7.7 Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?

The resurrection is so central to the Christian faith that the apostle Paul writes: If Christ has not been raised, our faith is in vain (1 Corinthians 15:17). In other words, the entire Christian faith depends on whether this event is historically true or not.

To evaluate its credibility from a historical perspective, we will consider three approaches. The first is the “minimal facts” approach proposed by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, which focuses on the facts most widely accepted by scholars, including skeptics¹. The second is the observation of the radical transformation of the disciples before and after Jesus’ resurrection. Finally, the third approach is the analysis of N. T. Wright, who highlights the unexpected emergence of belief in an individual and immediate bodily resurrection within first-century Judaism, along with the social and theological changes that followed²³.

7.7.1 Approach 1: The “Minimal Facts” Approach #

The “minimal facts” approach is a method developed by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona to defend the resurrection of Jesus. It focuses only on historical facts that meet two criteria:

1. They are strongly established by the available historical data.
2. They are widely accepted by the majority of New Testament scholars, including skeptics or non-Christians.

The minimal facts:

1. The death of Jesus by crucifixion
   The crucifixion of Jesus is attested by the Gospels, the letters of Paul, and extra-biblical sources such as Tacitus (Annals XV, 44) and Flavius Josephus (Antiquities XVIII, 63–64). This event is almost unanimously accepted by historians¹.
   Moreover, Jesus truly died on the cross. This is one of the best-established facts in ancient history, as shown in chapter 7.6.

2. The experiences of the disciples claiming to have seen the risen Jesus
   The disciples were convinced they had encountered Jesus alive after his death. These experiences profoundly transformed them, moving them from fear to bold public proclamation—even to the point of martyrdom.

   The tradition in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7, quoted by Paul around AD 55, predates the letter itself and likely goes back only a few years after the crucifixion. It contains a structured summary of early Christian belief, making a late invention highly unlikely¹⁴.

   1 Corinthians 15:3–7
   “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas (Peter), then to the Twelve.
   After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at the same time—most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.
   Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”

3. The conversion of Paul
   Paul, once a persecutor of the Christian movement, became one of its leading missionaries. He attributes this radical change to an appearance of the risen Christ (Acts 9, 22, 26; Galatians 1:11–16)⁴.

4. The conversion of James, the brother of Jesus
   James, described in the Gospels as skeptical (John 7:5), became after the resurrection a leader of the Jerusalem church and is recognized as a martyr by Josephus (Antiquities XX, 200)⁵.

5. The empty tomb (optional)
   This fact is not universally accepted by all historians, but it remains widely supported. It is based on the discovery reported by women (an embarrassing detail in a culture where their testimony had little value) and on the absence of veneration of a known tomb of Jesus in Jerusalem³.

A. Was the tomb empty? #

✅ Arguments in favor:

• The empty tomb appears in all four Gospels (Mark 16; Matthew 28; Luke 24; John 20), and it is discovered by women—an unlikely detail to invent in that cultural context².

• An early polemic recorded in Matthew (28:15) claims that the disciples stole the body. Even if this accusation is meant to discredit the movement, it implicitly acknowledges that the tomb was empty¹.

• Many historians consider the empty tomb historically plausible. Gary Habermas notes that more than 75% of scholars accept it as a probable fact¹.

❌ Skeptical arguments:

• Critics such as Bart D. Ehrman point out that no contemporary non-Christian source explicitly mentions the empty tomb⁴.

B. Can the appearances be considered authentic? #

❌ Skeptical arguments:

• The Gospel of Mark, generally dated around AD 70, ends abruptly at Mark 16:8 without appearance narratives. This suggests that traditions about the empty tomb and appearances developed progressively⁴.

• The accounts differ in details: Matthew places appearances in Galilee, Luke in Jerusalem, and John combines both. The order of events and witnesses varies, reflecting multiple oral traditions⁴.

• For Ehrman, it is therefore more cautious to interpret these accounts as visionary or inner religious experiences, similar to mystical states⁴.

✅ Arguments in favor:

• The earliest testimony about appearances comes not from the Gospels but from Paul. In 1 Corinthians 15, he transmits a tradition likely originating in Jerusalem shortly after the events.

• The diversity of witnesses is striking: individuals (Peter), groups (the Twelve, more than 500 people), and even skeptics or opponents (James and Paul).

• N. T. Wright emphasizes that the Gospel accounts describe a Jesus who is both bodily and transformed: he speaks, walks, eats, yet appears and disappears. This does not fit a ghost or a mere symbol but reflects belief in a real, unprecedented event²³.

Alternative explanations #

The minimal facts approach avoids debates about biblical inerrancy by focusing only on widely accepted historical data.

a) The stolen body
Requires a coordinated conspiracy and does not explain the appearances or the conversion of skeptics.

b) Hallucinations

• Usually individual, not collective
• Do not explain conversions like Paul
• Do not match Jewish expectations

c) Late legend
The early dating of 1 Corinthians 15 makes a late legendary development highly unlikely.

7.7.2 The Transformation of the Disciples #

Before the resurrection:

• discouraged, fearful, hiding

After:

• bold witnesses, proclaiming their message despite persecution

👉 This radical transformation strongly suggests a real and life-changing event.

7.7.3 Wright’s Argument #

N. T. Wright argues that:

• First-century Jews believed in a future collective resurrection, not an individual one in history
• They would not have invented such a concept
• Yet early Christians proclaimed exactly that

This proclamation led to major changes:

• shift from Sabbath to Sunday
• reinterpretation of Scripture
• new practices (baptism, Eucharist)
• worship centered on Jesus

👉 For Wright, the resurrection is the only explanation that accounts for all these elements.

7.7.4 Conclusion #

Historians can affirm with certainty that:

• Jesus was crucified and died
• his disciples sincerely believed they saw him alive afterward

The early testimony (1 Corinthians 15), the diversity of witnesses, the plausibility of the empty tomb, and the rapid emergence of new beliefs form a converging body of evidence.

Natural explanations—such as theft, hallucinations, or legend—fail to account for all the data without multiplying unlikely assumptions.

Three approaches reinforce one another:

• the minimal facts approach
• the transformation of the disciples
• Wright’s historical analysis

Together, they point to the resurrection as the most coherent explanation.

Notes et références #