'Chapter Summary: The Plausibility Of The Resurrection'

Now that the plausibility of the Resurrection has been established, critics begin introducing opposition. The next section of the book, chapters 5-8, addresses some of the opposing theories against the Resurrection. Chapter 5 deals specifically with “legend theories.” There are three types of these theories: (1) embellishments, (2) non historical literary style, and (3) myths in other religions.
First of all, legend theorists might assume that the disciples and New Testament writers used embellishments to fabricate the story of the Resurrection: “Embellishment theories state that Yeshua’s disciples never claimed that He rose from the dead. Rather as the story of [Yeshua] and His teachings spread, they were embellished with supernatural details.” However, there are problems with this theory. First of all, the original disciples claimed the Resurrection from the beginning and told about real experiences. Furthermore, both Paul and James, experiencing conversion based on personal appearances, claimed to have seen Yeshua. Therefore, critics need evidence for assertions, since not all ancient accounts accumulate embellishments over time.
The
In one type of fraud theory, critics say that the disciples lied and stole the body. The problem with this is that the disciples really wholeheartedly believed in a resurrection to the point of martyrdom. As mentioned earlier, “liars make poor martyrs.” Another twist to the fraud theory is that since the disciples truly believed that Yeshua rose, then perhaps someone else stole the body, and the disciples were deceived. For both of these ideas, the problem still remains that both Paul and James were converted based on experiencing the risen Yeshua. Furthermore, the beliefs of the disciples were based on appearances. Therefore, this theory can only partially explain the empty tomb, but not the