For Part 1, please click here.

In Part II we will examine sources germane to the aforementioned historical facts that Jesus was raised.

Category 1, Source 1 In first century Palestine, pen and paper were scarce. 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is the quintessential text among critical scholars for citing the church’s earliest oral tradition. According to Dr. Habermas, most scholars place the origin of this pre-Pauline creed within five years of Jesus’ crucifixion. Paul says, 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 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 (NIV). The words “received” and “passed” are Greek terms for passing on tradition. Paul is not the originator of the biblical text, nor did he receive it from the Lord. Paul’s source was other Christians, and he is passing it on.[7]

Category 1, Source 2 is the oral tradition notable in the Book of Acts and reflected in the kerygma (i.e. act of preaching). All contain references to the resurrection of Christ. The most popular candidates for these condensed confessional segments are located within the sermon material in Acts: Acts 1:21-22, 2:22-36, 3:13-16, 4:8-10, 5:29-32, 10:39-43, 13:28-31, 17:1-3, and 17:30-31. Habermas points out the majority of critical scholars dates some of these kerygmatic snippets back to the thirties. Anyone asserting the resurrection claim is a legendary development occurring decades after Christ must bear the burden of proof; ironically their debate would be with critical and conservative scholars alike.

Category 2, Source 3 The evidence for authorship of Paul’s epistles is supported by a consistent writing style and unified content that in turn makes Paul the critic’s darling. Virtually all critical scholars accept 7 of his 13 epistles as trustworthy historical data: Romans, Philippians, Philemon, Galatians, 1&2 Corinthians, and 1 Thessalonians. In addition, Paul’s authorship is multiply attested: 2 Peter 3:15-16, Ignatius in his Letter to the Ephesians, Clement of Rome in 1 Clement , and Polycarp in his Letter to the Philippians claim Paul wrote 1 Corinthians.[8] Paul not only claims to be an eyewitness of the resurrection, but to personally know other eyewitnesses who preached the same message. Paul’s authorship establishes numerous resurrection claims that are a vital link in this debate.

Category 3, Sources 4-7 are the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each of these independent sources claims resurrection appearances, or implies the tomb was empty because Christ had been raised: the sources are Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:13, Mark 16:6, Luke 24:5-6, Luke 24:36-43, John 2:18-22, John 20:1-15, John 20:24-28, and John 21:19-30. While authorship of the gospels is highly disputed, “it is well accepted that all four gospels plus Acts, the sequel to Luke, were written during the first century, within seventy years of Jesus’ resurrection.”[9]

Habermas adds that use of the gospels as a source for resurrection claims is not dependent on the gospel authorship debate. Rather, the larger point hinges on numerous, independent, early, multiply-attested, even non-biblically attested sources making claims to the resurrection. In other words, even if we took the most critical approach possible, and assumed unknown gospel authorship, and that the majority of gospel content is legendary, the fact remains: the gospels are first century documents having almost unanimous consensus among scholars claiming the disciples “AT A MINIMUM” believed Christ appeared to them.[10]

Category 4, Sources 8-9 come from the next generation leaders, Clement of Rome and Polycarp being in the forefront. Their testimony is significant, because like Paul, they are only one step removed from the eyewitnesses. In both cases, there is solid historical evidence for their apostolic association.

In AD 95, Clement wrote in 1 Clement that the apostles were so certain of the resurrection they proclaimed the Kingdom of God. Around AD 185 Irenaeus in Against Heresies states: “Clement had been conversant with the apostles, and received instructions from them.” Around AD 200, Tertullian writes in Prescription for Heretics, that Clement had been ordained a bishop by Peter.

Polycarp, in his Letter to the Philippians (AD 110 - AD140), mentions Christ’s resurrection five times. Around AD 180, Irenaeus says of Polycarp in Against Heresies, that he was instructed and ordained a bishop by the apostles. In addition, Irenaeus reports that Polycarp received his instruction directly from the eyewitnesses, and had familiar interaction with John, and the other disciples who had seen Christ.[11]

Additionally, we have good historical evidence the apostles and disciples not only “claimed” to see the risen Christ, but “believed” it. The evidence for this claim rests on the assertion that people do not usually suffer and die for something they know to be false. This is contrasted with those who die for a sincere belief, which happens often. The eyewitnesses, not their successors, were in the unique position to know if Christ had been resurrected, making their death all the more improbable if they were purposely lying.[12] These sufferings and deaths and their connection to the risen Christ rests on multiple sources: Clement (AD 95), Polycarp (AD 100), Ignatius (AD 110), Tacitus (AD 64-67), Dionysius (AD 170), Hegesippus (AD 170), Tertullian (AD 200), Origen (AD 200), Clement of Alexandria (AD 200), and Eusebius (AD 230s). Even if all these accounts were riddled with embellishments, the weight of historical evidence points toward the disciple’s suffering, and in some cases dying, for their “sincere belief” that Christ was raised from the dead.[13]

In conclusion, evidence for Jesus’ resurrection has been presented using the minimal facts approach, which considers only data so strongly attested historically that even the majority of non-believing scholars find them acceptable. We considered a quintet of facts: C.A.P.S. plus the Empty Tomb.

Using the acronym O.P.E.N. we have examined nine independent early sources spanning four categories of historical evidence with the focus on Christ’s postmortem appearances. Dr. Habermas summarizes the critical response to this data: “I recently completed an overview of more than 1,400 sources on the resurrection of Jesus published since 1975. I’ve studied and catalogued about 650 of these texts in English, German, and French. No fact is more widely recognized than that early Christian believers had real experiences they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus. A critic may claim they saw hallucinations or visions, but he does not deny that they actually experienced something.”[14]

The academic work of William Lane Craig justifies him as conceivably the premier Christian apologist in the last half century. In Craig’s view, the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus rests upon three independently established facts: the empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. If these facts can be established, then one is justified in inferring Jesus’ resurrection as the most plausible explanation.[15]

Attempts claiming the resurrection has little or no historical support comes from understudied laymen, not critical scholarship. The wealth of historical data does not prove the resurrection, but is the first step in advancing the probabilistic historical argument that multiple, independent, early, and some cases eyewitness claims about the resurrection are more than myths. Christians can safely base their faith on strong historical data, and if they are current on New Testament criticism, can easily repudiate a skeptic’s claim to the contrary. When the truth of Christ’s resurrection is attacked, it is incumbent upon us to take a stand: 3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people Jude 3 (NIV).

If you are interested in pursuing additional depth in defense of the historical claim of the physical resurrection of Jesus and being able to share those truths, a recommended resource is The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus authored by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona.

Footnote References [1] Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), 665. [2] Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2004), 47. [3] Ibid, 36-40. [4] Ibid, 48-68. [5] Ibid, 69-74. [6] Ibid, 48-77. [7] Ibid, 51-53. [8] Ibid, 280. [9] Ibid, 53. [10] Ibid, 50-51. [11] Ibid, 54-55. [12] Ibid, 56-57. [13] Ibid, 57-59. [14] Ibid, 60. [15] William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith Christian Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008), 361.

For writers of the New Testament, Jesus’ resurrection was the focal point of their teachings. The apostle Paul was adamant concerning the importance of the resurrection when he wrote: And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins 1 Corinthians 15:17 (NIV). This historical test of truth leaves no room for ambiguity. Christianity stands or falls based on the risen Christ. In fact, the resurrection loses its apologetic value unless it is a physical resurrection of the same body that died.[1]

In view of the common objection that Jesus was raised, we will examine historical data using Dr. Gary Habermas’ minimal facts approach. If we are successful, we will build a strong foundation that shows the resurrection claim is grounded on solid history, and, in turn, will enable us to safely share compelling evidence in defense of our Christian faith.

