There are four evidences that argue powerfully for the reality of the resurrection. The fourth evidence is the sudden and meteoric rise of the church. The sudden and meteoric rise of the church argues for the reality of Jesus’ resurrection. Let me explain...
Let’s pretend when New Day first started (in 2008) that within 5 weeks we had 10,000 people attending our church. That would be pretty amazing, right? And it would demand an explanation, right? People would want to know why 10,000 people started attending. They would conclude that there was some special reason for something so amazing to have occurred.
Well, in the same way, we have to ask ourselves why the first century church started and then exploded with growth? What made it come into existence (and so forcefully)? What caused this movement to begin? Friends - it makes no sense apart from Jesus’ resurrection. As Dr. Daniel Fuller has rightly stated, “To try to explain the church without reference to the resurrection is as hopeless as trying to explain Roman history without reference to Julius Caesar.”
Think about it...A rabbi named Jesus appears from a lower-class region. He teaches for three years, gathers a following of people, gets in trouble with the authorities, and gets crucified along with 30,000 other Jewish men who are executed during this time period. But somehow, within a brief period of time after Jesus’ death, the Christian faith spread rapidly throughout Palestine and then beyond until it finally permeated the entire Roman Empire. Its origin can be traced directly back to the city of Jerusalem in Palestine about A.D. 30 (right around the time Jesus died and his disciples and others claimed he rose from the dead and that they saw him alive). It took root and thrived in the very city where Jesus was crucified and buried. As a result of the first sermon, in which Peter asserted that Christ had risen from the dead, 3,000 people believed (Acts 2:41). In a short time the number had risen to 5,000 (Acts 4:4). Only five weeks after Jesus was crucified, an estimated 10,000 (and rising) Jews are following him and claiming that he has risen from the dead. Could all these converts have been made if Jesus had not been raised from the dead?
And it’s not just the huge numbers that have to be explained...
We also have to account for the decision by early Christians to change “the day of worship” from the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) to the first day of the week (Sunday). The early Christians were devout Jews who were fanatical in their observance of the Sabbath. The Jews feared breaking the Sabbath, believing they would incur the wrath of God if they violated the strict laws concerning its observance. So what happened that caused these Jewish men and women to turn their backs on all their years of religious training and tradition? Christians have an answer: They changed their day of worship to Sunday in honor of the anniversary of the resurrection of Jesus (which took place on a Sunday). Apart from the resurrection, we have no logical answer for why they would do this.
The evidence that the resurrection is responsible for the start of the church is so strong, that in all my reading I've come across not one alternate theory for the start and meteoric rise of the church. It seems critics are silent on this evidence. The “cat” of conclusive evidence has their tongue on this point.
Let’s pretend when New Day first started (in 2008) that within 5 weeks we had 10,000 people attending our church. That would be pretty amazing, right? And it would demand an explanation, right? People would want to know why 10,000 people started attending. They would conclude that there was some special reason for something so amazing to have occurred.
Well, in the same way, we have to ask ourselves why the first century church started and then exploded with growth? What made it come into existence (and so forcefully)? What caused this movement to begin? Friends - it makes no sense apart from Jesus’ resurrection. As Dr. Daniel Fuller has rightly stated, “To try to explain the church without reference to the resurrection is as hopeless as trying to explain Roman history without reference to Julius Caesar.”
Think about it...A rabbi named Jesus appears from a lower-class region. He teaches for three years, gathers a following of people, gets in trouble with the authorities, and gets crucified along with 30,000 other Jewish men who are executed during this time period. But somehow, within a brief period of time after Jesus’ death, the Christian faith spread rapidly throughout Palestine and then beyond until it finally permeated the entire Roman Empire. Its origin can be traced directly back to the city of Jerusalem in Palestine about A.D. 30 (right around the time Jesus died and his disciples and others claimed he rose from the dead and that they saw him alive). It took root and thrived in the very city where Jesus was crucified and buried. As a result of the first sermon, in which Peter asserted that Christ had risen from the dead, 3,000 people believed (Acts 2:41). In a short time the number had risen to 5,000 (Acts 4:4). Only five weeks after Jesus was crucified, an estimated 10,000 (and rising) Jews are following him and claiming that he has risen from the dead. Could all these converts have been made if Jesus had not been raised from the dead?
And it’s not just the huge numbers that have to be explained...
We also have to account for the decision by early Christians to change “the day of worship” from the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) to the first day of the week (Sunday). The early Christians were devout Jews who were fanatical in their observance of the Sabbath. The Jews feared breaking the Sabbath, believing they would incur the wrath of God if they violated the strict laws concerning its observance. So what happened that caused these Jewish men and women to turn their backs on all their years of religious training and tradition? Christians have an answer: They changed their day of worship to Sunday in honor of the anniversary of the resurrection of Jesus (which took place on a Sunday). Apart from the resurrection, we have no logical answer for why they would do this.
The evidence that the resurrection is responsible for the start of the church is so strong, that in all my reading I've come across not one alternate theory for the start and meteoric rise of the church. It seems critics are silent on this evidence. The “cat” of conclusive evidence has their tongue on this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment