This article began as a paper for one of my courses while pursuing my Bachelor's degree in Religion. Throughout this journey, I have been challenged to not only study what I believe, but also to ask why I believe it. Some assignments have pushed me to wrestle with difficult questions, examine historical evidence, and grow deeper in my understanding of Scripture and my faith.
I wanted to share this paper here because I know many people have wrestled with the same questions I have. If you've ever wondered whether miracles are possible, questioned the resurrection, or struggled to believe what you cannot see, you're not alone. My prayer is that this encourages you to explore the evidence with an open mind and ultimately points you back to the truth of Jesus Christ. More than earning a degree, this journey has been one that God has used to deepen my own faith, and I hope it does the same for you.
———
What we accept as true is often based on what we can see and make sense of. When we can grasp ideas, it becomes easier to trust them. If everything we trust is observable, what does that lead us to expect from life? Reality as we understand it, operates as a ‘set of rules that govern our existence. This is what we choose to believe or even what we have been told to believe. It is everything we know, or we think that we know.’ The idea of miracles, especially the resurrection, challenges this because it contradicts what we can understand and goes against everything we have come to understand about life itself.
This struggle between faith and understanding is not new, as Paul writes for we ‘walk by faith, not by sight’ (2 Corinthians 5:7). As a result, we often reject or question what does not fit into our current understanding of reality. While this way of thinking is understandable, it raises an important question.
Is this view complete?
Is this view of reality or an account for everything we experience? This perspective assumes that ‘nature is all that there is.’ In other words, only the things that can be observed, tested, or measured are real. Starting in this mindset, it leaves no room for anything beyond natural explanation or anything that does not follow repeatable patterns. But can this assumption be proven? Is this a conclusion drawn from evidence, or a belief that shapes how evidence is interpreted?
Consider this, there are aspects of human experience, such as our consciousness, thoughts, and awareness that we cannot be directly observed or measured in the same way as physical objects, yet we do not question their reality. Or even the beginning of the universe, how did the earth begin?
When we look at the findings and beliefs of creation, does this not point to the possibility of the supernatural? At some point, even the origin of the universe raises questions that extend beyond what can be fully explained through natural processes. Therefore, even if it is not labeled a miracle, it shows that some realities are difficult to place within a purely naturalistic box.
This raises the question of why we reject supernatural events that happened in the past as if they cannot happen today. If we allow for more than the measurable, what should our response to miracle claims be? Should miracles be dismissed before they are even considered? If we are open to the possibility of miracles, then it becomes necessary to examine whether any has occurred. Before doing so, it is important to define what is miraculous, which is simply something that goes against the laws of nature.
One event that stands at the heart of this question is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is not only a theological claim, but a historical claim that has been investigated. Rather than assuming its truth or dismissing it, it is important to examine the evidence that surrounds it. While there is disagreement about the resurrection itself, and ‘100 percent proof is not on the table for anyone.’, there are certain historical points that are difficult to deny. One of the strongest pieces of evidence is the testimony of those who claimed to have seen Jesus alive after His death. These reports were not limited to a single individual, but at one time included ‘more than five hundred people who saw the resurrected Jesus, and some of them were skeptics prior to what they witnessed.’
Another widely discussed fact is that the tomb was found empty. This claim is ‘consistent with archaeological evidence and Jewish law.’ Even deeper than that look at the parties involved, ‘The Romans would not have stolen Jesus’ body- they wanted him dead. The Jewish leaders would not have taken it either—they wanted him to stay dead.
The disciples? They had neither the courage nor the opportunity to get past the guards, roll back the stone, and steal Jesus’ corpse. And even if they had it, why would they? So, they could live lives of deprivation and suffering—all for a lie? The transformation of the disciples is also significant. Initially, they responded with fear and hid after his crucifixion in fear of the Roman empire coming after them, including one who denied even knowing Him upon his crucifixion. Then, ‘almost overnight [turning] into bold witnesses, risking death by proclaiming his bodily resurrection before many of the same people who fifty days earlier had participated in His crucifixion.’ Many of the disciples were willing to suffer and die for this belief. As we know, people may be willing to die for something they believe to be true, but not for something they know to be false. Unlike many movements, people gained money or power, but the disciples gained neither.
The question then becomes: ‘what is the best explanation for these facts? Several explanations have been proposed. One explanation suggests that the appearances of Jesus were hallucinations. However, ‘hallucinations are not collective.’ Individuals can experience them, which makes it difficult for five hundred people to experience the same hallucination at once.
Another explanation proposes that the body was stolen; this fails to explain why the disciples would continue to proclaim the resurrection and suffer a claim they would have known to be false. These explanations fail to account for all the facts. A good explanation must account for all the facts without unnecessary assumptions.
The resurrection of Jesus Christ provides an explanation for the empty tomb, His appearances, and the transformation of His Disciples. If Jesus rose from the dead, then the body would no longer be in the tomb. The resurrection also explains the multiple reports of people seeing Him alive and even why skeptics became convinced. Including former skeptics such as Paul who persecuted the Church and Christians. If the disciples honestly believed they encountered the risen Jesus, this explains why their message centered on the resurrection and why many were, willing to suffer for what they knew they saw.
Unlike other explanations, the resurrection accounts for all the facts without leaving significant gaps. Considering these facts, the Resurrection stands as the most reasonable explanation.
Since miracles cannot be ruled out, the resurrection cannot be dismissed simply because of the supernatural. Rather than dismissing this claim, it is worth seriously considering whether the resurrection of Jesus Christ is true.