7. Primary Sources: Creeds and Facts
What facts did the earliest Christians report concerning Jesus in the initial years after his crucifixion? Of what did the earliest Christology consist before the composition of the New Testament? Is it possible to get back to eyewitness testimony and to historical facts with regard to Jesus? These are fascinating and very important questions, and one of the chief efforts of contemporary scholarship has been to address these issues. Such is also a major concern in this book.
In this chapter we will endeavor to investigate an area which many feel is the most promising means of describing the nature of Christian thought before the writing of the New Testament. This general subject concerns the existence of early Christian creeds which were first repeated verbally and later written in the books of the New Testament. Thus, in one sense, this material is not extrabiblical since we rely on the scriptural material for the creeds. At the same time, this data was formulated before the New Testament books, in which the creeds appear, were actually written. In short, these creeds were communicated verbally years before they were written and hence they preserve some of the earliest reports concerning Jesus from about AD 30–50. Therefore, in a real sense, the creeds preserve pre-New Testament material, and are our earliest sources for the life of Jesus.
This chapter also includes a listing of facts which are admitted by virtually all critical scholars who study this subject. In other words, critical theologians, historians and philosophers who have studied the New Testament have ascertained a number of facts from the life of Jesus by the critical examination of the biblical sources. The procedure in this chapter is first to examine some Christological creeds with regard to the information they relate concerning the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. This last subject will be the special concern in the second section of this chapter, as we investigate 1 Corinthians 15:3ff., which is perhaps the most important creed in the New Testament (at least for our purposes). This is followed by the presentation of the critically accepted facts, as mentioned above. Lastly, an examination of this data will follow.
Christological Creeds
In the early church there were multiple creedal formulas which corresponded to various circumstances in the Christian faith. The most common of these confessions were purely Christological in nature.
The Life of Jesus Christ
The earliest Christians were confident that “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,” as proclaimed in the confession found in 1 John 4:2.
Another ancient creed which expresses a contrast between aspects of Jesus’ life is 2 Timothy 2:8.
One early confessional creed is 1 Tim. 3:16
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion:
He was manifested in the flesh,
vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels,
preached among the nations,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory (RSV).
Moule notes not only the early date of this creed but also its pattern of rhyme, which was probably utilized in worship and hymnody.
Another early confession which may well reflect an event in Christ’s life is Romans 10:9.
Although these early creeds are interested in theological elements of Christology, to be sure, they are also early reports of events in the life of Jesus. We are told (1) that Jesus was really born in human flesh (Phil. 2:6; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 4:2) (2) of the lineage and family of David (Rom. 1:3-4; 2 Tim. 2:8). We find (3) an implication of his baptism (Rom. 10:9) and (4) that his word was preached, (5) resulting in persons believing his message (1 Tim. 3:16).
The Death and Resurrection of Jesus
Just prior to Jesus’ trial and crucifixion, both the synoptic Gospels and Paul relate that Jesus had a private supper with his disciples. The Pauline account in 1 Corinthians 11:23ff. presents a fixed tradition which is probably based on material independent of the sources for the synoptic Gospels.
It is widely held that this ancient tradition presents actual historical events which occurred on the evening of the so-called “last supper.”
Another event just prior to Jesus’ crucifixion is related by 1 Timothy 6:13, which is also an early tradition,
We have already noted how some early Christian traditions presented a juxtaposition between the human and the divine Jesus. Several other early reports contrasted the seeming defeat suffered at the cross with the triumph of Jesus’ resurrection. Earlier, Philippians 2:6ff. was mentioned as expressing this first comparison of the human Jesus who was to be exalted by God. More specifically, Philippians 2:8 additionally reports the humbling of Jesus as he died on the cross in direct contrast to this later exaltation. Another example is to be found in Romans 4:25, which Bultmann refers to as “a statement that had evidently existed before Paul and had been handed down to him.”
Early accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are also preserved in Christian tradition. Next to 1 Corinthians 15:3ff., the most crucial texts for historical purposes are several early passages in the book of Acts (especially Peter’s speeches).
The earliest evidence we have for the resurrection almost certainly goes back to the time immediately after the resurrection event is alleged to have taken place. This is the evidence contained in the early sermons in the Acts of the Apostles. . . . But there can be no doubt that in the first few chapters of Acts its author has preserved material from very early sources.
Scholars have discovered that the language used in speaking about Jesus in these early speeches in Acts is quite different from that used at the time when the book was compiled in its final form.
Many scholars have argued that in these early texts we have a clear summary of the earliest apostolic kerygma.
Jeremias holds that Luke’s brief mention of Jesus’ resurrection appearance to Peter in Luke 24:34 is of even greater antiquity than is 1 Corinthians 15:5, which would make this an extremely early witness to these appearances.
That Romans 1:3-4 is an ancient pre-Pauline creed is shown by the parallelism of the clauses,
Another early creed which links the resurrection with the person and claims of Jesus is Romans 10:9-10.
Lastly, some creeds also confess Jesus’ ascension to heaven and his resulting exaltation. Two examples of such early creeds were mentioned earlier with regard to the life of Jesus. In 1 Timothy 3:16, it is proclaimed that, after his incarnation, Jesus was “taken up in glory.” In Philippians 2:6f. it is related that after Jesus humbled himself as a man, he was highly exalted and is to be worshiped by all persons (2:9-11).
Before proceeding to the extended examination of 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. it will be advantageous to briefly summarize the facts reported in various other creeds concerning the death and resurrection of Jesus. A few earlier events of Jesus’ life are mentioned, all from the creeds in Acts: (6) Jesus was born in the lineage of David (13:23; also Rom. 1:3; 2 Tim. 2:8), and (7) came from the town of Nazareth (2:22; 4:10; 5:38). (8) John preceded Jesus’ ministry (10:37; 13:24-25), (9) which began in Galilee, (10) afterwards expanding throughout Judea (10:37). (11) Jesus performed miracles (2:22; 10:38) and (12) fulfilled numerous Old Testament prophecies (2:25-31; 3:21-25; 4:11; 10:43; 13:27-37).
We are further informed by the creed in 1 Corinthians 11:23ff. that (13) Jesus attended a dinner (14) on the evening of his betrayal. (15) He gave thanks before the meal and (16) shared both bread and drink, (17) which, he declared, represented his imminent atoning sacrifice for sin.
(18) Later, Jesus stood before Pilate (Acts 3:13; 13:28) and (19) made a good confession, which very possibly concerned his identity as the King of the Jews (1 Tim. 6:13). (20) Afterwards, Jesus was killed (Acts 3:13-15; 13:27-29) (21) for mankind’s sins (1 Pet. 3:18; Rom. 4:25; 1 Tim. 2:6), (22) in spite of his righteous life (1 Pet. 3:18). (23) Crucifixion was specified as the mode of death (Acts 2:23; 2:36; 4:10; 5:30; 10:39), being performed (24) in the city of Jerusalem (Acts 13:27; cf. 10:39), (25) by wicked men (Acts 2:23). (26) Then he was buried (Acts 13:29).
(27) After his death he was resurrected (Acts 2:24, 31-32; 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30-37; 2 Tim. 2:8), (28) on the third day (Acts 10:40) and (29) appeared to his followers (Acts 13:31), even (30) eating with them (Acts 10:40-41). (31) His disciples were witnesses of these events (Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39, 41; 13:31). (32) After his resurrection, Jesus ascended to heaven and was glorified and exalted (Acts 2:33; 3:21; 5:31; 1 Tim. 3:16; Phil. 2:6f.).
(33) The risen Jesus instructed that salvation be preached in his name (Acts 2:38-39; 3:19-23; 4:11-12; 5:32; 10:42-43; 13:26, 38-41). (34) This event showed God’s approval of Jesus, by validating his person and message (Acts 2:22-24, 36; 3:13-15; 10:42; 13:32-33; Rom. 1:3-4; 10:9-10).
The person of Jesus Christ
Regarding his person, Jesus is called (35) the Son of God (Acts 13:33; Rom. 1:3-4), (36) Lord (Luke 24:34; Acts 2:36; 10:36; Rom. 1:4; 10:9; Phil. 2:11), (37) Christ or Messiah (Acts 2:36, 38; 3:18, 20; 4:10; 10:36; Rom. 1:4; Phil. 2:11; 2 Tim. 2:8), (38) Savior (Acts 5:31; 13:23), (39) Prince (Acts 5:31) and (40) the Holy and Righteous One (Acts 3:14; cf. 2:27; 13:35). (41) It is even said that, regarding his essential nature, he is God (Phil. 2:6).
1 Corinthians 15:3ff.
While the subject of early Christian creeds is a fascinating area of research, some may wonder on what grounds the facts of the creeds themselves may be established. One approach to this question is to validate the New Testament documents as reliable sources and then argue to the creeds as trustworthy testimony. Although we have provided much of the grounds for such a response in the above chapters, and while this writer believes that such an answer is an approach that has much to commend it, we are again reminded that the task we have set up for ourselves is to pursue independent evidence for such claims. Therefore, because of this particular goal, we will endeavor to provide special evidence for the death and resurrection of Jesus by referring to what is perhaps the most important single creed in the New Testament.
In 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, Paul states:
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures (RSV).
As the passage continues, Paul records appearances of the resurrected Christ to Peter, to the “twelve” disciples, to over 500 persons at one time, to James, to all of the apostles and then to Paul himself (vv. 5-8).
That this confession is an early Christian, pre-Pauline creed is recognized by virtually all critical scholars across a very wide theological spectrum.
First, Paul’s words “delivered” and “received” are technical terms for passing on tradition. As such, we have Paul’s statement that this material was not his own, but received from another source.
Second, a number of words in this creed are non-Pauline, again indicating another origin of this material.
Third, it is likely that the creed is organized in a stylized, parallel form, thereby providing a further indication of the oral and confessional nature of this material.
Fourth, there are indications that there may be a Semitic source, such as the use of the Aramaic “Cephas” for Peter (v. 5), hence pointing to an earlier source before Paul’s Greek translation.
Fifth, other indications of ancient Hebrew narration include the triple usage of “and that” along with the two references to the Scripture being filfilled.
How early is this creed? Numerous critical theologians have endeavored to answer this important question, with very striking results. Ulrich Wilckens asserts that this creed “indubitably goes back to the oldest phase of all in the history of primitive Christianity.”
How would Paul have received this creed? A number of scholars have arrived at the same scenario. Dating Jesus’ crucifixion around AD 30, Paul’s conversion would have occurred shortly afterwards, about AD 33–35. Three years after his conversion (AD 36–38) he visited Jerusalem and specifically met with Peter and James (Gal. 1:18-19). It is therefore reasoned that the gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus would in all likelihood be the normal center of discussion,
A Jerusalem location would date Paul’s reception of the creed at about five to seven years after the crucifixion. But we can actually proceed back two stages earlier. Since the tradition would actually have been formulated before Paul first heard it, the creed itself would be dated even earlier. Additionally, the independent beliefs themselves, which later composed the formalized creed, would then date back to the actual historical events. Therefore, we are dealing with material that proceeds directly from the events in question and this creed is thus crucial in our discussion of the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Not only are these facts reported early, but they are reported directly by the eyewitnesses themselves. Paul states that he specifically checked out his message with the apostles (Gal. 2:1-10) and he probably received this creed directly from these eyewitnesses themselves (Gal. 1:18-19), as already noted. As a direct result, not only had Paul personally seen the risen Christ (1 Cor. 15:8-9), but his testimony concerning the facts of the gospel agreed with that of the apostolic eyewitnesses (vv. 11, 14, 15).
As a result of this early and eyewitness testimony, the Christian teachings concerning the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus are open to historical testing. As German historian Hans von Campenhausen attests concerning 1 Corinthians 15:3ff., “This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text.”
Now we begin to perceive the immense importance of this creed in terms of both facts and faith. Initially, it reveals some crucial facts concerning the gospel of the deity, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. It also shows that Paul was very close to these facts.
Thus Paul’s preaching presents a special stream of Christian tradition which was derived from the mainstream at a point very near to its source. . . . anyone who should maintain that the primitive Christian gospel was fundamentally different from that which we have found in Paul must bear the burden of proof.
This factual witness to the death and resurrection of Jesus also became an apologetic for Christian belief.
The importance of the creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. can hardly be overestimated. No longer can it be charged that there is no demonstrable early, eyewitness testimony for the resurrection or for the other most important tenets of Christianity, for this creed provides just such evidential data concerning the facts of the gospel, which are the very center of the Christian faith. It links the events themselves with those who actually participated in time and space. As such this creed yields a strong factual basis for Christianity through the early and eyewitness reports of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, as will be shown in more detail in the next section of this chapter.
We said earlier that the naturalistic theories fail to account for this data. Additionally, the evidence demonstrates that these witnesses actually did see the risen Jesus, as they claimed.
The Known Historical Facts
Because of the testimony of these early Christian creeds, as well as other data, even contemporary critical scholars recognize a certain amount of historical facts surrounding the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. In other words, even treating the New Testament as nothing more than a book of ancient literature, critics have deduced numerous historical facts concerning Jesus’ life. In particular, 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. has played a significant part in this reconstruction.
There are a minimum number of facts agreed upon by practically all critical scholars, whatever their school of thought. At least twelve separate facts are considered to be knowable history.
(1) Jesus died by crucifixion and (2) was buried. (3) Jesus’ death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope, believing that his life was ended. (4) Although not as widely accepted, many scholars hold that the tomb in which Jesus was buried was discovered to be empty just a few days later.
Critical scholars further agree that (5) the disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus. Because of these experiences, (6) the disciples were transformed from doubters who were afraid to identify themselves with Jesus to bold proclaimers of his death and resurrection. (7) This message was the center of preaching in the early church and (8) was especially proclaimed in Jerusalem, where Jesus died and was buried shortly before.
As a result of this preaching, (9) the church was born and grew, (10) with Sunday as the primary day of worship. (11) James, who had been a skeptic, was converted to the faith when he also believed that he saw the resurrected Jesus. (12) A few years later, Paul was converted by an experience which he, likewise, believed to be an appearance of the risen Jesus.
These facts are crucial for our contemporary investigation of Jesus’ resurrection. With the exception of the empty tomb, virtually all critical scholars who deal with this issue agree that these are the minimum of known historical facts surrounding this event. As such, any conclusion concerning the historicity of the resurrection should properly account for these facts. An additional vital (and major) function of these known historical facts will be explained in the next section below.
These known historical facts have a twofold part in our case for the resurrection which is developed in this section. First, they answer the various theories which have been proposed in order to account for Jesus’ resurrection on naturalistic grounds. These hypotheses, chiefly popularized by liberal scholars in the nineteenth century, are rarely held today by critics, especially since they failed to account for the historical facts surrounding this event (such as those just mentioned above). Several reasons for this rejection could be enumerated.
Each naturalistic theory is beset by many major objections that invalidate it as a viable hypothesis. Combinations of these improbable theories likewise fail, again on factual grounds.
This leads to the second major argument for the resurrection based on the known historical facts. Not only do the naturalistic theories fail due to these historical facts, but these same facts also establish numerous positive evidences that corroborate the historical and literal nature of this event. Nine such evidences will be listed here, all of which have been taken from our list of accepted historical facts listed above. Thus, the factual basis for these nine evidences is admitted by virtually all scholars. However, because of the limitations of this chapter, these nine will simply be stated with very little elaboration.
The key evidence for Jesus’ resurrection is (1) the disciples’ experiences, which they believed to be literal appearances of the risen Jesus, since these experiences cannot be explained by naturalistic theories (as just shown) and because they are attested as both early and eyewitness sources, as pointed out above. Other positive evidences include (2) the transformation of the disciples into bold witnesses, (3) the empty tomb and (4) the fact that the resurrection of Jesus was the very center of the apostolic message, all of which require adequate explanations. It was also found that the disciples proclaimed this message in Jerusalem itself, where it is related that in repeated confrontations with the authorities, (5) the Jewish leaders could not disprove their message (Acts 1-5). Additionally, (6) the very existence and growth of the church, (7) featuring Sunday as the primary day of worship demand historical causes, as well.
Two additional major facts arguing for the historicity of the resurrection are that two skeptics, (8)James, the brother of Jesus, and (9) Paul, became believers after having experiences which they also believed were appearances of the risen Jesus. Fuller concludes that even if the appearance to James had not been recorded by Paul (1 Cor. 15:7), such an occurrence would still have to be postulated anyway in order to account for both James’ conversion and his subsequent promotion to a position of authority in the early church.
When combined with the failure of the naturalistic theories, this minimum of nine evidences provides a strong case for the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. This is especially so in that each of these evidences was based on a known historical fact.
Four Key Historical Facts
Earlier, twelve facts were enumerated as knowable history, accepted as such by almost all scholars. It is this writer’s conviction that even by utilizing only four of these accepted facts, a sufficient case can be made for the historicity of the resurrection, which will strengthen the earlier apologetic.
The four facts to be used here are (1) Jesus’ death due to crucifixion, (5) the subsequent experiences that the disciples were convinced were literal appearances of the risen Jesus, (6) the corresponding transformation of the disciples, and (12) Paul’s conversion appearance, that he also believed was an appearance of the risen Jesus. These four “core” facts are even more widely accepted as knowable history than the rest of the twelve, being accepted by virtually all critical scholars.
Each of these four facts is established by means of normal historical methodology (see
The fact of the disciples’ experiences that they believed to be appearances of the risen Jesus, is corroborated chiefly by the early and eyewitness testimony of 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. Other creeds (like Luke 24:34), and especially contemporary research on early confessions in the book of Acts,
Since naturalistic theories have failed and the evidence so strongly confirms these early creeds, the earliest Christian experiences (both to groups and to individuals) are generally considered by critical scholars to be as firmly established as almost any fact in the life of Jesus. In short, it is admitted by virtually all that the disciples had real experiences that caused them to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead.
The transformation of the disciples as a result of these experiences is confirmed by the material immediately following this early creed (1 Cor. 15:9-11), which reports the ministry of the eyewitnesses. Again, the entire New Testament also verifies this conclusion, as does the testimony of the early church authors, including the reports of the disciples dying for their faith as martyrs.
Lastly, Paul’s conversion due to an experience that he also believed to be an appearance of the risen Jesus, is both recorded by him personally in 1 Corinthians 9:1 and 15:8-10, and reported three times in Acts (9:1-9; 22:5-11; 26:12-18). Naturalistic theses also fail to apply to Paul.
Therefore, these four core facts are established on strong, historical grounds. They are generally accepted not only by critical theologians but also by historians and philosophers who study this subject.
Of these four core facts, the nature of the disciples’ experiences is the most crucial. As historian Michael Grant asserts, historical investigation actually proves that the earliest eyewitnesses were convinced that they had seen the risen Jesus.
Even the more sceptical historians agree that for primitive Christianity . . . the resurrection of Jesus from the dead was a real event in history, the very foundation of faith, and not a mythical idea arising out of the creative imagination of believers.
One major advantage of these core facts is that, not only are they critically accepted as knowable history, but they directly concern the nature of the disciples’ experiences. As such, these four historical facts are able, on a lesser scale, to both disprove the naturalistic theories and to provide major positive evidences which relate the probability of Jesus’ literal resurrection.
First, using only these four historical facts, the naturalistic theories can be disproven. For instance, the swoon theory is ruled out by the facts concerning Jesus’ death and by Paul’s conversion. The disciples’ experiences disprove the hallucination and other subjective theories both because such phenomena are not collective or contagious, being observed by one person alone, and because of the wide variety of time and place factors involved. The psychological preconditions for hallucinations were also lacking in these men. Paul’s experience also rules out these theories because he certainly would not be in the proper theological frame of mind.
That it was the disciples and other early eyewitnesses who had these experiences likewise rules out legend or myth theories, since the original teaching concerning the resurrection is therefore based on the early testimony of real eyewitnesses and not on later legends (as shown by the creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3ff.). Paul’s experience likewise cannot be explained by legends, since such could not account for his conversion from skepticism. Lastly, the stolen body and fraud theories are disproven by the disciples’ experiences and by their transformation, both because this change shows that the disciples really believed that Jesus rose from the dead and because of the probability that such liars would not become martyrs. Similarly, Paul would not have been convinced by such fraud.
Second, these four core facts also provide the major positive evidences for Jesus’ literal resurrection appearances, such as the disciples’ early and eyewitness experiences that have not been explained away naturalistically, their transformation into men who were willing to die for their faith and Paul’s experience and corresponding transformation. Thus, these core historical facts provide positive evidences which further verify the disciples’ claims concerning Jesus’ literal resurrection, especially in that these arguments have not been accounted for naturalistically.
Since these core historical facts (and the earlier accepted facts in general) have been established by critical and historical procedures, contemporary scholars cannot reject the evidence simply by referring to “discrepancies” in the New Testament texts or to its general “unreliability.” Not only are such critical claims refuted by evidence discussed in other chapters, but it has been concluded that the resurrection can be historically demonstrated even when the minimum amount of historical facts are utilized. Neither can it be concluded merely that “something” occurred which is indescribable due to naturalistic premises, or to the character of history or because of the “cloudiness” or “legendary character” of the New Testament texts. Neither can it be said that Jesus rose spiritually, but not literally. Again, these and other such views are refuted in that the facts admitted by virtually all scholars as knowable history are adequate to historically demonstrate the literal resurrection of Jesus according to probability.
In short, instead of stating what they believe we cannot know concerning the gospel accounts, critical scholars would do well to concentrate on what even they admit can be known about the texts at this point. Although Jesus was not photographed in his resurrection body for the benefit of the disciples, the factual basis is enough to show that Jesus’ resurrection is by far the best historical explanation. While critical doubts may be present with regard to other issues in the New Testament, the accepted facts are sufficient in themselves to show that Jesus rose from the dead in a new, spiritual body. As detailed in
Synopsis of Creeds and Facts
In this chapter we have investigated probably the strongest single category of evidence for the death and resurrection of Jesus. The data supplied by oral creeds that circulated before the actual composition of the New Testament and, often corresponding to these creeds, the facts that critical scholars admit as knowable history, together provide a formidable basis for knowledge about Jesus.
From these sources we find reports of some incidents of Jesus’ life but especially numerous details concerning his death and resurrection. Jesus was a real flesh and blood person (Phil. 2:6; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 4:2) who was physically born in the lineage of David (Acts 13:23; Rom. 1:3-4; 2 Tim. 2:8) and came from the town of Nazareth (Acts 2:22; 4:10; 5:38). John preceded Jesus (Acts 10:37; 13:24-25), and it is implied that Jesus was baptized (Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ ministry began in Galilee, and was extended throughout Judea (Acts 10:37). Jesus both performed miracles (Acts 2:22; 10:38) and fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies (2:25-31; 3:21-25; 4:11; 10:43; 13:27-37). He preached his message among men, resulting in people believing his testimony (1 Tim. 3:16).
On the night Jesus was betrayed, he first attended a dinner, where he prayed and gave thanks before the meal. Afterward, Jesus passed around both bread and drink, which he referred to as the sacrifice of his body and blood for sin (1 Cor. 11:23ff.). Later, Jesus appeared before Pilate (Acts 3:13; 13:28), where he made a good confession, which very possibly concerned his identity as the Messiah (1 Tim. 6:13).
In spite of the fact that Jesus was a righteous man (1 Pet. 3:18), he died for the sins of others (1 Pet. 3:18; Rom. 4:25; 1 Tim. 2:6). He was killed (Acts 3:13-15; 13:27-29; 1 Cor. 15:3; Phil. 2:8) by crucifixion (Acts 2:23; 2:36; 4:10; 5:30; 10:39), dying in the city of Jerusalem (Acts 13:27; cf. 10:39), at the hands of wicked men (Acts 2:23). Afterwards, he was buried (Acts 13:29; 1 Cor. 15:4). These events caused the disciples to doubt and despair.
On the third day after the crucifixion (Acts 10:40), the tomb was empty (1 Cor. 15:4, implied) and Jesus was raised from the dead (Acts 2:24, 31-32; 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30-37; 2 Tim. 2:8). Jesus appeared to numerous eyewitnesses (Luke 24:34; Acts 13:31; 1 Cor. 15:4ff.), even eating with them (Acts 10:40-41). Two of these persons — namely James (1 Cor. 15:7) and Paul (1 Cor. 15:8-9) — were formerly skeptics before they met the risen Jesus. The disciples were witnesses of the appearances (Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:32; 10:39, 41; 13:31), which were reported at a very early date (Acts 10:40-41; 13:31; 1 Cor. 15:4-8). After his resurrection, Jesus ascended to heaven where he was glorified and exalted (Acts 2:33; 3:21; 5:31; 1 Tim. 3:16; Phil. 2:6f.).
The disciples were transformed by these experiences (cf. 1 Tim. 3:16) and made the gospel the very center of their early preaching (1 Cor. 15:1-4). In fact, it was the risen Jesus who taught that salvation was to be preached in his name (Acts 2:38-39; 3:19-23; 4:11-12; 5:32; 10:42-43; 13:26, 38-41). The resurrection was the chief validation of Jesus’ person and message (Acts 2:22-24, 36; 3:13-15; 10:42; 13:32-33; Rom. 1:3-4; 10:9-10). The apostolic preaching initially centered in Jerusalem, the same place where Jesus had been killed. Here the church was born and grew, with Sunday as the chief day of worship.
In the early Christian preaching, Jesus was given numerous titles: Son of God (Acts 13:33; Rom. 1:3-4), Lord (Luke 24:34; Acts 2:36; 10:36; Rom. 1:4; 10:9; Phil. 2:11), Christ or Messiah (Acts 2:36, 38; 3:18, 20; 4:10; 10:36; Rom. 1:4; Phil. 2:11; 2 Tim. 2:8), Savior (Acts 5:31; 13:23), Prince (Acts 5:31) and the Holy and Righteous One (Acts 3:14; cf. 2:27; 13:35). Concerning his essential nature, he was even called God (Phil. 2:6).
Most of these facts are reported in early Christian creeds and actually predate the writing of the New Testament. Others are virtually unanimously accepted by critical scholars, usually because of these creeds and other early historical data. It should be pointed out that these latter, critical facts were not accepted in this chapter simply because the critics also accept them, but because they are established by the facts, such as by the creeds that we investigated in this chapter and by the work of careful historical methodology.
Summary and Conclusion
This chapter has presented perhaps our strongest category of evidence, especially for the death and resurrection of Jesus. Admittedly, the amount of material concerning the life and ministry of Jesus before his death was not overwhelming. However, when we enter the “passion week” of Jesus’ life prior to his crucifixion and afterwards, the situation changes drastically.
The strength of the testimony for Jesus’ death and resurrection comes from several facets of the evidence. First, the material in this chapter was quite early. These early Christian traditions predate the writing of the New Testament and hence give us our earliest look at data dealing with the life of Jesus. In the case of 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. and the Acts creeds (along with a few other examples), this material dates within a few years of the actual events. This is not disputed by the critical community.
Second, these creeds present eyewitness testimony for the facts that they report. Again, 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. and the Acts traditions are the keys in that they link us with the apostles, both singly and in groups, primarily through the testimonies of the two eyewitnesses Paul and Peter. An additional example is Luke 24:34, which may also date to the earliest church and Peter.
Third, additional evidences for Jesus’ resurrection include strong considerations like the empty tomb, the disciples’ radical transformations and willingness to die for the truth of the gospel, which was their central message, along with the conversions of skeptics Paul and James. These and other considerations must be explained.
Fourth, alternative hypotheses that seek to explain away the resurrection in natural terms have failed to adequately account for the known historical facts. Not only is this conclusion dictated by the data themselves, but critical scholars have even admitted this failure. Few researchers have favored any of these theses in recent times.
Fifth, the accepted facts, and the minimal facts in particular, are not only established historically but are recognized by virtually all critical scholars as well. The advantages are that these facts provide a strong basis for belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus and, at the same time, should not be rejected since they are recognized on strictly historical grounds. The facts that almost all scholars accept provide a strong basis for belief in Jesus’ literal resurrection from the dead, especially in the absence of viable naturalistic theories.
On this basis, then, we may conclude that the early Christian creeds and accepted historical facts prove the historicity of the death and resurrection of Jesus. These data are sufficient both to disprove the alternative theories, and to present strong evidences for these events (such as the early and eyewitness testimony), all on the grounds of known history. Critical doubts in other areas cannot disprove and change these basic facts.
1
The Earliest Christian Confessions,
2
3
4
Theology of the New Testament,
The Earliest Christian Confessions
Foundations,
Jesus,
5
Theology of the New Testament,
Eucharistic Words,
6
Confessions,
The Birth of the New Testament,
7
Theology,
Jesus,
Apostolic Preaching,
8
Theology,
9
Birth,
10
Eucharistic Words,
11
Theology,
Foundations,
12
Birth,
13
Confessions,
14
Eucharistic Words,
Theology,
Confessions,
15
Theology,
Confessions,
16
Birth,
Eucharistic Words,
17
18
19
Confessions,
Birth,
Confessions,
20
Theology,
21
The Atonement,
22
Birth,
23
Theology,
Confessions,
24
Confessions,
25
Theology of the New Testament,
26
Confessions,
27
28
Theology,
29
Confessions,
30
31
32
Introducing the NT,
33
Apostolic Preaching,
34
35
Theology,
36
Confessions,
Jesus,
Apostolic Preaching,
Theology,
Foundations,
37
Confessions,
38
Confessions,
Birth,
39
Confessions,
Jesus,
Theology,
Foundations,
40
Confessions,
41
Eucharistic Words,
Confessions,
Theology,
42
Apostolic Preaching,
43
Confessions,
44
Resurrection Narratives,
The Early Church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology,
Jesus,
Resurrection,
The Atonement,
Theology,
The Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth,
1 Corinthians,
The Cross,
Bible and Gospel,
The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus
The Resurrection According to Matthew, Mark and Luke
I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus
Confessions,
45
Resurrection Narratives,
Resurrection,
Theology,
Apostolic Preaching,
Confessions
Bodily Resurrection,
46
Early Church,
Resurrection Narratives,
Resurrection,
The Cross,
47
Eucharistic Words,
48
Resurrection Narratives,
The Cross,
Eucharistic Words,
49
(Eucharistic Words,
Jesus,
Resurrection Narratives,
Foundations,
The Cross,
50
Resurrection,
51
Resurrection,
52
53
Ostergeschen und Osterberichte,
The Easter Message Today
First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity
The Early Church,
Jesus,
Apostolic Preaching,
Jesus,
Bodily Resurrection,
Foundations,
Resurrection Narratives,
I Believe,
What Are They Saying About the Resurrection?
54
55
56
The Early Church,
Eucharistic Words,
The Atonement,
Apostolic Preaching,
57
Confessions,
58
Tradition and Life in the Church
I Believe,
59
Jesus,
60
The Early Church,
Eucharistic Words,
Jesus,
Apostolic Preaching,
61
Apostolic Preaching,
62
Theology,
Confessions,
63
Earliest Confessions,
Christianity Today,
64
The Cross,
The Atonement,
65
The Resurrection of Jesus: A Rational Inquiry
The Resurrection of Jesus,
66
Miracles
The Concept of Miracle;
Theology, Physics and Miracles,
Biblical Errancy: An Analysis of its Philosophical Roots
67
The Resurrection of Jesus: A Rational Inquiry,
68
Church Dogmatics,
Jesus,
Resurrection,
Jesus of Nazareth,
69
Resurrection Narratives,
Resurrection,
70
71
The First Easter Morning, Analecta Biblica
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
72
73
74
Resurrection Narratives
Theology,
Systematic Theology,
Jesus,
Resurrection,
Jesus,
Theology of Hope,
Jesus,
Resurrection,
Bodily Resurrection,
The Secular Meaning of the Gospel
75
76
(Jesus: An Historian’s Review,
(Theology,
77
Foundations,
78
79
Immortality,
80
Jesus: An Historian’s Review,
The Medieval Mind
History and Hermeneutic
81
82
History,
83
The Resurrection of Jesus: An Apologetic,
84
The Resurrection of Jesus: A Rational Inquiry,
85
Perhaps an illustration utilizing a court case will be helpful. We will postulate that more than a dozen eyewitnesses clearly observed some events that involved seeing a person perform a series of acts on various occasions. This testimony both came immediately after the occurrences themselves and the eyewitnesses were firm in their claims, as evidenced at numerous points. Further, the opposing lawyer and his assistants could not disprove the testimony even after literally years of research, in spite of their interest in doing so. No lying, collusion or other fraud, hallucinations, or any other means of fakery or misconception could be established. Admittedly, quite a strong case would be made that this person in question was, in fact, seen by these persons at those places and times. But even more revealing, a limited but demonstrable case could be built based only on the facts that their opponents admitted to be true. Thus the argument could be based on the antagonistic testimony alone.
Theoretically, would the jury be satisfied if the opposing lawyer pleaded that “Maybe the witnesses did not really see the person for some unknown reason in spite of the evidence” or “It’s not really important whether they saw him or not”? Clearly these would be inappropriate responses because the testimony reveals that the eyewitnesses did, in fact, literally see the person.
However, evidence for Jesus’ resurrection is actually superior to this. To be sure, as with the court case, people must make a decision about this event, but unlike the court case, their decision does not determine the issue. The historical fact is established on the evidence alone and not by any decision. And it is here that the evidence for the resurrection reveals that the earliest eyewitnesses did see the risen Jesus, as well as the literal nature of these appearances. Critical attempts fail at this point.
86
87
Jesus: An Historian’s Review,
Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament