Can the Resurrection Be a Legend?
Introduction
The resurrection of Christ has been a source of debate for generations but there are many modern scholars who believe that the resurrection is a story of legend. This is a major claim on their part because Jesus’ resurrection is at the center of the New Testament message[1] and it is the source of a Christian’s faith. But the account of Jesus’ resurrection could not be a story of legend since the first claims of his resurrection occurred shortly after his death.
This paper will look at the logical progression of a legend and show how the belief in the resurrection did not evolve over time but rather was at the start of the church. To accomplish this, this author, will look at Paul’s encounter with Christ, look at biblical sources and non-biblical sources. This paper is not meant to prove that the resurrection occurred but rather to prove that the claims of the resurrection of Christ began shortly after his crucifixion.
Logical Progression of Legends
Many have tried to make a case that the resurrection account is just a legend that has been invented by the church a few decades after the death of Christ. For example, Robert Funk and the Jesus Seminar claim that the resurrection account, as stated in the gospels, is just a ledged. He writes:
Legends may be subdivided into two sub-types: biographical legends and cult legends. A biographical legend is a story that casts a supernatural aura around the hero. The temptation story is a biographical legend. A cult legend accounts in story form for the establishment of some ritual practice in the Jesus movement. The depiction of the last supper is also just such a cult legend.[2]
Within Funk’s book, The Acts of Jesus, he claims, along with the resurrection, that the empty tomb, bribing the guards, appearance to Mary of Magdala, appearance to two in the country, appearance to the eleven, doubting Thomas, appearance to seven, appearance to James, and the ascension is all legends.[3] To understand why this claim is unfounded it is important to see how legends are formed.
The first way legends are formed is over time. When stories are told and retold it is easy for a story to become greater or different then what actually happened. MacLeod stated, “Legends require considerable period of time (generations, even centuries) to develop.”[4] So the resurrection cannot be a story of legend because on the Day of Pentecost Peter stood up and preached about the resurrection of Christ, an event that just happened and not an event that happened years before. Also the remainder of this paper will focus on the different sources that refer to the resurrection of Christ, both Biblical sources and non-Biblical sources.
The second way legends form is “to express certain social convictions and meet certain social needs. This is why the process of legend-making can almost always be explained sociologically.”[5] The problem with this claim, when it refers to the resurrection, is that Jesus’ ministry and resurrection did not meet the social needs of his day. There are three main examples of this. First, the Jews were expecting a Messiah that would be a military leader and inspire the people to rise up against Rome and liberate them. But Jesus came to liberate them from something greater than Roman oppression, he came to liberate them from sin, something they did not have in mind.
Secondly, the Jews were expecting the Messiah to reinforce the religious establishment and keep the Jewish tradition blameless.[6] This is not what Jesus did. He actually came to challenge the way the religious leaders where practicing their religion, not to come and reinforce what they were doing. So once again Jesus did something the people where not expecting.
Finally, N. T. Wright points out that while many Jews did believe in the resurrection it was a belief in the general resurrection of the dead at the end time. No on in the first century was expecting a resurrection of a single person or even a resurrection in the midst of the “present evil age.”[7] So while legends to form to meet social needs Jesus was not what everyone was expecting. There is no way this is how the legend would have went if the Jew’s community is the one who formed the legend, since none of them would have had any of this in mind. When looking at how legends are formed it is easy to see that the claims of the resurrection is not claims that evolved over time. They are not stories of legend but rather they are claims that occurred shortly after the crucifixion of Christ.
Paul’s Encounter with Christ
Another strong argument against the theory that the resurrection is just a legendary story is Paul’s claim to have encountered the risen Jesus. Paul starts out as a zealous persecutor of the church. He wholeheartedly believed that he was serving God by persecuting the church because, in his mind at least, Jesus was an impostor, and his followers deserved to be put to death.[8] But Acts 9 shows Paul’s encounter with the risen Christ as well as his conversion. After his encounter and conversion he began to preach the resurrection. For Paul, the resurrection was not just a topic among other topics but rather the central belief of Christianity. In 1 Corinthians 15:17 Paul says, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.”
To show the significance of Paul’s preaching of the resurrection one needs to try and date the accession of Christ and the conversion of Paul. This will show how much time had passed before Paul began to preach about the resurrection Christ and prove that the resurrection claims did not evolve over time. According to Eichhorn, De Wette, Usher, Pearson, and Olshausen the ascension of Christ probably occurred in the year 33 A.D.[9] On the other hand, Meyer, the prince of living commentators, believed the ascension occurred in 31. Then all the authorities first mentioned, including Meyer and Hug, believed Paul’s conversion occurred anywhere around 35-38 A.D.[10] If the earliest date for Jesus’ ascension is taken into account and the latest conversion date then there is only a seven year gap between Christ’s resurrection and Paul’s beginning ministry where he preached the resurrection of Christ. This is not enough time for a legend to form.
1 Corinthians 15
Earlier this paper looked at the possible time between Paul’s conversion, where he began preaching Christ’s resurrection, and Christ’s accession. This section will focus on 1 Corinthians 15, considered by some as the resurrection chapter of the Bible. Many consider the witness in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 to be the earliest Christian creed, much like the Apostle’s Creed.[11] This “creed” that Paul mentions can be dated within five or six years after Jesus’ death. [12] While these dates can still be debated Habermas stated, “At minimum, we have source material that dates within two decades of the alleged event of Jesus’ resurrection and comes from a source that Paul thought was reliable.”[13] He goes on to say, “Dean John Rodgers of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry comments, ‘This is the sort of data that historians of antiquity drool over.”[14] Once again this short time frame is not enough for a legend to form.
Also verse six of chapter fifteen need to be taken into account, which states, “Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.” This passage alone should show that the resurrection is not a story that would develop two decades after Jesus’ death, since Paul was giving his readers the opportunity to go and question the eyewitnesses for themselves.
Non-Biblical Sources State
Josephus
Josephus is one of the most famous historians concerning Jewish history. Josephus was Jewish and born in A.D. 37 and died in A.D. 97 and he became a Pharisee at the age of nineteen. He actually was able to become a part of all three Jewish sects of his day. When Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 he moved to Rome and became the court historian for Emperor Vespasian. In Josephus work, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3, he states, “On the third day he appeared to them restored of life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him.” Since Josephus died in A.D. 97 this work of his had to have been passed down to him from what he had heard others teaching and it is still too soon after the death of Christ to have formed into a legend.
Tacitus
Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55-120) was a Roman Historian and lived during the reign of several Roman emperors. He has been called the greatest historian of ancient Rome and he is known best for two of his works, Annals and Histories. The Annals covers the period from Augustus’s death in A.D. 14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begins after Nero’s death and go to Domitian in A.D. 96.[15] Tacitus wrote:
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.[16]
When Tacitus states, “a most mischievous superstition”, it is hard to not think he is referring to the Christians belief in the resurrection of Christ. Since Tacitus is writing within the first century, after Jesus’ crucifixion, it is once again proof that the resurrection is not a story of legend but rather a claim that started early in the church’s history.
The Nazareth Inscription
The Nazareth Inscription is a Greek inscription on a marble tablet. It contains the abridged decree of Emperor Claudius, which instituted the death penalty for tomb robbers or those who would move bodies for the reason of deception. The exact time and place of its discovery is not known but many scholars believe the inscription dates to around 41 A.D.
This inscription is an interesting extra-biblical document that seems to point toward the fact that the story of the resurrection was widely known shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion. Compton would state that the Nazareth Inscription is one of the “most powerful pieces of extra-biblical evidence that the resurrection of Christ was being preached right from the beginnings of Christianity.” [17] Although this claim has been widely debate there seems to be some merit to it. The most interesting warning of the inscription is found in lines 10 and 11 which discuss the transfer of bodies from one grave to another. [18] Being that this document was written so close to the crucifixion of Christ it is hard to not find a connection between the two.
Ancient Christian Sources (Non-New Testament)
Clement of Rome
Clement of Rome was a leading elder at the church in Rome. He wrote Corinthians around A.D. 95 to end an argument that was between church members and the elders in Corinth. Within the letter Clement stated:
The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come.[19]
Still within the first century the resurrection of Christ was still being preached.
Ignatius
Ignatius was the Bishop of Antioch and he wrote seven letters, six of them were to churches and one was to an individual. All his letters contained several historical references to Jesus and to his resurrection. One of his letters was entitled Trallians and in it he said, “was crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him.”[20]
Justin Martyr
Justin Martyr was a second century apologists. One of the letters that he is known for the most is his First Apology, which was an address to the Emperor Antonimnus Pius (A.D. 138-161) to clear up some misunderstandings with the Christians. Within this leter he said:
“Accordingly, after He was crucified, even all His acquaintances forsook Him, having denied Him; and afterwards, when he had risen from the dead and appeared to them, and had taught them to read the prophecies in which all these things were foretold as coming to pass, and when they had seen Him ascending into heaven, and had believed, and had received power sent thence by Him upon them, and went to every race of men, they taught these things, and were called apostles.[21]
One reoccurring theme that is seen throughout these ancient Christian writers is that the message of the resurrection of Christ has not changed. It is the same message that Paul preached in 1 Corinthians 15. So not only are the claims of the resurrection not a story of legend but they also have never changed. The same claims that were being preached then are the same claims that are being preached now.
Conclusion
This paper has briefly defended the fact that the resurrection is not a story of legend. This paper first focused on what makes a legend and how the resurrection does not fit within those criteria. To prove that point even more this paper moved to look at Biblical sources of the resurrection, such as 1 Corinthians 15 and Paul’s encounter with Christ, and non-Biblical sources, such as Josephus, Tacitus, and others. Finally, this paper showed how the claims of the resurrection had not changed. The same message that was preached on the day of Pentecost is the same message that has been preached throughout the ages.
[1] Abogunrin, Samuel Oyinloye. 1981. “The Language And Nature Of The Resurrection Of Jesus Christ In The New Testament.” The Journal of Evangelical Theological Society 24, no. 1: 55.
[2] Gary R. Gromacki, 2002, “The Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ,” Journal of Ministry and Theology 06, no. 1: 81.
[3] Ibid.
[4] David J. MacLeod, 1998, “The Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Myth, Hoax, or History?” Emmaus Journal 07, no. 2, 184.
[5] Gregory A. Boyd and Paul Rhodes Eddy, Lord or Legend? (Grand Rapids, MI: BakerBooks, 2007), 29.
[6] Ibid., 30.
[7] Ibid.
[8] George P. Fisher, 1860, “The Apostle Paul, A Witness For the Resurrection of Jesus,” Bibliotheca Sacra 17, no. 67: 624.
[9] Ibid., 627-628.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Rene A. Lopez, 2012, “Did Jesus Truly Die? Death Before Resurrection,” Journal of Dispensational Theology 16, no. 47: 68.
[12] Jared M. Compton, 2009, “Is the Resurrection Historically Reliable?” 105.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Gary R. Gromacki, 2002, “The Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ,” 53.
[16] Tacitus, Annals, vol. 15, The Complete Works of Tacitus, ed. Moses Hadas (New York: Random House, 1942), 44.
[17] Jared M. Compton, 2009, “Is the Resurrection Historically Reliable?” 106.
[18] Craig A. Evans, “Jesus and the Ossuaries,” Bulletin for Biblical Research, Vol. 13 (2003): 27.
[19] Gromacki, Gary R. 2002. “The Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part II).” Journal of Ministry of Theology 06, no. 2, 55-56.
[20] Ibid., 56.
[21] Ibid., 56-57.
