4. A Quintet of Facts (4+ 1): The Last Three
A Quintet of Facts (4 + 1)
The First Two
A s we approach the positive evidence for Jesus' resurrection, keep in mind
.the "minimal facts approach" explained in the introduction to part 2. In
particular, remember that we will consider data that are so strongly evidenced
historically that nearly every scholar regards them as reliable facts. Elsewhere,
Habermas lists twelve historical facts.' For our purposes here, though, we will
focus on just a few of them.' Our objective will be to build a strong yet simple
case for Jesus' resurrection on just a few facts. All four meet our "minimal facts
approach" criteria. They are backed by so much evidence that nearly every
scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones, accepts them. A
fifth fact will be added that enjoys acceptance by an impressive majority of scholars, though not by nearly all. That's why we refer to these as the "4 + 1." In this
chapter we will discuss the first two of these five facts.
Throughout chapters 3-8, the major points are illustrated graphically using charts. Some may find these illustrations to be a helpful way to remember ideas.
The first fact: Jesus died by crucifixion
Crucifixion was a common form of execution employed by the Romans to punish members of the lower class, slaves, soldiers, the violently rebellious, and those accused of treason.' The first-century Jewish historian Josephus reports that during the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, the Roman soldiers felt such hatred toward the Jews that they crucified a multitude of them in various postures.4 Crucifixion was a very torturous death. In the first century B.c., Cicero calls it the most horrendous torture.' So hideous was the act of crucifixion upon a man that he also writes that "the very word `cross' should be far removed not only from the person of a Roman citizen but from his thoughts, his eyes and his ears."' Tacitus in the second century refers to it as "the extreme penalty."'
That Jesus was executed by crucifixion is recorded in all four gospels. However, a number of non-Christian sources of the period report the event as well. Josephus writes, "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 its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.""
Lucian of Samosata, the Greek satirist, writes, "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, writing to his son from prison comments, "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?"" Although Mara does not mention crucifixion as the mode of Jesus' execution, he does say that he was killed. The Talmud reports that "on the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged."''- Yeshu is Joshua in Hebrew. The equivalent in Greek is lesous'3 or Jesus. Being hung on a tree was used to describe crucifixion in antiquity.' Clearly, Jesus' death by crucifixion is a historical fact supported by considerable evidence.
The highly critical scholar of the Jesus Seminar, John Dominic Crossan, writes, "That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be." 15 (We will save the crucial medical evidences favoring Jesus' crucifixion for chapter 5.)
The second fact: Jesus' disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them
There is a virtual consensus among scholars who study Jesus' resurrection that, subsequent to Jesus' death by crucifixion, his disciples really believed that he appeared to them risen from the dead. This conclusion has been reached by data that suggest that (1) the disciples themselves claimed that the risen Jesus had appeared to them, and (2) subsequent to Jesus' death by crucifixion, his disciples were radically transformed from fearful, cowering individuals who denied and abandoned him at his arrest and execution into bold proclaimers of the gospel of the risen Lord. They remained steadfast in the face of imprisonment, torture, and martyrdom. It is very clear that they sincerely believed that Jesus rose from the dead.
There is almost unanimous consensus among scholars to this belief on the part of the disciples. Suppose a skeptic said, 'I don't believe that the Bible is inspired by God, and I'm not so certain the four gospels were written by the four alleged authors. So how do you trace these claims back to the lips of the disciples themselves? Furthermore, even if you could trace them to the disciples, just because they claimed something doesn't mean they believed it. They could have been lying." These are fair questions. Using our minimal facts approach, there is no need to defend the position that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote the four gospels while discussing Jesus' resurrection. Instead, we are going to look at a number of ancient sources that will lead us to our conclusion regarding the beliefs of the disciples.
They claimed it.
First, Jesus' disciples claimed he rose from the dead and appeared to them. This conclusion can be reached from nine early and independent sources that fall into three categories: (1) the testimony of Paul about the disciples; (2) the oral tradition that passed through the early church; and (3) the written works of the early church.
Paul provides very strong evidence for establishing the Resurrection claims of the original disciples."' He claimed that his own authority in the church was equal to that of the other apostles.'' That authority was acknowledged by a number of the apostolic fathers soon after the completion of the New Testament. Two of those early writers may have been disciples of the apostles.'' Paul reported that he knew at least some of the other disciples, even the big three, Peter, James, and John.'"' Acts reports that the disciples and Paul knew and fellowshipped with one another. 21, Other early Christian writers within one hundred years of Jesus also seemed to hold that the disciples and Paul were colleagues, since they included Paul in the group called "apostles ."2 'Therefore, what he has to say concerning the other apostles is important.
After writing on the resurrection of Jesus in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, Paul said he worked harder than all of the other apostles (15:10), but that whether "it was I or they, this[ i.e., Jesus' resurrection appearances ] is what we preach"( 15: 11 N!v).22 Thus, Paul knew the apostles personally and reports that they claimed that Jesus rose from the dead.
The skeptic may respond, "But this is from the Bible, and I don't believe the Bible," as though you are using the Bible to prove the Bible. This blanket rejection will not do. We are not assuming inspiration or even the general reliability of the New Testament in our case for Jesus' resurrection. In our minimal facts approach, we are only regarding the New Testament as an ancient volume of literature containing twenty-seven separate books and letters. Then we are entertaining only those data that are well evidenced and accepted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones. Paul is a source independent of the original disciples. We must remember that, although all of the writings of the New Testament were composed during the first century, it was not until later that they were compiled into a single volume that we now call the New Testament.
The ancients did not have our tools for recording and passing along information. Tape recorders were nonexistent and the individual copies that could he made by hand could not reach many, for few people knew how to read. So they relied on oral tradition to teach others. Scholars identify several instances in which oral traditions have been copied into the writings that comprise the New Testament. These include carefully constructed creeds, hymns, story summaries, and poetry. These are significant, since the oral tradition had to exist prior to the New Testament writings in order for the New Testament authors to include them. This takes us back to some of the earliest teachings of the Christian church, teachings that predate the writing of the New Testament. Let's look at two types of oral tradition found in the New Testament that will support our point that the original disciples claimed that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them.
Creeds were a popular means to pass along important information in a format friendly to memorization and retention. They served for learning and stating faith and doctrine. A good example is the "Apostles Creed" which many of us have recited at one time or another: "I believe in God the Father Almighty; Maker of Heaven and Earth; and in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried...." This creed lays out several doctrines in a format easily memorized. We should not be surprised to find quite a few creeds that the early church formed, which are quoted by several of the New Testament authors.
One of the earliest and most important is quoted in Paul's first letter to the Corinthian church (c. A.). 55). He wrote in 15:3-5, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve."-'' Several factors mark this as an ancient creed that was part of the earliest traditions of the Christian church and that predate the writings of Paul.'' In fact, many critical scholars hold that Paul received it from the disciples Peter and James while visiting them in Jerusalem three years after his conversion. If so, Paul learned it within five years of Jesus' crucifixion and from the disciples themselves.2' At minimum, we have source material that dates within two decades of the alleged event of Jesus' resurrection and comes from a source that Paul thought was reliable.-''' Dean John Rodgers of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry comments, "This is the sort of data that historians of antiquity drool over."''
Since tape recorders were unavailable in the first century, recorded dialogues, such as the sermons of Jesus and his apostles, had to have been summaries prepared after the fact by those who had heard them. Most sermons last longer than five minutes. Yet most of the sermons in the New Testament can be read in that amount of time or less.''-' For these reasons and others, most scholars agree that many of the sermons in Acts contain oral summaries included in the text that can be traced to the earliest teachings of the church and possiblyto the disciples themselves.'-`' We say "possibly to the disciples" because we are considering only what we can argue from in our "minimal facts approach," not because we doubt the testimony of Luke. At minimum, these appear to have been standard sermons preached during the earliest times of the church, contemporaneous to the apostles, attributed to the apostles, and in agreement with Paul's eyewitness testimony that this is what they were preaching. Admittedly, this does not prove that these sermons proclaiming Jesus' resurrection and appearances were coming off the lips of the apostles. But if we are not there, we are very close.
