Implications of the Resurrection
by Haden Clark
Eight days ago, we celebrated Easter. In the weeks prior, we examined the evidence for the Resurrection and culminated that series on Easter Sunday. Having concluded that the Resurrection is the best explanation of the evidence, we will here examine some of the implications of the resurrection of Jesus. They may seem obvious, but the implications of the Resurrection affect how we do apologetics.
Perhaps, the most obvious implication of the Resurrection is that God exists. In a universe where atheism is true, we do not expect to see any resurrections. If a resurrection has occurred, then we live in a theistic universe. The argument would go as follows.
If Jesus rose from the dead, God exists.
Jesus rose from the dead.
Again, this may seem obvious. However, I don’t know about you, but when I am asked how I know God exists, my mind doesn’t immediately tend toward the Resurrection. I usually reach for the cosmological, fine-tuning, or moral argument. If the Resurrection can be reasonably substantiated, shouldn’t it have level grounding with other arguments for the existence of God? What’s more, as the Resurrection is the central claim of Christianity, ought this argument take precedence? Obviously, I am not here saying that one should not use the cosmological, fine-tuning, or moral argument; I make these arguments frequent enough. The point here is to say that an apologetic for the Resurrection is a strong argument for the existence of God, namely that Jesus is God…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE >>>