Monthly Archives: July 2015

Defending the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus: Postmortem Appearances (Part 4 of 8)

4.0 Postmortem Appearances On multiple occasions and under various circumstances, different individuals and groups of people claimed to have experienced appearances of Jesus alive from the dead. This is a fact that is almost universally acknowledged among New Testament scholars today. Prominent historian E. P Sanders, who calls himself a liberal , agrees. He declares that the “equally secure facts” include that Jesus’ disciples “saw him (in what sense is not certain) after his death. . . . Thereafter his followers saw him” . Koester asserts “We are on much firmer ground with respect to the appearances of the risen Jesus and their effect.” These appearances “cannot very well be questioned” …

Continue reading

Posted in Historiography, Resurrection.

Defending the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus: The Empty Tomb (Part 3 of 8)

3.0 The Empty Tomb The first of the historical facts comprising our data to be explained is that of that empty tomb. All four Gospel accounts are in agreement on this core fact: on the Sunday morning following His crucifixion, the tomb of Jesus was discovered to be empty. Remarkably, the majority of critical scholars affirm the empty tomb as historical. New Testament (NT) Scholar Dr. Gary Habermas has conducted a study1See here. of hundreds of scholarly sources on the resurrection. In which, he found nearly two dozen arguments for the empty tomb. What is more, approximately 75 percent of the scholars who were surveyed defend one or more of those …

Continue reading

Posted in Historiography, Resurrection.

Defending the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus: Preliminary Concerns (Part 2 of 8)

  2. Preliminary Concerns Before getting into how historical methodology is used to infer the Resurrection as the best explanation of the facts concerning the fate of Jesus, I think it wise to first dispel a few common (but severely misguided) objections: Textual variants: “The Bible has been recopied so many times and in so many different languages that it’s impossible to know what the original texts actually said.” Discrepancies in the narratives: “Seeing as how there are numerous differences in the writers’ accounts of what they claim happened on Easter morning and the days that followed, none of them should be viewed as trustworthy.” Legendary embellishment: “You can’t reasonably believe …

Continue reading

Posted in Historiography, Resurrection.

Defending the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus: Historical Methodology (Part 1 of 8)

1.0 Historical Methodology There is no denying the fact that the vast majority of people—Christian and non-Christian alike—would say that belief in the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth is just something you have to take on faith. For it’s an event, they’d say, that is separated from us by twenty centuries; and thus it cannot possibly be evinced by any real evidence. That response, however, is demonstrably false in light of the tools of historiography. These tools make it so that we can in fact construct a solid historical case for the Resurrection and, in so doing, produce real evidence. 1.1 Argument Structure The structure of such an argument will contain two key …

Continue reading

Posted in Historiography, Resurrection.
%d bloggers like this: