10 Reasons to Accept the Resurrection of Jesus as an Historical Fact

By Brian Chilton

When I left the ministry due to my skepticism, one of the factors involved in my departure concerned the reliability of the New Testament documents and the resurrection of Jesus. The folks from the Jesus Seminar had me second-guessing whether I could trust what the New Testament said and if I could truly accept the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. In July of 2005, my life changed. I entered the Lifeway Christian Bookstore in Winston-Salem, North Carolina and read three books that changed my life more than any other book outside the Bible. I discovered Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ, Josh McDowell’s The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, and McDowell’s A Ready Defense. I discovered that there are many reasons for accepting the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as a historical fact.

Resurrection Jesus History

Through the years, the evidence has increasingly mounted for the historicity of Jesus’s resurrection. This article will provide 10 of the most fascinating arguments for the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. This list is not exhaustive and my dealings with each argument is extremely brief. Nevertheless, I hope this list will provide a starting point for you to consider the authenticity of Jesus’s resurrection.

  1. The First Eyewitnesses were Women. The first eyewitnesses of the resurrection were women. All the Gospels note that the first individuals to discover the tomb empty were women. Matthew notes that “After the Sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to view the tomb…The angel told the women, ‘Don’t be afraid, because I know you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here. For he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the play where he lay” (Matthew 28:1, 5-6).[1] Women were not held in high esteem. In Greco-Roman culture, a woman’s testimony was not admissible in court. In Jewish circles, it took the testimony of two women to equate that of one man. If one were to invent a story, the last people one would place as the first witnesses would have been women, unless it were otherwise true.
  2. Minimal Facts Concerning the Resurrection. Gary Habermas has popularized the so-called minimal facts argument for the resurrection. The minimal facts are those things that are accepted by nearly all New Testament scholars. The minimal facts are “1. Jesus died by crucifixion. 2. Jesus’ disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them. 3. The church persecutor Paul was suddenly changed. 4. The skeptic James, brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed. 5. The tomb was empty.” [2] These facts are nearly universally accepted by New Testament scholars, including liberals.
  3. Transformation of the Early Disciples. As noted in the minimal facts, James, the brother of Jesus, was changed from a skeptic to a believer because of the resurrection. James along with his brothers did not believe in Jesus during Jesus’s early ministry (see John 7:5). However, Jesus appeared to James (1 Corinthians 15:3-9) and James became a leader in the early Jerusalem church. His death is recorded by Josephus.[3] Paul is another example of one who was completely transformed by the resurrection of Jesus. Paul had been a persecutor of the church. After witnessing the risen Jesus, Paul became a proclaimer for the church.
  4. Embarrassing Details of the Resurrection. Historically speaking, embarrassing details add veracity to a historical claim. The fact that women were the first witnesses, that a member of the Sanhedrin (the same Sanhedrin that executed Jesus) had to give Jesus a proper burial, and that the disciples were fearful and fled all serve as embarrassing factors for the resurrection account.
  5. Willingness to Die for What Was Known. Many people will die for what they believe to be true. But no one will die for something they erroneously invented. The disciples knew if they were telling the truth. Yet, one finds that the disciples were willing to die for what they knew to be true. Stephen died by stoning (Acts 7:54-60), James of Zebedee died by the sword at the hands of Herod (Acts 12:2), James the brother of Jesus died,[4] and Peter and Paul died at the hands of Nero.[5]
  6. Documentary Evidence. The documentary evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is quite good. The historian seeks to find how many primary and secondary sources[6] can be gathered for an event to determine the event’s historicity. Concerning primary sources, the resurrection has Matthew’s account, John’s account, and Paul’s account in 1 Corinthians 15, including the additional references by James (if one accepts that James wrote the letter attributed to him) and Jude. The following are secondary sources for the resurrection: Luke, Mark, Clement of Rome, and to a lesser degree Ignatius and Irenaeus.
  7. Circumstantial Evidence. Douglas Groothius notes that circumstantial evidence for the historicity of the resurrection is “namely, the practice of the early church in observing baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and Sunday worship.”[7] Baptism is based upon the analogy of Jesus’s death, burial, and resurrection. The Lord’s Supper is a symbol of Christ’s sacrificial death. In addition, it is quite odd that faithful Jews would move their worship from a Friday evening into Saturday to a Sunday morning unless something major had occurred on a Sunday morning. The major Sunday morning event was Jesus’s resurrection.
  8. The Missing Motive. J. Warner Wallace has noted in his lectures and books that when a conspiracy is formed, three motivating factors are behinds such a move—power, greed, and/or lust.[8] The disciples would hold no power behind claiming the resurrection as history. They were running around while often being threatened by the Jewish and Roman authorities. As far as greed, they taught that one should not desire earthly possessions, but spiritual ones. Lust was not a factor, either. They taught celibacy before marriage and marital fidelity after marriage. In fact, N. T. Wright notes in his classic book, The Resurrection of the Son of God, that the disciples had no theological motivation behind claiming that Jesus had risen from the dead as they were anticipating a military hero and a final resurrection at the end of time. What motivating factors existed for these disciples to invent such a story? None! The only reason the disciples taught the resurrection of Jesus was because Jesus’s resurrection had occurred.
  9. Enemy Attestation of the Resurrection. Historically speaking, if one holds enemy attestation to an event, then the event is strengthened. When one considers the claims of the authorities that the disciples had stolen the body of Jesus (Matthew 28:11-15), the testimony of the resurrection is strengthened. The early belief that the disciples had stolen the body of Jesus is strengthened by the discovery of the Nazareth Inscription that orders capital punishment for anyone who steals a body from a tomb.[9] In addition, several refences to Jesus and his resurrection include citations from Josephus,[10] Tacitus,[11] and Suetonius[12] among others (including the Babylonian Talmud).
  10. Multiple Post-Resurrection Eyewitnesses. Finally, there is multiple eyewitness testimony pertaining to the resurrection of Jesus. Several people had seen Jesus alive for a period of 40 days. The eyewitnesses include Mary Magdalene (John 20:10-18), the women at the tomb accompanying Mary (Matthew 28:1-10), the Roman guards (Matthew 28:4), the Eleven disciples (John 21), the two men on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35), an indeterminate number of disciples (Matthew 28:16-20); over five-hundred disciples (1 Corinthains 15:6), to James (1 Corinthians 15:7) and to Paul (1 Corinthians 15:8-9). I am certain that there were many other witnesses that are unnamed.

