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:

Share this with your friends:

Is the Resurrection of Jesus a Real Historical Event?

Last week I laid the groundwork for examining the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.  We’re going to be examining the evidence to help you in determining if it really happened.  I’m going to be presenting what’s known as the Minimal Facts Approach.  This approach was developed by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona. (For my Michigan readers, Gary got his Ph.D. at Michigan State.)

As I shared last week, the Minimal Facts Approach presents only those facts which are so strongly verified historically that they are accepted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.  It is presenting the case with the “lowest common denominator” of agreed-upon facts.  An advantage of this approach is that if you are sharing with someone who says, “I don’t  accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God.”  You can say, “That’s ok, you don’t have to to consider this evidence.  The evidence speaks for itself.”

Starting this week and in the coming weeks I will be presenting five minimal facts, or what Haberman and Licona call 4+1 facts.  This is because the first four are accepted by nearly every scholar and the fifth one is accepted by an impressive majority of scholars, though not by nearly all.  This week we begin with the first.

Fact 1 : Jesus Died By Crucifixion

Crucifixion was a common form of execution used by the Romans to punish members of the lower class, slaves, soldiers, the violently rebellious and traitors.  Crucifixion was an excruciatingly painful way to die.  In the first century BC, Cicero calls it the most horrendous torture.  Tacitus in the 2nd century calls it the “extreme penalty”.

So how historically certain is it that Jesus died by crucifixion?  Jesus’ execution by crucifixion is, of course, recorded in all four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  However a number of non-Christian sources report this as well.

The first century Jewish historian Josephus wrote, “When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified…”

Tacitus reports, “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 it’s origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate.”

Lucian of Samosata, the second century Greek satirist, wrote, “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day–the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.”

Mara Bar-Serapion, the Syrian, wrote, “Or [what advantage came to] the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them.”  While not specifically mentioning crucifixion, he does say that he was executed.

Finally, the Jewish Talmud reports that, “on the eve of the Passover Yeshu [Hebrew for Jesus] was hanged.”  Being hung on a tree was used to describe crucifixion.

So it seems clear that Jesus’ death by crucifixion is a historical fact supported by a good deal of evidence.

The highly critical Jesus Seminar scholar, John Dominic Crossan, who doesn’t accept a lot of what the Bible says about Jesus, however acknowledges,  “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”

So that’s the first building block in our case for the resurrection.  Come back next week as we build upon that with Fact 2, Jesus’ disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them.

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?

With Easter just six weeks away I’m going to begin looking at the evidence for the central element of all of Christianity, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.  The Resurrection sets Christianity apart from other faiths.  Christianity stands or falls on a historically verifiable event.  If the resurrection didn’t really take place, there’s no point to Christianity, it isn’t true, we may as well close the doors of every church.  The New Testament itself states this (1 Corinthians 15:13-18).

Jesus made some outrageous claims about himself, claiming to be God and the only way to the Father.  His critics asked for some evidence to back up his claims, they asked for a sign, and he said he would give them one, his resurrection.  Notice he didn’t give some vague, subjective test, but an objective, verifiable test.  You don’t just verify Christianity by some subjective, internal feeling you have that it’s true.  Any faith can be equally “verified” by that.  You can evaluate Christianity (and the subjective feelings you or someone else has about it) by looking at objective, external evidence.  That’s what we’ll be doing between now and Easter, examining the historical evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus.

It is my hope that if you haven’t come to know Jesus personally yet, that you will have some new things to consider, and if you do know him, that your faith will be strengthened and you will have some new things to share with others as we prepare to celebrate the greatest news of all, the good news of Easter!

How Do We Know if Something in History Actually Happened?

Before getting into the evidence we should first look at the nature of evaluating historical events.  How does one go about evaluating whether a reported historical event really happened?

First, it should be made clear that what we are looking for, with any historical event that occurred long ago, is not absolute certainty.  With events of long ago we don’t have the kind of evidence that can lead to 100% certainty.  When it comes to history we can only speak of probability.  As Gary Habermas asks, can we know with 100% certainty that George Washington was the first President of the U.S.?  Perhaps documents were forged and stories were invented in a conspiracy to encourage the citizens of this new country.  When looking at history, one investigates the data, considers the possibilities and seeks to determine which scenario best explains the evidence.

Next I want to present five principles that guide historians in evaluating accounts of the past.

1. Multiple independent sources support historical claims
   Naturally if we have more than one source telling us about an event, that makes it more certain.  Independent means  different sources witnessed and reported the event separately.  If a friend witnessed a crime and told you and you told someone else, there aren’t three independent sources, just one.  On the other hand if your friend and his brother both witnessed the crime and both told you, there are two independent sources.
2. Confirmation by an enemy supports historical claims
   If testimony is given by someone who is not sympathetic to the person or cause who benefits from the testimony, that’s an indication of authenticity.  If someone’s mother says that he is an honest person that means something, but if his enemy says that he’s honest, you’re probably more likely to believe it.
3. Embarrassing admissions support historical claims
   An indicator that a saying or event is authentic comes when the source would not be expected to create the story because it embarrasses him or his cause and weakens his position.  People make up stuff that makes them looks good, they don’t make up and share stuff that makes them look bad.
4. Eyewitness testimony supports historical claims
   Eyewitness testimony is stronger than a secondhand account.  Better that someone saw the event himself than just heard about it from someone else.
5. Early testimony supports historical claims
   The closer the time between the event and the testimony the better.  There is less time for exaggeration or legend to creep in.

These principles will guide us through our examination of the evidence.

Minimal Facts Approach

As we examine the evidence for the Resurrection we’ll be using Gary Habermas and Michael Licona’s Minimal Facts Approach.  This means considering only those facts which are so strongly verified historically that they are accepted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.  This is presenting the case with the “lowest common denominator” of agreed-upon facts.  Taking this approach means that one doesn’t need to accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God.

As Habermas and Licona say, “Too often the objection raised frequently against the Resurrection is, ‘Well, the Bible has errors, so we can’t believe Jesus rose.’  We can quickly push this point to the side: ‘I am not arguing at this time for the inspiration of the Bible or even it’s general trustworthiness.  Believer and skeptic alike accept the facts I’m using because they are so strongly supported.  These facts must be addressed.’”

It is not that they don’t believe in the inspiration of the Bible, they do, as do I, it’s about keeping the main thing the main thing, focusing on the evidence for the event on which Christianity stands of falls, the Resurrection of Jesus.  After all, we aren’t told in the Bible that someone has to believe in inspiration to have eternal life but we are told that one must believe that Jesus died for their sins and rose again.

I hope that you’ll join me each week leading into Easter as we examine these facts which are so strongly supported by the evidence and which build a very strong case.

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

Share this with your friends: