are one. Ron W.