Easter is a provocative, even outrageous thing that we celebrate. It’s easy to act casual about the claims of Easter because we’ve all heard them so many times.
Skeptics are fond of saying there isn’t any evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. What they mean is that there isn’t any scientific evidence. Well, what would scientific or forensic evidence of an event from 2,000 years look like? That’s a pretty convenient question considering science didn’t exist back then. It’s a little like saying, “Photos or it didn’t happen.”
As anyone familiar with our courts of law knows, there are more kinds of evidence than forensic. Eye witness testimony, a kind of direct evidence, is arguably the most important.
Love uCATHOLIC?
Get our inspiring content delivered to your inbox every morning - FREE!
Enjoyed reading. Is there such a thing as re incarnation.
Don’t forget about the historical evidence for the empty tomb and the culture shift. A full tomb is an easy myth buster for this claim. But the earliest Jewish sources claim that the disciples STOLE the body. Plus there wasn’t any Jewish understanding that the Messiah would die or that someone could quickly resurrect after death. What lead them to believe this new idea, and would they die defending it if the only evidence was based off of a lie (them stealing and hiding the body)?
[…] uCatholic posts about the resurrection: […]