Does the Resurrection Of Christ Stand Under the Laws of Evidence?

Does the Resurrection Of Christ Stand Under the Laws of Evidence?

Evidence is defined in the Oxford American Dictionary as, “1) anything that establishes a fact or gives reason for believing something, 2) statements made or objects produced in a law court as proof or to support a case.”

Here’s a smidge of what the laws and rules of evidence in the U.S. have to say:

In accordance with the 2011 Federal Rules of Evidence that govern every federal trial court in America - 

“We must begin with the fact that copies of lost original documents are admitted into evidence all the time.  Rule 1003 (of the Federal Rules of Evidence) allows for the admissibility of duplicates, or copies, unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. Thus, as in Greenleaf’s day, the burden to preclude admission of a copy falls first on the party objecting to its admissibility, not on the party offering it into evidence. Even so, I know of no one, let alone anyone of scholarly import, who questions whether the “original” Gospels actually existed, i.e., whether the copies we have today trace back to an original source or, more precisely, four original sources.  There is too much similarity between the copies we have today to conclude that they emanated from anything other than an original source. …Scholars refer to these originals as the “autographs.”  Presuming they existed, as the overwhelming weight of scholarship and evidence suggest, then they were (as originals) necessarily “authentic,” by definition. One cannot challenge the “authenticity” of something acknowledged to be an original. Given that, to the best of our present knowledge, no copies of the originals still exist, we must next determine whether the copies of the originals we do have are sufficiently “authentic” to be admitted into evidence pursuant to the 2011 Federal Rules of Evidence.  The particular Rule implicated [Rule 901] is markedly broad, meaning it provides wide latitude for the admissibility of documents.  More specifically, and merely by way of illustration, Rule 901(b) (8) provides that ancient documents are sufficiently authentic to be admissible if they are (1) in such a condition as to create no suspicion concerning their authenticity; (2) in a place where, if authentic, they would be expected to be; and (3) have been in existence 20 years or more at the time they are offered into evidence.

The data in favor of the authenticity of New Testament manuscript copies we have today (including the Gospels) are….overwhelming” (e) 

* Irwin H. Linton was a Washington, D.C. lawyer who argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. In A Lawyer Examines the Bible, he makes the following claims, challenging his fellow lawyers:

* “by every acid test known to the law...to examine the case for the Bible just as they would any important matter submitted to their professional attention by a client... .” 

* the evidence for Christianity is “overwhelming” and that at least “three independent and converging lines of proof,” each of which “is conclusive in itself,” establish the truth of the Christian faith. 

* “the logical, historical... proofs of... Christianity are so indisputable that I have found them to arrest the surprised attention of just about every man to whom I have presented them....”

*  the Resurrection “is not only so established that the greatest lawyers have declared it to be the best

proved fact of all history, but it is so supported that it is difficult to conceive of any method or line of

proof that it lacks which would make [it] more certain.”

* And that, even among lawyers, “he who does not accept wholeheartedly the evangelical, conservative belief in Christ and the Scriptures has never read, has forgotten, or never been able to weigh—and certainly is utterly unable to refute— the irresistible force of the cumulative evidence upon which such faith rests....”

* He concluded that the claims of the Christian faith are so well established by such a variety of

independent and converging proofs that “it has been said again and again by great lawyers that

they cannot but be regarded as proved under the strictest rules of evidence used in the highest

American and English courts.” (a) 

Dr. Simon Greenleaf was one of the greatest legal minds ever to have graced the United States.

He was a Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, and succeeded Justice

Joseph Story as the Dane Professor of Law at the same. In the Dictionary of American Biography, H. W. H. Knotts  says of him: “To the efforts of Story and Greenleaf is ascribed the rise of the Harvard Law School to its eminent position among the legal schools of the United States.”... Greenleaf concluded that the Resurrection of Christ was one of the best supported events in history, according to the laws of legal evidence administered in courts of justice.

In his book “Testimony of the Evangelists Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice,” Greenleaf writes: “All that Christianity asks of men... is, that they would be consistent with themselves; that they would treat its evidences as they treat the evidence of other things; and that they would try and judge its actors and witnesses, as they deal with their fellow men, when testifying to human affairs and actions, in human tribunals. Let the witnesses [to the Resurrection] be compared with themselves, with each other, and with surrounding facts and circumstances; and let their testimony be sifted, as if it were given in a court of justice, on the side of the adverse party, the witness being subjected to a rigorous cross-examination. The result, it is confidently believed, will be an undoubting conviction of their integrity, ability and truth.” 

Greenleaf went on near the end of his life to say: “Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt.  For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God.” (b)

Sir Edward Clark, K. C., says: “As a lawyer, I have made a prolonged study of the evidences for the events of the first Easter day [Christ’s Bodily Resurrection] . To me the evidence is conclusive, and over and over again in the High Court I have secured the verdict on evidence not nearly so compelling. Inference follows on evidence, and a truthful witness is always artless and disdains effect. The gospel evidence for the resurrection is of this class, and as a lawyer I accept it unreservedly as a testimony of truthful men to facts they were able to substantiate.” ( c )

The late J. N. D. Anderson, was one of the world’s leading authorities on Muslim law, Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of London, Chairman of the Department of Oriental Law at the School of Oriental and African Studies, and Director of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies at the University of London. In Christianity: The Witness of History, he supplies the standard evidences for the Resurrection and asks, “How, then, can the fact of the resurrection be denied?” before emphasizing that, “Lastly, it can be asserted with confidence that men and women disbelieve the Easter story [Christ’s Bodily Resurrection] not because of the evidence but in spite of it.” (d)

***********************************

Among the Brilliant legal, scientific and philosophical minds of the past and present who applied the standards of the Rules of Evidence (both in the U.S. and Europe), to the historically reliable documents of the Bible (NT particularly) we have the following testimonies (among Hundreds and Thousands more!): “Among the religions of the world, Christianity is unique in many ways. One area of uniqueness concerns the evidence supporting its basic claims. As lawyer, theologian, and philosopher Dr. John Warwick Montgomery points out, “The historic Christian claim differs qualitatively from the claims of all other world religions at the epistemological point: on the issue of testability.” In other words, only Christianity stakes its claim to truthfulness on historical events open to critical investigation. And only this explains the number of conversions by skeptics throughout history.”  (1)

[Montgomery is a Cornell University graduate with distinction in philosophy, Phi Beta Kappa. He went on to earn his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, a second doctorate in theology from the University of Strasbourg, France, plus seven additional graduate degrees in theology, law, library science and other fields. He has written over 125 scholarly journal articles, plus 40 books. He has held numerous prestigious appointments, is a founding member of the World Association of Law Professors, a member of the American Society of International Law and is honored in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, The Directory of American Scholars, International Scholars’ Directory, Who’s Who in France, Who’s Who in Europe, and Who’s Who in the World.] 

Dr. Montgomery states that “[No] genuinely historical/objective evidence exists for the foundational religious claims of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, or any religion other than Christianity. (2)

Scientist, [the late] Dr. Henry Morris observes, “As a matter of fact, the entire subject of evidences is almost exclusively the domain of Christian evidences. Other religions depend on subjective experience and blind faith, tradition and opinion. Christianity stands or falls upon the objective reality of gigantic supernatural events in history and the evidences therefore. This fact in itself is an evidence of its truth.” (3)

The 1930s rationalistic English journalist, Frank Morison attempted to discover the “real” Jesus Christ. He was convinced that Christ’s “history rested upon very insecure  foundations” - largely because of the influence of the rationalistic higher criticism so prevalent in his day.

He was dogmatically opposed to the miraculous elements in the Gospels. Nevertheless, he was  taken by the person of Jesus, who was to him “an almost legendary figure of purity and noble manhood.” 

Morison decided to take the crucial “last phase” in the life of Christ and “to strip it of its overgrowth of primitive beliefs and dogmatic suppositions, and to see this supremely great Person as he really was.... It seemed to me that if I could come at the truth why this man died a cruel death at the hands of the Roman Power, how he himself regarded the matter, and especially how he behaved under the test, I should be very near to the true solution of the problem.” (4)

Instead of proving the Biblical record about Jesus to be questionable, as he intended, Morison ended up writing one of the most able defenses of the Resurrection of Christ of our time, “Who Moved the Stone?”

Former atheist and Cambridge scholar C. S. Lewis was converted to Christianity on the basis of the evidence, according to his text Surprised by Joy. “I thought I had the Christians ‘placed’ and disposed of forever.” But, “A young man who wishes to remain a sound atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere - ‘Bibles laid open, millions of surprises,’ as Herbert says, ‘Fine nets and stratagems.’ God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous.”

The evidence was so compelling that he could not escape it, and he became a Christian because  Even against his will he says that he was “brought in kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting [my] eyes in every direction for a chance of escape.” The God “whom I so earnestly desired not to meet” became His Lord and Savior. (5)

Literary Icon, Malcom Muggeridge said “The coming of Jesus into the world is the most stupendous event in human history....” and “What is unique about Jesus is that, on the testimony and in the experience of innumerable people, of all sorts and conditions, of all races and nationalities from the simplest and most primitive to the most sophisticated and cultivated, he remains alive.”  concluding, “That the Resurrection happened... seems to be indubitably true” and “Either Jesus never was or he still is.... with the utmost certainty, I assert he still is.” (6)

Although admissibility rules vary by state, and no lawyer can guarantee the decision of any jury, no matter how persuasive the evidence, an abundance of lawyers in the U.S. and around the world, will testify today that the Resurrection would stand in the vast majority of law courts.

References: 

(a) Irwin H. Linton, A Lawyer Examines the Bible: A Defense of the Christian Faith (San Diego:

Creation Life Publishers, 1977), pp. 13, 16-17, 45, 50, 192, 196.

(b) In John Warwick Montgomery, The Law Above the Law (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany, 1975), pp.

132-133. (Greenleaf’s Testimony of the Evangelists is reprinted as an appendix)/A Cloud of Witnesses, by Stephen Abbott Northrop, D.D., (Portland, Oregon: American Heritage Ministries, 1987), p. 198. 

( c) In John Stott, Basic Christianity (London: InterVarsity Fellowship, 1969), p. 47

(d) J. N. D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale Press, 1970), p. 90, 105

(e) Robert R. Edwards, B.A., B.S., J.D., Is Simon Greenleaf Still Relevant?

(1) Dr. John Ankerberg and Dr. John Weldon, “The Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Part I— Can It Persuade Skeptics?”/John Warwick Montgomery, “The Jury Returns: A Juridical Defense of Christianity” in John Warwick Montgomery (ed.), Evidence For Faith: Deciding the God Question (Dallas: Probe/Word, 1991), p. 319.

(2) John Warwick Montgomery, “How Muslims Do Apologetics” in Faith Founded on Fact

(New York: Nelson, 1978); David Johnson, A Reasoned Look at Asian Religions (Minneapolis, MN:

Bethany, 1985); Stuart C. Hackett, OrientalPhilosophy(Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press,

1979); John Weldon, Buddhism, (MA Thesis) on file at Simon Greenleaf University, Anaheim, CA,

and John Ankerberg and John Weldon, The Facts On Hinduism in America and The Facts on

Islam.

(3) Henry Morris, Many Infallible Proofs (San Diego, CA: Master Books, 1982), p. 1.

(4) American Antiquarian Society, EarlyAmericanImprints, No. 8909 (1639-1 800 A.D.), p. 3. / Frank Morison, WhoMovedtheStone? (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1969), pp., 9–11.

(5) J. N. D. Anderson, Christianity: The Witness of History (London: Tyndale Press, 1970), p. 90, 105

(6) Malcolm Muggeridge, Jesus:TheManWhoLives (NY: Harper & Row, 1978), pp. 7, 184, 191