Thanks. That really does cut through a lot of clutter and red-herring arguments.
Bart Ehrman and Mike Licona debated the issue of whether the resurrection could be proved historically.
Both are excellent debaters and made their opposite cases flawlessly.
Ehrman staked his case that it could not be proved (not that it did or didn't happen) because it is a historian's job to figure out what "probably" happened and since miracles are inherently improbable no historian will ever say that any amount of eyewitness testimony about a statistically improbable event is historical proof.
Fair point, if those are indeed the "rules".
Licona takes a more pragmatic approach. Nearly every respected historian, including Ehrman agrees on three facts:
- Jesus was killed publicly by professional executioners who made sure he was really dead.
- Many eyewitnesses (supporters) saw Jesus alive after this event.
- Paul (an adversary at the time) saw Jesus alive after this event.
This is prima face historical evidence that he was dead and then alive.
(Subject to the credibility of the witnesses which are recorded for all to assess.)
From that theologians, not historians, can derive their own conclusions about how that came about. Perhaps aliens quickly cloned him from one of his DNA samples. Perhaps God resurrected him as he had predicted on many prior occasions.
But all the witnesses testified to Jesus' own explanation about what happened. So, in the absence of any historical evidence of any kind to the contrary, we are left with an historically documented supernatural event, coherently explained by the primary participants in the event.
Make of it what you will.
Good points @stan. The thing that really hit me was the transformation that occurred with the disciples after the alleged resurrection. Most of the remaining eleven disciples who were closest to Jesus fled when he was captured by the roman guards, but after the alleged resurrection, their attitudes were completely changed, to the extent that all of them were all willing to be martyred for their faith. And indeed, that's what happened to all of the remaining eleven except John. To me, this was the most convincing evidence, because something must have happened to them for such a dramatic change to have occurred.
The empty tomb and remaining burial clothe are some other evidence that convinced me about the resurrection. William Lane Craig has a few very good talks and debates about this. He presents the evidence in a very logical manner.