The cover of a recent news magazine read in bold print, “The Art of the Hoax.” [1] The pages presented everything from crop circles and television psychics to sinister 9/11 plots. The driving force of the entire storyline was perhaps the question posed in one article: Are we vulnerable to hoaxes even in the information age? Their response was a clear, “Yes!” Their advice for us was equally clear: “Distrust and verify.”
Such advice seems almost unnecessary for an age inundated not only with information but also with skeptical thought. No one wants to be duped. And it is certainly good to think critically and verify truth. But may I pose a question for us to think critically about? Skeptical or not, when you approach an event which seems to defy the laws of nature are you an honest investigator before crying hoax?
I ask because many have deemed the resurrection of Christ a hoax, on the premise alone that miracles are not possible. But in reality this is not being fair-minded. You see, without proof of atheism, which is impossible, it is really unreasonable to exclude supernatural explanations from your list of possible options. You see, if supernatural explanations have been eliminated from the onset of your investigation, what then happens when there is no natural explanation for an event?
Scottish skeptic David Hume is perhaps history’s most famous critic of the miraculous. Hume once stated that if historians consistently agreed that the Queen of England died and then reappeared a month later, he would be willing to accept any explanation but a miracle of God. Responding to Hume’s thought experiment, philosopher William Lane Craig marks the essential clue in investigating the miraculous. Says Craig, “I would agree that a miracle without context is inherently ambiguous…. The religio-historical context is crucial in understanding miraculous events. That is why… the Queen’s return would only perplex us [while] the Resurrection gives us pause.” [2]
Dr. Craig reminds us that Jesus performed miracles in a context brimming with religious significance. His supernatural acts authenticated his divine authority. And his resurrection is the culmination of the unparalleled claims for which he was crucified.
To further investigate, think of the situation the disciples faced following the crucifixion of their leader. Under Jewish law, anyone crucified was literally considered to be under the curse of God. Yet, despite having predispositions to the contrary, the disciples indisputably came to believe that Jesus was the Son of God who was resurrected from the dead. And they were willing to die for that belief.
Dear friends, the historicity of these events is not in doubt. Jesus was crucified. The disciples testified that they were with Jesus after his death. And all of them died proclaiming the resurrection of Christ. The question is, how will you explain them? A reasonable mind cannot be criticized for deducing the miraculous: that God raised Jesus from the dead that first Easter morning. Yes, hoaxes abound. However, I cannot reasonably conclude that the resurrection is one of them. Can you?
____________
1. U.S. News and World Report, Aug. 26, 2002.
2. William Lane Craig quoted in Lee Strobel’s “A Case for Faith,” page 91.
____________
Copyright © 2002 Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM). Reprinted with permission. “A Slice of Infinity” is a radio ministry of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.
*
[Original illustration at this number was added to HolwickID #3872]