Part 1: Why the Resurrection Deserves Serious Examination
Part 2: Why the Alternative Theories Fail

Several years before the Gospel accounts were ever written, the apostle Paul penned a letter to the church in Corinth. This letter has been preserved for us today, known as 1 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul recorded the earliest preserved list of resurrection appearances.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

1 Corinthians 15:3-8

The question, of course, is whether or not Paul’s proclamation is based on historical fact. Did Jesus actually rise from the dead and appear to multiple witnesses as Paul had claimed? Or could there be a better explanation for the existence of this list? There are four arguments that arise from this passage that lead to the unavoidable conclusion:

Yes. Jesus did in fact rise from the dead.

The Resurrection Proclamation is Too Early to Be a Myth

The first reason Paul’s testimony in 1 Corinthians 15 is so important is because of the early dating of the book. 1 Corinthians was written sometime between AD 54-56. We know this with a high degree of certainty because of the combination of both internal and external factors.

First, we know that Paul wrote the letter during the last few months of his stay in Ephesus (“But I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost” – 1 Corinthians 16:8). Because of Acts 18:18-19:10, we know that Paul had come to Ephesus straight from Corinth, and the entirety of his stay was somewhere between two and three years. We know Paul was in Corinth during Gallio’s term as proconsul of Achaia. So if we can date Gallio’s term, we can date Paul’s stay in Corinth. And if we can date Paul’s stay in Corinth, we can date Paul’s stay in Ephesus, and if we can date Paul’s stay in Ephesus, we can date the letter of 1 Corinthians. And guess what? There is an externally datable Roman inscription discovered in Delphi that mentions Gallio by name, and firmly dates his proconsulship to AD 51.

All of that is simply to make this point: It is almost universally agreed upon by conservative scholars, liberal scholars, Christian scholars, and non-Christian scholars, that the letter of 1 Corinthians was penned only about 20 or 25 years after Jesus’s death.

This fact alone rules out the possibility that Jesus’s resurrection was a complete myth or legend. Myths and legends typically take many generations to develop. Yet there was no more than 20 or 25 years between Jesus’s death and the writing of 1 Corinthians 15. This is nowhere close to enough time for the myth theory to have any serious explanatory power.

That is, of course, unless it can be shown that there were exceptionally unusual factors that would cause this “legend” to develop extremely rapidly. Could that possibly be the case? Absolutely not, and here’s why:

The Resurrection Tradition Significantly Predates 1 Corinthians

Perhaps it could be argued that because of extraordinary circumstances, the resurrection narratives were entirely contrived and developed during the two decades between Jesus’s death and the writing of 1 Corinthians. The problem with this theory is that it does not account for Paul’s language used in 1 Corinthians 15.

Notice carefully how Paul introduces the passage: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received” (1 Cor. 15:3). That means the Corinthians had already received this teaching from Paul before Paul wrote this letter. And Paul himself claims that he himself had received this teaching from others. This is likely referring to his early contact with Peter and James, referenced in Galatians 1:18-19.

And of additional significance is the form of writing Paul used to relay this resurrection teaching. What follows is written in short, rhythmic clauses, with a repetitive structure. It has long been recognized by scholars that this style of writing is typical of a standardized, well-known formula that was likely memorized, frequently recited, and already circulating among the earliest disciples as an oral tradition. In other words, because of the style of writing used in this passage, it sounds as if Paul is relaying a well-rehearsed, familiar chorus which was already firmly established prior to Paul’s writing of the letter. Because of this, even a majority of skeptical scholars concede that the resurrection tradition was already established as a foundational teaching of early Christianity, even before Paul came on the scene.

If this is true, it forces us to face a very important question: If the report of the empty tomb and resurrection appearances isn’t rooted in solid historical fact, what else explains how this teaching came to be publicly proclaimed in such a short period of time? If Jesus never rose from the dead and appeared to his disciples, how do we explain the fact that almost immediately after his death, his followers thought Jesus rose from the dead, appeared to them, and began circulating this account? There’s no easy answer to these questions.

If 1 Corinthians 15 is in fact relaying a previously well-established Christian teaching, as Paul claims, and as the writing style used in the passage suggests, we cannot avoid wrestling with those questions.

The Public Verifiability of Paul’s Account

But what if the majority of scholars are wrong? What if the resurrection was not a well-established teaching among the early disciples? What if it was all made up? What if it was actually Paul who was the first to fabricate this story? What if he wrote 1 Corinthians 15 in the style he did just to make it sound like a well-established teaching? In other words, what if Paul was being intentionally deceptive?

First of all, if Paul was making this story up, what was his motive? So that he could leave behind his life as a well respected, highly educated Pharisee, and live a life of disrepute, hunger, homelessness, and persecution? Paul did not share this list of resurrection appearances to boost his own authority as an apostle, but rather to concede that he considered himself the least of the apostles! (1 Cor. 15:9).

Secondly, Paul himself recognized that if his report about the resurrection was false, then he and the other apostles would have been guilty of “misrepresenting God” (1 Cor. 15:15). He was well aware of the serious spiritual implications of making up such a claim if it were not true.

But most significant is the fact that Paul’s resurrection claim is grounded by numerous eyewitness testimonies. Paul reports that Jesus appeared to Peter, then the twelve, then more than five hundred at once, then to James the brother of Jesus, then to other apostles, and finally to Paul himself. If Paul was inventing this story, what was he thinking by throwing in all these names? Paul was inviting people to fact-check him! That was the point he was making when he added the phrase “most of whom are still alive” (1 Cor. 15:6).

Once again, this forces us to face the all-important question: If the tomb of Jesus wasn’t empty, and Jesus hadn’t risen from the dead, what explains the fact that after his death we find so many people sincerely thinking the tomb was empty and believing that he rose from the dead, and were willing to lay their lives on the line to stand by this conviction?

If we limit ourselves to only considering naturalistic explanations, we are left with no easy answer to this question. And when we consider the evidence for the resurrection from the Gospels, the challenge of this question only grows in its difficulty. These Gospel accounts will be the subject of part 4 in this series.