Understanding Historical Evidence
“History is not the past itself, but a reasoned reconstruction of what the best evidence allows us to affirm.”
— Mark Noll
In an age of instant information—and instant skepticism—it is easy to forget that most of what we know about the past comes down to us through careful reasoning, not absolute proof. We trust that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon, that Socrates drank the hemlock, that Alexander conquered Persia—not because we saw it, but because reliable evidence has survived.
The same methods that allow historians to affirm ancient events also apply to the apostles’ testimony about the resurrection.
Understanding how history works empowers us not only to defend the Christian faith but to think more clearly about all historical claims.
In this blog, we will explore what counts as historical evidence, how historians reason about the past, and why understanding these principles matters for evaluating both ancient and modern events—including the martyrdoms of the apostles.
What Counts as Historical Evidence?
Historians work with many types of evidence, including:
- Eyewitness Testimony
Firsthand accounts from people who directly observed events. - Contemporary Documentation
Writings created close in time to the events described (e.g., letters, decrees, official records). - Hostile Testimony
Admissions from opponents or neutral parties confirming key facts. - Archaeological Findings
Material evidence that corroborates historical claims (e.g., coins, inscriptions, burial sites). - Multiple Independent Sources
When different sources affirm the same basic events, credibility rises. - Historical Context and Plausibility
Events fitting known cultural, political, and social realities of the time are more credible than those out of character.
Historians rarely have video footage or DNA tests from ancient times.
Instead, they use reasoned inference: what explanation best fits the totality of the available evidence?
Case Studies from Ancient History
Let’s examine some examples where historians confidently affirm major events—even though the evidence is partial, indirect, or written decades later.
1. Julius Caesar Crossing the Rubicon (49 BC)
- Sources
Mostly from Suetonius and Plutarch, both writing about a century later. - Eyewitnesses
No original eyewitness documents survive. - Reasoning
The crossing triggered a civil war well attested by multiple later sources. The magnitude of consequences (the fall of the Roman Republic) confirms the core event.
Conclusion
Historians confidently affirm Caesar’s crossing despite the gap between the event and our surviving sources.
2. Socrates’ Trial and Execution (399 BC)
- Sources
Plato and Xenophon—both students of Socrates. - Bias
Plato admired Socrates deeply. Yet even hostile sources (Aristophanes) confirm that Socrates was a controversial figure. - Reasoning
The convergence of friend and foe, combined with historical context (political instability in Athens), supports the reliability of the main event.
Conclusion
Historians affirm Socrates’ trial and death, even though much of what he said is filtered through admiring students.
3. Alexander the Great’s Conquests (336–323 BC)
- Sources
Arrian and Plutarch—both writing centuries later. - Eyewitness Material
Arrian relied on now-lost contemporaneous sources like Ptolemy (one of Alexander’s generals). - Archaeological Confirmation
Cities founded by Alexander, coins minted in his name, and spread of Greek culture confirm the broad strokes.
Conclusion
Historians affirm Alexander’s conquests with confidence, though details vary.
How the Same Principles Apply to the Apostles
Skeptics sometimes demand an unreasonable level of proof for Christian claims—greater than what they require for other ancient events.
But when we apply the same historical standards, the apostolic testimony holds up remarkably well.
- Eyewitness Testimony
The apostles (e.g., Peter, John, Paul) claimed direct experience of the risen Christ (Acts 2:32; 1 John 1:1–3; 1 Corinthians 15:3–8). - Contemporary Documentation
Paul’s letters are dated to within 20–25 years of Jesus’ death—an incredibly short gap by ancient standards.¹ - Hostile Testimony
Jewish leaders acknowledged the tomb was empty (Matthew 28:11–15). - Multiple Independent Sources
The Gospels, Pauline letters, early church fathers, and hostile references from Tacitus and Josephus converge. - Historical Context
First-century Judaism had no concept of a single man rising bodily before the general resurrection. The resurrection proclamation was shocking—and dangerous.
Conclusion
Using standard historical reasoning, the apostolic claims emerge as highly credible.
Common Objections About History — and the Responses
Objection 1: “Ancient sources are too late to be trusted.”
Response
Almost all ancient history relies on later sources.
For example, the best biographies of Alexander the Great were written 400 years after his death, yet no serious historian doubts his existence or basic achievements.
The Gospels and Paul’s letters were written within decades—not centuries—of the events they record.
Objection 2: “There are discrepancies in the accounts!”
Response
Minor differences in testimony are expected in genuine eyewitness accounts.
If four witnesses describe a car accident, they will differ in emphasis, perspective, and detail—but the core event remains clear.
In fact, total uniformity would suggest collusion, not authenticity.
Similarly, the resurrection accounts differ in peripheral details (e.g., number of angels, exact sequence of events) but converge on the central fact:
The tomb was empty, and Jesus appeared alive.
Objection 3: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
Response
The resurrection claim is extraordinary, but so is the evidence:
- Multiple eyewitnesses
- Sudden transformation of the apostles
- Empty tomb admitted by enemies
- Rapid rise of Christianity under persecution
No naturalistic explanation (body theft, hallucination, wrong tomb) sufficiently accounts for all the facts.
Extraordinary events require sufficient evidence—not evidence that is itself miraculous.²
Modern History: Trusting Recent Events by the Same Reasoning
The same principles used to affirm ancient events apply today.
1. World War II Events: D-Day and Pearl Harbor
- Eyewitnesses
Thousands of accounts exist, each with slight differences in detail. - Documentation
Photographs, government reports, newspaper articles, personal letters. - Hostile Testimony
Japanese military records confirm the attack on Pearl Harbor. German archives affirm the D-Day invasion.
Despite minor discrepancies (times, sequences, personal memories), no one doubts the core realities:
- Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7, 1941.
- Allied forces stormed Normandy beaches on June 6, 1944.
2. The September 11 Attacks (2001)
- Eyewitnesses
Thousands of survivors, first responders, journalists. - Media Evidence
Video footage, photographs, news reports from multiple independent sources. - Discrepancies
Witnesses disagree on small points (e.g., order of tower collapses, exact sounds heard), but the core event is universally affirmed.
If we demanded absolute agreement on every minor detail, we would have to doubt almost every major event in modern history.
But we do not—because the core facts remain consistently attested by multiple independent witnesses.
Building a Reasoned Faith
Christian faith is not belief without evidence.
It is trust based on testimony—the same way we trust most historical knowledge.
- We believe Alexander conquered Persia not because we saw it, but because trustworthy sources recorded it.
- We believe in Lincoln’s assassination, D-Day, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 through consistent testimony.
- We believe in the resurrection through the testimony of credible, suffering eyewitnesses.
Faith and reason are not enemies. They are partners.
As historian Gary Habermas notes, “The resurrection is not merely a faith event; it is a historical event open to investigation.”³
The Verdict: Reason to Trust
Understanding how history works does not eliminate faith—it strengthens it.
We do not demand impossible proofs. We ask:
- What best explains the evidence?
- What account fits the facts with the least assumptions?
- Where does the weight of testimony point?
And when we ask those questions about the resurrection of Jesus, the answer remains what the apostles first proclaimed:
“He is not here; he has risen, just as he said.” (Matthew 28:6)
Footnotes
¹ Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004).
² Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994).
³ Gary Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin: College Press, 1996).
Tom's Theology Blog 
Leave a comment