Did Jesus really rise from the dead, or is it just myth? Who saw him, and can we believe them? What convinced them he was alive? Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent, looks at the case for and against, and at what it all means anyway

Thomas was "the man". Maybe not for all seasons, but most certainly for these sceptical times when so many prefer to live with the unanswerable question rather than the questionable answer. He just would not believe Jesus had risen from the dead. "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it," he told his fellow apostles. Good old Thomas. He should be the patron saint of reporters.

Then in John's gospel, the only one which recounts the Thomas story, Jesus obliged. Suddenly. Shockingly.

As John told it: "A week later, his disciples were in the house again and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said: 'Peace be with you.' Then he said to Thomas: 'Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.' "

Well, that was some put-down. Thomas had little choice. So, probably sheepishly, he did as bid and said: "My Lord and My God." To which Jesus replied, pointedly: "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." Which was all very well for him.

And Thomas. And the Apostles.

And the 500 others who were supposed to have seen Jesus after the "Resurrection". And his brother, James, to whom he also appeared. And St Paul himself, whom he symbolically upended in that most dramatic conversion on the road to Damascus.

Paul tells us all about the above. But he does not mention the women. Quelle surprise?

In what is believed to be the first written account of the Resurrection, preceding all four gospels, Paul, in his first letter to the Corinthians (chapter 15) mentions all the above, but not one of the women who we are told saw the risen Jesus first. Good old Paul, consistent as ever where women were concerned.

But then how could he, the first of the Jesus spin doctors, when - horror of horrors - the first of these women was Mary Magdalene? And with her reputation. According to John's gospel, she was the only one in the garden near the tomb that morning. Not very cleverly, she mistook Jesus for the gardener. O Lord. Then realised her mistake. She told the others.

Luke places Mary the mother of James (the virgin Mary?), Joanna, Mary Magdalene and "the others" at the scene. Mark says it was Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome, while a less exacting Matthew is satisfied with "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary" as the first witnesses. All four gospels place Mary Magdalene at the first appearance of Jesus after the Resurrection.

Yet even the story of doubting Thomas carries within it some of the seeds which have puzzled believers about the Resurrection down the ages. For instance, if Jesus was such an insubstantial being as to be able to appear in a room even though its doors were locked, how was it possible for Thomas to feel his wounded flesh, as requested. If there was but airy nothing, what did Thomas feel?

But also, why is it that, according to Jesus, the credulous - those who believed what they did not see, and so denied their natural intelligence - are more blessed than those who preferred to stand by their God-given intelligence?

And is it significant that this comment, attributed to Jesus, appears only in the last gospel, the one written maybe two generations after the crucifixion? Would the fact that many who claimed to have seen the risen Jesus had by then died have anything to do with it? When it was possibly becoming more difficult to convince a younger generation that such a thing had indeed happened?

But let's look at this objectively. If it had been reported that Jesus was alive and well and living in Emmaus/Galilee/Jerusalem, it is difficult to believe this would not have excited great curiosity among the population at large, including the Romans, the High Priests. Such an event would surely have had an impact that would have sent reaction to the topmost end of an equivalent Richter scale.

But there were only 500 witnesses. Plus the women/men, the Apostles, James, and Paul? A paltry lot. And whereas the Roman historian, Tacitus, the Greek satirist, Lucian, the Jewish historian, Josephus, and the Jewish Talmud all record the death of Jesus, who records his Resurrection?

Well . . . Josephus for one. He lived from 37-100AD (from just after the crucifixion) and wrote of Jesus: "At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders."

Note the distancing "they reported" and the "he was perhaps the Messiah". Josephus doesn't sound terribly convinced.

Case for the Resurrection

"Facts" (from the openly biased four gospel accounts and Paul's letter):

• The tomb was empty

• The large stone blocking it had been moved aside, despite the presence of a Roman guard

• The Roman guard had fled (for which it is believed the penalty could have been execution)

• The grave-clothes remained in the tomb (a small point, but would robbers, i.e. the disciples, have stripped the body?)

• Christ appeared alive on several occasions afterwards and to more than 500 people

• The lives of the dispersed motley crew that were the Apostles after the death of Jesus were suddenly transformed, quite literally, beyond belief

The Case Against

Opposing the entire notion of Jesus's Resurrection are the following possibilities:

• The swoon theory, which suggests Jesus didn't die on the cross but passed out - pretty difficult to sustain this, as it doesn't explain how he could have been unconscious for three days and still have the strength to move the stone and get past the guard)

• The stolen body theory, which suggests the apostles stole the body

• That it was all hallucination or illusion on the part of Jesus's followers, traumatised by his death

• That the Resurrection is but a belief inferred by Christians from such events as the empty tomb

• The "wrong tomb" theory, which proposes that the women/men made a mistake