Is the Resurrection Really Real?

Last updated on: February 3, 2016 at 8:05 pm by Kyle Roberts

Is the Resurrection Really Real? 2016-02-03T20:05:44-05:00 Kyle Roberts

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A reader of my blog sent me a really good question the other day. It’s more than a question, though. He’s processing through some heavy theological questions.

Alexander Ivanov, “Christ’s Appearance to Mary Magdalene,” via WikiCommons

I’ve asked him if I could use his question as the basis for a blog post. He agreed (but prefers to stay anonymous). I’ll post the question below, and then respond:

So I wanted to write to you to see if you could give me some advice, because I still consider myself Christian. I think Jesus was the Messiah, in the sense that He was a descendant of David who spread knowledge of God around the world and created a spiritual kingdom (the Church), but Jesus also taught that He was God’s unique, miraculous Son and the apostles also demanded faith in His resurrection.

You see, on one hand, I believe in God, love Jesus and the Christian community, find his teachings inspiring and connect with Him emotionally and personally, and want and feel a major need for the resurrection to be real. But at the purely mental level, it seems to me uncertain or even unlikely that it physically happened. I have spent years in the mainstream church and pray about it. I don’t find it illogical or impossible, nor am I disillusioned by Christians as people or resent the Church, nor do I feel the Bible demands Biblical inerrancy, as you rightly described in your essay as reasons why some people leave Christianity.

It’s that when I try to separate my biases and emotions from the issue and look at it objectively using the kinds of discernment that mainstream Christians do for other phenomena and religions, it seems more likely that it didn’t happen. To do this, I try to think of and compare the reasons in favor of it and against it.

Dear A,

You’ve posed a great question and have obviously done a lot of thinking about these important matters. This is the type of question that keeps many of us ruminating, speculating and exploring for a lifetime.

The “tug” between your subjective, emotional desire–need, even–to believe in the resurrection as a real, time-and-space event in the life of Christ and a nagging sense that “objectively” speaking it might not be true (critical reflection happening at the “purely mental level”) reflects a serious wrestling with the question. And of course, you are not alone in that.

I do suspect that too many people undermine the subjective side of the wrestling as “just emotions,” or as unscientific and on that basis they are perhaps too quick to disregard the very human phenomena that accompanies religious belief–and to discount the felt “need” for a belief to be true as falsifying evidence.

That goes something like: If I “need” it to be true, it must not be true.

I get the logic behind that–the logic that raises the suspicion-antennae in people trained in critical thinking and perhaps disposed to spurn emotion and passion as irrelevant to the question of truth.

That said, it’s just not wise to pit emotion against logic, or subjectivity against objectivity, in this way. One of the books that opened my eyes to the ways that subjectivity (passion, emotion, vested interest, etc.) factors positively in the ways we apprehend the world and discover truth is Michael Polayni’s Personal Knowledge.

He–a historian of science–argues that the history of science does not support the common picture of science as a purely “objective” enterprise that has no room for the subjective aspects of the human experience. In fact, the impetus behind scientific discoveries is human passion, curiosity, even vested interest. Though those things can go wrong, too.

We should weigh the evidence–rational, empirical, historical, and so on. We should be open to questioning our inherited religious beliefs–particularly when those beliefs rest largely on faith or trust in the unobserved and are obviously not grounded in everyday (or even any day) experience and observation. I have not seen anyone resurrected from the dead and I have not experienced it myself–so I don’t know from empirical observation whether or not resurrection is a viable idea. Like many aspects of religious belief, the validity of resurrection can only be verified eschatologically–which is to say, in the future.

We can examine the historical and textual (not to mention philosophical, theological, and so on) arguments for and against the validity of a time-and-space resurrection of Jesus. And we can consider what science might even have to say about the conceptual possibility. For example, if Jesus was (bodily) resurrected after his death, where is he now? In a body–somewhere? Where? Or if we want to get really funky: When?

After we’ve done all that investigative, critical work–considering arguments for and against the historicity and legitimacy of the resurrection narratives, we’re still left with the question: What will we do with it?

None of us was there to observe Jesus during and after his death. And none of us has (I’m just going to assume, for the sake of argument!) observed a dead person raised to life. We haven’t died yet, so we just don’t know what the future holds. We don’t know if we will–or won’t–continue on in some form or other.

I like to think in terms of the possibility of “singularities.” Miracles–supernatural divine interventions or interruptions of normal everyday operations of life–by definition are rare and are often embedded within stories (folklore or myth) which serve all sorts of cultural and social functions. Religion is a very human endeavor and we must always be open to the ways that our humanity factors into the stories that we tell ourselves and pass along to others. But I am not ready to rule out the miraculous and, if supernatural divine interventions happen anywhere/time in space and time history, you would think (I acknowledge my Christian convictions here) they would happen in and during the life of Jesus. If Jesus was truly unique, and represented and embodied God in a unique way, then both his life, his death, and his resurrection would serve to draw attention to his uniqueness and to the coming kingdom.

The bottom line is I just don’t think the evidence and the written testimonies can be either proven or dis-proven, so we’re left with either trusting the accounts, disbelieving them, or something in between.

Maybe we just keep on exploring, neither completely trusting nor completely disregarding our emotions and our rational, critical, capacities, but holding them together as we live on love, faith, and hope. But I would urge you to not disregard the tug of your need for the resurrection to be true.

For more theology posts and discussion, like/follow Unsystematic Theology on Facebook

Image Source (cropped)

Previous Post

February 1, 2016

Today: A Conversation With John Cobb on "How Modern Metaphysics Killed God"

Next Post

February 4, 2016 Is the Resurrection a "Broken Myth"?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month December 2020 November 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 December 2018 July 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz