Why did the Romans crucify Yeshua of Nazareth? For many historians, the Romans crucified Yeshua because the religious leaders believe that he made outrageous claims about himself. He claimed to be the one and only Son of God. Why would anyone take his claim seriously? Well, that all depends. If Yeshua actually rose from the dead, then his claim to be God’s unique son carries considerable weight. On the other hand, if the resurrection never actually happened, then historians should safely dismiss Yeshua as just another interesting, but tragic historical figure. Did Yeshua rise from the dead? As we explore this question, we need to address two further questions. What are the facts that require explanation? Do Christian philosophers find explanations that best accounts for these facts? There are three main facts that Christian apologists use to defend their belief in the resurrection: the discovery of Yeshua’s empty tomb, the appearances of Yeshua alive after his death, and the disciple’s belief that Yeshua rose from the dead. Let us examine each of these.
Fact number one: six independent sources report the discovery that Yeshua’s tomb was empty, and some of these are among the earliest materials historians found in the New Testament Christian Scriptures. This is important because when an event is recorded by two or more unconnected sources, historians’ confidence that the event actually happened increases, and the earlier these sources are dated, the higher their confidence. Moreover, women were the first people who discovered that Yeshua’s body was missing, according to the Gospels. This is likely historical, because in many Patriarchal cultures of Greco-Roman antiquity, a woman’s testimony was considered next to worthless. A later legend or fabrication would have had men make this discovery. The response of the religious leadership increases our confidence in the empty tomb. When they heard the report that the tomb people found empty, they said that Yeshua’s followers had stolen his body, thereby admitting that Yeshua’s tomb was in fact empty. Most scholars by far hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements about the empty tomb.
Fact number two: the appearances of Yeshua alive after his death. In one of the earliest letters in the New Testament, Paul provides a list of witnesses to Yeshua’s resurrection appearances. He appeared to Peter, then to the twelve, then he appeared to more than 500 brothers at one time, then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Finally, he appeared also to Paul. Furthermore, the Gospel account confirmed various resurrection appearances of Yeshua. Based on Paul’s testimony alone, virtually all historical scholars agree that various individuals and groups experienced appearances of Yeshua alive after his death. It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Yeshua’s death in which Yeshua appeared to them as the risen Messiah.
Fact number three: the disciple’s belief in the resurrection. After Yeshua’s crucifixion, his followers were devastated, demoralized, and hiding in fear for their lives. As Jews, they had no concept of a messiah who his enemies would execute, much less come back to life. The only resurrection Jews believed in was a universal event on judgement day after the end of the world, not an individual event within history. Moreover, in Jewish law, Yeshua’s crucifixion as a criminal meant that he was literally under God’s curse. Yet somehow, despite all of this the disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe that God had raised Yeshua from the dead. They were so completely convinced that when threatened with death, not one of them recanted. Even the Pharisee, Paul, who persecuted Christians, suddenly became a Christian himself. Yeshua’s skeptical younger brother James also became a Christian. Some somewhat powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was. That is why many historians cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Yeshua rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.”
Finally, these three firmly established facts cry out for an adequate explanation. How do you make sense of them? Down through history, critics offer various naturalistic explanations to explain away these facts: the conspiracy hypothesis, the apparent death hypothesis, the hallucination hypothesis, and so on. Contemporary scholars have rejected all of these false arguments. The simple fact is that there is just no plausible naturalistic explanation of these three facts. The explanation given by t
PRIMARY SOURCE: Dr. William Lane Craig Videos on the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.