The skeptic asks challenging questions that demand answers: “What are the best sources in support of the resurrection of the historical Jesus?” “Are there any persuasive facts concerning Jesus’ resurrection for which all scholars agree?” How will you address these questions? It is almost a guarantee that most people will not listen patiently through a ten minute response. It’s imperative when sharing our faith to be able to cogently summarize an argument, and then handle follow-up questions. As the apostle Peter stated: Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have 1 Peter 3:15b (NIV). Given that other religions and worldviews make “one-way-only” claims of their own, where does the Christian begin?

According to Dr. Habermas, minimal facts are represented by three core criteria for evaluating the resurrection claim: (a) it uses only the strongest historical evidence based on universally accepted criteria; (b) it uses only historical evidence conceded by virtually all critical scholarship; and (c) while the Bible is divinely inspired, it treats the Bible as another book of ancient literature, i.e. divine inspiration is not used to advantage.[2] The beauty of the minimal facts approach eliminates the burden of brute memorization of numerous details, yet provides key facts required to build a substantive case for Jesus’ resurrection. The skeptic will need to respond.

Credible historiography, according to Habermas, is dependent upon the historical principles of multiple, independent, early, eye witness testimony. While firsthand testimony is ideal, an “eyewitness of an eyewitness” is also strong historical evidence.[3] Non-Christian authors and embarrassing testimony are also considered highly reliable. In addition, when it comes to history, we can only speak of probability; nothing can be established with 100% certainty. When dealing with historical topics, we follow the weight of the data, much in the same way as the judicial system when solving crimes.

Based on minimal facts criteria and credible historiography summarized above, Habermas cites four virtually undisputed historical facts concerning the resurrection accepted by critical and conservative scholars. At the risk of redundancy, these facts will be referred to using the acronym C.A.P.S.: (C)rucifixion of Christ, (A)ppearances of Christ to the disciples in bodily resurrection, (P)aul, the former church prosecutor, became a church promoter to the point of martyrdom for his belief in the resurrection, and the (S)keptic James, brother of Jesus, became a church leader and martyr for his belief that Christ was raised.[4]

In addition to the four undisputed facts, Habermas espouses solid evidence for the Empty Tomb. Had Jesus’ tomb been occupied, it would have been impossible for Christianity to get started in the same city (Jerusalem) where Jesus was publicly executed. Moreover, the empty tomb was enemy attested by non-Christian sources. In addition, the empty tomb was discovered by women who were not considered to be credible witnesses in first century Palestine. Why would authors knowingly invent data that would hurt the credibility of their story? According to Habermas, the empty tomb is 75-80% undisputed.[5] When the stone was rolled away, the evidence clearly shows that Jesus’ tomb was not occupied. JESUS IS ALIVE. We cannot say the same for Muhammad, Confucius, and Buddha.

Figure 1 summarizes the five substantive facts (above)

As with all valid historical arguments, assertions are meaningless without the historical sources to justify their claims. Based on Dr. Habermas’ and Dr. Licona’s book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, we will examine in more detail the “central point” of the resurrection argument, the appearances of Christ to the disciples, which is the “A” in C.A.P.S. Nine independent sources are cited that employ four categories of historical data.

For ease of memorization, the categories are represented by the acronym O.P.E.N.: The “O” stands for the category oral tradition in support of the earliest church creeds. The “P” stands for the category Paul’s epistles. The “E” stands for the category evangelist’s gospel accounts. The “N” stands for the category next generation leaders who were eyewitnesses of those claiming to be eyewitnesses of the resurrection.[6] Again, brute memorization is not required. Most of the time, a summary of the four categories of O.P.E.N. without introducing detailed sources is generally a sufficient argument. In fact, this summary would place you well ahead of what the majority of Christians know concerning resurrection apologetics.

Figure 2 incorporates the categories and sources pertinent to the appearances of Christ in bodily resurrection. Additional details are included in the textual source descriptions that follow.

For Part 2, please click here.