Conclusion:

Many other evidences could be given for the resurrection of Jesus. Thinking about the methods of history, one must understand that there is a reason why American accept the first President of the United States as George Washington and not Spongebob Squarepants. History backs up the claim that Washington was the first President. In like manner, history backs up the reality of Jesus’s resurrection. Now the question is this: what will you do with such information? Some will try to ignore the event. Some will try to dismiss it. Others will acknowledge the factual nature of the event and worship Jesus as the risen Lord. It is my prayer that you will do the latter.

 Notes

[1] Unless otherwise noted, all quoted Scripture comes from the Christian Standard Bible (Nashville: Holman, 2017).

[2] Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004), 48-50, 64-69.

[3] Josephus, Antiquities XX.200.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Eusebius, Church History XXV.5.

[6] Primary sources are documents written by eyewitnesses. Secondary sources are documents written by individuals who know eyewitnesses. For instance, my grandfather was an eyewitness to the biggest naval battle in World War II history. From the information my dad gathered from him, he would be a secondary source, whereas my grandfather would have been a primary source.

[7] Douglas Groothius, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (Downers Grove; Nottingham, UK: IVP Academic; Apollos, 2011), 553-554.

[8] See J. Warner Wallace, “Rapid Response: I Think the Disciples Lied About the Resurrection,” Cold-case Christianity.com (October 17, 2016), retrieved April 11, 2017, http://coldcasechristianity.com/2016/rapid-response-i-think-the-disciples-lied-about-the-resurrection/.

[9] See http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/07/22/The-Nazareth-Inscription-Proof-of-the-Resurrection-of-Christ.aspx#Article.

[10] Josephus, Antiquities XX.9.1.

[11] Tacitus, Annals XV.

[12] Suetonius, Lives of the Caesars-Claudius 25 and Suetonius, Lives of the Caesars-Nero 16.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2ppUPKK


Free CrossExamined.org Resource

Get the first chapter of "Stealing From God: Why Atheists Need God to Make Their Case" in PDF.

Powered by ConvertKit
72 replies
  1. Dwight says:

    I admit to a bit of confusion about point #9. I fail to see how claims that the disciples stole the body is proof of the opposite. Could someone shed some light on that for me?

    Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        It was not a law against stealing bodies but against moving graves.
        It strikes me how such details are bypassed in order to make it evidence for the resurrection.
        .

        Reply
        • Glen says:

          Actually, Ed:

          EDICT OF CAESAR

          It is my decision [concerning] graves and tombs—whoever has made them for the religious observances of parents, or children, or household members—that these remain undisturbed forever. But if anyone legally charges that another person has destroyed, or has in any manner extracted those who have been buried, or has moved with wicked intent those who have been buried to other places, committing a crime against them, or has moved sepulcher-sealing stones, against such a person I order that a judicial tribunal be created, just as [is done] concerning the gods in human religious observances, even more so will it be obligatory to treat with honor those who have been entombed. You are absolutely not to allow anyone to move [those who have been entombed]. But if [someone does], I wish that [violator] to suffer capital punishment under the title of tomb-breaker.

          Reply
          • Ed Vaessen says:

            It seems this blog has been refurbished to such an extent that days of comments of people posting here are missing now.

    • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

      For the fact that the Chief Priests with the religious authority bribed the guards to spread the claim that the disciples of Jesus Christ came and carry His body away while they, the guards were all asleep, is a legal evidence in the court of social justice (Matthew 28:12-16)!

      Reply
  2. Paul says:

    Though illiteracy ran rampant at that time, plenty were able to write. Why did it take decades after the resurrection before the gospels were written? Why are there no eye witness, written testimonials? If Jesus was the saviour of all, why did he appear only to a small group of people in the middle ease – why did he forsake the rest of the world in the sharing of this glory?

    Reply
    • JLM says:

      In short, it took only decades because diciples thought Jesus was coming back during their lifetime and when he didn’t return and persecution was increasing, they thought it would be good to write thing down while they can.

      The Gospels are considered to be written by eyewitnesses, the writers call themselves eyewitnesses.

      Think about your last question – if God decided He wants to be known by all, He could easily do it. But then we would be stripped away of the very thing He values the most in us – freedom to decide to worship him because we want to not because we have to. Without free will there is no freedom to love.

      Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        JLM says:
        “Think about your last question – if God decided He wants to be known by all, He could easily do it. But then we would be stripped away of the very thing He values the most in us – freedom to decide to worship him because we want to not because we have to. Without free will there is no freedom to love.”

        An informed decision is not the same as losing free will.
        How can one know God if the information is unclear? The present situation in the religious world is that most people do believe in gods but not in the god of the Bible. So a far better explanation is that the god of the Bible does not exist.

        Reply
        • JWS says:

          God does exist. In response to Paul’s second question I submit this reply: Immediately after the Ressurrection, Jesus appeared to those who had been following Him prior to his death. These are the ones who would understand the significance of His reappearance. That he had been prophesying that his death and resurrection would occur. He ate with them. Later, he commissioned them to go and make more disciples by spreading the word.

          Reply
          • Ed Vaessen says:

            And why should we believe these gospels to be true in every respect? One can always invent a story and religious people have been infamous throughout history for making up the most fantastic stories.

          • Tracey says:

            Ed.
            by asking God yourself.
            and then you can debate and/or argue with yourself, as even then you would not believe.
            It’s entirely up to you.
            No point in asking a christian, Jew etc, they can’t help you, even if your responses may read, taunting, they read as an internal struggle.
            Go on ask God yourself.

        • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

          You have your free choice to claim that God of the Bible does not exist. Such and other related claims of sorts do not change anything reasonable of thought about the eternal reality of the existence of God Almighty, the Creator of all heavens and earth, including the existence of you and I. God Almighty remains God Almighty, no matter what human beings think about Him!

          Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        JLM says:
        “Think about your last question – if God decided He wants to be known by all, He could easily do it. But then we would be stripped away of the very thing He values the most in us – freedom to decide to worship him because we want to not because we have to. Without free will there is no freedom to love.”

        Which means that when Jesus appeared to the apostles and those 500 people that Paul writes about, he was robbing them of their free will?

        Reply
        • Kalmaro says:

          Why would these people make up a story about the resurrection, then let themselves be persecuted for it?

          I could understand if you claimed that they may been confused about something, but then what happened that convinced them that Jesus came back in the first place?

          One thing we can be pretty sure of is that people do not die for something they don’t believe in.

          Reply
    • Donna B.. says:

      Paul, good questions! I particularly like this question: “If Jesus was the saviour of all, why did he appear only to a small group of people in the middle ease – why did he forsake the rest of the world in the sharing of this glory?”

      Here we are over 2,000 years since the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and we are still learning about Jesus. What an impact! I would say we are sharing in his glory – in His love, in the way He changed history, and the great love He demonstrated through his life, death and resurrection. In time, we will share in His glory face to face.

      Reply
      • paul k says:

        Christ did not forsake the rest of the world,he told his disciples to go and preach to the whole world(mathew28:19).No man is pushed to have faith in Christ,if your hearts are hardened to accept him as your Lord and Saviour remain so(rev22:11).Kalmaro truly a man can die for what he belives to be true but no man can die for what he knows to be a lie.Peter denied the Lord(mathew26:74&75) but he confessed Christ(acts2:14-41),with confidence2:29.I truly come to the conclusion that peter,paul,james and thomas confessed,were persecuted and died for the faith because they had an encounter with the resurrected King of glory Jesus Christ.He is a prince of peace to those who trust in him.Faith is not in things seen but in those we can not now see(2corithians4:18). God has reached you with his word what you do with it is up to you(jer10:10,prov30:5,john3:33,roma3:4).One of the things written in the following verses will happen to any one of us,it is your choice(revs22:12John3:36).

        Reply
    • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

      God is the universal Creator of all, He reveals Himself to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, just few groups of people, not to all mankind. The same is clearly applicable with Jesus Christ as the Saviour of all, yet He appeared to few groups of people after His resurrection before His ascension!

      Reply
  3. Anthony says:

    1. Women witnesses. Perhaps that is why the overwhelming majority of the Jews of the time did not accept the resurrection?

    2. Assuming most New Testament scholars are Christians, this “argument” says nothing more than “Christians accept certain facts about the resurrection”..Which is already a given. In the case of any New Testament scholars who aren’t Christians, well I guess they they don’t find the evidence persuasive. Either way, this is a very poor reason to accept the resurrection.

    Reply
    • Skip Jacobs says:

      There was a Roman Guard guarding the tomb. How many soldiers is that? At least 4.
      When they found the Emory tomb the linen cloths were over in the corner. So let’s think about this. So the body was stolen as all soldiers fell asleep at the same time? They would have had to break the roman seal and pull the stone away. Then for some I inexplicable reason they decided to steal the body naked! That means they would had to unwrap the linen cloths after a hundred pounds of burial ointment had been placed on them and dried. That would have mad a horrendous noise. But amazingly, these soldiers stayed asleeep.
      So, supppsedly the Roman soldiers went to the authorities and said the disciples came and stole the body while they were asleep. You know why that proves that was a preconceived lie by the authorities? Because no Roman soldier would have admitted to that as that was punishable by death.

      Reply
    • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

      Beyond the intellectuals and academic background reasons, supernatural encounter on individual and personal ground is needed, just as Paul’s encounter with Jesus Christ on his way to Damascus for persecution mission against Christianity and Christians(Acts 9; 22), became his convincing reasons and good evidence for his bearing witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ to others from then on, till his own death through the Roman Government execution under emperor Nero!

