The deity of Jesus was widely reported in the ancient writings that we investigated. Of our 45 sources, 30 record this teaching, which surprisingly includes seven of the 17 secular sources.
It was pointed out in Chapter 4 that Jesus claimed to be deity, as indicated, for example, by such titles as “Son of God” and “Son of Man.”4 The pre-New Testament creeds (the six Acts texts, along with Rom. 1:3-4, 1 Cor. 11:23ff., 15:3ff., and Phil. 2:6ff., in particular), provide especially strong evidence for the deity of Jesus. This conclusion rests on the authoritative, apostolic sources for the creeds and the incredibly early time period to which they date, right after the conclusion of Jesus’ ministry.
These creeds show that the church did not simply teach Jesus’ deity a generation later, as is so often repeated in contemporary theology, because this doctrine is definitely present in the earliest preaching. The best explanation for these creeds is that they properly represent Jesus’ own teachings, especially since he made similar claims.
The Teachings of Jesus
There is remarkably little dispute about the teachings of Jesus as found in the list above.5 That Jesus’ central message was the Kingdom of God and the entrance requirements is rarely questioned, even by critics. That this is his chief theme is significant in light of his resurrection, for if Jesus was raised from the dead, confirmation is provided regarding the truthfulness of his most important teaching.6
The Death of Jesus
Of all the events in Jesus’ life, more ancient sources specifically mention his death than any other single occurrence. Of the 45 ancient sources, 28 relate to this fact, often with details. Twelve of these sources are non-Christian,7 which exhibits an incredible amount of interest in this event.
Not only is Jesus’ death by crucifixion of major concern to these authors, but 14 of the 28 sources give various details about the crucifixion, from medical observations to political information concerning the current rulers, to historical specifications of the times in which Jesus died, to religious details about the reason for his death. These data witness to the facticity of Jesus’ death by crucifixion, regarding both the reality of the event itself, as well as numerous details surrounding it. It is fair to assert that this is one of the best-attested facts in ancient history.
After Jesus’ death, he was buried. This fact is not only strongly confirmed by five different sources,8 but is generally a normal consequence of dying.
The Resurrection of Jesus
At this point in our evaluation we arrive at the crucial issue that brings us face to face with a miracle-claim. Again, it is not our purpose in this volume to make a judgment as to whether the resurrection is an actual miracle, as an act of God, but to evaluate whether it was an actual historical event. An examination of the details provides us with an affirmative answer — the facts demonstrate Jesus’ resurrection from the dead according to the canons of history.
Of our 45 sources, 18 specifically record the resurrection, while an additional eleven more provide relevant facts surrounding this occurrence. Even if we were only to use the known facts that are accepted as historical by critical scholars, we still arrive at three major categories of evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.
First, alternative theories that have been hypothesized by critics to explain the resurrection on naturalistic grounds have failed to explain the data and are refuted by the facts. Combinations of these theories also fail on these grounds. This is further illustrated by the refutation of David Hume’s thesis concerning miracles (as well as other related approaches), by the nineteenth century liberal critiques of each of these naturalistic theories, and by the twentieth century rejection of them as a whole.9 Such refutations of critical theories are a major blow to those who would deny this event.
Second, even the accepted historical facts alone provide at least nine historical evidences for the resurrection, as enumerated above.10 In particular, that this event was reported early (probably in the AD 30s) by the very eyewitnesses who attested to seeing the risen Christ (especially 1 Cor. 15:3ff. and the Acts creeds) is extremely strong evidence in favor of the literal resurrection.11 The historical evidence for the empty tomb is also very strong (even from secular sources alone), as are the changed lives of the disciples and the conversions of Paul and James. Therefore, a historical case for this event can be built on both a failure of critical hypotheses on the one hand plus the presence of valid, positive evidences on the other.
Third, even if we were to utilize only the four minimal historical facts that are accepted by virtually all scholars who deal with this issue, we still have a significant basis on which to both refute the naturalistic theories and provide the major evidences for the resurrection. The primary strength of these four facts is that they have been established by critical methodology and thus cannot be rejected by those who have doubts concerning other issues such as Scripture. In other words, the minimum amount of historical facts is sufficient to establish the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. Doubts on other issues do not disturb this basic fact.12
If the Shroud of Turin is the burial garment of Jesus, we have another potential category of evidence for the resurrection, in that it would provide some strong scientific, repeatable evidence for this event. There is certainly no proof at this point, and the shroud could still turn out to be a fake, although the data appear to dictate otherwise. It would seem that, even if it did not belong to Jesus, the shroud is at least an actual archaeological artifact, thereby still providing some important information concerning death by crucifixion. The absence of bodily decomposition shows that the body was not in the cloth very long. Further, if the body was not unwrapped and if the image was created by a scorch from a dead body, we have some potential data that could be highly evidential considerations in favor of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead.
These three major categories of arguments for the resurrection do not exhaust the ancient evidence for this event,13 but they do demonstrate this fact as a literal event of history, according to normal historical methodology. This event is the final capstone and fitting conclusion for the unique life, person, teachings, and death of Jesus. In the earliest church, the resurrection served the purpose of confirming Jesus Christ’s message and providing the basis for the truth of the Christian message.
The place that the resurrection might play in validating Christian theism today is a fit sequel for just such a study,14 for the only time that such a resurrection is ever known to have occurred, it happened to the very person who made the most unique claims in the history of religions.
1Other relevant material on the life of Jesus is found in Part One.
2Our explicit intention in Chapter 10 was only to mention the post-New Testament Christian sources that reported historical facts during the life of Jesus. We did not mention the sources that also make claims concerning Jesus’ deity. For examples, see Clement, Corinthians, 36; Ignatius, Ephesians, 7, 18; Romans, Introduction; Smyrnaeans, 1; To Polycarp, 8; Polycarp, Philippians, 12. In these examples from Ignatius and Polycarp, Jesus is specifically called God.
3See chapters 7 and 9.
4For a detailed case arguing for Jesus’ unique claims concerning his deity and their corroboration, see Miethe and Habermas, chapter 27.