Christian Evidences: Jesus and the Resurrection
Question One: The “Minimal” Facts Approach to the Resurrection of Christ
When it comes to Christianity, the truth that the religion stands on is the bodily resurrection of Christ. This is reiterated in the words of Apostle Paul, who stated that if Jesus had not been raised from the dead, then the preaching of those who spread the word of God was useless, and so was the faith of all who believed. By making this statement, Paul presented an unbiased standard on which the validity of Christianity could be determined. Essentially, the claim is that if one could prove that Jesus had not risen from the dead, then it would automatically prove that Christianity is nothing but a fake narrative: Christian Evidences: Jesus and the Resurrection.
However, if it can be proven that Jesus rose from the dead, then this proves that Christianity is true. As such, Christianity is falsifiable, meaning that based on where it has based its faith, which is the resurrection of Christ, if this event can be proven real, then it is true; however, if it can be proven false, then the entire religion is false.
The minimal facts approach to the resurrection question is a methodology whereby the data considered is exclusively that which is historically strongly confirmed in a way that they are approved by almost all scholars who have been students of the subject, particularly those who are skeptical of religion, including Gary Habermas and Michael Licona (Beck & Licona, 2020). This approach does not take on the assumption that the accounts of the resurrection of Jesus are free from error or that they were divinely inspired.
Contrastingly, this approach only holds the assumption that all these accounts or writings are historical documents or primary sources of the information that happened around the time that Jesus is said to have lived (Habermas & Licona, 2004). This approach also applies the criterion that the fact must be supported by numerous sources of evidence, which must also be independent of each other.
The outline of this approach, when applied to the resurrection of Christ, would include the following: one, identifying the core facts, in this case, that the crucifixion of Jesus took place. This is supported by multiple sources, which are also independent of each other, including Roman, Christian, and Jewish. The second fact is the empty tomb. Jesus died, and His body was buried by Joseph of Arimathea, but then something happened to His body, and no one could prove what happened.
The authorities who were hell-bent on squashing the believers would have produced His body if they could, but they did not, and on top of that, women were the first witnesses of an empty tomb. This is highly unlikely for a made-up story because, at the time, women were not highly regarded, and as such, making them witnesses in a made-up story would have only made the story more unbelievable. There are also numerous accounts from enemies who witnessed the empty tomb, and scholars have pointed out that the accounts of the burial and empty tomb are simple and absent of theological or legendary development.
The other minimal fact is the post-death appearance, where numerous people, including Paul, who was a skeptic, had numerous accounts talking about seeing Jesus, accounts that were written around one to two years after Jesus had died. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul uses what scholars refer to as the early Christian creed to talk about Jesus’ death, empty tomb, and resurrection (Craig, 2010). The information in the Christian creed shows that the language used can be dated back to around time of Jesus existence.
Another minimal fact is the transformation of the disciples, whereby when Jesus was arrested and killed, there was fear among His disciples in fear of their lives due to prosecution. Still, this changed, and they became bold proclaimers of their faith and the resurrection of Jesus. Scholars agree that something did happen among the disciples to change their behavior to such an extent.
The last minimal fact is the origin of Christianity, which is traced back to the first century when it exploded out of Israel several years after Jesus died. The only explanation for this strong movement spreading out across the world preaching about Jesus despite the risk of prosecution is that these believers experienced something that assured their faith in their savior, especially after He died.
In conclusion, in the debate on the truth about the Christian faith, the resurrection of Jesus is the one account that provides the most rational and complete explanation that can be applied in the minimal facts approach to proving that the account is reliable and true. As such, I agree with this approach.
Question Two: Proof of the Resurrection of Christ
A response to the question of whether it is possible to prove that Jesus resurrected depends on how one defines proof or evidence. Today’s world relies on scientific proof, which is evidence that is tangible, quantifiable, reproducible, and consistent with what is being told. Nonetheless, the resurrection of Jesus is a historical event, and so is every other proof used to tell it today.
Such proof mainly depends on factors such as eyewitness accounts and the strength of the evidence dating back to the manuscripts, among other things that do not consist of the aspects of scientific proof. This makes it hard to prove that Jesus was raised from the dead.
However, the minimal facts approach can be applied to provide a good enough argument to prove that Jesus was raised from the dead. This approach encompasses a procedure where undeniable facts established by scholars of the work are highlighted that prove that certain events that occurred at the time support the resurrection of Christ. These historical events have been held up to a criterion that was established by scholars, including critics of religion, that they needed to meet to be proven valid. This validity criterion states as follows.
First, the historical claims must be supported by numerous sources, which are also independent. Second, the historical claims include testimonies from enemies because this makes them authentic, as opponents are unlikely to support them. Third, these historical claims must have a principle of embarrassment because it shows authentic reporting as opposed to a polished-up creative account (Craig, 2010).
Fourth, the historical claims must be supported by eyewitness testimonies from numerous people. Lastly, the historical claims must be supported by original or primary sources rather than secondary sources. All these are requirements that the resurrection of Jesus meets, making it more plausible and credible.
Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus can also be used to support other apologetic arguments in Christianity. For example, when it comes to the divinity of Christ, there are critics against it, especially because all other notable characters in other religions, like Mohammed and Buddha, regarded themselves as mere servants with no divinity.
However, Jesus stated that He was the Son of God and that the only way to God was through Him. Evidence for resurrection proves these claims that Jesus made about His divinity to be true. In addition, it also fulfills prophecies that had been made years before Jesus existed, proving that the manuscripts used to write the Bible are historically reliable.
Another argument that the proof of the resurrection of Jesus supports is that God exists. Jesus claimed that He was the Son of God, and after resurrection, He ascended into heaven, where He seats next to His Father. Secondly, resurrection is a supernatural event beyond human capability, proving that some supernatural power was used and, therefore, God exists because He is the only supernatural being Jesus associated Himself with.
In addition, by ascending into heaven, Christians hope for eternal life, and their beliefs about eternal life, heaven, and judgment are reinforced. Christians argue that there is life after death and that there will be a judgment day where those who were believers and acted accordingly will be rewarded while the rest will be punished.
In conclusion, while it cannot be proven that resurrection is real in an absolute sense, historical evidence is more than enough to support apologetic arguments, which solidifies Christian truths.
References
Beck, W. D., & Licona, M. R. (2020). Raised on the third day: Defending the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. Lexham Press.
Craig, W. L. (2010). On guard: Defending your faith with reason and precision. David C. Cook.
Habermas, G. R., & Licona, M. R. (2004). The case for the resurrection of Jesus. Kregel Publications.
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
OVERVIEW
In both Christian Evidences Assignments, you will answer two of the three provided questions based on reading from the learn material and any additional research you want to conduct. The goal with these assignments is to analyze the concepts presented and succinctly synthesize it into a coherent response based on the types of experiences Christians face when being asked about their faith.
INSTRUCTIONS
Each Christian Evidences Assignment should answer two of the three provided questions. Each question should be answered in 2-3 pages, double spaced. These answers should then be combined into a 4-6-page essay, double spaced, and submitted as a singular assignment.
It is expected that the course textbook reading will qualify as the primary source for writing essays; however, you are permitted to use other sources. Any sources quoted or used in the essay should be cited using current APA, MLA, or Turabian. Each essay is meant to answer a related group of questions, so it is important that you are thorough in answering the questions completely.
Christian Evidences: Jesus and the Resurrection
Christian Evidences: Jesus and the Resurrection Assignment (YOU MUST ANSWER TWO OF THE FOLLOWING THREE QUESTIONS for MODULE 8)
- Describe the “minimal” facts approach to the resurrection question. Be sure in your answer, to provide a general description and outline of this approach when applied to the resurrection of Christ. Do you agree or disagree with this approach?
- Can one “prove” that Jesus was raised from the dead? Why or why not? Can evidence from the case for the resurrection be used to further any other apologetic inquiries or arguments? If so, which ones?
- Why is it so important to deal with the question of “legend” as it pertains to the resurrection? What is the relationship between the early dating of New Testament documents and the dispelling of accusations that the resurrection story developed as a legend? Why is it so important that resurrection testimony be dated back to the years immediately following the crucifixion of Christ? Why is the recognition of “creeds” so important in establishing an argument refuting the “legendary development” objection to the resurrection?
Readings: