The Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus

Why it Matters
1 Corinthians 15:12-19
12

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no
resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ
has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false
witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if
in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ
has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are
lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

The truth of Christianity stands or falls on the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Hope that is not founded in fact is not hope, but mere illusion.
Fortunately, as a worldview rooted in history, the Bible makes claims that can be investigated and tested.
A historian can only show whether or not the evidence makes it at all plausible to assert that Jesus rose from the dead. Neither
God nor the Resurrection is directly observable, but from data that is directly observable we can argue that the only possible
adequate explanation of this data is the Christian one.

The Minimal Facts Approach

This method considers only data that is so strongly attested historically that nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the
sceptical ones, accept it. This approach does not assume the inerrancy or divine inspiration of any NT document. Rather it merely
holds these writings to be historical documents written during the first century AD.
Standards of Historical Credibility

Multiple Attestation when numerous sources independently offer roughly the same portrait of an event or person that
portrait takes on greater plausibility
Early testimony the closer to the time, the more likely that the account has not been altered
Eyewitness testimony far better to have the words of eyewitnesses than those of people writing long after the events
recorded
Enemy testimony whenever a hostile source confirms an account which hinders its own interests, this is likely to be very
reliable.
Embarrassing testimony- similarly an account that embarrasses or undermines the authors purposes is unlikely to have
been made up
Historical Coherence accounts that are historically and geographically consistent with the time they are purportedly
written in are more able to be trusted
Motive What is the purpose of the document? What did the author hope to achieve by writing it?

Fact #1 The Crucifixion of Jesus

Perhaps no other fact surrounding the life of the historical Jesus is better attested to than His death by crucifixion.
Not only is the crucifixion account included in every gospel narrative, the Book of Acts and several letters in the New Testament,
but it is also confirmed by several non-Christian sources. Some of these include the Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities of
the Jews 18.64), the Roman historian Tacitus (Annals of Imperial Rome 15:44), as well as the Jewish Talmud (Sanhedrin
43a). Therefore Jesus crucifixion meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources,
including enemy attestation.
Nero fastened the guilt [of the burning of Rome] and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations,
called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of
Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus
Tacitus, Annals 15.44
To be executed by hanging on a tree was to be rendered literally a heretic: a man who was accursed and forsaken by God (see
Deuteronomy 21:23). This is one of the leading reasons why it remains virtually beyond doubt that Jesus really was crucified in
that manner: If he hadnt been executed in that manner, a death by crucifixion is the very last thing that the disciples would have
attributed to Jesus.

That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.

John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2009), 163. (Non-Christian scholar)

Fact #2 The Empty Tomb

Tombs in 1st century Palestine were like a cave hewn out of the rocky side of a mountain or hill. They consisted of a rectangular
opening into a main room or central chamber with a niche carved into the side of one of the inner walls where the body was
placed. At one end was a special elevated place for the head.
The opening of the central chamber was covered by a large circular stone or heavy disc of rock set in a slanting groove so that
when the stone was released it would roll by its own weight and cover the entrance. Because of its enormous weight (possibly
several tons) it would require the combined efforts of several men to move the stone back up the groove and block it
a.

Proclamation of the Resurrection in Jerusalem

Jesus post-mortem appearances and empty tomb were first publicly proclaimed In Jerusalem. This would have been impossible
with a decaying corpse still in the tomb. As the preaching occurred in the city of the event immediately after it occurred every
possible fact could have been investigated thoroughly.
All 4 gospel writers tell us that Jesus was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, an influential Jewish religious leader. This
means the location of his body was well known. It would have been destructive for the writers to invent a man of such
prominence, name him specifically, and designate the tomb site, since eyewitnesses would have easily discredited the authors
false claims.
Furthermore the tomb was guarded by Roman soldiers. The Jewish authorities had plenty of opportunity to produce a body and
silence the first Christians effectively ending Christianity for good. But no one could. The corpse of Jesus was never found. Not
one historical record from the 1st or 2nd century is written attacking the fact of the empty tomb or claiming discovery of the
corpse.
b.

The earliest Jewish attack against the Resurrection presupposes the vacancy of the Tomb

The earliest Jewish allegation was that Jesus disciples had come during the night and stolen the body while the guards were
asleep (Matthew 28:11-15).
The Toledoth Yeshu, (a compilation of early Jewish writings), alludes to the stolen body allegation, as does the record of a second
century debate between Justin Martyr and the Jew Trypho, Chapter CVII: you have sent chosen and ordained men
throughout all the world to proclaim that a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom we
crucified, but His disciples stole Him by night from the tomb, where He was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive
men by asserting that He has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.
The allegation that someone had stolen the body is an implicit admission that the tomb was empty. The fact that Jesus opponents
conceded the vacancy of the tomb is strong evidence in the eyes of historians.
c.

The First Witnesses were Women

All 4 gospel narratives say women were the first witnesses of the empty tomb. It is hard to imagine this being an invention of the
early church considering the low social status of women in both Jewish and Roman cultures and their inability to testify as legal
witnesses. This is evident in rabbinic expressions such as "Sooner let the words of the law be burnt than delivered to women."
Josephus states further, But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity of their sex. Saying that women
were the first witnesses would have been an embarrassment to the early church and would not have helped its cause in
convincing people of the Resurrection.
The best explanation for why all four gospel writers would have included such an embarrassing and awkward detail is that that is
actually what happened and they were committed to recording it honestly and with integrity, regardless of its blow to their
credibility.
As with the crucifixion, the account of the empty tomb meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early
eyewitness sources, including implicit enemy attestation as well as the principle of embarrassment.

Atheist historian Michael Grant concedes that the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the
tomb was indeed found empty.
Michael Grant, Jesus: An Historians Review of the Gospels (New York: Scribners, 1976), 176.
So who moved the Stone?

The enemies would not for it was their purpose to keep His body there and the door sealed (Matt. 27:62-66).
If the disciples had done it and had removed the body they did so without the knowledge of the women, for they came
expecting to find the body (John 20:1-2). Besides the guards were present.
The women themselves would have been unable to remove the stone. As they came to the tomb the morning of the
resurrection, they were wondering, who would role away the stone for them (Mark 16:2-8).
Matthew 28:2-4 tells us it was an angel of the Lord. This shows divine intention.

It was not rolled away so Christ could leave because he could pass through the walls in His glorified body. By divine purpose it
was removed to call attention to the testimony of the empty tomb. The tomb had been opened not to let Jesus out, but to let people
in.
Fact #3 The Post-Resurrection Appearances and the Origins of Christianity
There are two facts that need historical explanation:
1) Christianity emerged almost immediately after the death of Jesus
2) The earliest Christian teaching was that Jesus was the Son of God who had been crucified, but then was physically resurrected
from the dead.
Jesus' closest disciples claim to have had experiences subsequent to the crucifixion that led them to conclude that Jesus had been
resurrected from the dead. This is a fact accepted by essentially all New Testament scholars, even those that are most sceptical of
Christianity and of the resurrection itself. How these experiences are to be properly understood, however, is a subject of intense
debate.
The debate is over whether this belief was based on natural or supernatural causes. Regarding the disciples claims, there are three
possibilities: (1) They were lying; (2) they were honestly mistaken; or (3) they were telling the truth about what they actually saw.
However the appearances are to be explained, it must account for the extraordinary disciples beliefs that:
a.
b.
c.
d.

Jesus was the long-awaited Jewish Messiah even though he had been executed
Jesus death brought forgiveness of sins
Jesus was God in the flesh
The eternal fate of every human being rested upon the response to Jesus

Finally, we must account for how the disciples were able to remain steadfast in these proclamations about Jesus despite
persecution, imprisonment, the risk of dishonour and alienation from their communities, and even the threat of death.

a.

Multiple, Independent Attestation

Jesus appearance to Peter is independently confirmed in Lukes Gospel and the appearance to the Twelve is independently
affirmed by both Luke and John. Moreover, we have independent witnesses to the Galilean appearances in Matthew, Mark and
John, as well as to the women in Matthew and John. Paul testifies that Jesus appeared to him as well.
b.

Evidence for very early Belief in the Resurrection The 1 Corinthians 15 Creed

In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 (written c. 54) Paul recounts what the majority of biblical scholars recognize as an early Christian
creed (statement of belief) which he received from others within a few years of the crucifixion and is now passing on to the
Corinthians.
3

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he
was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the
Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still

living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me
also, as to one abnormally born.
Among the facts which have convinced scholars as to the creedal nature of this text are the following:

Paul introduces it with the words received and delivered, which are technical rabbinic terms indicating hes passing along
holy tradition.
The writing is highly stylised with non-Pauline characteristics
The original text uses Cephas for Peter, which is his Aramaic name. The Aramaic itself could in fact indicate a very early
origin.
The creed uses several other primitive phrases that Paul would not customarily use, such as the Twelve, the third day, he
was raised according to the Scriptures.
Fourfold use of Kai hoti (and that) is common in creeds.

Origin of the Creed

Paul was converted to Christianity within 1 or 2 years of Jesus death.

He meets Peter and James 3 years later (Galatians 1:18-19). The most popular view is that Paul received this creed during his
trip to Jerusalem during this visit to Peter and James, both of whose names are in the appearance list.
Therefore the time between the event of Christ's crucifixion and Paul receiving the information about His death, burial, and
resurrection (in Jerusalem) would be as short as 4-5 years.
This means the creed which Paul received and quoted in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 demonstrates an extremely early belief in the
resurrection of Jesus.

The early date of this creed also rules out the possibility of myth or legendary development as a plausible explanation of the
Resurrection account.
Remember, there were plenty of Christians around who could have corrected the writings of Paul if he was in error. The fact that
Paul states that of the 500 who saw Jesus, most were still alive, demonstrates that he knew others who could back up his claim.
The material collected here indubitably goes back to the oldest phrase of all in the history of primitive Christianity.
Ulrich Wilckens, Resurrection-Biblical Testimony to the Resurrection: An Historical Examination and Explanation, trans. by A.
M. Stewart (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1978), 2.
The elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus. . . . not later than three years. . . .
the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in I Cor.15.3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 CE. "
Gerd Ludemann, The Resurrection of Jesus, trans. John Bowden (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), 38 (Sceptical Scholar)
Included in this creed are all three of the minimal facts: the death of Jesus, the empty tomb, and the post-resurrection appearances.
c.

Willing Martyrs and Transformed Lives

That the disciples sincerely believed the resurrection occurred is demonstrated by their transformed lives. 11 early sources testify
to the willingness of the original disciples to suffer and die for their belief in the resurrection (Luke, Paul, Josephus, Clement
of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Polycarp, Ignatius, Dionysius of Corinth, Tertullian, Origen, and Hegesippus).
Their willingness to face persecution and in most cases martyrdom was not based on a religious or faith-based commitment, nor
an oral tradition. Rather, it was based on something which they had actually seen first-hand with their own eyes.
Many people have been martyred over the centuries for a religious belief. But how many have died for the advancement and
propagation of a known lie? To the contrary, when life or liberty is at stake, multi-party conspiracies invariably break down. The
disciples had nothing to gain by lying and starting a new religion except hardship, ridicule, hostility and death. Liars make poor
martyrs.
It is recorded in the Gospels that while Jesus was on trial, the Apostles deserted Him in fear. Yet 10 out of the 11 original Apostles
died as martyrs believing Christ rose from the dead. Peters death is attested to by Clement of Rome, Tertullian, Jerome and also
by Origen. Origen, for example, writes that Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to
suffer.
The transformation from a company of terrified disciples who had lost their leader and feared for their own life to the fearless
apostles who boldly kept on preaching and proclaiming the Gospel of the risen Lord begs explanation. What accounts for their

transformation into men willing to die for their message? It must have been a very compelling event to change their behaviour so
radically.
Atheist historian Gerd Ldemann acknowledges, It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had
experiences after Jesus death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.
Gerd Ldemann, What Really Happened to Jesus?: A Historical Approach to the Resurrection, trans. John Bowden (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox, 1995), 80. (Ldemann appeals to hallucinations as an explanation.)
d.

Enemy Attestation

Paul was a devoted Jew (he was a Pharisee) and zealous persecutor of Christians, (1 Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13-14; Phil. 3:4-7). He
claimed that the risen Jesus appeared personally to him (1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8; Gal. 1:16). After this he abandoned Judaism and
converted to Christianity becoming one of its leading missionaries.
In addition to Pauls writings, we have six ancient sources (Luke, Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Tertullian, Dionysius of Corinth
and Origen) reporting that Paul was willing to suffer continuously and even die for his beliefs.
James, the brother of Jesus, was a sceptic (Mark 3:20-21, John 7:5), but later would become the leader of the first Christian
community in Jerusalem after he saw the risen Jesus.
It seems absurd that the early church would invent fictitious stories about the unbelief of Jesus own family had they been faithful
followers all along. It undermined a rabbis credibility if he lacked the support of his own family.
Yet James later became an active Christian following Jesus execution and subsequent resurrection, and was martyred for his
belief (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 20:9:1, Hegesippus (110-180 A.D.), in the fifth book of his memoirs (cited by Eusebius)).
How much would it take to convince you that your elder brother was God incarnate to the point of martyrdom?
e.

Jewish, Near Eastern and Greco-Roman understanding of Resurrection

Was the Resurrection of Christ a doctrine that arose from contemporary beliefs?
The Jewish conception of resurrection differed in two important, fundamental respects from Jesus' resurrection. In Jewish
thought the resurrection to eternal life and glory always (1) occurred after the end of the world, not within history, and (2)
concerned all the people, not just an isolated individual.
Moreover, there was no Jewish expectation that the Messiah would die and be resurrected. That was just totally unknown.
The disciples radical proclamation that Jesus had already risen from the dead was a completely foreign concept in Judaism. So
where did the idea that one man, the messiah, would rise from the dead before the end of time come from? The disciples were
fishermen and tax collectors, not theologians!
His (Jesus) predictions of rising from the dead and His interpretation of the Old Testament were original with Him; they were
not the echoes of current theology that He had absorbed and repeated unthinkingly.
Merrill Tenney, The Reality of the Resurrection, 1963, reprinted 1972, p. 28.
There was a wide spectrum of beliefs about life after death in the Greco-Roman world, but resurrection did not feature among
them. Pagans who did believe in an afterlife thought in terms of the immortality of the soul. The body was thought of as a
hindrance from whose weaknesses the soul must escape.
f.

Criterion of Embarrassment

Another sure mark of the truth, which we find in the Gospel accounts of the resurrection, are the numerous details of the very type
that false accounts would be careful to avoid e.g.

Often when Jesus first appears to his followers they dont recognise him.
In Luke 24:39 when Jesus first appeared to the disciples they feared and thought that they were seeing a spirit .
In John 20, Thomas does not believe that Jesus has risen from the dead.
Considering the criterion of embarrassment, it seems that such fear and doubts upon those that became the very foundation of
the church are unlikely to have been invented, but more likely reflect historical reminiscence.

The birth and rapid rise of the Christian Church remain an unsolved enigma for any historian who refuses to take seriously the
only explanation offered by the church itself.
Alternative Theories
Alternate theories must take into account all the minimal facts to have credibility. Which theory has the greatest explanatory
power?
Theory 1 Conspiracy - The Disciples stole Jesus Body and made up the gospels
1.
2.
3.

4.

5.
6.

What would they gain from lying? They were hated, scorned, persecuted, excommunicated, imprisoned, tortured, exiled,
crucified, boiled alive, roasted, beheaded, disembowelled and fed to lions.
Why die for what you know to be a lie? Nothing proves sincerity like martyrdom.
If the disciples were lying, they could have merely said that Jesus rose spiritually, allowing his body to remain in the tomb.
Instead they said he rose physically, which if not true, was an enormous risk to take should the body have ever been
found.
The disciples also had no motive for stealing the body, for the reason that the Jewish tradition and mindset precluded anyone
rising bodily from the dead to glory and immortality until the general resurrection at the end of time. The disciples, therefore,
had no necessary predisposition towards positing a physical resurrection, nor an empty tomb.
Would the depressed and cowardly disciples become so brave and daring as to face a detachment of soldiers at the tomb
and steal the body?
The story the Jewish authorities spread, that the guards fell asleep and the disciples stole the body (Mt 28:11-15), is
unbelievable. Roman guards would not fall asleep on a job like that; if they did, they would lose their lives. And even if
they did fall asleep, the crowd and the effort and noise it would have taken to move an enormous boulder would have
wakened them.

Theory 2 Delusion The Disciples wanted Jesus to be alive so much that they were hallucinating
1.

2.

3.
4.

5.
6.

7.

8.

Its not possible for 500 people to have exactly the same delusion. There were too many witnesses. Hallucinations are
private, individual, and subjective. For this theory to work, all of the members in the group present would have to go into
"vision-mode" at about the same time and location. The appearances of Jesus to groups are attested in every source that
contains post-mortem appearances of Jesus (i.e. 1 Cor. 15, Matthew, Luke, John, and Acts). Additionally, the best attested
appearance we have is a group appearance, that being the appearance to "the twelve", which is found in at least 1 Cor. 15,
Luke, and John.
Jesus was seen not once, but many times; not by one person, but by several; not only by individuals, but also by groups; not at
one locale and circumstance but at many; not by believers only, but by sceptics and unbelievers as well. The hallucination
theory cannot be plausibly stretched to accommodate such diversity.
Hallucinations usually last a few seconds or minutes and never are prolonged, such as the disciples spending hours with
Jesus. This one hung around for forty days (Acts 1:3).
The apostles could not have believed in the "hallucination" if Jesus' corpse had still been in the tomb. This is very simple and
telling point; for if it was a hallucination, where was the corpse? They would have checked for it; if it was there, they could
not have believed.
Can a hallucination be physically touched? Can it eat? Luke 24:39, 42-43, John 20:17, 21:1-14.
Not only did the disciples not expect this Jesus to be resurrected, they didn't even believe it at firstneither Peter, nor
the women, nor Thomas, nor the eleven. They thought he was a ghost; he had to eat something to prove he was not (Matthew
28:17, Lk 24:25, 36-43, John 20:25).
Paul most certainly did not want Jesus to be alive, yet he saw him too! He was then blinded for 3 days do hallucinations
blind people? Pauls companions also had a supernatural experience when Paul first say Jesus - In Acts 9:3-9, they heard the
voice; in Acts 22:6-11, they saw the light, but did not hear the voice; in Acts 26:12-19, they fell to the ground with Paul.
Hallucinations cant explain the empty tomb, the rolled-away stone, the inability to produce the corpse, the conversion
of sceptics or the multiple and varied resurrection appearances.

Theory 3 Jesus didnt die. He swooned and was buried alive. He revived in the coolness of the tomb, arose and departed.
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

Jewish and Roman sources also say that Jesus died multiple testimonies to the event
Romans were expert executioners. Roman law laid the death penalty on any soldier who let a capital prisoner escape in any
way, including bungling a crucifixion. (Mark 15:43-45)
The Romans didnt break Jesus bones a sign that he had indeed died (John 19:33). Breaking his legs would have
hastened Jesus death so that his corpse could be taken down before the Sabbath.
The flowing of blood and water from Jesus side shows that Jesus' lungs had collapsed and he had died of asphyxiation.
(John 19:34). When blood and water come out separately, this indicates the blood cells had begun to separate from the plasma
which will only happen when the blood stops circulating.
Jesus was buried in pounds of bandages and wrappings from head to toe. It would have been impossible for him to breathe
and resuscitate.

6.
7.

After what he went through the beatings, carrying the cross, the crucifixion how could he (a) remove the tightly
bound wrappings let alone breathe in them, (b) move the stone, (c) get past the guards, (d) hide for the rest of his life?
Jesus Resurrection body was glorious and new. It is psychologically impossible for the disciples to have been so
transformed and confident if Jesus had merely struggled out of a swoon, badly in need of a doctor. A half-dead, staggering
sick man who has just had a narrow escape is not worshiped fearlessly as divine lord and conqueror of death.

Theory 4 Spiritual Resurrection - Christs body remained in the grave and His real resurrection was spiritual in nature.
It was only told this way to illustrate the truth of spiritual resurrection.
1.
2.
3.
4.

If it was only a spiritual resurrection, then what happened to the body? The enemies of Christ were never able to produce
the body.
The resurrection accounts are not presented in parabolic or symbolic language, but as hard fact. John 20 is full of what
Greek grammarians call vivid historical present tenses to stress the historical reality of the Gospel message.
He was touched and handled, He had a body, and He even ate with the disciples (Luke 24:30, 41f; John 21:12f).
Jewish understanding of resurrection was physical not spiritual. For Jews the concept of spiritual resurrection was an
oxymoron it was a contradiction in terms.

Theory 5 The Gospels are Myth

2 Peter 1:16 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. Therefore if the gospel is not a myth, and is not true, it must be a lie which
takes us back to Theory 1.
2. The style of the Gospels is radically and clearly different from the style of myths. Any literary scholar who knows and
appreciates myths can verify this. The character depth and development of everyone in the Gospel, especially Jesus himself,
is remarkable. It is also done with an incredible economy of words. Myths are verbose; the Gospels are concise.
3. There are tell-tale marks of eyewitness description, like the little detail of Jesus writing in the sand when asked whether to
stone the adulteress or not (John 8:6). No one knows why this is put in; nothing comes of it. The only explanation is that the
writer saw it. If this detail and others like it throughout all four Gospels were invented, then a first-century tax collector
(Matthew), a "young man" (Mark), a doctor (Luke), and a fisherman (John) all independently invented the new genre of
realistic fantasy 19 centuries before it was reinvented in the 20th. Luke's use of eyewitnesses (Lk. 1:4) shows that he is not
copying down myths, thinking it is history.
4. The Gospels are set firmly in the real Palestine of the first century. The little details are not picturesque inventions but the
real details that only an eyewitness. They are full of historically accurate and verified data e.g. proper names, cultural details,
historical events, and customs and opinions of that time.
5. There was not enough time for myth to develop. There is no example anywhere in history of a great myth or legend arising
around a historical figure and being generally believed within 30 years after that figure's death. The letters of Paul, and
according to some scholars, the gospels, were written within this time frame. If Pauls letters are not myth, then the Gospels
are not either, for Paul affirms all the main claims of the Gospels. Several generations have to pass before added mythological
elements can be mistakenly believed to be facts. Eyewitnesses would be around before that to discredit the new, mythic
versions. We know of other cases where myths and legends of miracles developed around a religious founder -- for example,
Buddha, Lao-tzu and Muhammad. In each case, many generations passed before the myth surfaced.
6. The myth theory has two layers. The first layer is the historical Jesus, who was not divine, did not claim divinity, performed
no miracles, and did not rise from the dead. The second, later, mythologized layer is the Gospels as we have them, with a
Jesus who claimed to be divine, performed miracles and rose from the dead. The problem with this theory is simply that there
is not the slightest bit of any real evidence whatever for the existence of any such first layer.
7. The Apostles began preaching the Resurrection in Jerusalem. This is significant since this is the very city in which Jesus
was crucified. This was the most hostile city in which to preach. Furthermore, all the evidence was there for everyone to
investigate. Legends take root in foreign lands or centuries after the event. Discrediting such legends is difficult since the
facts are hard to verify. However, in this case the preaching occurs in the city of the event immediately after it occurred.
Every possible fact could have been investigated thoroughly. As Paul said to Festus at his trial; this was not done in a
corner Acts 26:26.
8. In first-century Judaism, women had low social status and no legal right to serve as witnesses. If the empty tomb were an
invented legend, its inventors surely would not have had it discovered by women, whose testimony was considered worthless.
If, on the other hand, the writers were simply reporting what they saw, they would have to tell the truth, however socially and
legally inconvenient.
9. The stories of Jesus' human weaknesses and of the disciples' faults also point to the historicity of the text. Myths tend to
exaggerate their heroes attributes.
10. There are mythical stories about Jesus, but these are found in the apocryphal gospels, the ones written after the first century
when all the eyewitnesses had died. These myths have not been included in the Bible.
1.

