The Historian, the Christian Apologist and the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus: A Re-evaluation

<jats:p>Christian apologists generally insist on the historicity of Jesus’ bodily resurrection because the biblical evidence supports it. However, history relies upon the use of widely-accepted historical methods which can be applied to all past historical events, from which biblical history is not exempt. Apologists often introduce God as a _deus ex machina_ to override the necessity of applying secular historical methods to claims for the miraculous, including the resurrection of Jesus. In the present paper I deploy two well-respected methods – historical analogy and inference to the best explanation – to argue that biblical history, no less than any other, must adhere to such approaches if it is to be worthy of the name. I also discuss the place of statistical inference in historical enquiry and argue that its application to the historicity of alleged events like the resurrection is of limited value. Potentially, these events are open to historical enquiry if the aim is to provide a natural explanation. The claim that they were engineered by God, however, is beyond the scope of the historian.</jats:p>