Share this with your friends:

Is the Resurrection of Jesus a Real Historical Event?

Easter is just a week away and today we wrap up with the fifth historical fact in what I could call my Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. We’ve been examining the evidence for the resurrection using the Minimal Facts Approach presented by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona.  This deals with the five minimal facts that are so well historically confirmed that they are accepted by nearly every scholar, even the skeptical ones.  Check out the four previous posts if you missed them.

Fact 5 : The Tomb was Empty

This fifth fact doesn’t have as wide an acceptance among scholars as the previous four but still an impressive majority of about 75% accept it.  What’s more there is strong evidence for it.  Let’s look at that evidence.

The Jerusalem Factor

Jesus was publicly executed in Jerusalem.   Then his after death appearances and empty tomb were first proclaimed publicly in Jerusalem.  That being the case, it would have been impossible for Christianity to get off the ground in Jerusalem if the body had been in the tomb.  His enemies in the Jewish leadership and Roman government would have only had to exhume the body and display it to bring an end to it all.  But not only are Jewish, Roman and all other writings missing any such account, there is total silence from Christianity’s critics who would have jumped at this sort of evidence.  Certainly the 2nd century critic Celsus would have mentioned it when writing against the resurrection but no such mention is made.

Some have said that by that time the body wouldn’t have been recognizable so they didn’t produce it.  However, it is reported that they began proclaiming it about 50 days after Jesus’ crucifixion and in the arid climate there, a corpse’s hair, stature, and distinctive wounds would still have been identifiable.  Besides that, regardless of the condition of the body, the enemies of Jesus would still have found benefit in producing the corpse.

Enemy Confirmation

Enemy confirmation is strong evidence and the empty tomb is not only reported by Christian sources but Jesus’ enemies confirmed it as well, even if indirectly.  Rather than produce a body, early critics accused Jesus’ disciples of stealing the body.  This is reported by Matthew, Justin Martyr and Tertullian.  There would have been no need to account for the missing body if it was still in the tomb.  This is the only early opposing theory that we know of that was offered by Jesus’ enemies.  So they indirectly confirmed that the tomb was empty.

You Wouldn’t Make That Up

Let’s consider one of the interesting details of the story of the empty tomb.  Who were the primary witnesses of the empty tomb? Some of the women followers of Jesus were.  Not only are women the first witnesses mentioned, they are mentioned in four gospels whereas male witnesses only appear later and only in two gospels.

So what?  This would be a very odd invention when you consider how the testimony of women was viewed in Jewish and Roman cultures at this time.  A woman’s testimony was considered questionable and certainly not as credible as a man’s testimony.

First century Jewish historian Josephus wrote, “But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex, nor let servant be admitted to give testimony on account of the ignobility of their soul; since it is probable that they may not speak truth, either out of hope of gain, or fear of punishment.”

 The Talmud said, “Any evidence which a woman [gives] is not valid (to offer), also they are not valid to offer.”

 According to the statement in Rosh Hashannah, a woman’s testimony was given the same regard as that of a robber.

 So given that view of the testimony of women at the time, it is highly unlikely that the gospel authors would invent the story and have women be the witnesses.  Imaging them saying, “Let’s make up this story that’s hard to believe in the first place, and let’s make some women, that most people won’t listen to, let’s make them the ones who witness and report it.”

This doesn’t sound like an invention.  Rather it sounds like the accurate reporting of the facts, even though those facts might not be the most helpful to them.

And so, for these three reasons, the empty tomb seems historically credible.

Former Oxford University church historian William Wand writes, “All the strictly historical evidence we have is in favor of [the empty tomb], and those scholars who reject it ought to recognize that they do so on some other ground than that of scientific history.”

Come back next week as we sum up the case for the resurrection and celebrate what that great, historically verifiable event can mean to your life and my life today.

Source: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona

Share this with your friends:

Share this with your friends:

Is the Resurrection of Jesus a Real Historical Event?

Were any skeptics of Jesus won over by seeing him after his resurrection?  We’ll explore that as we continue to examine the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, using the Minimal Facts Approach.  I’m presenting the five minimal facts that are so well historically confirmed that they are accepted by nearly every scholar, even the skeptical ones.  With the first two facts we saw that Jesus died by crucifixion and his disciples believed that he rose again and appeared to them.  The last three facts support the first two.  Last week we saw that the persecutor of the Church, Paul, was suddenly changed.  Now we move onto fact 4.

Fact 4 : The Skeptic James, the Brother of Jesus, was Suddenly Changed

The gospels report that Jesus had at least four brothers, or rather half-brothers, James, Joseph, Judas and Simon, plus unnamed sisters.  Josephus, the Jewish historian mentions, “the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, whose name was James.”

So what did James think of Jesus during his life?  How do you think you would react if your brother started claiming he was God?

Before

We don’t have as much historical information on James as we do on Paul, but the gospels report that Jesus’ brothers, including James, were unbelievers during Jesus’ ministry.

Mark 3:21 says that his family “went to take charge of him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind.’”

John 7:5 says, “For even his own brothers did not believe in him.”

After

Acts 15 identifies James as one of the leaders at the Jerusalem council.

Galatians 1:19 refers to “James, the  Lord’s brother” as an apostle.

And not only did James become a believer, he also became willing to suffer and even die as a martyr for his new belief in the risen Jesus, just as the other disciples did.  James’ suffering and martyrdom for his faith in the risen Jesus is reported by multiple sources: Josephus, Hegesippus, and Clement of Alexandria (we no longer have these writings by Hegesippus and Clement, but the church historian Eusebius quotes them).  This means we have both Christian and non-Christian sources for this.

Why?

So what explains such a dramatic change for James, that he went from not believing in his brother at all to becoming a leader in the new Christian church and, what’s more, becoming willing to give his life for his belief?  What could explain this if not,  as is reported, that Jesus appeared to his brother after he died and rose again?  Then you just might believe your brother is God, right?

Come back next week for Fact 5: The tomb was empty.

Source: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona

Share this with your friends:

Share this with your friends:

Is the Resurrection of Jesus a Real Historical Event?

Did only people who were friendly to Jesus claim to have seen him after his resurrection?  The last few weeks we’ve been examining the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, using the Minimal Facts Approach.  I’m presenting the five minimal facts that are so well historically confirmed that they are accepted by nearly every scholar, even the skeptical ones.  Two weeks ago we looked at the first fact, Jesus died by crucifixion.  Last week built upon that with the second fact, Jesus’ disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them.  The last three facts support the first two.

Fact 3 : The Church Persecutor Paul was Suddenly Changed

Saul of Tarsus, better known to most of us as the Apostle Paul, was a devout Jew who believed it was God’s will for him to persecute and imprison member of the new Christian church.  He was going about doing that when he suddenly changed and became one of the church’s most influential messengers and leaders.

In his letters to three different churches Paul writes of his change from persecutor of the church to promoter. The story of his conversion is also recorded in the book of Acts.  It also seems that the story of his dramatic change was going around the region of Judea within three years of his conversion.  Paul hinted at this in writing to the Galatians that though they did not know him by sight, they had heard the report that “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.” (Galatians 1:23)  So multiple sources report his sudden change but what could bring this radical change about?

Why?

Both Paul himself and Luke, in Acts, report that it was because Paul firmly believed that he had experienced an encounter with the risen Jesus. (Acts 9:1-19; 22:3-21; 26:9-23; 1 Corinthians 9:1; 15:8)  Paul’s conversion is so interesting because he was an enemy of Jesus and the church when he claimed that he saw the risen Jesus appear to him!  And so the resurrection of Jesus is testified to by both his friends and an enemy.  We saw in the introduction to this series of posts that confirmation by an enemy strongly supports historical claims.

What’s more, we must realize that Paul’s sudden change came at a great cost.  Someone might say, “People do change their minds and positions sometimes, what’s the big deal?”  However this wasn’t like Rush Limbaugh suddenly supporting a Democrat candidate for President, as shocking as that would be.  Remember what Paul was doing when he was converted.  He was persecuting the church.  He was imprisoning Christians under the authority of the Jewish leaders and he had been there at the stoning of the first Christian martyr, Stephen.  Luke reports that Paul was, “still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples.” (Acts 9:1)

As shocking as it would be for Rush to support a Democrat, he wouldn’t be persecuted, imprisoned or possibly killed for it.  Paul was so convinced that he had seen Jesus, risen from the dead, that he chose to go from being an authorized and empowered persecutor to being one of the persecuted!  Paul began preaching about the risen Jesus even though that meant that he would suffer greatly for it and it would end in his martyrdom.  This is well documented by Paul himself, Luke, Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Tertullian, Dionysius of Corinth and Origen.

Friend and Foe Alike

So not only did Jesus’ friends and followers so firmly believe that the risen Jesus appeared to them that they were willing to suffer for their testimony, so too was Paul, the once great enemy of the church.

As we continue to add these five minimal facts I think you can see that they build a very strong case.  Any alternate theory has to account for not just one, but all five facts.  For example, one could say that the disciples stole Jesus’ body and lied about the resurrection, as the Jewish leaders did.  However (aside from the fact that that seems unlikely given the disciple’s willingness to suffer and die for their claims) how does that explain how an enemy of the church came to claim he had seen the risen Jesus and went from persecutor to persecuted?  And it will become even more difficult for any other theory to explain all the facts once we add the final two.

Come back next week for Fact 4: The skeptic James, the brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed.

Source: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona

Share this with your friends:

Share this with your friends:

Is the Resurrection of Jesus a Real Historical Event?

Two weeks ago I laid the groundwork for examining the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and  now I’m presenting the five minimal facts that are so well historically confirmed that they are accepted by nearly every scholar, even the skeptical ones.  Last week we looked at the first fact, Jesus died by crucifixion.  This week we build upon that with the second fact.

Fact 2 : Jesus’ Disciples Believed that He Rose and Appeared to Them

There is a virtual consensus among scholars who study the resurrection that after Jesus died by crucifixion, his disciples really believed that he rose from the dead and appeared to them.  This is because the evidence shows that 1) the disciples themselves claimed that Jesus had risen and appeared to them, and 2) after they said that they saw the risen Jesus, they were radically transformed from fearful cowards who denied and abandoned Jesus at his arrest and went into hiding — to bold and brave men who proclaimed the good news of the risen Jesus in spite of the imprisonment, torture and death that that brought.

Let’s look at the evidence for each of these point.

1) They claimed it

What if someone says, “I don’t believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God and I’m not sure the four gospels were written by the alleged authors.”?  Some say that the resurrection and Jesus’ miracles are legends that were added much later.  So how do we trace these claims back to the disciples themselves?  There are nine early, independent sources, in three categories, that show that Jesus’ disciples themselves claimed to have seen the risen Jesus.

First, Paul confirmed that the disciples made this claim. Paul wasn’t with the twelve disciples when Jesus was here.  He joined the church later, after persecuting it, but he got to know the original disciples personally (this is confirmed by sources both inside and outside of the Bible) and he confirms that they proclaimed that Jesus appeared to them 1 Cor 15:11.

Second, while I don’t have the space to go into the details, early oral tradition, that came before the writing of the New Testament, takes the proclamation of Jesus’ resurrection appearances back to within five years of the event and back to the disciples themselves.

Third, early church fathers, including Clement and Polycarp, who were students of the disciples themselves and knew them personally, confirm that they claimed and proclaimed the appearances of Jesus, risen from the dead.

2) They believed it

The disciples’ radical transformation into bold proclaimers and their willingness to suffer and even die for their claim shows that they believed it.  Sources outside the Bible, as well as those within, report the persecution, suffering and even martyrdom of the original disciples and Paul as well.

Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius Tertullian, Origen and others report the disciples’ willingness to suffer for their beliefs.  They report their suffering and martyrdom for their claims.  Origen wrote that the disciple’s devotion to the teachings of Jesus “was attended with danger to human life”.  Further, he said, “Jesus, who has both once risen himself and led his disciples to believe in his resurrection, and so thoroughly  persuaded them of it’s truth, that they show to all men by their sufferings how they are able to laugh at all the troubles of life, beholding the life eternal and the resurrection clearly demonstrated to them both in word and deed.”

The evidence is clear that the disciples believed that the risen Jesus appeared to them and they were willing to suffer and even lose their lives for those claims.  Atheistic New Testament scholar, Gerd Ludemann concluded, “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.”  This doesn’t mean that he believes that Jesus rose from the dead but it’s clear to him that the disciples believed it.

So What?

So they believed it, but don’t people die all the time for things they believe that aren’t true?  The 9-11 terrorists clearly believed in their cause and were willing to give their lives for their beliefs, but that doesn’t mean their beliefs were true.  So why is the disciples’ belief in the resurrection of Jesus such strong evidence that it actually occurred?

There is a significant difference between modern martyrs dying for their beliefs and Jesus’ disciples doing so.  Modern martyrs act on their trust in things that were taught to them by others.  The disciples, on the other hand, stood firm on their own eyewitness claims.  The disciples were in the position to know if their claims were true or a lie.  People die for a lie quite often but no one willingly dies for a lie that they know is a lie.

In a conspiracy someone always cracks to save their own skin.  And yet the disciples of Jesus were so certain that Jesus rose from the dead that every one of them continued to proclaim that, no matter what they were threatened with.  They never changed their story because the message of the Risen Savior meant more to them than their very lives.  I don’t know about you but I think that’s some testimony that’s worth listening to.

Come back next week for Fact 3:  The church persecutor Paul was suddenly changed.

Source: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona

Share this with your friends: