#2: The Reason-Based-Faith Approach, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection, Part 1 (of 2)

(For much-more information about this blog, see the home page at https://reasonbasedfaith.com/.)

This post clarifies more implications of reason-based faith and answers the following questions:

• Is faith based on reason—on evidence and logic—in the Bible? Or is it based on pure instinct?
• Are atheists right when they say that Jesus accepted and encouraged blind faith in the Gospel of John, Chapter 20?
• Did Jesus really die or did he just pass out or faint or “swoon” on the cross?
• How severe was the flogging or whipping that Jesus endured at the hands of a Roman soldier?
• What was the hypovolemic shock that Jesus experienced?
• Does hypovolemic shock in the Gospel accounts point to the historical reliability of these accounts?
• What do scholars believe about God and religion?
• What is the renaissance in Christian and theistic philosophy that’s now occurring at major universities?
• What were the physical effects of the Crucifixion?

1. Biblically, faith is often based on reason

Atheists like to claim that faith and reason are incompatible—that if you have a reason to believe something, you don’t need faith. However, from a biblical perspective, faith is often based on reason; that is, on evidence and logic. Christians will be interested in knowing that this statement—that faith is often based on reason—is supported by each of the following Scripture verses, which are individually linked to the English Standard Version at Biblegateway.com: Exodus 4:1-5; 14:26-31; 1Kings 18:36-39; Psalm 19:1-2; Mark 2:5-12; John 2:1-11, 23; 10:37-38; 14:11; 20:24-31; Acts 1:3; 2:22-41; 3:11—4:4; 8:4-13, 26-38; 9:1-22, 32-42; 14:15-17; 17:1-4, 10-12, 22-34; 22:1-16; 26:9-20; Romans 1:19-20; 1Peter 3:15.

These biblical examples provided me with my first impression and understanding of reason-based faith; the biblical impression that faith is often based on evidence and logic (or reason) was and is overwhelming! All that one needs to do in order to see this clearly is to read through these Scripture verses from a reasonably-objective viewpoint.

2. No significant basis for blind faith? What about John 20?

After about sixteen years of studying these issues, it’s now clear to me that there is no significant basis for assuming that the Bible teaches that faith is blind—i.e. that faith is (supposedly) never based on reason, logic, or evidence.

I know that some atheists have assumed that blind faith is accepted and encouraged by Jesus in John 20. In the proper context, the pertinent verses are 19, 20, and 24 to 29. (The narrative begins on the Sunday evening after the Crucifixion.)

Verses 19 and 20 read as follows: “On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.”

I’ll continue with the narrative in verse 24: “Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord.’ But he said to them, ‘Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe.’ Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, ‘Peace be with you.’ Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing.’ Thomas answered him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.’” (John 20:24-29 English Standard Version)

3. An atheistic interpretation of John 20:29

Notice that Jesus said to Thomas, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:29) Some atheists have exclaimed, “Here it is! We’re supposed to believe in Jesus without any evidence!”

They then speculate that the other disciples were seen as superior to Thomas because they exercised blind faith, whereas Thomas required evidence. But this is obviously not so: according to John’s narrative, the other disciples had evidence: they had seen Jesus resurrected back in verses 19 to 23; they had eyewitness evidence—from their own senses of sight and hearing!

4. Did Jesus die or swoon on the cross?

Before I proceed further in refuting this atheistic interpretation of John 20:29, it might be beneficial to consider the question: Did Jesus really die or did he just pass out or faint or “swoon” on the cross? Some atheists maintain that he just fainted or “swooned” and then revived later. This is the so-called “swoon theory.” It conveniently appears to explain the post-crucifixion appearances of Jesus, which are difficult to explain from an atheistic perspective because of the multiple attestations and the dramatic, 180-degree change in the disciples’ behavior, including their refusal to recant when confronted and persecuted—they refused to deny that Jesus had risen from the dead, even (sometimes) when they were threatened with death. In fact, this is one of the proofs that the disciples had seen Jesus resurrected: no one would die for what he knew to be a lie! (E.g. Acts 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 6:8–7:60; 21:26–23:24)

As to the swoon theory, it appears to suffer from intractable (unyielding) and insurmountable difficulties. Firstly, Jesus was so severely affected by the Roman flogging and crucifixion that, if not dead, he would have appeared to the disciples as wounded and debilitated to such a degree that they could not have reasonably believed that he had been miraculously restored to life—in which case there would NOT have been a dramatic, 180-degree change in their behavior, but there WAS! Secondly, the medical evidence appears to show conclusively that Jesus did indeed die on the cross—in which case the swoon theory is simply false. And if false, then the only thing that can reasonably account for Jesus’ (multiply-attested) post-crucifixion appearances and the dramatic, 180-degree change in the disciples’ behavior is the fact that Jesus did what he claimed—supernaturally rise from the dead—which is also overwhelmingly implied by Paul’s conversion, as we will see in an upcoming post on “The Bible’s Strongest Proof for God.” (The confirmed historical accuracy of Luke’s writings combined with the unique circumstances of Paul’s conversion make this, in my opinion, the strongest proof.)

In this regard, we are benefitted by Dr. Alexander Metherell, who has provided us with an insightful medical analysis of the scourged and crucified Jesus—an analysis which greatly clarifies these issues. A former research scientist and board-certified diagnostician, as a highly-respected medical authority, he has written for publications such as Aerospace Medicine and Scientific American. He was interviewed by journalist Lee Strobel in Chapter 11 of his book, The Case for Christ.

5. The terrible, destructive flogging

Strobel asked him about the Roman flogging or whipping that Jesus endured before being crucified. (Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15; John 19:1) Dr. Metherell responded by saying, “Roman floggings were known to be terribly brutal. They usually consisted of thirty-nine lashes but frequently were a lot more than that, depending on the mood of the soldier applying the blows. The soldier would use a whip of braided leather thongs with metal balls woven into them. When the whip would strike the flesh, these balls would cause deep bruises or contusions, which would break open with further blows. And the whip had pieces of sharp bone as well, which would cut the flesh severely. … It was just terrible.” (The Case for Christ Movie Edition: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time, Zondervan, 2017, Chapter 11, p. 306, Kindle locations 3969-3975)

The graphic portion of this quote that I omitted described how the flesh would be torn open severely; there would be great blood loss. The entire text (in an earlier edition) may be read from this web page at books.google.com.

Dr. Metherell continued: “We know that many people would die from this kind of beating even before they could be crucified. At the least, the victim would experience tremendous pain and go into hypovolemic shock. … Hypo means ‘low,’ vol refers to volume, and emic means ‘blood,’ so hypovolemic shock means the person is suffering the effects of losing a large amount of blood. … This does four things. First, the heart races to try to pump blood that isn’t there; second, the blood pressure drops, causing fainting or collapse; third, the kidneys stop producing urine to maintain what volume is left; and fourth, the person becomes very thirsty as the body craves fluids to replace the lost blood volume.” (Ibid, pp. 306-307, Kindle locations 3979-3985)

Strobel asked him, “Do you see evidence of this in the gospel accounts?”

Dr. Metherell confirmed Strobel’s hunch: “Yes, most definitely … Jesus was in hypovolemic shock as he staggered up the road to the execution site at Calvary, carrying the horizontal beam of the cross. Finally Jesus collapsed, and the Roman soldier ordered Simon to carry the cross for him. Later we read that Jesus said, ‘I thirst,’ at which point a sip of vinegar was offered to him. Because of the terrible effects of this beating, there’s no question that Jesus was already in serious-to-critical condition even before the nails were driven through his hands and feet.” (Ibid, pp. 307-308, Kindle locations 3987-3991)

6. Hypovolemic shock and other evidences

An important observation to make is that these symptoms of hypovolemic shock, exhibited by Jesus—which we would expect to see exhibited by someone flogged by a Roman soldier—point to the historical reliability of the gospel accounts, as do many other evidences.

For example, Dr. Craig Blomberg, a distinguished New Testament scholar, has made a list of 59 historically-confirmed or historically-probable details in John’s Gospel, which demonstrate its historical accuracy. This list is in his book, The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel (IVP Academic, 2011) and also in the lay-friendly book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Drs. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek (Crossway Books, 2004), in Chapter 10: Do We Have Eyewitness Testimony About Jesus?

Dr. Blomberg has also written three other similar books: The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (IVP Academic, 2014), The Historical Reliability of the New Testament (B&H Academic, 2016), and Can We Still Believe the Bible? (Brazos Press, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2014) In the third, he summarizes his conclusions and adds further commentary, particularly about the skeptical theories (not strictly based on evidence), but formulated by some scholars.

(Parenthetically: scholars range from atheists to agnostics to theists to Christians, along with other varieties thrown into the mix. In my opinion, they sometimes follow evidence and logic, but at other times, personal preference. I agree with Pascal’s observation: “People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof, but on the basis of what they find attractive.” Yet this need not be so; we can arrive at realistic and reasonable perspectives if we scrupulously examine ALL of the many evidences and then analyze logically and strictly what they probabilistically infer or deductively demonstrate. This should be done not superficially or halfheartedly, but instead with seriousness, carefulness, and attention to detail. And this is being done, increasingly so, in philosophy departments at major universities, in the current renaissance of Christian and theistic philosophy! An increasing number of philosophy majors and graduates know how to construct sound logical arguments for generic theism and for biblical theism! See the Introduction in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, edited by Drs. William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland; Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, 2012.)

7. Describing the physical effects of the Crucifixion

Dr. Metherell went on to describe (in unambiguous detail) the physical effects of the Crucifixion: “First of all, his arms would have immediately been stretched, probably about six inches in length, and both shoulders would have become dislocated—you can determine this with simple mathematical equations. This fulfilled the Old Testament prophecy in Psalm 22, which foretold the crucifixion hundreds of years before it took place and says, ‘My bones are out of joint.’” (The Case for Christ Movie Edition, pp. 310-311, Kindle locations 4026-4028)

Strobel then asked about the cause of death; the good doctor responded: “Once a person is hanging in the vertical position … crucifixion is essentially an agonizingly slow death by asphyxiation. The reason is that the stresses on the muscles and diaphragm put the chest into the inhaled position; basically, in order to exhale, the individual must push up on his feet so the tension on the muscles would be eased for a moment. … After managing to exhale, the person would then be able to relax down and take another breath in. Again he’d have to push himself up to exhale, scraping his bloodied back against the coarse wood of the cross. This would go on and on until complete exhaustion would take over, and the person wouldn’t be able to push up and breathe anymore. As the person slows down his breathing, he goes into what is called respiratory acidosis—the carbon dioxide in the blood is dissolved as carbonic acid, causing the acidity of the blood to increase. This eventually leads to an irregular heartbeat. In fact, with his heart beating erratically, Jesus would have known that he was at the moment of death, which is when he was able to say, ‘Lord, into your hands I commit my spirit.’ And then he died of cardiac arrest.” (Ibid, pp. 311-312, Kindle locations 4033-4042)

8. The spear in his side and the effusions

Now, John recorded that, after Jesus died, a Roman soldier pierced his side with a spear, and blood and what looked like water came out. (John 19:30-37) John was apparently an eyewitness to this. (John 19:26-27, 35; 21:20-24)

Dr. Metherell commented: “Even before he [Jesus] died—and this is important, too—the hypovolemic shock would have caused a sustained rapid heart rate that would have contributed to heart failure, resulting in the collection of fluid in the membrane around the heart, called a pericardial effusion, as well as around the lungs, which is called a pleural effusion.” (The Case for Christ Movie Edition, p. 312, Kindle locations 4044-4046)

Strobel asked, “Why is that significant?”

The good doctor responded: “Because of what happened when the Roman soldier came around and, being fairly certain that Jesus was dead, confirmed it by thrusting a spear into his right side. It was probably his right side; that’s not certain, but from the description, it was probably the right side, between the ribs. The spear apparently went through the right lung and into the heart, so when the spear was pulled out, some fluid—the pericardial effusion and the pleural effusion—came out. This would have the appearance of a clear fluid, like water, followed by a large volume of blood, as the eyewitness John described in his gospel.” (Ibid, pp. 312-313, Kindle locations 4047-4052)

Strobel, a trained and experienced journalist, then added his own thoughts: “John probably had no idea why he saw both blood and a clear fluid come out—certainly that’s not what an untrained person like him would have anticipated. Yet John’s description is consistent with what modern medicine would expect to have happened.” (Ibid, p. 313, Kindle locations 4053-4054)

My comment: this again reinforces the impression that the narrative was historically accurate.

9. Was Jesus surely dead?

Strobel then asked a key question: “At this juncture, what would Jesus’ condition have been?”

Dr. Metherell replied, “There was absolutely no doubt that Jesus was dead.” (Ibid, pp. 313-314, Kindle location 4063)

Since a significant number of skeptics believe the “swoon theory,” Strobel wasn’t satisfied. He asked if there was ANY possible way that Jesus could have survived the cross.

The good doctor responded: “Absolutely not. Remember that he was already in hypovolemic shock from the massive blood loss even before the crucifixion started. He couldn’t possibly have faked his death, because you can’t fake the inability to breathe for long. Besides, the spear thrust into his heart would have settled the issue once and for all. And the Romans weren’t about to risk their own death by allowing him to walk away alive.” (Ibid, p. 316, Kindle locations 4095-4097)

Dr. Metherell pointed to the historical fact that, if a Roman soldier allowed someone to be let down from the cross alive, that soldier himself would then be crucified in his place! No soldier would dare risk this dreadful consequence; they were very careful to be sure that he was dead, which is likely why one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear. This again points to the narrative’s historical accuracy.

Also, I very-much agree with Dr. Metherell about this. Specifically, since blood AND a clear fluid coming out would be considered (by most people) to be an odd, unexpected occurrence—and this is from a purely-logical perspective—it is very-unlikely that this detail (of clear fluid) would be made up or contrived. (If John were making this up, he’d just say that blood came out.) And, as the good doctor has pointed out, this detail is medically substantiated. In other words, logically, this occurred exactly as it’s written—as John (of course) firmly maintains in John 19:34-35. Therefore,if Jesus somehow wasn’t dead prior to the spear piercing his side, he was MOST-assuredly dead afterward!

10. Suppose the impossible happened

Strobel STILL wouldn’t give up! He suggested that the impossible happened—that Jesus WAS somehow let down from the cross alive! What then?

The good doctor had an answer, from the perspective of the swoon theory: “Listen, a person in that kind of pathetic condition would never have inspired his disciples to go out and proclaim that he’s the Lord of life who had triumphed over the grave. … After suffering that horrible abuse, with all the catastrophic blood loss and trauma, he would have looked so pitiful that the disciples would never have hailed him as a victorious conqueror of death; they would have felt sorry for him and tried to nurse him back to health. So it’s preposterous to think that if he had appeared to them in that awful state, his followers would have been prompted to start a worldwide movement based on the hope that someday they too would have a resurrection body like his. There’s just no way.” (Ibid, p. 317, Kindle locations 4111-4117)

11. My conclusions from the medical evidence

The swoon theory, then, is clearly false. This leaves no other reasonable alternative that can account for Jesus’ (multiply-attested) post-crucifixion appearances and for the dramatic, 180-degree turnaround in the disciples’ behavior, except that Jesus did what he claimed—supernaturally rise from the dead! The disciples would not have dramatically changed their behavior—from fearfully hiding to avoid arrest and possible execution TO being bold, public proclaimers of Jesus as the resurrected Son of God, even in the face of arrest and persecution (Acts Chapters 2 through 9)—UNLESS they were personally convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead!

Again: no one, in facing authorities who could execute him, would be willing to die for what he knew to be a lie! The disciples would have never been willing to die UNLESS they knew that Jesus HAD been resurrected!

Now, I know that some atheists will tell me to, “Hold on there! People like terrorists have been known to give their lives because they believe things that are false! Terrorists, like suicide bombers, do this frequently! So the disciples could have easily been willing to give their lives because they believed what is false—that Jesus rose from the dead. Your reasoning proves nothing!!”

On the contrary, it proves much!! The difference here is that terrorists DO NOT KNOW FOR SURE that what they believe is true, yet THE DISCIPLES DID KNOW FOR SURE THAT WHAT THEY BELIEVED WAS TRUE! How did they know? THEY SAW AND TOUCHED JESUS’ PHYSICAL BODY AFTER HE HAD DIED AND WAS NONETHELESS ALIVE! In other words, THEY WERE IN A POSITION TO KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER OR NOT WHAT THEY BELIEVED WAS TRUE OR FALSE! And because they directly risked persecution and death (Acts Chapters 2 through 9), THEY DID SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT JESUS HAD RISEN! Again, I want to emphasize: THEY WERE IN A POSITION TO KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS TRUE! Modern-day terrorists are in no such position.

I will add even more weight to this argument in my upcoming post on “The Bible’s Strongest Proof for God.” This will feature two of the three arguments (from Luke’s accuracy and Paul’s conversion) that convinced me to believe and become a Christian.

12. Refuting that atheistic interpretation of John 20:29

Now let’s return to my refutation of that atheistic interpretation of John 20:29. Remember that it was based on Jesus’ statement, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” This particular atheistic interpretation is that, although Thomas needed empirical or evidential proof that Jesus had risen, Jesus himself commended those who would believe on the basis of no proof at all; hence, some atheists assume that Jesus was encouraging people to exerciser blind faith.

Yet, when it’s interpreted in its proper context, Jesus’ statement obviously does not encourage people in this way. Remember that Thomas had been already exposed to the evidence of the other disciples’ eyewitness testimonies, which he refused to believe. (John 20:19-25) Therefore, eyewitness testimony as a basis for belief was not excluded by Jesus when he said, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Thomas, up to that point, had not seen Jesus personally, but had heard the testimonies of the other disciples who had seen him.

Also, many other verses tell us that Jesus knew that people would believe on the basis of the disciples’ testimonies. (Matthew 28:19-20; Luke 24:46-48; John 15:26-27; Acts 1:8) That is, Jesus knew that people would believe on the basis of eyewitness evidence, not in the absence of all evidence! And from Matthew 26:24, 52-54, Mark 9:12, Luke 24:25-27, 46, and John 17:12, we infer that he knew that some people would likely believe on the basis of Scripture verses about him, such as Isaiah 52:13–53:12 and Psalm 22:1-18.

Therefore, Jesus’ statement (in John 20:29) doesn’t exclude or minimize the possibility of people believing because of eyewitness testimony or because of Scripture. (We have this today—Old Testament Scripture and the eyewitness testimonies in the New Testament, along with Jesus’ sayings and the writings of the early Christians.)

It’s just that those who believe without having the direct, visual proof (that Thomas had) are, apparently, more blessed or “happy, spiritually secure, and favored by God.” (This phrase, from The Amplified Bible in John 20:29, is a rendering of the meaning of “blessed” by New Testament scholars.)

Some readers may be interested in the factors supporting the veracity or truthfulness of the disciples’ testimony to Thomas; these factors were:

• The disciples’ devout upbringing in first-century Judaism
• Their resultant respect and reverence for God’s truth
• Their strong belief that Jesus was the Messiah (this is evident in Acts Chapters 2 through 9)
• And their resultant sense of responsibility to tell the truth about him, not to lie.

13. Addendum

These are the reasons why Jesus did NOT accept or encourage blind faith in John 20, as some atheists have supposed. On the contrary, the Scripture verses I cited at the beginning of this post clearly establish that, from a biblical perspective, faith is often based on reason. (Exodus 4:1-5; 14:26-31; 1Kings 18:36-39; Psalm 19:1-2; Mark 2:5-12; John 2:1-11, 23; 10:37-38; 14:11; 20:24-31; Acts 1:3; 2:22-41; 3:11—4:4; 8:4-13, 26-38; 9:1-22, 32-42; 14:15-17; 17:1-4, 10-12, 22-34; 22:1-16; 26:9-20; Romans 1:19-20; 1Peter 3:15)

In the next post—part 2—we will consider the following:

• How the very next verses in John 20 (vv. 30-31) point to faith as reason and evidence-based
• Why there was an insufficient amount of time (between the Crucifixion and the disciples’ evident belief in the Resurrection, recorded in the early creed of 1Corinthians 15:3-7) to support the skeptical “legend hypothesis”
• Why Jesus’ miraculous acts can be directly inferred from the Jewish Talmud (since, historically, he performed miraculous healings—at a bare minimum—a Resurrection is at least possible)
• Why miracles do NOT violate the laws of nature (as some atheists claim)
• My best logical argument for the existence of miracles
• Alternate, skeptical theories to the Resurrection and why they fail
• And a substantive logical argument supporting the Resurrection.

14. Recommended book

The Case for Christ Movie Edition: Solving the Biggest Mystery of All Time by Lee Strobel (Zondervan, 1998, 2016, 2017). My comments: this is the latest edition of Lee’s best-known book describing his investigation into the main evidences for Jesus. It’s a “movie edition” because (in the “Letter to the Reader” and in the “Interview” appendix) it discusses the Pure Flix 113-minute movie (with the title The Case for Christ) released in 1,174 theaters in 2017. As I mentioned earlier, Lee Strobel is a journalist, a former atheist, and a nationally-known author. He holds a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School and has been interviewed numerous times on national television, including CNN, ABC’s 20/20, and Fox News. In each chapter of this book, Strobel records an interview with a highly respected scholar—Craig Blomberg, Bruce Metzger, Edwin Yamauchi, John McRay, Gregory Boyd, Ben Witherington, Gary Collins, D. A. Carson, Louis Lapides, Alexander Metherell, William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, and J. P. Moreland. The content of these interviews demonstrates that the historical evidences for Jesus are cogent and compelling. Topics include:

• Do the New Testament Gospels provide reliable descriptions of the historical Jesus?
• Were these Gospels reliably preserved through the centuries of manuscript copying?
• Is there credible evidence for Jesus outside of the New Testament?
• Do archeological discoveries confirm or contradict these Gospels?
• Is the Jesus of history the same as the Jesus of faith?
• Was Jesus really convinced that he was the Son of God?
• Was Jesus crazy when he claimed to be the Son of God?
• Did Jesus fulfill the attributes of God?
• Did Jesus—and Jesus alone—match the identity of the Messiah?
• Was Jesus’ death a sham and his Resurrection a hoax?
• The medical reasons why Jesus died on the cross and why the “swoon theory” is not credible
• Was Jesus’ body really absent from his tomb?
• Was Jesus seen alive after his death on the cross?
• Are there any supporting facts that point to the Resurrection?
• What does the evidence establish—and what does it mean today?

In addition, if we believe a story told to Lee Strobel, this book appears to have God’s endorsement! Strobel explained, “I remember getting a letter shortly after the book came out from an atheist who had gone into a bookstore to buy an astronomy magazine. He settled onto a bench to look at it and realized he had sat on something—it was a copy of The Case for Christ. He thumbed through it, said to himself, ‘I don’t believe this stuff,’ and tossed it aside. But he said there was like an inner voice that told him he should read it—so he bought the book, read it, and came to faith in Christ!” (The Case for Christ Movie Edition, in the section “An interview with Lee Strobel,” p. 352, Kindle locations 5525-5528)

15. Relevant videos

• The Case for Christ documentary (not the 2017 movie) with journalist Lee Strobel and scholars who are recognized authorities on Jesus of Nazareth
• Dr. Craig: are there logical reasons to believe that God exists?
• Animated video: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part One by Reasonable Faith
• Animated video: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Part Two by Reasonable Faith
• Six animated videos on the Resurrection of Jesus by Inspiring Philosophy
• Top reasons to believe in the Resurrection by Greg Koukl
• Good reasons to believe in the Resurrection of Jesus, part 1, by J. Warner Wallace
• Good reasons to believe in the Resurrection of Jesus, part 2, by J. Warner Wallace
• Dr. William Lane Craig at Yale University, speaking on the Resurrection
• Atheism vs. Christianity: Which Way Does the Evidence Point? A Debate between William Lane Craig and Frank Zindler

16. Relevant articles

• A Dozen Evidences for the Resurrection of Jesus by Kenneth Samples
• Five Reasons to Believe in the Resurrection by Kenneth Samples
• Resource Highlight: Jesus’ Death and Resurrection by Kenneth Samples

17. Recommended websites

• Reasons To Believe’s YouTube Channel
• Reasonable Faith with Dr. William Lane Craig (articles, videos, and podcasts on apologetics, theology, and philosophy)
• Just Thinking with Ravi Zacharias and his team of speakers (audio podcasts on apologetics)
• Reasons To Believe, with Dr. Hugh Ross and his team of scholars (videos and blogs of scientists pertaining to apologetics and science/faith issues)
• Animated videos from Reasonable Faith (excellent animated or partly-animated videos)
• Inspiring Philosophy: YouTube Channel (excellent animated or partly-animated videos)
• Short videos by Dr. Craig
• Longer videos by Dr. Craig
• Video podcasts by Dr. Craig
• Lecture videos by Dr. Craig
• Ravi Zacharias International Ministries YouTube Channel
• Illustra Media’s YouTube Channel
• The John 10:10 Project: videos
• Discovery Science News YouTube Channel
• Dr. Stephen Meyer’s YouTube Channel