I read a newspaper article today which dismissed Easter as an unlikely story. But is a story even worth telling or remembering if it is a “likely” story? An event is only significant and worth commemorating if it is “unlikely”. The real question is not “Is the resurrection of a man unlikely?” – of course it is – but “Is the resurrection of Jesus true?” If you believe in the existence of a God powerful enough to bring the universe into existence and everything in it, then it is a small thing to believe that God can bring his son back to life.
When John the Baptist was in prison about to be executed by the king, even he started to doubt whether Jesus was the Messiah. He sent two men to find out, and Jesus’s answer was: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind can see, the lame can walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf can hear, the dead come back to life, and the poor are hearing the good news.” In other words, the best way to see whether Jesus really was the Messiah was to look at the changes he had caused in people’s lives.
In many ways, the best evidence about who Jesus is can still be found by looking at the lives that have been transformed through the work of Jesus in their lives. On the other hand, perhaps the most convincing evidence against the resurrection is the lack of any discernible change for the better in the lives of many who claim to be followers of Jesus.