Second, these creeds present eyewitnesstestimony for the facts that they report. Again, 1 Corinthians 15:3ff. and the Acts traditions are the keys in that they link us with the apostles, both singly and in groups, primarily through the testimonies of the two eyewitnesses Paul and Peter. An additional example is Luke 24:34, which may also date to the earliest church and Peter.
Third, additional evidences for Jesus’ resurrection include strong considerations like the empty tomb, the disciples’ radical transformations and willingness to die for the truth of the gospel, which was their central message, along with the conversions of skeptics Paul and James. These and other considerations must be explained.
Fourth, alternative hypotheses that seek to explain away the resurrection in natural terms have failed to adequately account for the known historical facts. Not only is this conclusion dictated by the data themselves, but critical scholars have even admitted this failure. Few researchers have favored any of these theses in recent times.
Fifth, the accepted facts, and the minimal facts in particular, are not only established historically but are recognized by virtually all critical scholars as well. The advantages are that these facts provide a strong basis for belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus and, at the same time, should not be rejected since they are recognized on strictly historical grounds. The facts that almost all scholars accept provide a strong basis for belief in Jesus’ literal resurrection from the dead, especially in the absence of viable naturalistic theories.
On this basis, then, we may conclude that the early Christian creeds and accepted historical facts prove the historicity of the death and resurrection of Jesus. These data are sufficient both to disprove the alternative theories, and to present strong evidences for these events (such as the early and eyewitness testimony), all on the grounds of known history. Critical doubts in other areas cannot disprove and change these basic facts.