William Craig's Case for the Resurrection of Jesus - Part 27: More Appearances

THE MOST IMPORTANT HISTORICAL CLAIM IN CRAIG'S CASE

 Craig's case for the resurrection of Jesus is based on three key historical claims. The most important of these historical claims is this one:

HC2: Beginning on the first day of the week following Jesus' crucifixion, various individuals and groups experienced on different occasions and under varying circumstances appearances of Jesus alive. 

Because this claim is crucial to the success of Craig's case, if Craig fails to show that (HC2) is a historical fact, then his case for the resurrection of Jesus also fails.

In Part 25, I showed that the best piece of historical evidence presented by Craig is weak and dubious and thus fails to provide any significant support for (HC2).

In Part 26, I showed that another key piece of evidence, the alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to Peter, is also weak and defective evidence and thus fails to provide any significant evidence for (HC2).

In this current post, I will critically examine some more alleged appearances of the risen Jesus that Craig offers as evidence for (HC2).

THE ALLEGED APPEARANCE TO 500 BRETHREN

The third piece of evidence that Craig uses to support (HC2) is an alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to five hundred brethren (RF3, pages 378-379).  Once again, Craig makes a very honest admission:

...we have no mention whatsoever of this appearance elsewhere in the New Testament. (RF3, page 378)

However, I don't think Craig realizes how devastating this admission is to his use of this evidence to support (HC2).

First, it is very unlikely that the authors of the four Gospels were aware of this alleged appearance of the risen Jesus, given that none of them chose to mention this astounding event.  Either the authors of the Gospels were completely unaware of this astounding event, or else they had heard about this alleged event but had serious doubts about it being a real historical event. In either case, the silence of all four Gospels plus Acts (and the rest of the New Testament, other than 1 Corinthians) raises significant doubts about the historicity of this alleged appearance of the risen Jesus.

Second, it is doubtful that the alleged appearance to five hundred brethren was part of the Christian creed or tradition that Paul was referencing.  The eminent N.T. scholar Raymond Brown states that there is disagreement among scholars about where in the passage from Chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians the Christian tradition ends and where Paul's own additions to that tradition begin.[1] 

Brown, himself, appears to favor the view that the list of appearances was NOT part of the Christian tradition which Paul was referencing:

...let us now turn to the list of six recipients (I Cor 15:5b-8) that Paul himself seemingly added to the primitive formula.[2] 

The N.T. scholar Elizabeth Fiorenza allows the first two appearances as being part of the traditional credal formula (because she has Paul's additions start at verse 6): 

...Paul reiterates the gospel that he has preached to them by quoting...a traditional credal formula in vv. 3b-5 that he expands in vv. 6-8.[3] 

That means she views the appearance to the five hundred as being something Paul added to the traditional credal formula. 

The N.T. scholar Stephen Barton agrees with Fiorenza that the traditional Christian confession ends with verse 5, and that verses 6 through 8 were additions by Paul:

To this early tradition, Paul adds resurrection appearances to "more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time," James (presumably the brother of Jesus), "all the apostles," and finally, "as to one untimely born...," Paul himself (vv.6-8)[4] 

If the appearance to the five hundred brethren was not part of the Christian tradition that Paul was referencing, then we cannot date this information to when Paul began preaching to the Corinthians; we can only date it as being as old as the writing of 1 Corinthians by Paul (around 55 CE).  This still dates the information to earlier than the writing of the Gospels.  However, such an early date makes it even more puzzling why there is no mention of this event in any of the Gospels, nor in Acts.

Third, as with the alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to Peter, we have no story describing this alleged appearance to five hundred Christian believers, and we have no details about this alleged event:

• We don't know when this appearance took place: a few days after the crucifixion? a few weeks after the crucifixion? a few months after the crucifixion? a few years after the crucifixion?
• We don't know where this appearance took place: Jerusalem? Samaria? Galilee? Athens? Corinth? Rome? 
• We don't know the weather and lighting conditions during this event: was it on a dark night or at noon on a sunny day? or was it at dusk? or on a cloudy morning?
• We don't know the social and psychological circumstances of the people who had this alleged experience: was this during a long worship service? or during big public celebration? or in the middle of a severe rainstorm or windstorm? or during a long drought or famine?
• We don't know if anyone saw Jesus' face, or saw Jesus' body, or heard Jesus speak, or touched Jesus' body
• We don't know if anyone among the 500 had ever seen Jesus before his crucifixion and burial (if not, then how could they identify the person they "saw" as being Jesus?)
• We don't know how far away Jesus appeared to be from the people who allegedly had this experience: a few feet away? a few yards away? 50 yards away? 500 yards away? one mile up in the sky?
• We don't know how long this experience lasted: a few seconds? a few minutes? a few hours?
• We don't know if everyone in the crowd experienced this appearance of Jesus: or only the adults? only the men? only the Christian believers? only about half of the crowd of people? only one-third of the people?
• We don't know if everyone in the crowd had the same experience of Jesus: did some see Jesus in the sky and others see him standing on the ground? did some see Jesus about 50 yards away and others see him standing just a few feet away?  Did some hear Jesus speaking but others did not hear Jesus?  did some see Jesus in and white robe while others saw Jesus in a red robe or in some other kind of clothing?

Without such details, we cannot evaluate the significance of this alleged event.  Because we don't know where or when this alleged event took place, and because we don't have any details about the circumstances of this alleged event, we cannot determine if it occurred "on different occasions and under varying circumstances" compared with other alleged appearances of the risen Jesus.  

Therefore, this alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to five hundred brethren does NOT provide any significant support to (HC2).

Craig also puts forward a very bad argument in a desperate attempt to bolster this very weak bit of evidence. However, that argument hurts his case more than helps it, because the poor quality of the argument casts doubt on Craig's credibility as a serious thinker and scholar.[5] 

THE ALLEGED APPEARANCE TO JAMES 

The fourth piece of evidence used by Craig to support (HC2) is an alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to James, the brother of Jesus.  This point also fails to provide any significant evidence for (HC2), because it suffers from the same problems that we saw with the alleged appearance to the five hundred brethren:

• Even though James was one of the top leaders of the early Christian church in Jerusalem, there is no mention in any of the Gospels or in Acts (or in the rest of the New Testament) of this alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to James.
• It is doubtful that the alleged appearance to James was part of the early Christian tradition that Paul referenced in 1 Corinthians 15.
• Because there is no story anywhere in the New Testament describing this alleged appearance to James, we have no details about when or where this took place, and no details about the circumstances of this alleged event.

Thus, the alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to James is very weak and dubious evidence for (HC2).

THE ALLEGED APPEARANCE TO "ALL THE APOSTLES"

 

While the author of the Gospel of Luke uses the term "apostles" narrowly, to refer to "the Twelve" disciples that Jesus selected to be part of his inner circle of followers, Paul sometimes uses the term more broadly:

Besides the limited group of apostles (the twelve) in Jerusalem (1 Cor. 15.5; Gal. 1.17.19), Paul knew another circle of apostolic preachers (1 Cor. 9.5; 12.28; 2 Cor. 11.13; Rom. 16.7).  Therefore, one may distinguish between two types of New Testament apostles in Paul's view: those called through an appearance of the risen Lord; and charismatic preachers, who were delegated by a church such as that at Antioch (see Acts 13.1-3; Rev. 2.2; Did. 11.3-6), including both men and women (Rom. 16.7; see Junia).[6]

In 1 Corinthians chapter 15 verse 7, where Paul mentions the alleged appearance(s) of the risen Jesus to "all the apostles", it is clear that he has in mind some group other than "the twelve" disciples (minus Judas), because he had already mentioned an appearance to "the twelve" in verse 5.  

So "all the apostles" in I Corinthians 15:7 means something like "all the delegated Christian missionaries" or "all the designated preachers of the Gospel".  Since there were various Christian churches in different towns and cities, and since each church could send out evangelists or missionaries, the phrase "all the apostles" might well encompass several dozen people from many different churches.  Paul probably would NOT know all of these people, although he might have known several of them.

It is unlikely that such a large collection of Christian preachers and missionaries from a variety of different towns and cities would all gather together in one location and be able to have a simultaneous group experience of an alleged appearance of the risen Jesus. 

Thus, Paul might well be referring to an alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to a small subset of the several dozen Christian missionaries and evangelists sent out by various Christian churches, or he might well be referring to various individual alleged experiences of the risen Jesus that occurred to some of the people who were part of the larger collection of designated Christian missionaries and evangelists.

In any case, the same three problems exist with this claim about the alleged appearance(s) of the risen Jesus to "all the apostles" as we saw with the claim about the alleged appearance of the risen Jesus to "the five hundred brethren":

• There is no other mention in any of the Gospels or in Acts (or in the rest of the New Testament) of the alleged appearance(s) of the risen Jesus to "all the apostles".
• It is doubtful that the alleged appearance(s) to "all the apostles" was part of the early Christian tradition that Paul referenced in 1 Corinthians 15.
• Because there is no story anywhere in the New Testament describing this alleged appearance to "all the apostles", we have no details about when or where this took place, and no details about the circumstances of this alleged event.

Once again, this is very weak and dubious evidence, and it fails to provide any significant support for (HC2).

CONCLUSION

We have now examined five out of the six key pieces of evidence that Craig provides in support of (HC2).  Each of those five pieces of evidence fails to provide any significant support for (HC2). Therefore, Craig has, so far, failed to show that (HC2) is a historical fact.  

If Craig's sixth key piece of evidence is as weak and dubious as the first five pieces of evidence, then he will have failed to show that (HC2) is a historical fact, and because (HC2) is a historical claim that is crucial to his case, this would mean that Craig's case for the resurrection of Jesus fails.

END NOTES

1. Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1997), footnote #64 on page 534. 

2. Raymond Brown,The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York, NY: Paulist Press, 1973), page 92.

3. Elizabeth Fiorenza, "I Corinthians" in The HarperCollins Bible Commentary, Revised Edition (San Francisco, CA: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000), page 1091. 

4. Stephen Barton, "I Corinthians" in Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), page 1347.

5. See my blog post "William Craig's Argument about the Alleged Appearance to Five Hundred Brethren" where I critically examine this argument: https://tcaict.blogspot.com/2026/06/william-craigs-argument-about-alleged.html  

6. Otto Betz, "Apostle" in The Oxford Companion to the Bible (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1993), page 42.