So we know that the gospels are reliable eyewitness accounts, some first-hand accounts, some second-hand. Now we have to investigate the controversial part, were the supernatural reports true? To do this, let's analyze any doubts about the major claim from the gospels, the resurrection of Jesus.
Paul, who wrote most of the New Testament, says
"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied." - 1 Corinthians 15:14-19
If you want to hear a maximal data argument for the resurrection (which accepts that the gospels are reliable eyewitness testimony) then watch this video below or go through this website: Home | Is Jesus Alive?
But if you want a more scrutinized approach or you haven't checked out the “Is Christianity a Myth” section yet, then keep reading to hear my minimal facts argument for the resurrection. My minimal facts argument is inspired and outlined by New Testament Scholar Michael R. Licona, who holds a Ph.D. in New Testament studies from the University of Pretoria.
Minimal Facts Argument
The logic I will be using to assess the resurrection facts follows methodical neutrality, where the one making the claim bears the burden of proof. If a hypothesis is true, then it should be able to reasonably explain all the facts without any liability that would cause a reasonable doubt. As a member of the Jury in a court case, you are presented with the facts or evidence around a case. You have to set aside your biases and speculations surrounding the case and base your decision on the hard evidence. With this evidence, you have to find reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case or decide on a reasonable explanation for the facts beyond a reasonable doubt.
Here are the relevant and minimal facts in the case of Jesus' fate, the majority of New Testament scholars (Atheist, Christian, and Agnostic alike) can agree on these three facts:
Jesus died by crucifixion and was buried
Jesus' tomb was empty and no one ever produced his body
Very shortly after Jesus’ death, the disciples had experiences that led them to believe and proclaim that Jesus had been resurrected and had appeared to them.
There must be a reasonable explanation for these facts. There are only four broad explanations, hypotheses, or theories that attempt to cover these facts:
The resurrection claims developed mythologically
The disciples lied
The disciples were deceived
Jesus had a bodily resurrection
The prosecution has the burden of proof, meaning they must prove that their explanation is correct beyond a reasonable doubt. Since I am trying to prove the 4th explanation (that Jesus rose from the dead), then I will take the position of a prosecutor. If the first three explanations fail to reasonably explain all the minimal facts due to liability but the last explanation can exhaustively explain the minimal facts in a reasonable manner without difficulty or liability, then my case is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The definition of reasonable is: “Acceptable to sound reason or judgment, logical.”
Fact #1: Jesus died and was buried
Evidence Sources:
(Licona),(Licona pp.303-318)
Licona, Michael R. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. InterVarsity Press, 2011, https://a.co/d/77f7Xrl.
Evidence Explanation:
Historical Evidence Jesus is alive (50-second mark)
1st-century historians Tacitus (Roman) and Josephus (Jewish) mention that Jesus died by crucifixion. We have ancient external sources (Josephus and Deuteronomy) and archaeological evidence that supports the historicity of Jewish burial customs for crucifixion victims. The Joseph of Arimathea burial story in the gospels is also an unlikely Christian invention because of the Sanhedrin hostility towards Christians. All reputable NT scholars accept that Jesus died by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, which would have most likely led to his burial.
✅The resurrection claims developed mythologically
If the resurrection claims developed mythologically, then you would expect Jesus to have died and been buried. Non-eyewitnesses could have stretched the truth about his death and burial by creating resurrection stories that developed over time. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The mythology theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅The disciples were lying
If the disciples were lying about the resurrection, then you would expect Jesus to have died and been buried. The witnesses could have lied about their resurrection sightings after his death and burial to create an elaborate hoax that misinformed their converts. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The lying theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅The disciples were deceived
If the disciples were deceived about the resurrection, then you would expect Jesus to have died and been buried. The death and burial of Jesus sets up the psychological grief for the witnesses to have fallen for a delusion or hallucinate a risen Jesus. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The deceived theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅Jesus had a bodily resurrection
If Jesus had a bodily resurrection, then you would expect Jesus to have died and been buried. For someone to have risen from the dead, they must have died first. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The resurrection theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
Fact #2: Jesus' tomb was empty and no one ever produced his body
Evidence Sources:
(Licona), (Licona pp.461-463)
Licona, Michael R. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. InterVarsity Press, 2011, https://a.co/d/77f7Xrl.
