a) As to the Number of the Witnesses.
The resurrection of Christ as a historical fact is verified by a
sufficient number of witnesses: over five hundred (1 Cor. 15:3-9).
In our courts, one witness is enough to establish murder; two,
high treason; three, the execution of a will; seven, an oral will.
Seven is the greatest number required under our law. Christ's
resurrection had five hundred and fourteen. Is not this a sufficient
number?
b) As to the Character of the Witnesses.
The value of the testimony of a witness depends much upon his
character; if that is impeached, then the testimony is discounted.
Scrutinize carefully the character of the men who bore witness to
the fact of Christ's resurrection. Impeach them if you can. They
are unassailable on ethical grounds. "No honorable opponent of the
Gospel has ever denied this fact. Their moral greatness awakened
an Augustine, a Francis of Assisi, and a Luther. They have been the
unrivalled pattern of all mature and moral manhood for nearly two
thousand years." In law much is made of the question of _motive_.
What motive could the apostles have had in perpetrating the story
of Christ's resurrection upon people? Every one of them (except
one) died a martyr's death for his loyalty to the story of Christ's
resurrection. What had they to gain by fraud? Would they have
sacrificed their lives for what they themselves believed to be an
imposture?
Nor are we to slight the testimony to Christ's resurrection that
comes to us from sources other than that of the inspired writers
of the New Testament. Ignatius, a Christian, and a contemporary of
Christ, a martyr for his faith in Christ, in his _Letter to the
Philadelphians_, says: "Christ truly suffered, as He also truly
raised up Himself. I _know_ that after the resurrection He was
in the flesh, and I believe Him to be so still. And when He came
to those who were with Peter, He said to them, 'Take, handle me,
and see that I am not an incorporeal phantom!'" Tertullian, in
his _Apolegeticus_, says: "The fame of our Lord's remarkable
resurrection and ascension being now spread abroad, Pontius Pilate,
according to an ancient custom of communicating novel occurrences
to the emperor, that nothing might escape him, transmitted to
Tiberius, Emperor of Rome, an account of the resurrection of our
Lord from the dead...Tiberius referred the whole matter to the
Senate, who, being unacquainted with the facts, rejected it." The
integrity of this passage is unquestioned by even the most sceptical
critics.
Alleged Discrepancies.
[Footnote: The following extract from Dr. Orr's book, _The
Resurrection of Jesus_, will throw some light on the matter
of differences in testimony, while maintaining the credibility of
the fact itself. "An instructive example is furnished in a recent
issue of the _Bibliotheca Sacra_. A class in history was studying
the French Revolution, and the pupils were asked to look the matter
up, and report next day by what vote Louis XVI was condemned. Nearly
half the class reported that the vote was unanimous. A considerable
number protested that he was condemned by a majority of one. A few
gave the majority as 145 in a vote of 721. How utterly irreconcilable
these reports seemed! Yet for each the authority of reputable
historians could be given. In fact, all were true, and the full
truth was a combination of all three. On the first vote as to the
king's guilt there was no contrary voice. Some tell only of this.
The vote on the penalty was given individually, with reasons, and
a majority of 145 declared for the death penalty, at once or after
peace was made with Austria, or after confirmation by the people.
The votes for immediate death were only 361 as against 360. History
abounds with similar illustrations. As an example of another kind,
reference may be made to Rev. R. J. Campbell's volume of _Sermons
Addressed to Individuals_, where, on pp. 145-6 and pp. 181-2,
the same story of a Brighton man is told with affecting dramatic
details. The story is no doubt true in substance; but for
'discrepancies'--let the reader compare them, and never speak more
(or Mr. Campbell either) of the Gospels!"]
The seeming differences in the testimony of the witnesses to the
resurrection may be largely, if not altogether reconciled by a
correct knowledge of the manner and order of the _appearances_
of Christ after His resurrection.
The following order of appearances may help in the understanding
of the testimony to the resurrection: