Witness of the Apostles

The term "Apostle" refers to those sent as ambassadors to spread the Gospel. Almost all Apostles and numerous disciples met martyrdom, facing death not only for their beliefs but also for their public proclamations against the authorities. The term "Martyr" translates to "Witness," which illustrates that Jesus dispatched His followers as messengers of truth.

The evidence supporting the martyrdom of the Apostles is substantial. For example, Jesus foretold Peter's martyrdom in the Gospel of John, and early Church historians confirm the execution of James, the son of Zebedee (Acts 12:2), as well as James, the brother of Jesus, whose death was noted by the historian Josephus.

If one dismisses the Gospel's truth, they must confront a pivotal question: Why would these individuals willingly endure persecution and die for a falsehood? Would anyone do so? They were direct witnesses to Jesus' ministry and believed in His resurrection after witnessing His return.

While many have died for falsehoods in various religions and political movements, those Apostles who faced persecution had a choice. They chose to endure hardship because they believed in the truth of what they preached. They had personally witnessed everything from the moment Jesus called them.

One could argue that either Jesus was a master deceiver who convinced His followers of His resurrection post-crucifixion, or the Apostles fabricated the resurrection story to gain power and subsequently vanished when faced with danger.

The latter theory aligns with the so-called "Stolen Body Hypothesis" regarding the empty tomb. If this were accurate, we would expect the resurrection accounts to be more consistently aligned. However, the narratives often display inconsistencies, which is typical of genuine events rather than well-orchestrated fabrications. Additionally, it's crucial to contextualize this through the beliefs of 1st-century Jews, who did not anticipate immediate resurrection. They expected Jesus to restore the kingdom of Israel, which He did not do. There was no incentive to claim that He had risen, especially if someone else had taken His body, as resurrection was not a widely held belief at that time.

The Final Explanation

The most plausible explanation remains that Jesus genuinely resurrected from the dead. While it is easy to concoct intricate conspiracy theories, the inclination to do so often stems from conflicting preconceived notions.

For 1st-century Jews, this conflict arose from their traditional interpretations of scripture and their expectations of the Messiah, who was thought to overthrow Roman rule and establish a terrestrial kingdom. For modern Westerners, it contradicts our understanding of scientific principles, which shape how we interpret history.

There exists a perceived discord between scientific reasoning and the testimonies of the Apostles and martyrs because what they asserted has never been shown to be scientifically feasible. Miraculous healings and resurrection are events that seem impossible without the advanced technology that did not exist in the 1st century.

However, the resurrection of Jesus stands as a singular historical event without precedent. It resembles the Big Bang, where we have extensive knowledge about post-event phenomena but cannot fully comprehend the event itself. Similarly, we lack the physical models to elucidate how Jesus could have been resurrected, as it is a unique occurrence.

Yet, just as we can infer the Big Bang's occurrence from its aftermath, we can also deduce that the significant aspects of Jesus’ ministry transpired as the Gospels describe. For instance, following Jesus’ crucifixion during Passover, His disciples were not expecting Him to rise from the dead the next day. Despite His repeated assertions of a resurrection on the third day, they interpreted this as a spiritual ascension rather than a physical return. They, like contemporary scientists, had seen many so-called “Messiahs” who had perished, and none had returned.

Nonetheless, the disciples' perspective shifted dramatically after they encountered the risen Jesus, leading them to establish the church. A profound change had occurred.

Inferring Historical Events

To draw parallels, we infer the Big Bang's occurrence from indirect evidence, such as the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation and the movement of galaxies. Although not all observations can be explained, most scientists accept the Big Bang as the most viable explanation, despite the impossibility of replicating it in a lab.

Thus, if we disregard the resurrection of Jesus from history, we still need to infer its occurrence based on subsequent events. Acts 5:34–39 illustrates that at least one member of the Sanhedrin, Gamaliel, acknowledged this theory:

"But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men [Apostles] be put outside for a little while. Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: 'Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case, I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.'"

If we consider Gamaliel’s assertion that this movement not only survived but thrived, overcoming an empire and continuing to this day, it implies that the resurrection was indeed true and that the Apostles’ mission originated from divine intention.

Some might argue that the Apostles were simply an anomaly who succeeded while others failed. However, this perspective necessitates the belief that they knowingly perpetuated a lie or were caught in a convoluted conspiracy, which is implausible.

Moreover, the notion that the Gospels and the Apostles' martyrdom were fabrications of later Christians lacks credibility. The New Testament documents are too rich in detail and crafted in a manner that suggests they are firsthand accounts (possibly shared orally at first).

The Gospel writers do not claim divine authorship or angelic transmission of their texts, unlike other religious scriptures. They present their narratives as authentic accounts of actual events.

The Gospels humbly portray themselves as narratives authored by ordinary humans. For instance, Luke, in his introduction, mentions that "those who [were] eyewitnesses and servants of the word" had shared various accounts (Luke 1:2). His objective was not merely to document a firsthand narrative but to create an "orderly account," implying that existing accounts may have lacked coherence.

Witness Credibility

Interestingly, the initial witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection were not the most credible in a legal context, as they were women (Mary Magdalene being one), whose testimonies would not have been admissible in a court of law at that time.

If one were to fabricate a religion, would it be structured in this manner? Would ordinary people testify to pivotal events, or would a divine being relay these details? The New Testament contains only one book, Revelation, which discusses future events and cannot present firsthand accounts of widely witnessed occurrences.

It is improbable that Christians of the 1st or 2nd century would concoct such narratives, especially since early Christianity faced numerous attempts to distort its core teachings. Heretical movements like Docetism and Marcionism sought to redefine Jesus and his teachings.

Four accounts of Jesus’ life, ministry, and resurrection have endured, despite various attempts to alter them. Few historical occurrences from antiquity possess even two accounts, let alone four.

In conclusion, if we infer the resurrection based on its aftermath, we have two options: we can approach the evidence without bias and consider how it aligns with the accounts, or we can remain closed-minded, assuming the narratives are false and attempting to concoct alternative explanations. Choosing the latter often leads to convoluted theories that may satisfy our biases but do not necessarily reflect the truth.

As someone who values evidence in decision-making, I strive not to base my choices on desires or hearsay. Yet, every decision requires an open mind and a willingness to explore the improbable. The story of Jesus’ life and resurrection embodies this principle. While resurrection may seem improbable, it is not scientifically impossible. Accepting it requires a leap of faith, but this faith is not devoid of evidence; Jesus invites us to engage our intellect and consider the testimonies of those willing to risk everything to share His message.

The first video titled "Is There Credible Archaeological Evidence Related to the Earliest Jesus Followers?" delves into archaeological findings that support the existence and impact of early followers of Jesus, providing context and analysis of evidence related to their faith.

The second video, "Did Jesus Exist? A Doubter's Guide to Historical Evidence Outside the Bible," explores external historical evidence concerning Jesus' existence, addressing skepticism and providing insights into how non-biblical sources corroborate His life and ministry.