1
Summarization of Habermas’ Minimal Facts Argument for the Resurrection
Habermas' Minimal Facts argument for the resurrection is based on historical evidence
widely accepted by scholars, both religious and secular. Among these are Jesus' death by
crucifixion, his burial in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea, the discovery of his empty tomb by
female followers, the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to individuals and groups, and the
origins of Christianity and the transformation of Jesus' disciples, particularly their willingness to
suffer and die in order to believe in the resurrection. Habermas perceives the argument for the
resurrection differently when the historical evidence is selectively minimized to this fundamental
level.1 Thus, by relying solely on these established historical facts, Habermas argues that it
becomes difficult for naturalistic theories to explain away the resurrection. Naturalistic theories
often struggle to account for the combination of these facts in a coherent manner without
invoking the resurrection as the best explanation. Habermas argues that these facts are strongly
supported by historical evidence and are not reliant on Christian belief or scripture. He posits that
the best explanation for these facts is the resurrection of Jesus, as it provides a coherent and
plausible explanation for the evidence at hand.
Habermas' argument concerning the death of Jesus is based on the concept of
asphyxiation, which was validated through medical analysis, particularly "by the nature of the
spear wound, and especially by Strauss's renowned critique of the swoon theory."2 According to
the author, scholars have reached a consensus regarding early proclamations of the resurrection
message, as evidenced by the creeds found in Paul’s letter to the Corinth church (1 Corinthians
15:3), as well as Luke 24:34, and numerous early sermon summaries in Acts. According to these
sources, the teaching of the resurrection dates back to the 30s A.D.3
1 Gary R. Habermas, The Risen Jesus & Future Hope (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Pub, 2003), 27.
2 Ibid, 27.
3 Ibid, 29.
2
In Habermas' argument, eyewitness testimony contributes to the reliability of the
resurrection narrative. Aside from pointing out Paul's transformation from one of the most
fervent proponents of Christianity to a persecutor of Christians, he emphasizes the significance
of his firsthand encounter with the risen Jesus. He suggests that the foundational essence of the
resurrection narrative did not stem from ancient myths and legends. Instead, it mirrors the
perspectives of individuals who purportedly directly experienced these events.4 According to
Habermas, this transformation lends credibility to Paul's testimony.
Habermas also suggests that early traditional sources, like 1 Corinthians 15:3ff, may
provide clues. Luke 24:34 and Mark 16:17, likely contain eyewitness accounts or were
influenced by individuals who witnessed the resurrection directly. Therefore, the resurrection
message was based on the experiences and testimonies of those present rather than embellished
myths or legends developed over time.5 Thus, it was Habermas assertion that the initial reports
regarding the resurrection sightings originated from firsthand, eyewitness encounters rather than
ancient folklore.
Using eyewitness testimony, Habermas aims to establish the historical credibility of the
resurrection narrative. He argues that firsthand accounts of people like Paul and other early
witnesses provide a solid foundation for belief in Jesus' resurrection in response to skeptics who
might attribute the resurrection to legendary accretion or mythical invention over time. In
Habermas' argument, eyewitness testimony plays an important role in evaluating historical
events, such as the resurrection.
Arguments for God’s Existence
Arguments for God's existence provide a philosophical framework that supports the
4 Ibid, 29.
5 Ibid, 29.
3
plausibility of miracles, including the resurrection. Beck argues that the issue of miracles is
intricately linked with the inquiry into the existence of God. Miracles have been employed as
evidence to support the existence of God.6 According to philosophical and theological
arguments, God's existence establishes a context where supernatural events, such as miracles, are
deemed plausible and coherent within God's order. Among the attributes and actions attributed to
God, miracles, including the resurrection, are seen as manifestations of divine intervention.
Consequently, arguments for God's existence support theological and philosophical
interpretations of miraculous events, such as the resurrection.
A transcendent, powerful, and morally perfect being, God, is proposed by philosophical
arguments such as the cosmological argument, teleological argument, and moral argument.
Within this theological framework, miracles, such as the resurrection, become more plausible if
God exists. Within the Christian worldview, these arguments establish the possibility of
supernatural intervention in nature, making the resurrection a divine miracle.
Bibliography
Geivett, R. Douglas, and Gary R. Habermas. In Defense of Miracles: A Comprehensive Case for
God’s Action in History. 1st ed. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1997.
6 R. Douglas Geivett and Gary R. Habermas, In Defense of Miracles : A Comprehensive Case for God’s
Action in History, 1st ed. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1997), 149.
