The Legends Theory Fails to Hold Up Against the Resurrection of Jesus

If I am brutally honest with myself, I would have to admit the strongest case against Christianity is the "legends theory" which simply states the Apostles that spent 3 years with Jesus never claimed to have seen Jesus risen from the dead even to their deaths as martyrs (though people don't willingly die for what they know is a lie). This may appear to be a way out for skeptics. The problems with legends theory though prove it implausible.

1. The resurrection of Jesus can be traced to the real experiences of the original Apostles and in setting up the first churches. The original story was so early in creeds and oral tradition that it could not have been embellished. The apostles Jesus selected were teaching the miraculous from the beginning. Or as G. Habermas puts it: "If embellishment added details over time so the ending of the story became the resurrection of Jesus, then the original story told by the disciples most likely would not have included Jesus' resurrection. In short, the evidence for the disciples contradicts the embellishment explanation." The original story was so early it could not have been embellished about the resurrection.

2. Paul came to Christ through an experience in which he thoughts he encountered the risen Jesus. We need reasons for Paul's conversion. The only thing that could convert Paul from unbelief is seeing Jesus, for Paul was highly regarded and had high standing as a Pharisee. He was very upwardly mobile.

3. The same applies to James, Jesus' brother, with respect to his conversion from unbelief. Only seeing Jesus alive from the dead could convince him.

4. Paul said in 1 Cor. 15, Gal. 1 & 2 he spent 15 days with Peter, and time with James. Some years later he spent time again with Peter and James, and also John. It's safe to say they talked about more than just the weather.

5. We have 12 different group settings recording the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles, some of which Paul listed in 1 Cor. 15 he received from the original Apostles. Group hallucinations are impossible.

6. Creeds for the saving gospel message (the good news) and oral tradition given in, for example, 1 Cor. 15 take us all the way back to the cross of Christ 33 AD when they were first preached.

7. The mere mentioning of embellishment doesn't make it true. Not all ancient accounts are necessarily legendary.

8. Even if some legend surrounding the resurrection of Jesus have crept into the text that doesn't negate the resurrection.

9. One must ask could a better proof for the resurrection of Jesus be put forth, and I say there is none better than what the 66 books of the Bible provide, because I can think of no better proof. Nobody I know has come up with a better hypothetical proof. So it stand on its own merit.

10. If no better proof exists than what we have in the 45 sources for Jesus within 150 years of His death, 17 of which are non-Christian sources, and there are more sources for Jesus within 150 years of His death than for any 10 figures from antiquity combined, then the reason why someone wouldn't give their live to Christ is not for lack of evidence, but because they prefer to remain eternally separated from God, thus, going to Hell. Jesus said they are "condemned already" (John 3.18) and "without excuse" (Rom. 1.20).

I don't know how to disprove this proof so it must be true.