I was still a sophomore when I first encountered the curious documentary entitled The Case for Christ. It’s a story about Lee Strobel – a journalist from Chicago who started a journey to discount a Christian faith, only to find out that this faith has some serious merits. In his investigation, Strobel focused on the question of Jesus’ life concluding that there are strong historical arguments not just for the existence of Jesus (A fact that most critical scholars – me included(!) agree with) but also for his resurrection. Strobel holds that the resurrection of Jesus is a historical fact that can be proved by a historical analysis of the documents at hand. Personally, the documentary had a great impact on my professional life as it sparked additional interest in the issue of the origins and development of Christianity. Nonetheless, I can’t say that agree with every detail of that documentary! For example, Strobel presupposes that the Gospels were indeed written by Matthew the tax collector, John (the beloved disciple of Jesus), Mark (companion of st. Peter), and Luke (companion of st. Paul) – about that see: here! But most notably, Strobel rejects the notion of methodological naturalism – he thinks that historians can really prove supernatural claims. It’s a thesis I can not agree with. Historical studies always have to be within the framework of methodological naturalism (see: here). In other words, just as astrophysicists cannot give you scientific proof that God exists (or that He does not exist!), so the historians can not prove (or disprove) supernatural claims such as the resurrection! However, that doesn’t mean we should refrain from the historical analysis itself. History can tell us a lot about the context and specific elements of that belief!

First and foremost, unlike the scholarship of the early 20^th century, contemporary critical scholars are quite sure that the belief in Jesus’ resurrection appeared extremely early in the Christian tradition. How do we know that? Leaving the canonical Gospels (written 30-65 years after Jesus’ death) aside, the crucial confirmation of this thesis lies in Paul’s first epistle to Corinthians written c. AD 50 – 20 years after Jesus’ death. For our purposes the most important passage is the following:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received:

that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,

and that he was buried,

and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,

and that he appeared to Cephas,

then to the Twelve (1 Cor 1, 15, 3-5)

In order to understand the significance of this quote, I need to give a background picture! Some passages in the New Testament are remnants of much older traditions from the early years of the Christian movements. Few of them are part of the Pauline corpus and scholars usually call them “Pre-Pauline creeds”. How do we detect these elements? There are several indicators:

1. These creeds tend to be self-contained units. That means you can remove them from the literary context that they are in, and they will still make sense.
2. Furthermore, they are often highly structured in a literary sense – they are quite stylized which can best be seen when you read them in the original (Greek) language.
3. Finally, one can find that the words and phrases of these creeds are not favored, or used at all, by the author within whose works they are embedded. That stands as additional proof that the author himself probably did not compose them.

In the passage quoted above, Paul indicates that this statement of faith is something he already had taught the Christians in Corinth – probably when he converted them. But most importantly, this passage is a prime example of the Pre-Pauline creed! Paul emphasizes that he did not invent this statement himself but that he “received” it from others. In other words, Paul uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” – referring to the information he is passing on to the Corinthian community. Moreover, verses 3-5 are highly stylized four-line formula with non-Pauline characteristics. Therefore, almost every critical scholar that I’m aware of, holds that this statement of faith is something that Paul received from other Christians – probably by the apostles themselves! This tradition likely goes back to Paul’s visit to Jerusalem around AD 36 when he spent two weeks with Peter and James (Gal 1,18). It thus dates to five years after Jesus’ death. That means the belief in Jesus’ resurrection didn’t emerge after the stories of Jesus circled around for decades or centuries. It is woven into the very beginnings of Christianity. To quote Gerd Ludemann, a leading New Testament scholar who is by no means a Christian: “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ”. – see: here!

Furthermore, we know of other 1st century Jewish apocalyptic prophets who gathered people around them proclaiming the end of Roman rule in Palestine. For example, the Jewish historian Josephus tells us about certain Egyptian: There was an Egyptian false prophet that did the Jews more mischief than the former, for he was a cheat, and pretended to be a prophet also, and got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him.

His revolt was crushed by the Roman procurator of Judea Antonius Felix (who ruled from AD 52 to AD 60). The Egyptian fled, while many of his followers were killed and captured! In a nutshell: his fame did not last long enough to be remembered by no one except for the historians who are experts in the world of 1^st century Palestine. The point of this is that in every other case in which some self-proclaimed Jewish prophet attracted followers his movement hit the “Roman wall”! In the end, both he and his followers were forgotten. In the case of Jesus, there is a crucial exception – the belief in his resurrection. Connected to this is the fact that no Jew (and all of Jesus’ apostles were Jews!) would ever invent out of the thin air the claim that the guy who was killed and humiliated in the way Jesus was, is actually the resurrected Messiah and the Son of God! We know that before and during the 1^st century the Messianic expectations were quite popular among the Palestinian Jews! These expectations varied in their details (see: here), but the common denominator was the emphasis on the victory! The Messiah (whether he will be some sort of a priest or a heavenly figure or a mighty ruler) will defeat the forces of evil and bring the Kingdom of God to Earth! And yet, Jesus’ followers such as Peter, James, and Paul claimed that he, in spite of his shameful death on the cross, was the resurrected Son of God and Messiah! So firmly rooted in Paul is this belief in Jesus as the messiah that the phrase Jesus Christ, which means “Jesus the Messiah” (since the Greek word Christ is a literal translation o the Hebrew word messiah) is exceedingly common in Paul’s epistles. In other words, Paul was so convinced that Jesus was the Jewish messiah that he used the term Christ as one of Jesus’ actual names! Why would people like Peter and Paul stand firm in their belief in Jesus’ messiah identity after he was captured and killed? Precisely because they believed he was resurrected! And they believed it because they had an experience they interpreted as the encounter with the risen Jesus! Finally, the case of the apostle Paul is very interesting. According to his own testimony, Paul started his public work as a persecutor of Christians (Gal 1, 13-14). He despised the first Church. What was the reason? Probably because he, as a devote Jew, wouldn’t approve and accept the proclamation of the first Christians that God raised Jesus! But, on the roads to Damascus, Paul experienced salto mortale – he had a vision of the risen Christ! Still, almost 2000 years later it is difficult to understand why would someone like Paul suddenly change his mind and become a follower of Jesus.

Does all of this prove beyond any reasonable doubt Jesus’ resurrection? Of course not. Historians of early Christianity can never prove to you that Jesus walked on water, turn water into the vine (too bad for that one!) or that he was, on the third day, indeed resurrected by the God Almighty! Historians can never operate beyond the restrictions of methodological naturalism. However, they can pinpoint (with a certain probability) a time frame when the belief in Jesus’ resurrection occurred, and they can shed some light on the context of that belief. In contrast to those who claim that resurrection belief emerged slowly after decades of legends and myths, the serious historical analysis points to a “big bang” that happened soon after Jesus died! In this belief lies the theological core of the Christian faith. As Paul states: If Christ has not been raised your faith is in vain. In this belief lies the center of the Christian faith! In this belief, a person can find a purpose, hope, and eternal life. This belief is still a motivating force for more than a billion Christians in the world! But, it is, after all, a belief!

To all those who do believe, I wish you a happy Easter with a powerful quote from the Gospel of John: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life!