This page does not allow for all the evidence and information regarding the resurrection. There are many great books available that study the evidence in great detail. Check the Links section on the homepage for resources.

Resurrection Christian Nonsense or Fact?

Confucius's Tomb:Occupied Buddha's Tomb: Occupied Mohammed's Tomb:Occupied Jesus's Tomb: EMPTY In 56 AD Paul wrote that over 500 people had seen the risen Jesus and that most of them were still alive(1 Cor. 15:6). It passes the bounds of credibility that the early Christians could have manufactured such a tale and then preached it among those who might easily have refuted it simply by producing the body of Jesus. Paul Little On The Disciples:"Are these men, who helped transform the moral structure of society, consummate liars or deluded madmen? These alternatives are harder to believe than the fact of the Resurrection, and there is no shred of evidence to support them." Had the crucifixion of Jesus ended His disciples experience of Him, it is hard to see how the Christian church could have come into existence. That church was founded on faith in the Messiahship of Jesus. A crucified messiah was no messiah at all. He was on rejected by Judaism and accursed of God. -HDA Major If Jesus Christ were not risen again(I speak the language of unbelievers), He had deceived His disciples with vain hopes of His resurrection. How came the disciples not to discover the imposter? -Wilbur Smith

Let it simply be said that we know more about the details of the hours immediately before and the actual death of Jesus, in and near Jerusalem, than we know about the death of any other man in all the ancient world. -Wilbur Smith But when He said that He Himself would rise again from the dead, the third day after He was crucified, He said something that only a fool would dare say, if he expected longer devotion to any disciples - unless He was sure He was going to rise. No founder of any world religion known to men ever dared say a thing like that! -Wilbur Smith I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead -Thomas Arnold, Oxford University Two able young men, Gilbert West and Lord Lyttleton, went up to Oxford. They were friends of Dr. Johnson and Alexander Pope, in the swim society. They were determined to attack the very basis of the Christian faith. So Lyttleton settled down to prove that Saul or Tarsus was never converted to Christianity, and West to demonstrate that Jesus never rose from the tomb. Some time later, they met to discuss their findings. Both were a little sheepish. For they had come independently to similar and disturbing conclusions. Lyttleton found, on examination, that Saul of Tarsus DID become a radically new man through his conversion to Christianity; and West found that the evidence pointed unmistakably to the fact that Jesus did rise from the dead. You may still find his book in a large library. It is entitled Observations of Jesus Christ, and was published in 1747. On the fly leaf he had printed his telling quotation from Ecclesiasticus 11:7, which might be adopted with profit by any modern agnostic:"Blame not before thou hast examined the truth." -Green The evidence points unmistakably to the fact that on the third day Jesus rose. This was the conclusion to which a former Chief Justice of England, Lord Darling, came. At a private dinner party the talk turned to the truth of Christianity, and particularly to a certain book dealing with the resurrection. Placing his fingertips together, assuming a judicial attitude, and speaking with a quiet emphasis that was extraordinarily impressive, he said,"We, as Christians, are asked to take a very great deal on trust; the teachings, for example, and the miracles of Jesus. If we had to take all on trust, I, for one, should be skeptical. The crux of the problem of whether Jesus was, or not, what he proclaimed Himself to be, must surely depend upon the truth or otherwise of the resurrection. On that greatest point we are not merely asked to have faith. In its favour as living truth there exsist such overwhelming evidence, positive and negative, factual and circumstantial, that no intelligent jury in the world could fail to bring in a verdict that the resurrection story is true." -Green