Evidence Explanation:
Early Christianity could not have taken off without an empty tomb; the Jewish authorities would have dragged out Jesus’ body to end the resurrection claims. This is known by historians as the “Jerusalem factor”. Ancient Jews also held the view that the disciples stole the body for an empty tomb, as noted in Justin Martyr’s dialogue with a Jew. This shows that both opponents and proponents of the resurrection agreed on the tomb being empty. The gospel accounts of the women seeing the empty tomb is an embarrassing detail for the early Christians because a woman's testimony was seen as unreliable in ancient Palestine, which makes it an unlikely Christian invention. (It doesn't matter if the gospel story of the empty tomb comes from the disciples or not, either way, it is an unlikely Christian invention and is therefore historical). Most reputable NT scholars accept that the tomb was empty, regardless of what caused Jesus's body to go missing.
✅The resurrection claims developed mythologically
If the resurrection claims developed mythologically, then you would still expect to see an empty tomb. The disciples could have stolen the body for their hoax while the stories of Jesus' resurrection started later on by non-eyewitnesses. Or the resurrection stories could have been started far away from Jerusalem where story inventors and listeners wouldn't investigate the empty tomb. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The mythology theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅The disciples were lying
If the disciples were lying about the resurrection, then you would expect to see an empty tomb. The disciples could have stolen the body for their hoax to trick others into thinking that Jesus’ empty tomb meant that he rose from the dead. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The conspiracy theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
❌The disciples were deceived
If the disciples were deceived about the resurrection appearances, you wouldn’t expect to see an empty tomb. If they were deceived, they would have sincerely believed in a resurrection and thus had no reason to steal Jesus’ body and lie.
Whether it be hallucinations, an imposter, epilepsy, ecstasy, mass delusion, or another psychotic episode, none of those deceptions would be able to explain the empty tomb. If the disciples were deceived and started proclaiming the resurrection, then the hostile Jewish authorities would have just dragged Jesus' body out of the tomb to end the delusion. The disciples would have realized their own deception after being proven wrong by Jesus' dead body and then Christianity would not have begun, but we know that Jesus’ tomb was empty and that no one produced his body. Any attempt to suggest that someone else stole or moved the body would lack evidence for the claim, motive, and means, which would make such an explanation extremely ad hoc (speculation) and inadmissible in a court of law. (If you have an evidential claim that rivals this explanation, please share it with my email in the About tab!)
The empty tomb becomes a major liability for the deception theory since it fails to be accounted for and reasonably explained by deception. This liability gives us reason to doubt the deceived explanation. The deception theory fails to reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅Jesus had a bodily resurrection
If Jesus had a bodily resurrection, then you would expect to see an empty tomb. In order for Jesus to be resurrected and appear to his disciples, he would need to leave his tomb. The Jewish authorities would not be able to discount real bodily resurrection claims about Jesus since there would be no dead body to drag out. The empty tomb is evidence that Jesus’ dead body left the tomb, which can be explained by a bodily resurrection that made Jesus’ dead body become a living body. There is no reason to doubt this explanation. The resurrection theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
Fact #3: Very shortly after Jesus’ death, the disciples had experiences that led them to believe and proclaim that Jesus had been resurrected and had appeared to them
Evidence Sources:
(Licona), (Licona p.302 pp.318-373)
Licona, Michael R. The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. InterVarsity Press, 2011, https://a.co/d/77f7Xrl.
Evidence Explanation:
The early dating of the Corinthian creed shows that the resurrection claims started within 3 days (or a similarly short time) of Jesus' death and that the claims came from the original disciples themselves. This creed records the 12 apostles, James, and 500 brothers at one time as seeing the risen Jesus, along with Paul (the former Pharisee tasked with killing Christians) adding that he saw the risen Jesus and converted.
Paul's letters and the growth of the early church show that the disciples boldly proclaimed the resurrection. The letters from Paul and early church father letters show that the disciples faced immense persecution for their resurrection proclamation. These sources also mention the martyrdom of some apostles with Tertullian attesting to public records of Paul and Peter's death. The crucifixion of Jesus and Nero’s persecution of Christians mentioned by Tacitus shows the hostile environment towards early Christians and their sufferings, which corroborates the NT and church tradition claims of persecution. Pliny the Younger describes “recant or be killed” practices by the Romans for the execution of Christians. Josephus wrote in 90 AD saying that the disciples never abandoned their faith (read the uncorrupted Arabic and reconstructed versions here).
How would the early church start, grow, and endure persecution if the founding disciples recanted their faith? You don't have to prove martyrdom to believe in the sincerity of the disciples' resurrection claim. The evidence shows that the disciples were willing to suffer, be persecuted, and risk death for resurrection proclamations that provided no worldly gain. All reputable NT scholars accept that the disciples sincerely believed in their resurrection appearances, no matter what the actual cause of those appearances was.
❌The resurrection claims developed mythologically
If the resurrection claims developed mythologically then you wouldn't expect to see the original disciples proclaiming the resurrection early on. Myths are formed by non-eyewitnesses who create stories long after the event and its eyewitnesses have passed away. The fact that the resurrection claims can be traced to the original eyewitness disciples means that it's impossible for the resurrection claims to have been started by mythology.
This fact is a major liability to the mythology theory because it shows that the resurrection claims were made by eyewitnesses who lived and walked with Jesus, not by non-eyewitnesses who invented stories generations later. This liability gives us reason to doubt the mythology explanation. The mythology theory fails to reasonably explain this fact without liability.
❌The disciples were lying
If the disciples were lying, then you wouldn’t expect them to believe that Jesus had resurrected and appeared to them. When you start a lie, you know that you are spreading false information, meaning that you are not convinced by the lie that you created. If the disciples lied, then they wouldn’t be able to believe that Jesus appeared to them because that contradicts the meaning of a lie. Therefore, the disciples did not steal Jesus' body and create an elaborate hoax.
New Testament scholars will unanimously acknowledge that the disciples had experiences that led them to sincerely believe in a risen Jesus (see the evidence explanation above). There is no reputable NT scholar in academia who accepts the conspiracy/lying theory because of the hard evidence, and that is a major liability for this theory which gives us reason to doubt the conspiracy explanation. The lying/conspiracy theory fails to reasonably explain this fact without liability.
❌The disciples were deceived
If the disciples were deceived then you would still expect them to believe and proclaim that Jesus had resurrected and appeared to them, but you wouldn’t expect those deceived resurrection claims to start very shortly after his death and still lead to long-lasting proclamation. The 12 disciples and “500 brothers at one time” (see the Corinthian creed source above) could have experienced a vision of Jesus that wasn’t actually there such as a mass delusion or a hallucination caused by grief, ecstasy, or epilepsy. Although group hallucinations are highly implausible according to modern psychologists, such a deception would lead the disciples to sincerely believe that Jesus rose from the dead.
However, the fact that the disciples made these claims so soon after Jesus' death means that they were near Jewish authorities who could have discredited their visions. The disciples did not experience resurrection appearances years after Jesus' death in faraway countries where his tomb wouldn't be available, the claims were made very early on and thus present at Jesus' grave. Given the intense and hostile persecution of Christians by the Jewish authorities, disproving the early resurrection deceptions would have been an easy task. The Jewish authorities would have been around to drag Jesus' body out of the tomb and discredit the resurrection claims made early on in Jerusalem and Judea. This would expose the disciples' delusions and lead them to drop their claims that they could no longer sincerely believe.
