Tom Davis presents biblical evidence for why believing in the resurrection of Jesus Christ is reasonable.
One unique thing about the Christian religion is that it is testable. The most important claim the Christian makes is that Jesus rose physically from the dead. Paul taught, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Paul is telling the church at Corinth that if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then Christianity is false. When Jesus cleansed the temple, the Jews asked Him what authority He had to chase the people from the Temple. Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). Jesus was saying that the test to authenticate His authority was if He would be raised from the dead. The claim that Jesus was raised from the dead is testable using the same methodology that a historian would use to determine if Alexander the Great invaded India, or if the Roman Senate murdered Julius Caesar.
Early Evidence
To evaluate the truth of historical claims it is important to have accurate historical records. The New Testament contains the historical record of the early church. There are over 5,700 Greek New Testament manuscripts. The earliest manuscript is P52, a papyrus containing part of John chapter 18. This manuscript is dated around A.D. 130. The New Testament was written between the late 40’s and the mid 90’s. The Gospel of John was written sometime between the late 60’s and the mid 90’s. This means that there are 40 to 70 years from the time John was written to the time of the first manuscript evidence. The ancient literature with the second most manuscript documentation is the works of Homer. The Odyssey and the Iliad have 643 manuscripts.{1}
When compared to other historical writings, the New Testament manuscript evidence is very good. Only ten manuscripts attest to Caesar’s Gallic Wars; the oldest manuscript is dated 900 years after the original writing. What we know of the works of Tacitus comes from two manuscripts. The oldest is 800 years after the original writing.{2} When comparing the manuscript evidence for the New Testament to the rest of the writings of antiquity, the New Testament has more evidence, and the evidence is closer to the dates of the original writings in question. The manuscripts show that what was written by the original authors of the New Testament has been accurately preserved and faithfully passed down through history. There are a few scribal insertions, but today’s Bible copies accurately represent what the apostles originally wrote.
Not all the New Testament is relevant to the resurrection of Jesus. The four canonical gospels are relevant to the life of Jesus. Most New Testament scholars agree that Mark was the first gospel and was written in the late 60s. John was the last gospel. He wrote his gospel between A.D. 80 and A.D. 95. Jesus was crucified in A.D. 30 or 33. The gospels were written between 30 and 65 years after the events they describe.
Virtually all scholars agree that there is earlier evidence that must be considered. Paul wrote the book of 1 Corinthians in A.D. 55. Paul writes, “For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also” (1 Corinthians. 15:3-8). Paul is claiming that this is something that he “received.” This is an early church confession that was given to Paul sometime after his conversion experience.
In Galatians Paul states that after his conversion he went to Arabia, then returned to Damascus. Paul writes, “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas” (Galatians 1:18). Paul’s conversion was a few years after the death of Jesus. Wolfhart Pannenberg claims that “Paul would have been in Jerusalem six to eight years after the events.”{3} The confession was formulated before Paul visited Peter. N.T. Wright comments, “It was probably formulated within the first two or three years after Easter itself, since it was already in formulaic form when Paul ‘received’ it.”{4} The confession that Paul refers to in 1 Corinthians 15 was formulated sometime between two and six years after the death of Jesus. There is no time for legendary embellishment.
The Facts
Several facts can be gleaned from the passage in 1 Corinthians 15:
1. Jesus died.
2. His disciples believed they experienced a resurrected Jesus.
3. Paul had an experience that he thought was the resurrected Jesus.
The gospels and Paul’s undisputed letters support these facts.
1. Jesus died
“Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3)
Jesus died by crucifixion during the Passover celebration. This is attested by all four Gospels (Matthew 27:32-54, Mark 15:21-39, Luke 23:26-49, John 19:16-30). The Talmud also states that “Jesus of Nazareth was hanged on Passover Eve.”{5} At that time, the term “hanged” referred to crucifixion. Jesus’ death is well attested in the ancient literature. Michael Licona sums up the evidence: “Jesus’ death and/or crucifixion are also abundantly mentioned in non-canonical literature. Moreover, there is no ancient evidence to the contrary.”{6}
2. His disciples believed they experienced a resurrected Jesus
“He appeared to Cephas” (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Jesus’ disciples had experiences that they interpreted as seeing the resurrected Jesus. The first person Paul lists in 1 Corinthians 15 is Peter. There is no direct evidence that Jesus appeared to Peter individually. Luke also records an early Christian saying, “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon” (Luke 24:23). We know that Paul met with Peter and James (Galatians 1:18-19; Acts 15:1-21). His knowledge of Jesus’ appearance to Peter probably came from them.
“then to the twelve” (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Jesus appeared to the twelve (minus Judas). Paul was an associate of the apostles; he would have had knowledge of Jesus appearing to these men. Luke and John record Jesus appearing to the apostles (Luke 24:36-49, John 20:19-20). Together, Paul, Luke, and John give three independent attestations of Jesus appearing to the twelve.
“Then he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:6-7)
Jesus appeared to 500 brothers and sisters. There is no other attestation of this appearance. It is unlikely that Paul could have made up this appearance. Paul refers to them as “Most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:6). Paul’s statement that most of these people are alive, and that some had died, indicates that he had some knowledge of these individuals. He is saying that these people were available to be questioned about the event.
“Then he appeared to James” (1 Corinthians 15:7)
Jesus’ brothers did not believe that He was the Messiah before His death. However, Luke claims that after the ascension, the brothers of Jesus were at the upper room (Acts 1:14). Peter thought that it was important for James to be informed of his escape from prison (Acts 12:17). Later, when Paul visits Jerusalem, Paul gives a report to “James, and all the elders” (Acts 21:18). The book of Acts indicates that James rose to a prominent leadership role in the Jerusalem church. Paul also notes the influence of James. When Paul visited Peter in Jerusalem, he said that he “saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother” (Galatians 1:19). James is also referred to as a pillar of the church (Galatians 2:9). The Biblical evidence indicates that James was once an unbeliever who became one of the most influential leaders in the early Jerusalem church. An appearance of the risen Jesus would explain the transition from unbeliever to leader of the church in Jerusalem.
“then to all the apostles.” (1 Corinthians 15:7)
Jesus appeared to all the apostles. There are no clues to the nature of this appearance. This may refer to the appearance to the disciples in Galilee (Matthew 28:16-20). There is no conclusive way to link that passage to Paul’s creedal formula in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. The reliability of this appearance rests on its early attestation. Paul probably knew the people involved.
3. Jesus appeared to Paul
“Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also.” (1 Corinthians 15:8)
Paul rhetorically asks the Corinthians, “Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” (1 Corinthians 9:1). Luke also records Jesus’ appearance to Paul (Acts 9, 22, 26). These three passages are consistent in the details of what Paul experienced. However, there are some apparent inconsistencies in the details of what Paul’s companions experienced. In Acts 22:9 and 26:13, Paul’s companions see the light that blinded Paul. In Acts 9:3-7 there is no mention of them seeing light. Because not mentioning the light does not necessarily contradict the presence of light, it is reasonable to conclude that the men saw the light. There is also a question as to whether Paul’s companions heard the voice. The word that Luke uses in Acts 22 is the Greek word acouo, which can mean “hearing,” “understanding,” or “to obey.” This means that acouo can mean to hear but not understand what a voice is saying. This is why the passage in chapter 22 is translated, “Now those who were with me saw the light, but did not understand the voice (acouo) of the one who was speaking with me” (Acts 22:9). There is also the question of whether the men with Paul were standing (Acts 9:7) or if they were on the ground (Acts 26:14). The Greek word used in Acts 22:9 is istemi, which can mean “stopped,” as in not being able to move. When Luke writes, “The men who were traveling with him stood speechless” (Acts 9:7), this could also be understood as saying that the men did not leave Paul.{7} Michael Licona addresses the issue of these translation difficulties:
“It is one thing to note a contradiction between two authors. However, it is another thing to claim that an author is contradicting himself, within his same writing no less. Unless Luke was being careless, it seems to me that it is better to be charitable in our interpretations of surface contradictions within the same work if they do not require too much strain.”{8}
Licona was specifically addressing the issue of whether the men heard the voice, but this same concept also applies to the interpretation and understanding of whether the men were standing or on the ground.
Evaluating Arguments
What can we conclude so far? There are multiple independent attestations that Jesus’ followers experienced Jesus appearing to them after He was buried. These experiences occurred with individuals and groups of people. William Lane Craig concludes, “The evidence makes it certain that on separate occasions different individuals and groups had experiences of seeing Jesus alive from the dead.”{9}
Marcus Borg (liberal Christian theologian and historian of Jesus and a fellow of the Jesus Seminar) challenges the passage found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 on two points. First, Borg argues, Paul includes himself in the list of people to whom the risen Christ appeared; implicitly, he regards his own experience as similar to the others.{10} Borg then refers to the record in Acts chapters 9, 22, and 26, claiming that this shows that Paul’s experience was a vision. For Borg, this implies that the experience of the other disciples were visions.
There is an important distinction that Borg does not address. The book of Acts begins with Jesus’ final appearance to the disciples, which is followed by His ascension into heaven (Acts 1:9). All the appearances to the other disciples took place between the resurrection and the ascension of Jesus. Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus occurs well after the ascension of Jesus. This also ignores many details of the appearances recorded in the gospels. Visions do not eat or drink. They cannot be touched. The narratives in the Gospel accounts involve Jesus, in His resurrected body, eating and drinking and being touched. By the time Paul wrote 1 Corinthians, he would have been familiar with at least some of these stories. Because the ascension occurs between the appearances to the disciples and the appearance to Paul, it is reasonable to expect some differences in the nature of these appearances.
Borg’s second challenge is concerned with the last half of 1 Corinthians 15 where Paul discusses the nature of the resurrected body. According to Borg, Paul “explicitly denies that it is a physical body; instead, it is a spiritual body.”{11} In 1 Corinthians 15:44, Paul writes: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.” Borg takes the term “natural body” to refer to a physical body, while he takes “spiritual body” to mean a body that is not physical. The Greek word that is translated as natural is psuchikon. Licona searched the Greek literature and found that psuchikon never means physical or material.{12} Psuchikon always refers to something natural or unspiritual. Pnumatikos is the Greek word translated as spiritual. This word can mean ethereal or refer to something that is not physical. However, pnumatikos is not used in the New Testament to refer to a ghost or something ethereal. At the beginning of 1 Corinthians Paul writes, “But I, brothers and sisters, could not address you as spiritual (pnumatikos) people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ” (1 Corinthians 3:1). Paul is not referring to people who do not have spiritual bodies here. In chapter 15 he is not claiming that a resurrected body is not physical. In this chapter, Paul makes a similar kind of comparison to what he wrote in verse 3:1. The people are “of the flesh,” but when they become spiritual people, they do not lose their physical body. Just as in verses 15:44-49, people do not lose their natural body when they are raised a spiritual body.
A few verses earlier Paul writes, “What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or some other grain” (1 Corinthians 15:36-37). Paul is making an analogy between a seed and the plant that it produces, and a body before and after it has been resurrected. A plant is bigger and more beautiful than the seed that it comes from, but there is continuity between the two. A plant is the same organism that was once a seed. A resurrected body is more glorious than the body was before it died, but both bodies bear the same identity of the person. There is continuity between a natural body and a spiritual body.
The appearances are not the only things to be considered. The tomb Jesus was buried in was found empty by a group of His women followers. John designates that Mary Magdalene came to the tomb (John 20:1). Matthew records that “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb” (Matthew 28:1). Mark writes that Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome went to the tomb. Luke lists Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women as those who went to the tomb. The genre of the Gospels is ancient biography. The writers of ancient biography were not concerned with explaining all the details. They were not overly concerned with exact details. Ancient authors were more concerned with portraying the nature of events. Matthew, Mark and John do not exclude the possibility that other women were present. At that time, women were not viewed as being capable of reasoning well. In the first century, women could be legal witnesses, but they were not trusted to be reliable and reasonable witnesses. If you were looking for witnesses, you found a man if you could. If the evangelists were to make up a story to convince people that Jesus’ tomb was found empty, they would have said that the discovery was made by men. Claiming that the empty tomb was found by women would not have been convincing to any first-century audience–unless it really happened. It is highly plausible that the tomb was found empty by a group of Jesus’ women followers.
Robert J. Miller raises an interesting point in the resurrection debate concerning Jesus’ empty tomb: “The reports that his grave was empty would hardly persuade many. Even if it was confirmed that the grave where they claim he was buried was empty, what would that prove? Nothing.”{13} Miller is right. An empty tomb alone would not cause anyone to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead. An empty tomb was not an unusual occurrence. When explaining the facts surrounding the beginnings of Christianity, the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus to His disciples must be explained. Wright observes, “The empty tomb and the ‘meetings’ with Jesus, when combined, present us with not only a sufficient condition for the rise of early Christian belief, but also, it seems, a necessary one.”{14} Any explanation of the facts surrounding the death of Jesus and the origins of Christianity must explain both the empty tomb and the appearance of Jesus to His disciples after the resurrection. In current scholarship, there is no natural explanation that can explain both the empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus to His apostles.
Eighteenth-century Scottish philosopher David Hume raised an objection to the resurrection that is common today. Hume starts by asking that if all the historians and the physicians agreed that Queen Elizabeth died, and was dead for a month, then reappeared and reigned on her throne for three more years, should someone conclude that she was raised from the dead? Hume answers:
“I should be surprised at the concurrence of so many odd circumstances but should not have the least inclination to believe so miraculous an event. I should not doubt of her pretended death and those of other public circumstances that followed it; I should only assert it to have been pretended, and that it neither was, nor possibly could be, real.”{15}
Even though all the people who could know agree, and there is no one who disputes the resurrection of the Queen in this hypothetical situation, Hume says that it could not possibly have happened. Hume argues that because all miracle stories are ridiculous, the effect of education on people would “not only . . . make them reject the fact but even reject it without further examination.”{16} Hume argued that resurrections do not conform to our knowledge of past experiences. This is a bad argument for two reasons; first, it is a circular argument. Hume claims that resurrections do not happen; therefore, a resurrection did not happen. Second, it is impossible to gain knowledge based on the conformity of past experiences. Many experiences that lead to more knowledge do not conform to past experiences. History is made up of many unique and unrepeatable events. The origin of the universe only happened once. The origin of life only happened once. The life and death of Alexander the Great only happened once. The only reason to reject the resurrection without a careful investigation of the facts is because of a worldview bias against supernatural events.
Conclusion
A careful examination of the evidence surrounding the claim of the resurrection of Jesus reveals four facts. First, Jesus died of crucifixion under the reign of Pontius Pilot. Second, Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of His women followers. Third, Jesus’ disciples had experiences which they interpreted as seeing a resurrected Jesus. Fourth, Paul had an experience that he interpreted as an encounter with the risen Jesus. Naturalistic explanations have failed to explain these facts. Hallucination hypothesis fails to explain the empty tomb. Stolen body hypothesis fails to explain the appearances. Combining the hypotheses makes the explanation of the facts complex. When formulating historical hypotheses, the simpler explanation is to be preferred. Hallucinations and grave robbers do not provide any illumination for the origins of Christianity. The resurrection provides a simple explanation of the facts and also explains the beginnings of the Christian religion. There are good reasons to believe that Jesus rose physically from the dead.
Notes
1. Norman L. Geisler, Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004), 226.
2. F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1981), 9-15.
3. Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus—God and Man (London: SCM Press, 2002), 84.
4. N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 319.
5. Normon Solomon, The Talmud: A Selection (London: Penguin B16.ooks, 2009), 505.
6. Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2010), 305.
7. Ibid., 382-394.
8. Ibid., 390.
9. William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics 3rd ed. (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2008), 381.
10. Marcus Borg, “The Irrelevancy of the Empty Tomb” in Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? Paul Copan, ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), 123.
11. Ibid., 123.
12. Licona, op. cit., 407.
13. Robert J. Miller, “What Do Stories about Resurrection(s) Prove?” in Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? Paul Copan ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), 97.
14. N.T. Wright, op. cit., 706.
15. David Hume, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995), 138.
Ibid., 139.
©2025 Probe Ministries