Sources that cannot be ignored are the Gospels themselves. No matter how skeptical the critic might be concerning the Gospels, it is well-accepted that all four gospels (i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke/Acts, John) were written during the first century. Each gospel attests to the resurrection of Jesus,' and Acts is the sequel to the third gospel, Luke. This means that four accounts were written within seventy years of Jesus at the latest, reporting the disciples' claims that Jesus rose from the dead.'
The apostolic fathers are the church leaders who succeeded the apostles. It is probable that some of these men had fellowshipped with the apostles or were instructed and appointed by them, or they were close to others who had known the apostles.'- Therefore, there is a strong likelihood that their teachings can be traced back to the apostles themselves. The following apostolic fathers taught that the apostles were dramatically impacted by Jesus' resurrection.
Clement, bishop of Rome (c. 30- 100), may have been the Clement to whom Paul refers in Philippians 4:3, although this cannot be confirmed. We do have a letter that we know Clement wrote to the church in Corinth around the year 95. Around 185, the early church father, Irenaeus gives some behind-the-scenes information about that letter. "Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing, and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone, for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brothers at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians."" Around 200, the African church father, Tertullian wrote, "For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter.""
If Irenaeus and Tertullian are correct, Clement had seen the apostles and had fellowshipped with them, particularly Peter. This would render great historical value to Clement's writings concerning the apostles and their teachings.
Does Clement mention the resurrection of Jesus? In his letter to the Corinthian church, Clement writes, "Therefore, having received orders and complete certainty caused by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and believing in the Word of God, they went with the Holy Spirit's certainty, preaching the good news that the kingdom of God is about to come."35 Clement writes that Jesus' apostles were fully assured by Jesus' resurrection. If he knew the apostles, Clement would be in a good position to report whether they had been teaching Jesus' resurrection, especially since he notes that it is the church's central teaching.
Irenaeus also reported information regarding Polycarp (c. 69-c. 155): "But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth ] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles.";" Irenaeus states that Polycarp was taught by the apostles, taught others what he had learned from them, appointed by the apostles as bishop of the church in Smyrna, and had talked with many who had seen Jesus.
Irenaeus also makes mention of Polycarp in a letter to Florinus which is now lost but fortunately preserved by the early church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263-c. 339) as saying, "When I was still a boy I saw you in Lower Asia with Polycarp, when you had high status at the imperial court and wanted to gain his favor. I remember events from those days more clearly than those that happened recently ... so that I can even picture the place where the blessed Polycarp sat and conversed, his comings and goings, his character, his personal appearance, his discourses to the crowds, and how he reported his discussions with John and others who had seen the Lord. He recalled their very words, what they reported about the Lord and his miracles and his teaching-things that Polycarp had heard directly from eyewitnesses of the Word of life and reported in full harmony with Scripture."" Furthermore, Tertullian wrote that the apostle John appointed Polycarp.3x
Polycarp was martyred in Smyrna (modern Izmir, Turkey) around the year 160 at the age of eighty-six"' Around 110, he wrote a letter to the Philippian church, speaking of the righteousness and endurance witnessed in the lives of several including "Paul himself and the other apostles." Of them he says, "For they did not love the present age, but him who died for our benefit and for our sake was raised by God.""' In fact, Polycarp mentions the resurrection of Jesus five times in his letter to the church in Philippi."
As with Clement, if Irenaeus and Tertullian are correct that Polycarp had been taught and appointed by the apostles, his statements concerning Jesus' resurrection can be linked to these apostles, since, as their central teaching, it makes the most sense that they would have wanted to preserve it above all other doctrines.
The nine sources in the three categories above point to multiple, very early, and eyewitness testimonies to the disciples' claims of witnessing the risen Jesus.42 The late New Testament critic at the University of Chicago, Norman Perrin, who rejected Jesus' resurrection wrote, "The more we study the tradition with regard to the appearances, the firmer the rock begins to appear upon which they are based."43 Now, of course, the mere fact that the disciples claimed that they saw the risen Jesus does not alone merit the conclusion that Jesus rose from the dead, since anyone can make a claim. However, as we will see in a moment, the data reach beyond the mere claim they made.
To help remember this wealth of data when sharing with someone, use the acronym POW! ("Paul, Oral Tradition, Written Tradition"). When presenting our evidence, we can start off using POW! and unpack it if and when needed. For example, if someone challenges you to establish that the original disciples really made the claim that the risen Jesus had appeared to them, you might respond with the following: "That's a great question. Let me give you three categories of evidence. First, we have Paul who claims to have known and fellowshipped with the disciples firsthand. He says that they said it. Second, we know of some very early oral tradition that was circulating within the church before the New Testament was even written and points to the disciples saying it. Third, we have written tradition that portrays or assumes the disciples saying that Jesus had appeared to them after he rose from the dead. In all, we have nine independent sources. So you can see why there is a virtually unanimous consensus among scholars today who hold that Jesus' original disciples said that he appeared to them risen from the dead."
This answer will be more than sufficient for the average person. However, some may ask you to explain one or more of your three categories a little further: "Wait a minute. What do you mean by 'oral tradition'?" Now you can unpack it a little by defining creeds and providing an example. You might say, "Creeds originated because of the need to pass along important information in a format that could be easily memorized. Take the creed in I Corinthians 15, for example. Most scholars would place the origin of this creed within five years of Jesus'crucifixion. This may be the earliest Christian tradition available, and it lists numerous appearances of the risen Jesus to his disciples and others." The idea is that you do not need to overload your friend's mind by immediately citing and explaining nine sources. Rather, present POW!and unpack it as needed. This also facilitates productive dialogue rather than an overwhelming lecture. The statement of POW! is quick, simple, and invites interaction.
They believed it.
After Jesus' death, the lives of the disciples were transformed to the point that they endured persecution and even martyrdom. Such strength of conviction indicates that they were not just claiming that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them in order to receive some personal benefit. They really believed it. Compare this courage to their character at Jesus' arrest and execution. They denied and abandoned him, then they hid in fear. Afterward, they willingly endangered themselves by publicly proclaiming the risen Christ." These facts are validated by multiple accounts, both from early sources in the New Testament as well as outside of it.
One need only read through the book of Acts to find reports that the disciples were willing to suffer for their belief that the risen Jesus had appeared to them.a5 Clement of Rome, mentioned earlier, reports the sufferings and probably the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul:
Because of envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars have been persecuted and contended unto death. Let us set the good apostles before our eyes. Peter, who because of unrighteous envy endured, not one or two, but many afflictions, and having borne witness went to the due glorious place. Because of envy and rivalries, steadfast Paul pointed to the prize. Seven times chained, exiled, stoned, having become a preacher both in the East and in the West, he received honor fitting of his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, unto the boundary on which the sun sets; having testified in the presence of the leaders. Thus he was freed from the world and went to the holy place. He became a great example of steadfastness."
Polycarp, in the above cited letter to the church in Philippi, mentioned the "unlimited endurance" the church had seen in Ignatius, Zosimus, Rufus, the apostle Paul, and the rest of the apostles, among others. He added, "They are in the place due them with the Lord, in association with him also they suffered together. For they did not love the present age....".' Through Polycarp, we know that Paul, other apostles, and other believers suffered for their faith. Polycarp himself would follow their example of strength and conviction in the face of martyrdom.
Ignatius was bishop of the church in Antioch in Syria. While en route to his martyrdom in Rome, about 110, he wrote seven letters, six to churches and one to his friend and colleague, Polvcarp. Since the apostles trained Polycarp, Ignatius is certain to have been well acquainted with apostolic teachings. Ignatius recorded the willingness of the disciples to suffer for their beliefs. In his letter to the church in Smyrna where Polycarp was bishop he wrote, "And when ]Jesus] came to those with Peter, he said to them: 'Take, handle me and see that I am not a bodiless demon.' And immediately they handled him and believed, having known his flesh and blood. Because of this they also despised death; but beyond death they were found."" Ignatius said that, having seen the risen Jesus, the disciples were so encouraged that "they also despised death" as had their Master.'" The Greek word for "despised" is better translated "cared nothing for" or "disregarded.""' Not only did they act in a manner that they thought little of dying, but Ignatius adds that "beyond death they were found," most likely referring to their attitude toward death being proved or demonstrated by their own boldness when the moment of execution actually came. Even if Ignatius's comment doesn't refer to their moments of death, he at least means that the disciples were so strengthened by seeing the risen .Jesus that they preached without a thought for their earthly fates because they knew that immortality awaited them. Think of an employee who suffers under an unreasonable boss, then suddenly inherits enough money to become independently wealthy. With the money deposited safely in a personal account, the employee can go to work on the last day and smile at whatever abuse the supervisor dishes out.
Tertullian was an early church father who wrote just prior to 200. He reports the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul:
That Paul is beheaded has been written in their own blood. And if a heretic wishes his confidence to rest upon a public record, the archives of the empire will speak, as would the stones of Jerusalem. We read the lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. Then is Peter girt by another, when he is made fast to the cross. Then does Paul obtain a birth suited to Roman citizenship, when in Rome he springs to life again ennobled by martyrdoms'
According to Tertullian, if one did not want to believe the Christian records concerning the martyrdoms of some of the apostles, he could find the information in the public records, namely "the lives of the Caesars."52 Tertullian says that Peter was crucified and Paul was beheaded under Nero, who was the first emperor to execute Christians. Since Nero was emperor between A.D. 54 and 68, we know that Peter and Paul must have been martyred within that period. It is even more probable that their martyrdoms occurred in 64. In that year, Rome was burned. According to the early second-century Roman historian Tacitus, when the people blamed Nero for the fire, Nero turned the blame on Christians and began a horrible persecution, killing them brutally.53
Origen (c. 185-c. 254) is a church father. Many of his works are still available to us but some have been lost. In Contra Celsum, he relates how the disciples' devotion to the teachings of Jesus "was attended with danger to human life ... [and that they] themselves were the first to manifest their disregard for its [i.e., death's] terrors."54 A few chapters later, Origen writes, 'Jesus, who has both once risen Himself, and led His disciples to believe in His resurrection, and so thoroughly persuaded them of its 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 ."5' Another of Origen's writings relates that Peter had been crucified upside down and that Paul had been martyred in Rome under Nero.5'
Eusebius (c. 263-c. 339) is called the first church historian. Having just come out of a severe persecution against Christians, he wrote Ecclesiastical History, in which he compiles a history of the Christian church up until his time of writing, about 325. Eusebius had at his disposal a wealth of resources, many which have since been lost. For the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, he cites Dionysius of Corinth (writing about 170), Tertullian (writing about 200), and Origen (writing about 230-250)." He cites Josephus (writing about 95), Hegesippus (writing about 165-175), and Clement of Alexandria (writing about 200), on the martyrdom of James the brother of Jesus."
All of these sources, biblical and non-biblical alike, affirm the disciples' willingness to suffer and die for their faith.") Of course the conviction of the disciples that Jesus rose from the dead and had appeared to them does not necessarily mean they were right. The skeptic might object, "Followers of other religions and causes have willingly suffered and died for their beliefs. Even atheists have willingly died for the cause of communism. This does not mean that their beliefs were true or worthy." Agreed, but this misses the point: The disciples' willingness to suffer and die for their beliefs indicates that they certainly regarded those beliefs as true. The case is strong that they did not willfully lie about the appearances of the risen Jesus. Liars make poor martyrs.
No one questions the sincerity of the Muslim terrorist who blows himself up in a public place or the Buddhist monk who burns himself alive as a political protest. Extreme acts do not validate the truth of their beliefs, but willingness to die indicates that they regarded their beliefs as true. Moreover, there is an important difference between the apostle martyrs and those who die for their beliefs today. Modern martyrs act solely out of their trust in beliefs that others have taught them. The apostles died for holding to their own testimony that they had personally seen the risen Jesus. Contemporary martyrs die for what they believe to be true. The disciples of Jesus died for what they knew to be either true or false.
A skeptic may reply, "How do you know that they willingly died for their beliefs? What if they were arrested and executed against their will and perhaps even recanted under torture before they died?" This is a fair question. From the early martyrdoms of Stephen"" and James the brother of John"' as well as the imprisonments and sufferings of Peter, Paul, and others,`''- the disciples became well aware that publicly proclaiming Jesus as risen Lord in certain times and places made suffering and, perhaps, martyrdom inevitable. Therefore, to continue on this path, fully aware of the probable outcome, was to demonstrate a willingness to endure suffering and martyrdom, regardless of whether these were actually experienced. Furthermore, the primary purpose of getting someone to recant under torture is to gain evidence by which to discourage others publicly. Recantation under torture would not necessarily indicate a change in the victim's mind. Nevertheless, there is no evidence of a recantation being announced. Instead, all the reports testify to steadfast courage during suffering." If the news spread that several of the original disciples had recanted, we would expect that Christianity would have been dealt a severe blow. If those in management of a publicly traded company are bailing out, the workers are not going to dump their life savings into company stock. And yet we find early Christians willingly suffering and dying for their beliefs. 4
In all, at least seven early sources testify that the original disciples willingly suffered in defense of their beliefs.t 5 If we include the sufferings and martyrdoms of Paul and James the brother of Jesus, we have eleven sources.66 Even the highly critical New Testament scholar Rudolf Bultmann agreed that historical criticism can establish "the fact that the first disciples came to believe in the resurrection" and that they thought they had seen the risen Jesus.67 Atheistic New Testament scholar Gerd Ludemann concludes, "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."6R Paula Fredriksen of Boston University comments, "I know in their own terms what they saw was the raised Jesus. That's what they say and then all the historic evidence we have afterwards attest to their conviction that that's what they saw. I'm not saying that they really did see the raised Jesus. I wasn't there. I don't know what they saw. But I do know that as a historian that they must have seen something.""
On the state of Resurrection studies today, I (Habermas) recently completed an overview of more than 1,400 sources on the resurrection of Jesus published since 1975. I studied and catalogued about 650 of these texts in English, German, and French. Some of the results of this study are certainly intriguing. For example, perhaps no fact is more widely recognized than that early Christian believers had real experiences that they thought were appearances of the risen Jesus. A critic may claim that what they saw were hallucinations or visions, but he does not deny that they actually experienced something.70
Notice what happens when we consider the fact of the disciples' claims and beliefs that they had actually seen the risen Jesus. Since the original disciples were making the claim that Jesus rose from the dead, his resurrection was not the result of myth making. His life story was not embellished over time if the facts can be traced to the original witnesses. Moreover, if the direct witnesses really believed that he rose from the dead, we can dismiss contentions that they stole the body and made up the story. In fact, virtually all scholars agree on that point, whatever their own theological positions.
(E) signifies the quotation is found in Eusebius
The disciples' belief that they had seen the risen Jesus is one powerful historical fact in the case for the Resurrection. Next we will examine three other facts surrounding the Resurrection that are strongly attested historically. These will serve as a collection of facts that support the view that what the disciples actually witnessed was indeed the risen Jesus.
The chart above contains quite a lot of details. So we have also included a condensed version below. This chart should help you see the information at a glance and assist you in remembering how to present the evidence in more of a snapshot version. Remember, you can present the three categories of evidence (POW!)and unpack them if and when the skeptic requests more information. However, since the information discussed in this chapter is perhaps more important than any other information in this book, we strongly encourage you to master the more detailed chart.