********************************************************************************************************

Theory 6 - Jesus bodily rose from the dead

The bodily resurrection explains the empty tomb.

The bodily resurrection explains the encounters that numerous people had with Jesus.
The bodily resurrection explains the times Jesus had physical contact after the resurrection (eating, being able to be touched).
The bodily resurrection was the earliest explanation (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).
The bodily resurrection story explains the changed lives of the disciples. It is hard to believe that 1st century Jews who
witnessed Jesus would be willing to die for a lie.
In sum, the bodily resurrection of Jesus has the best explanatory power when all theories of the resurrection story are lined up.

"All of the alternative hypotheses with which I am familiar are historically weak; some are so weak that they collapse of their own
weight once spelled out. . . . the alternative theories that have been proposed are not only weaker but far weaker at explaining the
available historical evidence. "
Stephen T. Davis, "Is Belief in the Resurrection Rational?" Philo, Vol. 2 (1999), 57-58.
Other Objections
No alternative to a real resurrection has yet explained: the existence of the Gospels, the origin of the Christian faith, the failure of
Christ's enemies to produce his corpse, the empty tomb, the rolled-away stone, or the accounts of the post-resurrection
appearances. Swoon, conspiracy, hallucination and myth have been shown to be the only alternatives to a real resurrection, and
each has been refuted.
What reasons could be given at this point for anyone who still would refuse to believe? At this point, general rather than specific
objections are usually given. For instance:
Objection 1: History is not an exact science. It does not yield absolute certainty like mathematics.
Reply: This is true, but why would you note that fact now and not when you speak of Caesar or Luther or George Washington?
History is not exact, but it is sufficient. No one doubts that Alexander invaded India so why do many doubt that Jesus rose from
the dead? The evidence for the latter is much better than for the former.
The historical evidence is massive enough to convince the open-minded inquirer. By analogy with any other historical event, the
resurrection has eminently credible evidence behind it. To disbelieve it, you must deliberately make an exception to the rules
you use everywhere else in history. Now why would someone want to do that?
Objection 2: Science shows that miracles dont happen.
Reply: This is a philosophical question, not a scientific statement. The scientific method is based on showing that something is
fact by repeated observations of the object or event. Therefore, the method is limited to repeatable events or observable objects.
Historical events cannot be repeated. Science therefore cannot be used to disprove miraculous claims. If a supernatural God
exists, then miracles are obviously possible.
Objection 3 The first Christians were superstitious and attributed natural occurrences to supernatural ones
1.
2.

The disciples were sceptics too note their reaction when the women told them what they had seen; Luke 24:11-12, Luke
24:37 note Thomas response (John 20:24-29). They werent superstitious fools, but rational human beings.
They had no expectation that Jesus would be resurrected:
- The women at the tomb were 'confused' by the experience (Luke 24.4)
- They were afraid when they saw Jesus (Mt 28.10)
- When the women told the disciples as a group, they didn't believe them at first! (cf. Luke 24.11: But they did not believe
the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense.)
- Even as they saw Jesus, some STILL doubted!!!! (Mat 28.17, Luke 24:38)
- They don't even recognize Him on a couple of occasions! (John 21.4; Luke 24.16)
- They thought he was a 'ghost'--not an expected 'Risen Lord' at first (Luke 24.37)

Jesus disciples rejected the first reports of his resurrection. It was only after Jesus appeared to them again and again, talking with
them, encouraging them to touch Him, to see that He had a physical body, showing them the wounds in His hands and His side,
that they became convinced (John 20:27, 29). If they had expected a resurrection, they would have been waiting for it. But they
werent, and they needed a lot of convincing when it did happen (Acts 1:3).

Implications
1.

The bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead is Gods public vindication of his Sons radical claims to divine authority.
No human being can bring himself back to life. God wouldnt have raised a liar or lunatic.

concerning His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who was a descendant of David according to the flesh 4 and who has been declared
to be the powerful Son of God by the resurrection from the dead according to the Spirit of holiness. (HCSB) Romans 1:3-4
2.

Because Jesus divine authority was demonstrated through the Resurrection, then we can trust that everything he said
was true.

He stated, "I am the Resurrection and the life; he who believes in me shall live even if he dies" (John 11:25). He also stated,
"I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no man comes to the father, but through me" (John 14:6). Our Salvation and
Resurrection to Eternal life is found and guaranteed through Jesus Christ alone. He also described the Bible as the Word of God
and that is how we should view it too.
He will transform the body of our humble condition into the likeness of His glorious body, by the power that enables Him to
subject everything to Himself. (HCSB) Philippians 3:21
3.

Any belief that contradicts this must be false. All other religious or secular ideas that contradict Jesus must therefore be
false, because no-one apart from Jesus has the authority that his resurrection from the dead gives. All other human leaders are
dead: Jesus is alive!

4.

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:54, "Death has been swallowed up in victory." Physical death is not the end; eternal life with
our Lord awaits all who trust in Him because Jesus has conquered death.

5.

While the resurrection can provide assurance of salvation, it also provides assurance of judgment because the resurrection
demonstrates that there is a life to follow this one, and Jesus claimed that those who reject His offer of forgiveness will face
judgment for their sins.

He (God) has set a day when He is going to judge the world in righteousness by the Man He has appointed. He has provided
proof of this to everyone by raising Him from the dead. (HCSB) Acts 17:31

I hope that that this presentation has shown you that Christian belief is not based on blind faith. Rather it is evidence based and
rational. God has revealed Himself to humanity through Jesus whom he raised from the dead. For Christians this is the greatest
news!
Jesus promised that whoever seeks Him will find Him. If you have not already done so, will you take up His invitation?

Some Sources on the Historicity of the Resurrection

Evans, Craig A. & Wright, Tom, Jesus, The Final Days, SPCK, 2008.
Habermas, Gary R., Experiences of the Risen Jesus: The Foundational Historical Issue in the Early Proclamation of the
Resurrection, Dialog: A Journal of Theology, Vol. 45; No. 3 (Fall, 2006), 288-297.
Habermas, Gary R. & Licona, Michael R., The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, Kregal Publications, 2004.
Holding, James Patrick (ed), Defending the Resurrection: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?, Xulon Press, 2010.
Kreeft, Peter & Tacelli, Ronald K., Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Chapter 8), Intervarsity Press, 1994.
Lane Craig, William, "Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Truth 1
(1985): 89-95.
Licona, Michael R, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, Intervarsity Press, 2010.
McDowell, Josh, The Resurrection Factor, Alpha, 1993.
Strobel, Lee, The Case for Easter, Zondervan, 2004.
Strobel, Lee, The Case for the Resurrection, Zondervan, 2010.
Wenham, John, Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Accounts in Conflict?, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005.
Wright, N.T., The Resurrection of the Son of God, Fortress Press, 2003.
Websites
Piper, John, Eight Reasons Why I Believe Jesus Rose from the Dead, http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/taste-seearticles/eight-reasons-why-i-believe-that-jesus-rose-from-the-dead, 2007.
Turner, Ryan, An Analysis of the Pre-Pauline Creed in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, http://carm.org/analysis-pre-pauline-creed-1corinthians-151-11
Yamauchi, Edwin M., Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History?, http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html,
1974.
Zukeran, Patrick, The Resurrection: Fact or Fiction?,
http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4225079/k.359F/The_Resurrection_Fact_or_Fiction.htm, 1997.
Something Different!
Resurrection Quiz Game, http://garyhabermas.com/games/games.htm

If you have questions feel free to contact me via email mrff39@gmail.com

10