If the disciples were deceived by early visions of Jesus, then you would expect the present Jewish authorities to have defeated their resurrection claims and end the growth of Christianity. However, the disciples made resurrection claims very early on and were able to still proclaim the resurrection years later. This shows that the Jewish authorities failed to discredit their claims and expose the delusion, making the deception hypothesis highly unlikely. This failure was most likely due to an empty tomb since an observable dead body of Jesus would have put a sure end to the resurrection claims and growth of the early church. As we learned earlier, the deception theory fails to reasonably explain the empty tomb fact, which is a fact that can be reasonably derived from this early resurrection proclamation line of evidence.
The very early resurrection claims are a major liability to the deception theory because of the Jewish failure to discredit the claims and the empty tomb inference that ensues, which gives us reason to doubt this explanation. The deception theory fails to reasonably explain this fact without liability.
✅Jesus had a bodily resurrection
If Jesus had a bodily resurrection, then you would expect the disciples to believe and proclaim that Jesus had resurrected and appeared to them. The disciples believed that they saw a resurrected Jesus. This is direct evidence of a risen Jesus, and if Jesus was alive in a physical body, then it would have been reasonable for him to appear to his closest disciples and have them proclaim the amazing news. There is no reason to doubt such an explanation. The resurrection theory can reasonably explain this fact without liability.
Is there any liability for the resurrection hypothesis?
The bodily resurrection theory is the only hypothesis left standing that can reasonably explain ALL the minimal facts while the other competing explanations fail to reasonably explain the same facts without a liability that sparks reasonable doubt. However, some may argue that the bodily resurrection hypothesis is implausible because it suggests that a supernatural miracle occurred which skeptics would say “is impossible because I and many other people have never seen a miracle”.
However, people who argue this are implementing a clear anti-supernatural bias. I could flip their logic on its head and say “I’ve personally experienced a miracle like 35% of Americans, therefore complete naturalism is false and Jesus rising from the dead is way more likely than other natural explanations”. See how flawed that logic is? Neither philosophical bias (anti-naturalism or anti-supernaturalism) should be used as an argument. When fairly assessing the facts and competing explanations, we need to set aside our philosophical biases and personal experiences, just like fair members of a jury.
Based on an understanding of scientific laws, I know that full bodily resurrections after three days of death are implausible by purely natural means, only a supernatural miracle could cause such an event to happen. The definition of a miracle per Oxford is “a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency”. A miracle seems to describe Jesus’ bodily resurrection perfectly since there is no natural law that could reasonably explain such an occurrence, and the resurrection witnesses associated this event with the divine work of God and his holy spirit.
But is this really possible?
Modern-day medical documentations show that supernatural miracles are possible:
More medical miracles (see the footnotes of this article for sources)
Now I’m not saying that we must accept every miracle claim (they must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis), what I’m saying is that the strongest miracle claims (which are backed by proven medical evidence) give us reason to believe that miracles are possible. We can’t dogmatically conclude that miracles are impossible; the anti-supernatural bias is unreasonable and therefore not a true liability for the resurrection claims.
The resurrection miracle claim shifts from just being possible to being reasonable and plausible in this case because of the way it explains the facts compared to the other possible naturalistic counter theories. The disciples’ resurrection claim exhaustively explains the facts without difficulty and liability while the other naturalistic theories fail to reasonably explain the same facts without liability. Therefore, the disciples' claim that Jesus rose from the dead is the most reasonable and plausible explanation for the resurrection facts. The resurrection miracle claim is a form of direct evidence, meaning if the testimony of the disciples is true then it proves that a resurrection occurred. Is there any reason to believe that their testimony was not truthful?
We know that the disciples weren't lying,
We know that the disciples weren’t deceived,
so abductive logic tells us that the disciples must have been telling the truth about a resurrection miracle. Jesus' resurrection is true beyond a reasonable doubt.