Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach

[Angrboda]

Okay, I'll play.

1. Jesus died by crucifixion

Let's assume he existed.  His manner of death adds nothing to the claim that he resurrected from the dead.  But let's assume this is true.

2. Jesus' disciples believed that He rose and appeared to them

That Jesus rose and appeared to his disciples is a legend which developed between his death and the writing of the gospels. Maybe it was even started by the disciples; people don't always think through the consequences of their actions. It's not even clear that what might start out as a lie could not have come to be seen as the truth by some disciples; it's well within the range of normal human behavior.
That the disciples were martyred for their beliefs are either mistakes of interpretation (dying for something other than belief), or were legends which were added after the gospels were written.

3. Saul, the persecutor of the Church, was suddenly changed

People change for all sorts of reasons.  A resurrection isn't the only explanation for why a hallucinating fanatic might change his tune.  Either way, it doesn't solely support a resurrection, so it's a moot point.

4. James, the skeptical brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed

The same as for Paul.

5. Jesus' tomb was found to be empty

Was Jesus' tomb found empty?  Or was this a part of the later resurrection legend.  It's interesting to note that there was no tomb veneration for the first few centuries after his death.  That's odd because even an empty tomb would have attracted veneration.  Did they just forget where he was buried?  Regardless, the reasons a tomb might go empty are many, it doesn't necessarily point to a resurrection.  For lack of a better option, let's take Ehrman's hypothetical that the body was being moved, and those doing the moving were slain by Roman guards.


All facts accounted for with no physical resurrection.