Answering Objections, Recap and Final Bayes’ Theorem

Introduction: The Need for a Final Defense

The resurrection of Jesus is the most historically supported supernatural event in history, yet skeptics continue to raise objections. Many objections attempt to diminish the historical evidence or redefine early Christian beliefwithout addressing why the disciples believed the resurrection was true.

This post will address some of the most common skeptical objections, recap the strongest arguments for the resurrection, and calculate the final probability based on our cumulative Bayesian analysis.

As philosopher William Lane Craig states:

“The resurrection of Jesus is not just a matter of theological speculation, but one of historical fact that demands an explanation.”¹

---

1. Objection: “Christians Simply Believed Because They Wanted to Believe”

Response: This claim ignores the historical evidence that the disciples were not expecting a resurrection and were actually in a state of fear and despair after Jesus’ death.

• Jewish Messianic expectation did not include a dying and rising Messiah before the end of time.²
• The Gospels depict the disciples as doubting and afraid (Luke 24:11, John 20:24-29).
• Paul, a former persecutor of Christians, had no reason to believe—yet he became one of its greatest proponents.

If belief in the resurrection were based on wishful thinking, the disciples would have clung to a spiritualized message of Jesus living on in their hearts, rather than boldly proclaiming a bodily resurrection that invited persecution.

---

2. Objection: “The Resurrection Accounts Contradict Each Other”

Response: While the Gospel accounts contain variations in detail, they agree on the core fact that the tomb was empty and Jesus appeared to His followers.

• Multiple independent sources confirm the resurrection (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul’s letters).³
• Variations in eyewitness testimony actually strengthen credibility—identical accounts would suggest collusion.⁴
• Differences are minor details, not contradictions. The core events remain the same:
  • The tomb was found empty.
  • Women were the first witnesses.
  • Jesus appeared to the disciples.
  • The disciples proclaimed the resurrection publicly.

As historian Richard Bauckham states:

“The variations in the resurrection accounts reflect authentic eyewitness testimony rather than fabrication.”⁵

---

3. Objection: “The Resurrection is a Copy of Pagan Myths”

Response: The claim that Christianity borrowed from pagan resurrection myths fails for several reasons:

• No parallels exist before Christianity that match the resurrection of Jesus.⁶
• Dying and rising gods in pagan myths were symbolic seasonal cycles, not historical events.⁷
• Jewish monotheism rejected pagan myths—it is highly unlikely that early Christians would base their faith on them.

Even skeptical scholars reject this argument. Bart Ehrman states:

“The idea that Jesus was simply made up from dying and rising gods is a theory that no serious historian would accept.”⁸

---

4. Objection: “Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence”

Response: The resurrection is supported by multiple independent sources, enemy attestation, and early proclamation—evidence that meets the highest historical standards.

• If extraordinary evidence means multiple independent accounts, we have them.
• If extraordinary evidence means eyewitnesses willing to die for their claims, we have them.
• If extraordinary evidence means rapid growth of a movement in hostile conditions, we have it.

As historian N.T. Wright states:

“The historical data concerning the resurrection are so strong that an alternative explanation is hard to find.”⁹

---

Final Recap: The Case for the Resurrection

This series has examined the resurrection through multiple historical and theological lenses. Below is a summary of the strongest evidential arguments:

Bayesian Probability Table with Added Objections

Skeptical minds should know that the probability factor numbers are based on computer projections given a lower likely probability of only 10, as opposed to a neutral likely probability of 50 or a higher probability of 90. This distinction is crucial because it highlights the varying degrees of confidence in predictions based on different statistical parameters. When considering various scenarios, it becomes evident that the implications of a lower likelihood can significantly alter decision-making processes. If the prior likely probability were set at 50 or 90, the overall calculation would be even higher, suggesting that the potential outcomes could change dramatically. Therefore, understanding the underlying assumptions of these projections is vital for developing a comprehensive view of potential risks and rewards in any given analysis.

As is the nature of Bayes’ Theorem, new information has been added as opposed to the theorem presented in Part 10. This model includes the content of the past two parts and changes the overall total from 2.7 × 10¹⁶ (27 quadrillion to 1) to an even higher probability of 2.55 × 10²⁴ (2.55 septillion to 1). This significant increase in probability demonstrates a more robust understanding of the underlying data and its implications, leading to a more nuanced interpretation of the events analyzed. Which means the chances of these events occurring without the physical resurrection of Christ are, mathematically, non-existent. This conclusion emphasizes the importance of considering statistical evidence in theological discussions. This is not opinion; this is a valid scientific model based on mathematics, showcasing how a rigorously applied mathematical approach can yield insights that might challenge conventional beliefs.

Theory/Objection	Bayes Factor
The Empty Tomb	20
Multiple Independent Accounts	50
Eyewitness Testimony	75
The Apostles’ Willingness to Die	98
The Conversion of Paul and James	98
The Failure of Alternative Theories	100
The Early Proclamation	50
Jewish Burial Customs	75
The Growth of Christianity	100
The Apostolic Fathers	50
Responding to the Stolen Body Theory	30
Responding to the Hallucination Hypothesis	40
Responding to the Swoon Theory	45
Responding to the Legend Theory	35

Final Probability Totals

• Cumulative Bayes Factor: 2.55 × 10²⁴ (2.55 septillion to 1)
• Final Probability of the Resurrection: 100.0%

Given the overwhelming historical, eyewitness, and theological evidence, the probability of the resurrection is effectively certain under Bayesian reasoning.

As William Lane Craig concludes:

“There is no plausible naturalistic explanation for the historical facts—only the resurrection of Jesus provides a satisfying account.”¹⁰

---

Conclusion: The Resurrection is the Most Well-Attested Event in Ancient History

• No alternative explanation accounts for all the evidence.
• The resurrection was proclaimed immediately, not developed over time.
• The apostles and early Christians died rather than deny it.
• The Apostolic Fathers continued to teach it.
• Christianity’s explosive growth has no other sufficient cause.

Final Consideration and Testimony:

Over the past twelve posts, I have presented evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Yet, as the vast host of volumes written on this subject testify, this is only scratching the surface. The resurrection of Christ, as presented in Scripture, stands not merely as a theological claim but as a historical reality grounded in evidence. The apostle Paul boldly declared, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins” (1 Corinthians 15:17, ESV). But Christ has been raised, and because of this, the Christian faith is not a blind leap into the dark but a confident trust rooted in truth.

Therefore, belief in the resurrection of Christ is an evidentially based faith—one that rests on the weight of history, reason, and testimony. As Peter writes, “We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Peter 1:16, ESV). The faith that we proclaim is not founded on legend or speculation but on the very real encounter with the risen Lord, experienced firsthand by those who saw Him, touched Him, and suffered for His name.

But there is more. The resurrection is not merely an event to be studied—it is a reality that can be personally tested. The same Jesus who appeared to His disciples after His resurrection, saying, “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see” (Luke 24:39, ESV), still invites people to come and see today. If you have not encountered the risen Christ, I invite you to do so now. Stop and pray. Ask Him if He is indeed alive. Confess your need for Him, and ask Him to be your Savior. “For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13, ESV).

While I am not an apostle, nor a disciple of one of the disciples, I made this simple profession of faith sixty years ago. I can honestly say that each day, the risen Christ has been with me—not only as my Savior but as my Friend and my Lord. He has kept His promise: “And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20, ESV). I have found Him faithful, guiding me, strengthening me, and walking beside me in every season of life.

Will you take this step of faith and call on Him today? Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life” (John 5:24, ESV). He is not in the tomb. He is risen. He is alive. And He is calling you to Himself.

Footnotes:

¹ William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008).
² N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003).
³ Craig S. Keener, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009).
⁴ Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006).
⁵ Michael R. Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2010).
⁶ Jonathan Z. Smith, Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990).
⁷ Ronald H. Nash, The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow from Pagan Thought? (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2003).
⁸ Bart D. Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist? (New York: HarperOne, 2012).
⁹ Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2004).
¹⁰ William Lane Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press, 1989).