“So comprehensive and pervasive is the resurrection of Jesus that, historically speaking, the onus is on the skeptic to overturn it.”[1]

– Historian Paul W. Barnett

This article is the third in a series of 5 facts that nearly every historian accepts as true, including atheist and non-Christian ones! These facts are:

(1) Jesus died by crucifixion

(2) Jesus’ followers believed he rose and appeared to them

(3) Sudden Change in Church persecutor Paul

(4) Sudden Change in skeptic James

(5) Empty tomb discovered

You may have heard of these labeled as the minimal facts argument which Gary Habermas champions. While attending Liberty University where Habermas taught, I had the privilege of hearing him give an extensive lecture series on the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. I would like to share some of these facts while incorporating the insight of several other world-renowned historians who also accept these historical facts as true.

In my second article, I’ve established that:

• The disciples claimed Jesus had bodily risen.
• The disciples sincerely believed Jesus had bodily risen.
• The historical evidence for this is contained in Paul’s writings, oral tradition, the Gospels and early Church writings (Clement and Polycarp).
• Universal agreement among historians that Jesus’ disciples believed they experienced what they thought was the resurrected Jesus.

So, did the disciples die in vain? Again, just because they claimed and believed Jesus was risen, obviously does not mean Jesus was actually risen. Was there anyone else besides Jesus’ disciples who suffered and died because of their belief that Jesus was alive again? Yes, there was. In this article, I will cover historical fact 3: Sudden change in church persecutor Paul.

Who Was Paul?

The Apostle Paul was born sometime between AD 5–15; he was a Jew by birth and a member of the Pharisees (Phil. 3:5), which held to a strict observance of the Written Law (Torah: first 5 books of the Bible) and Oral Law (Prophets’ teachings and Jewish oral tradition), and in the book of Acts he is said to be a Roman citizen (Acts 16:38, 21:39, 22:25).

And although he was not an imposing figure physically—his mental fortitude, intellectual rigor, and respected position among his religious peers certainly made up for it. Historian Stanley Porter explains that many scholars think Paul grew up in the flourishing university city of Tarsus, where he was most likely educated under the Greco-Roman system before moving to Jerusalem to receive his rabbinical education under Gamaliel.[2]

Because of this, Paul had the ability to speak both Aramaic and Greek, differentiating him from Hellenistic Jews who could only speak Greek[3] Paul has shown that he was familiar with Greek philosophers and poets, sometimes quoting and referencing them when addressing pagan audiences (Acts 17). Scholars Copan and Litwak add that Paul “built cultural bridges by borrowing from Greek authors.”[4] Additionally, Paul could read both Hebrew Scriptures and the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures).

Paul, whose Jewish name was Saul, was advanced in Judaism beyond his years (Gal. 1:14) and was extremely proud that he was a Pharisee, and that his lineage could be traced back to the tribe of Benjamin. Paul was known for persecuting Christians and played some role in murdering Hellenistic-Jewish Christians.[5]

When Jews were starting to claim that Jesus was the long-anticipated Messiah and that he had been raised from the dead, combined with a fast-growing Jesus movement, in and out, of Jerusalem—it was time for the Jewish authorities to take action. Paul was just the man for the job. Prominent theologian David Wenham said,

“Their attempts to suppress it, including by arresting and killing some of its leaders, were singularly unsuccessful. It was in this context that the student Paul began to get involved, and in due course he became one of the most violent and feared opponents of the Christians.”[6]

Paul’s Conversion Experience

Ironically, it was while Paul was on his way to Damascus to persecute more Christians that he ended up converting to Christianity (Acts 9). Scholars such as the distinguished historian Luke Timothy Johnson have confirmed that “his [Paul’s] conversion took place around 33 CE.”[7] Paul said he personally encountered the risen Jesus and immediately became a Christ-follower. Historian Michael Licona explains this historical fact is multiply attested in (1) Paul’s own testimony; (2) book of Acts; (3) a story circulating around Judea within 3 years of his conversion.[8]

Habermas and Licona point out that it’s also important to note that Paul’s testimony indicates that he experienced the risen Jesus personally, meaning that his testimony serves as primary evidence rather than secondary (primary holds more weight than secondary).[9] You and I may have converted on what we’ve heard from others (secondary), but Paul did not convert to Christianity based on what he heard, rather he converted based on what he directly witnessed (primary).

New Testament scholar Stefan Alkier says that Paul “had an experience that fundamentally convinced him, in a way that altered his existence…. According to Galatians, no empirical proof, no empty tomb, no proposition convinced him of these things, only the spontaneous certainty of his own experience.”[10] Paul believed he saw the risen Jesus.

Renowned historian Larry Hurtado states,

“In the light of Paul’s initial opposition to the Christian message, whatever convinced him to take an entirely different view of Jesus would have to have been something potent and transformative.”[11]

What would make a highly respected and devout Pharisee suddenly change and become the very thing he despised the most—a Christian? It doesn’t make any sense, unless Paul truly saw what he claimed. Paul makes it clear that he saw and heard the risen Jesus during his encounter (1 Cor. 15:8; Gal. 1:16; Acts 9).

Eminent biblical scholar and leading authority on Paul, Jerome Murphy-O’Connor says,

“Paul now knew with the inescapable conviction of direct experience that the Jesus who had been crucified under Pontius Pilate was alive. The resurrection which he had contemptuously dismissed was a fact, as undeniable as his own reality.”[12]

Prominent theologian Gordon Fee says that “his [Paul] personal encounter with the risen Jesus radicalized Paul (cf. 1 Cor. 15:8).”[13]

Habermas mentions the consensus among critical scholars who agree that

“Paul certainly had an experience that he thought was an appearance of the risen Jesus. Accordingly, they regard Paul as an eyewitness.”[14]

So, we not only have testimony from the followers of Jesus that saw him alive again, but we also have testimony from a serious enemy saying the same thing. That’s a big deal.

Paul’s Next Move: From Persecuting to Preaching

After encountering the risen Jesus, Paul immediately went into Arabia (Gal. 1:17) and began telling others that Jesus had risen and its implications. He was now commissioned as an apostle and had a serious mission to carry out. Although some scholars have thought Paul may have gone to Arabia to self-reflect on what had just happened, I don’t think that was all he did. I agree with Murphy-O’Connor and others who point out that Paul was driven back to Damascus because the local authorities were trying to arrest him for proclaiming Jesus as the Risen Christ (Gal. 1:17; 2 Cor. 11:32-33).[15] Paul went straight to work.

After I accepted Christ, I found myself immediately wanting to talk to others about Jesus and sharing my faith (even if I wasn’t very good at it). So, can you imagine having an encounter like Paul’s? How much more would he be doing the same thing??

Another notable point is that Paul wanted to make it crystal clear that he did not receive this gospel from any individual, rather it was directly communicated to him by Jesus himself (Gal. 1:12). Gordon Fee remarks that Paul confirmed that

“his version of the gospel was without human origins of any kind—and was therefore not dependent on those in Jerusalem who were apostles before him—Paul points to the radical nature of his own conversion.”[16]

Scholar Anthony Thiselton explains that after Paul went to Arabia in AD 33 or 34, he returned to Damascus around AD 34-37, and in AD 36-37 he went to Jerusalem and stayed with Peter while “familiarizing himself with Jesus’ earthly life and passion, and with earliest apostolic preaching.”[17]

In other words, Paul wanted to confirm that the gospel he had been proclaiming was indeed the same message that Jesus’ disciples were teaching, since they were also direct eyewitnesses of the risen Jesus and had been commissioned to spread the gospel message. Renowned atheist historian Gerd Lüdemann agrees, saying,

“Three years after he [Paul] had seen (and heard) Jesus he visited Cephas in Jerusalem and learned from him further details of the preaching and activity of Jesus.”[18]

Earliest Historical Tradition for Jesus’ Resurrection

It was here where Paul would receive the earliest historical tradition that we have for Jesus’ resurrection. Paul received a creed (statement of faith) in the form of oral tradition that condensed the primary facts that Christianity is founded upon as recorded in the gospels. This creed can be seen in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians (one of our earliest writings in Christianity) which says,

“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” (1 Corinthians 15:3-5, ESV).[19]

Dean Overman adds that “we have great reason to trust the oral tradition process in the very earliest church and to trust the written documents; they are consistent in presenting the core of the deeds and saying of Jesus.”[20] Slight variations in a large narrative do nothing to undermine the primary details of a past event. In other words, if minor details of an event that happened in the past are inconsistent with other minor details, this does not falsify the major details that we have conclusive evidence for.

For example, I read several of the eyewitnesses reports from survivors of the Titanic. Some said the Titanic broke in two before sinking, and others said it stayed in one piece before sinking. Either way, despite the differences, we know the ship sank.[21] If there are certain parts of a story told by multiple people that cannot be harmonized, this doesn’t mean the story never happened or that we can’t have confidence in knowing what happened in the end.

It is nearly the unanimous consensus among Christian and non-Christian scholars that this early creed dates within 2-3 years of Jesus’ crucifixion.[22] Other scholars have dated it to within a couple months! So, here we have in the earliest writings of Christianity, an even earlier creed that developed before Paul put it into his letter.

Scholars know it is earlier based on several factors, some of which are: Paul’s precise language saying that this creed was passed on to him, the Aramaic undertone as “Cephas” is used instead of Peter, non-Pauline terms and sentence structures, and also the stylized wording that demonstrate an easily memorable oral construct (Ex. That Christ died…that he was buried…that he was raised…that he appeared…).[23]

Paul was able to share his own eyewitness account of the risen Jesus with some of the other eyewitnesses of the risen Jesus, confirming the message that he received from Jesus was the same message that they received from Jesus. Renowned historian Dale Allison’s notes,

“Indeed, Paul knew Peter and James and presumably others who claimed to have seen the risen Jesus. First Corinthians 15:3-8 is not folklore.”[24]

Paul’s Sufferings

Paul would go on to suffer immensely for his beliefs and ultimately endure martyrdom just as many of Jesus’ disciples would. Prominent historian E. P. Sanders says that

“after his [Jesus’] death his followers experienced what they described as the ‘resurrection’: the appearance of a living but transformed person who had actually died. They believed this, they lived it, and they died for it.”[25]

Paul describes his persecution and adversities which entailed imprisonment, numerous whippings and floggings, rod beatings and stoning, shipwrecks, imminent danger from nature, robbers, violent Jews/Gentiles, sleep deprivation and malnourishment, exposure to harsh conditions without proper shelter, and immense psychological and spiritual pressure for the churches he labored for (2 Cor. 11:23-28).

One would only subject themselves to such peril if they had tremendous motives and reasons for doing so. Paul would eventually be killed for his faith. He was most likely beheaded under the reign of Nero.[26]

Did Paul Really “See” Jesus?

Subjective Visions

In order to explain the incredible fact that Paul truly saw Jesus, which is unanimously accepted by historians, many have turned to a naturalistic explanation to account for this bizarre event. Skeptical scholars have attributed Paul’s encounter to a subjective vision, in which Paul didn’t really see the physical body of Jesus, but rather had a projection from his own mind.

Because this type of vision is strictly internal and not external to the subject, it has no correlation to external reality outside of the mind. Subjective visions would be similar to hallucinations or dreams. Therefore, concerning Paul’s eyewitness account of the risen Jesus, many skeptical scholars would say something similar to Jewish historian Geza Vermes, who declared, “Crucified, dead and buried, Jesus rose in the hearts of his disciples, and he lived on.”[27]

Typically, the only time a person hallucinates seeing someone else are those in the bereavement stage who are mourning the loss of a loved one. There have been reports of spouses who thought they saw their now deceased significant other in a crowd, or a mother who senses her child’s presence, or received one last visit before their final departure, and so on.

There’s a couple of major problems in trying to apply this to Paul’s situation. First, Paul wasn’t grieving over the death of Jesus as the disciples did, rather Paul was just dandy that Jesus was crucified. He could not have cared less. The only thing that he cared about concerning this messianic pretender, were the “delusional” Christians he was out to destroy. Paul wasn’t grieving the loss of Jesus in any way, shape or form.

Second, people who experience hallucinations of deceased loved ones know that those people are dead. They do not experience a dramatic life-changing event that makes them truly believe that their loved one is somehow alive again. But this is precisely what happened to Paul. His world was turned upside down and went to his death claiming that Jesus was alive and that he had seen his physical body.[28]

Objective Visions

There are other scholars who believe that Paul experienced an objective vision. This would be someone seeing a real image which is not merely a projection of the mind. Natural senses would not be involved, but rather something external to the mind is causing the image to be seen.[29] For example, the stoning of Stephen is sometimes referred to by scholars as an objective vision, because Stephen had an experience and saw a real image that others apparently did not.

Nevertheless, even if Paul did have an objective vision and did not see the physical risen body of Jesus (which is not supported by the evidence), you would still have a resurrection. Philosopher Stephen Davis argues that Paul’s description of a resurrected or glorified body in 1 Cor. 15, is referring to a physical body that can be seen and touched; Davis rightly points out:

“A glorified body (soma) is still a body—that is, still a material object that can be seen.”[30]

One of the prerequisites of being an apostle was that you had to have seen the risen Jesus, and not have a mere subjective vision of him in your mind. Paul makes it clear in 1 Cor. 9:1 that he saw the body of the risen Jesus, which was a material object occupying time and space. Historian N. T. Wright holds this position, stating,

“The word heoraka, ‘I have seen’ is a normal word for ordinary sight. It does not imply that this was a subjective ‘vision’ or a private revelation.”[31]

Licona declares,

“Having observed other passages in Paul related to the resurrection of Jesus, it is clear to me that he thought of the resurrection of Jesus in terms of an event that revivified his corpse and transformed it into a new and immortal body.”[32]

Some critics have attempted to use Luke’s story of Paul’s Damascus Road conversion to dismiss the idea that Paul really saw Jesus. The dramatic descriptions told 3 different times in 3 different ways seem to focus more on Paul’s unique calling by God, rather than providing details of a physical body.[33]

Moreover, the differences in Luke’s narrative are complementary and they formally supplement each other, rather than essentially contradict each other.[34] Regardless, again, this does nothing to take away from Paul’s testimony in 1 Cor. 9 and 15 where he states that he has seen the risen body of Jesus.

Another point to mention is that scholars have used the Damascus Road conversion as evidence that Paul did not hallucinate the risen Jesus due to the external reality of the event. The details in Acts describes the physical impact it had on the companions travelling with him.

It says they heard an audible voice (Acts 9:7), saw a light (Acts 22:9), and fell to the ground (Acts 26:14). Hallucinations in one person’s brain are not capable of producing these kinds of physical effects on everyone else. Licona reminds us that “his [Paul’s] traveling companions perceived portions of the auditory and visible aspects of the experience.”[35] If others saw the light and heard the voice, then there was an external reality to the vision outside of Paul’s brain.

It was a Physical Body

Paul was confident that he had encountered the risen Jesus as a resurrected, physical body. Scholars Paul Rhodes Eddy and Greg Boyd rightly note another difficulty with the hallucination theory, saying,

“It flies in the face of the first-century Jewish understanding of resurrection. When Jews thought of resurrection, they thought of a bodily resurrection in history, not a mystical vision.”[36]

Historian Craig Evans rightly adds,

“I find it difficult to explain Paul’s proclamation of Jesus as resurrected, had the followers of Jesus spoken only of a spiritual resurrection and had the body of Jesus remained dead and decomposing in a tomb.”[37]

The disciples knew Jesus had been bodily raised from the dead. Recall, the risen Jesus ate food with them, and they physically touch Jesus (Luke 24:39-43). Hallucinations or ghost-like spirits cannot do that. If Paul and everyone else hallucinated, then Jesus’ body would have still remained, which would have prevented Christianity from ever starting.

If Jesus’ resurrection represents a spiritual mindset rather than a literal event, then this contradicts the long-standing tradition of bodily resurrections understood within Hebrew Scripture, which is precisely what Paul correlated it with. Paul’s extraordinary claim of seeing the risen Jesus offers an adequate explanation for why he suddenly changed and converted to Christianity.

The next article will cover: Historical Fact 4: Sudden Change in Skeptic James. Thanks for reading. Be bold and share this!

Blessings,

Andrew Drinkard

[1] Paul W. Barnett, “Is the New Testament Historically Reliable,” ed, Steven B. Cowan and Terry L. Wilder. In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Academic, 2013), 250.

[2] Stanley E. Porter, The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016), 20-21.

[3] Porter, The Apostle Paul, 29.

[4] Paul Copan and Kenneth D. Litwak, The Gospel in the Marketplace of Ideas: Paul’s Mars Hill Experience for Our Pluralistic World (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2014), 72.

[5] Porter, The Apostle Paul, 31. Additional note: Hellenistic Jews could only speak Greek, had to attend Greek-speaking synagogues, and limited to the use of the Septuagint, while Palestinian Jews spoke Aramaic.

[6] David Wenham, Did St Paul Get Jesus Right?: The Gospel According to Paul (Chicago: Lion Hudson LTD, 2010), 19.

[7] Luke Timothy Johnson, Constructing Paul: The Canonical Paul, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2020), 3.

[8] Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2010), 374-375.

[9] Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2004), 65.

[10] Stefan Alkier, Reality of the Resurrection: The New Testament Witness (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2013), 15.

[11] Larry W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 2015), 159.

[12] Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Paul: A Critical Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press USA – OSO, 1998), 78.

[13] Gordon D. Fee, Jesus the Lord According to Paul the Apostle: A Concise Introduction (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2018), 72.

[14] Habermas, The Risen Jesus and Future Hope, 20.

[15] Murphy-O’Connor, Paul, 81.

[16] Fee, Jesus the Lord According to Paul the Apostle, 70.

[17] Anthony C. Thiselton, The Living Paul: An Introduction to the Apostle’s Life and Thought (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2010), 21.

[18] Gerd Lüdemann, “The Earliest Christian Belief in the Resurrection,” Historical Jesus in Recent Research, ed. James D. G. Dunn and McKnight, Scot McKnight (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 415.

[19] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the English Standard Version. This creed is accepted among scholars as stretching from v3b-8 with v6 as an addition by Paul to persuade others by the massive eyewitness account of the risen Jesus. Many scholars do accept 6a, but ultimately, as Dale Allison points out, we do not know if or what Paul modified in v6-7; see Resurrecting Jesus, 233-234. For an in-depth treatment, see Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Keys to First Corinthians: Revisiting the Major Issues (2009), 230-241. O’Connor believes Paul slightly altered the traditional phrase of v7 and moved it as a transitional piece in order to emphasize the legitimacy of his authoritative apostolic position (2009), 236.

[20] Dean L. Overman, A Case for the Divinity of Jesus: Examining the Earliest Evidence (Blue Ridge Summit: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009), 140-141.

[21] Bill Wormstedt, “The Facts-What did the Survivors See of the Break-up of the Titanic?” Encyclopedia Titanica, accessed February 11, 2021, https://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/articles/wormstedt.pdf.

[22] Habermas, The Risen Jesus and Future Hope, 19.

[23] Wright (2003), 319; Habermas (2003), 17; Licona (2010), 223-4.

[24] Dale C. Allison, Jr., Resurrecting Jesus: The Earliest Christian Tradition and Its Interpreters (New York: Bloomsbury Academic & Professional, 2005), 234.

[25] E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus (New York: Penguin Books), 306. Kindle.

[26] Murphy-O’Connor, Paul, 370-371.

[27] Geza Vermes, Jesus in the Jewish World (London: Hymns Ancient & Modern Ltd, 2010), 33.

[28] Something else to consider is that there were groups of people who saw Jesus, including over 500 eyewitnesses at one time. Hallucinations are entirely subject to an individual, they are not shared experiences. They happen in one person’s brain, not hundreds at the same time. I’ve heard it said that group hallucinations would be more miraculous than a resurrection.

[29] See N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 377-84 and Habermas & Licona (2004), 110-113.

[30] Stephen T. Davis, Daniel Kendall, and Gerald O’Collins, Editors. The Resurrection (Oxford: Oxford University, 1997), 139.

[31] N. T. Wright, Resurrection Son of God V3: Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 382.

[32] Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus, 378.

[33] See Wright (2003), 392-393.

[34] See Charles W. Hedrick, “Paul’s Conversion/Call: A Comparative Analysis of the Three Reports in Acts.” Journal of Biblical Literature 100, no. 3 (1981): 415-32.

[35] Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus, 394.

[36] Paul Rhodes Eddy and Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus Legend: A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 145.

[37] Michael F. Bird, Craig A. Evans, Simon Gathercole, Charles E. Hill and Chris Tilling, How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus’ Divine Nature—A Response to Bart Ehrman (Grand Rapids: HarperCollins Christian Publishing, 2014), 92.