Examining the Resurrection of Jesus: Historical Evidence and Implications

The resurrection of Jesus is the cornerstone of the Christian faith. It is the event upon which the entire belief system hinges. If Jesus truly rose from the dead, it provides the foundation for Christian teachings on life, death, and salvation. However, for centuries, theologians, historians, and scholars have debated the historical reliability of this claim. In this article, we will examine the key historical evidence supporting the resurrection of Jesus, as outlined by William Lane Craig, and explore the implications of this event.

Three Central Facts Supporting the Resurrection

William Lane Craig, a prominent philosopher and theologian, presents the case for the resurrection by summarizing three key historical facts. These facts are not just theological assertions but are supported by historical investigation.
The first fact is the **discovery of the empty tomb**. According to multiple gospel accounts, a group of women followers of Jesus found His tomb empty on the Sunday following His crucifixion. Craig points out that the discovery by women is significant because, in the cultural context of the time, women’s testimony was often considered less reliable. The inclusion of this detail strengthens the authenticity of the story, as it is unlikely to be a fabrication given the societal norms of the period.
The second fact is the **post-mortem appearances of Jesus**. After His death, numerous individuals and groups, including the apostles, claimed to have encountered the risen Jesus. These appearances were not isolated to a few individuals but were reported by different people at various times, often under diverse circumstances. This widespread testimony supports the idea that the resurrection was not merely a hallucination or a spiritual vision, but a physical event.
The third fact is the **origin of the disciples’ belief** that Jesus had risen from the dead. The early Christian movement was born from the conviction that Jesus had been raised by God. The sudden and dramatic shift in the disciples—from fear and despair after the crucifixion to bold proclamation of Jesus’ resurrection—requires an explanation. Craig argues that the best explanation for these three facts is the one the disciples themselves gave: God raised Jesus from the dead.

Faith and Evidence: Two Separate Pillars

While the resurrection is central to Christian belief, Craig makes an important distinction between the **fact** of the resurrection and the **evidence** for the resurrection. He argues that Christianity stands or falls on the fact of Jesus’ resurrection, not on the availability of historical evidence. Many historical events, including those that are widely accepted, lack comprehensive evidence. The same may be true of the resurrection, as extraordinary events often do not leave behind ordinary evidence.
However, Craig emphasizes that despite the extraordinary nature of the resurrection, the available evidence is remarkably strong. This came as a surprise to him during his research at the University of Munich. Rather than relying solely on the New Testament accounts, Craig delved into the historical traditions that predate the gospels, which provided even earlier testimony of the resurrection.

Early Testimony and Historical Credibility

One of the most compelling pieces of evidence Craig highlights is found in **1 Corinthians 15**. In this passage, the apostle Paul recounts a creed that he received from the early Christian church, likely within five years of Jesus’ crucifixion. This creed affirms Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Scholars agree that this is one of the earliest written testimonies of the resurrection, predating the gospel accounts. The early date of this creed makes it highly valuable in establishing the historical credibility of the resurrection claims.
Additionally, Craig addresses the argument that the gospel accounts are contradictory. Some critics point to differences between the gospels, such as whether Jesus appeared in Galilee or Jerusalem, or the lack of post-resurrection appearances in the original ending of the Gospel of Mark. However, Craig asserts that these inconsistencies concern **secondary details** and do not detract from the historical core of the narratives. In any historical account, especially one passed down through oral tradition, minor discrepancies are expected, yet the core facts remain consistent.

Alternative Explanations: A Spiritual Resurrection?

Skeptics often propose alternative explanations for the resurrection accounts. One common argument is that the earliest Christian belief in the resurrection was not of a **physical body**, but rather a spiritual resurrection. According to this view, the idea of a bodily resurrection developed later, possibly as a theological embellishment. Some suggest that Paul’s writings, which predate the gospels, describe Jesus’ resurrection as spiritual rather than physical.
Craig challenges this interpretation by examining the term **“spiritual body”** used by Paul in **1 Corinthians 15**. He argues that Paul does not mean a body made of spirit, which would be a contradiction in terms for Paul. Instead, the term refers to a body that is **dominated by the Holy Spirit**, rather than one that is controlled by human nature. This spiritual body is still a **physical, corporeal body**, but it is transformed, glorified, and no longer subject to mortality. This interpretation is widely accepted by scholars, refuting the claim that Paul envisioned a non-physical resurrection.

The Importance of the Physical Resurrection

The question arises: How essential is the **physicality** of the resurrection to Christian theology? Could Christianity still stand if the resurrection were purely spiritual? Craig argues that while the physical resurrection is an important aspect of the faith, the **truth of the resurrection** does not depend on it being physical. Even if God had raised Jesus in a non-physical way, the resurrection would still be a miraculous event that demands explanation.
However, Craig maintains that the historical evidence strongly supports a bodily resurrection. The disciples’ experiences, the empty tomb, and the early church’s belief in a physical resurrection all point toward a bodily resurrection rather than a purely spiritual one.

Conclusion: A Miraculous Event Worth Investigating

The resurrection of Jesus remains one of the most debated events in history. For believers, it is the foundation of their faith, and for skeptics, it raises important questions about the nature of historical evidence and the plausibility of miracles. William Lane Craig’s thorough investigation into the historical evidence for the resurrection presents a compelling case for its credibility. While alternative explanations exist, Craig argues that the best explanation for the empty tomb, the post-mortem appearances, and the disciples’ belief is that God raised Jesus from the dead.
If you’re interested in exploring more about this topic and learning from William Lane Craig’s extensive research on the resurrection, I invite you to watch this insightful discussion: William Lane Craig Retrospective II: Resurrection of Jesus | Closer To Truth.