      Reply
    • Ryan says:

      To your first point…exactly! If they were inventing a new religion the Apostles certainly would not have begun with the testimony of women. They recorded the facts of history as they happened, not as they would have liked for them to happen.

      To your second point, I think a better choice of words would have been “historians” rather than “New Testament scholars”…although there is a surprising number of New Testament scholars that are skeptics/atheists.

      Reply
  4. Anthony says:

    Also, you seem to be attempting to mislead the reader about primary sources. As well as being incoherent (you seem to think your Grandfather is a document), your definition is backwards. An eyewitness account would indeed be a primary source, but a primary source is not necessarily an eyewitness account. One other thing new testament scholars agree on is that the gospels are not eyewitness accounts.

    Reply
    • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

      The eyewitness accounts of Jesus Christ teachings and resurrection started as an oral transmission source before it finally become a documentary source as we have them today in the New Testament Bible.
      There is no misreading of any sort from that, except those who blindly want to be misguided!

      Reply
  5. Ed Vaessen says:

    “Willingness to Die for What Was Known. Many people will die for what they believe to be true. But no one will die for something they erroneously invented. ”

    What about the terrorists of 9/11? There are enough Muslims that believe that they will go to heaven when they die for Islam.

    Reply
    • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

      Christ Jesus disciples have no related comparison with the Islamic terrorists of all sorts in the world.
      Christ Jesus followers simply bear the witness of Jesus Christ teachings, His death and His resurrection from the dead in line with Jesus Christ instructions to them in Acts 1:4-11 before His final ascension back to heaven.
      They were being persecuted, and many of them were killed by Jewish religious authority and Roman Government of their time, not because they committed any crime, but because they were bearing the witness of Jesus Christ resurrection before the people!

      Reply
    • Ryan says:

      True, but the Muslim terrorists of today, and the Buddhist monk that burns himself in the town square, and the non-terrorist Muslim, and the modern Christian, and the modern atheist, and the modern etc., etc., etc. are making decisions based on the best available evidence of today. The Apostles KNEW whether or not they were telling the truth or telling a lie. Liars make bad martyrs…people do not die for what they KNOW to be a lie especially when there is no gain in doing so.

      Reply
  6. Ed Vaessen says:

    “In addition, it is quite odd that faithful Jews would move their worship from a Friday evening into Saturday to a Sunday morning unless something major had occurred on a Sunday morning. The major Sunday morning event was Jesus’s resurrection.”

    How do we know that faithful Jews did exactly that?

    Reply
      • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

        Faithful Jews never means all Jews, it means those that have clear conviction of God”s new wave through the resurrection reality of Jesus Christ that occurred in Sunday early morning as the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) have in their records.
        Saul/Paul who changed through his supernatural encounter he had with Jesus Christ on his way to Damascus through evidential conviction, was a faithful Jew and many others!

        Reply
        • Ed Vaessen says:

          Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:
          “Faithful Jews never means all Jews, it means those that have clear conviction of God”s new wave through the resurrection reality of Jesus Christ that occurred in Sunday early morning as the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) have in their records.”

          In fact you say that ‘faithful’ only means ‘according to my opinion’. I don’t blame Jews for not believing anything in the NT, as their OT clearly never speaks about a Trinity or a messiah that is God at the same time and who is going to be born from a virgin one day.

          Reply
    • James says:

      Ed Vaessen: “How do we know that faithful Jews did exactly that?”

      Peter, Matthew, John, James and all of Jesus’ family were faithful Jews, as were, obviously the Pharisees, Sanhedrin and their followers in this primarily Hebrew land . They pilgrimaged to Solomon’s Temple, observed Sabbath and Hebrew Law. Enough of these people DID change to start a new church. A church that violated the Hebrew traditional Sabbath, the very religion of their longstanding culture. Within 380 years this new church, followers of “the Way” prevailed over the very empire that persecuted them.

      The thing is, when adding and finally beginning to understand Jesus’ fulfillment words to their own worldview, plus gentiles pointing out fulfillment of the Hebrews’ very own prophecy (read Isaiah 49), the belief became logical in the most logically thinking of all places – the place of lovers of knowledge, reason and philosophy – Greece.

      The ENLIGHTENMENT of the Hebrew, combined with Greek love of KNOWLEDGE and the GLORY of the Roman Empire set mankind upon a new course of enlightenment, knowledge and glory via the LOVE of the one true God in our world 2000 years ago.

      “For God SO loved the WORLD that he gave His ONLY Son, so whoever believes will not perish, but have eternal life”. (Eyewitness) John 3:16

      “This is my Son with whom I am pleased” – (Eyewitness) Matthew 3:16

      “For unto you a child is born, unto you a Son is GIVEN”. Isaiah 9:6.

      May hardened hearts become softened so as to receive the truth. (paraphrased) Ezekial 36:26

      The choice is this: move into true reality, or, relegate one’s self to his own relative (made up and comfortable) truth i.e. eternal life, or worm food. Your choice. But remember, “the problem with the self-made man is that he worships his creator”. 🙂

      Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        James says:
        “Ed Vaessen: “How do we know that faithful Jews did exactly that?”

        Peter, Matthew, John, James and all of Jesus’ family were faithful Jews, as were, obviously the Pharisees, Sanhedrin and their followers in this primarily Hebrew land . They pilgrimaged to Solomon’s Temple, observed Sabbath and Hebrew Law. Enough of these people DID change to start a new church. A church that violated the Hebrew traditional Sabbath, the very religion of their longstanding culture. Within 380 years this new church, followers of “the Way” prevailed over the very empire that persecuted them. ”

        Hoe do we know that Peter, Matthew, John, James (not very well known persons it seems, as we only get information about them from the Bible and not from any other source as far as I know) changed to the Sunday?

        Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:
        “We know because many New Testament Bible records bear clear witness to that events!”

        I know. Witness Matthew even invented solar eclipses, earthquakes and walking zombies. The man seemed to have a lot of fantasy and had no problem in degrading God to an illusionist that fancies special effects. His god was a god for very, very silly people.

        Reply
  7. Bryan says:

    “Many people will die for what they believe to be true. But no one will die for something they erroneously invented”

    See Joseph Smith jr. He invented Mormonism and could have denied it to say his life.

    Reply
    • Kalmaro says:

      Joseph Smith admitting that he was wrong would not have saved him. This becomes clear once you look into why he died in the first place. He had made himself a lot of enemies and had broken his own rule about violence by trying to fight people off with a gun.

      Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        Kalmaro says:
        “Joseph Smith admitting that he was wrong would not have saved him. This becomes clear once you look into why he died in the first place. He had made himself a lot of enemies and had broken his own rule about violence by trying to fight people off with a gun.”

        Like most Christians do nowadays. Like Jesus did in the Temple, whipping people out.

        Reply
      • Bryan says:

        Joe was running a scam. He could have confessed at any time. His buddy Oliver Cowdery once said Mormonism was “a bottle of smoke”. But even when he was tarred and feathered, even when he was put in jail, even when he was nearly executed in Missouri Joe never let on it was a scam. His luck just ran out that day in Catheridge.

        Reply
  8. Bryan says:

    Also: I have often wondered why the Christian God chose to have his son killed and brought back to life in a time before television, cameras, cell phones, and Internet. Could you see Peter’s twitter account? “Peter@realsimonpeter OMG! He’s back! Check out the pics #handsfeetside.”

    Reply
    • Kalmaro says:

      That’s a good question. I often wonder about his timing as well. Though, considering that they lacked any and all social media whatsoever, word has still managed to get it world wide.

      It’s spread so well that pretty much anyone who is curious about Jesus can pick up a book about him and see thousands of years of commentary about him in a matter of seconds. Not too shabby.

      Reply
      • Bryan says:

        …and Buddha and Mohammed too. They are as famous as Jesus. My point was that there would be no need for a list of resurrection evidence has the Christian God done his thing in 2017.

        Reply
        • Kalmaro says:

          Well that is going to be hard to prove. We don’t have any official numbers on how many people believe in Jesus vs Buddha. Vs Muhammad.

          We also don’t know exactly what effect God revealing himself now would have today. I don’t mind speculating, but that’s about all we can do at this point. All things considered, the timing seems to have been effective.

          In an unrelated note, are you getting email notifications to comments? I never do for some reason. I just keep checking this page instead.

          Reply
          • Ed Vaessen says:

            Kalmaro says:
            “Well that is going to be hard to prove. We don’t have any official numbers on how many people believe in Jesus vs Buddha. Vs Muhammad. ”

            Hundreds of millions for sure. Billions as far as Muslims are concerned. The reproductive attitude of women make all the difference. Christians fuck less in these modern days and that is why Christianity is loosing ground.
            But the question of course is not what people believe, but how good the reasons are for their specific belief.
            By the way: you were raised in a Christian tradition, like I was?

          • Ed Vaessen says:

            Kalmaro says:
            “We also don’t know exactly what effect God revealing himself now would have today. I don’t mind speculating, but that’s about all we can do at this point. All things considered, the timing seems to have been effective. ”

            So was the timing of Buddha and Mohammed. Hundreds of millions of followers they have today

        • Jim Barringer says:

          You really think people would be more likely to believe evidence for the resurrection in this age of Photoshop and CGI?

          Reply
        • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

          That is part of what makes Him God Almighty. God Almighty remains the universal Creator of time and eternity!
          He does not need our current access to social media to execute His ordained agenda.

          Reply
      • Ed Vaessen says:

        Kalmaro says:
        “That’s a good question. I often wonder about his timing as well. Though, considering that they lacked any and all social media whatsoever, word has still managed to get it world wide.

        It’s spread so well that pretty much anyone who is curious about Jesus can pick up a book about him and see thousands of years of commentary about him in a matter of seconds. Not too shabby.”

        But even though Christian Europe once ruled the world, it never convinced very much.

        Reply
        • Kalmaro says:

          Define ‘very much’ and ‘christen Europe’ . I believe there’s quite a large number of people who believe Jesus at least existed.

          I don’t think Christianity was ever in a position to rule over anything. Then again, I view Christianity as the following of Christ’s words and only that, which tends to go against the modern idea of what a Christian is, or even what it was defined as during the time that the Roman Catholic Church rose in power.

          Also, please mind the language.

          Reply
          • Ed Vaessen says:

            The spread of a religion has few to do with its truth. People generally adopt the religion of their parents and don’t think very much about it. They don’t have time to do.

    • Ed Vaessen says:

      There is quite some fun about this. Kalmaro accepts the Bible. He accepts the story of an earthquake, a solar eclipse and walking zombies at that faithful moment when Christ dies on he cross. Perhaps he wonders why God failed to bring in the dancing girls and fireworks.
      Not a second of his life has Kalmaro ever thought about how ridiculous this story is.
      Kalmaro rejects Hinduism. Why? He doesn’t know. He was told it is wrong. But he never studied it. As few as he ever really thought about the texts of the Bible, fewer times has he pondered the Hinduism writings. Perhaps he once heard about Ganesha getting his elephant head and thought that so silly a story that he concluded that Hinduism cannot possibly be true. But earthquakes, solar eclipses and walking zombies make perfectly sense to him. That is a far as his intellectual curiosity takes him.
      Now the situation of Kalmaro is not very different from most religious people.

      Reply
      • Kalmaro says:

        You just made a lot of assumption. What makes you think I have not taken the time to study the evidence, the fact that I don’t agree with you?

        I think you will find that more people who believe in God do so for logical reasons than you currently believe.

        Not to mention that, assuming God exists and that he quite literally spoke the universe into existence. Things like eclipses and the dead walking and earthquakes seem like child’s play in comparison.

        I think you would benefit from looking into various religions and seeing how they started before you make assumptions about its followers.

        Reply
        • Ed Vaessen says:

          Kalmaro says:
          “You just made a lot of assumption. What makes you think I have not taken the time to study the evidence, the fact that I don’t agree with you?”
          You studies the Hindu religion? Of course not.

          “I think you will find that more people who believe in God do so for logical reasons than you currently believe.”
          You think Hindu’s have no logical reasons to believe what they believe?

          “Not to mention that, assuming God exists and that he quite literally spoke the universe into existence. Things like eclipses and the dead walking and earthquakes seem like child’s play in comparison.”
          They look exactly like the imagination of children that want to see fireworks.

          Reply
        • Ed Vaessen says:

          In other words, Kalmaro: if you believe in a God that deems it necessary to throw around earthquakes, solar eclipses and lets zombies walk into Jerusalem to make the sacrifice of Jesus look very, very special, you will believe anything. As children will believe anything. It is for such children that Matthew wrote his fantasies.
          If your explanation is that God acts in mysterious ways, I would like to see you discuss Hindu’s and ask people who of you looks more ridiculous.

          Reply
          • Kalmaro says:

            I’m not exactly seeing the point you’re trying to make. All the signs that happened around Jesus death were prophesied ahead of time, which is what made them significant.

            Nevermind the fact that if God is powerful enough to make the universe then almost nothing is farfetched in comparison.

          • Ed Vaessen says:

            Kalmaro says:
            “I’m not exactly seeing the point you’re trying to make. All the signs that happened around Jesus death were prophesied ahead of time, which is what made them significant.”

            Earthquakes, solar eclipses and walking zombies were prophesied?
            Of course they were not. Earthquakes, solar eclipses and walking zombies are exactly stories that fit the level of children that like fantastic fireworks. I wonder if you can explain why God seems to think it necessary to use such miracles that seem to add nothing to the occasion. If you cannot explain it with rational arguments, it is clear that you also cannot explain why the story of how Ganesha got his elephant head is ridiculous. You only make clear that anything goes.

        • ANTHONY says:

          What makes me say that? How many religions are there now? How many have there been in the past, that have died out? Their adherents believed they were true; and now they are forgotten:followed by no one. What reason is there to accept any one of them over any other? None!

          Reply
      • Emmanuel Chukwuma Umeh says:

        There are man-made religions and there is God-made, true and non-fraudulent religion.
        There are fraudulent religions, but not all religion is fraudulent.
        We must be fair and unbiased in our judgements!

        Reply
  9. Karu says:

    John 6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
    2 Corinthians 3:6
    Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
    1 Corinthians 2:11
    For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
    Note: we can’t fully comprehend the things of God if we lack His Spirit.

    Isaiah 61:1
    The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    Romans 8:14
    For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

    The problem today is this:
    1 Timothy 4:1
    Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
    Hence, some have given up their faith and settled in those doctrines of devils, they stand against the doctrine of God Almighty. And all these happens because the Spirit of God is not there.
    But listen to what king David had to say:
    Psalms 51:11
    Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

    Reply
  10. Ed Vaessen says:

    Ed Vaessen says:
    (April 21, 2017 at 2:04 pm)

    “How strange. I answered before to this post and my answer is nowhere to be seen now.”

    And now I say it is even stranger. The text in quotes above was from months ago. Yet April 21, 2017 is tagged to it.

    Reply
  11. Bob says:

    In 1 Cor 15:5-8 Paul basically says “Jesus appeared to them and he appeared to me too.” No distinction in nature is provided between the appearances. Well, the appearance to Paul was some sort of spiritual vision, not an encounter with a formerly dead corpse that had returned to life. Therefore, we can infer that Paul was saying the others had spiritual visions like his. He certainly gives no evidence otherwise. Paul is the earliest and only firsthand source so his testimony is preferred to the secondhand or worse testimony in the Gospels.

    Reply
    • pa says:

      The disciples account is the key(luke24:36-49,john21:1-14),they ate with him,touched him etc simply meaning a living being like the one they had been with before crucifixion.God is not man(num23:19).If you can not have faith or sometimes reason enough to accept Christ do not deny that he came for the goodness of your souls(1john2:22).God’s ways are far from ours(isaiah55:8).Do not divert the meaning of the scripture deliberately.

      Reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] THIS ARTICLE is such a superb list of believable reasons for accepting the resurrection as a historical FACT…for strong believers and less strong believers alike…..please take a look. […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *