I do not intend to solve the debate here. For those who are interested in this topic please see the book Five Views on Apologetics.
When I say "Jesus and the Apostles were Evidentialists" I am using the term evidentialist (or evidentialism) in a much broader sense to mean "presenting evidence or appealing to facts in order to demonstrate the truthfulness of the Christian faith." Apologists from various methodologies (including the classical, evidentialist, and cumulative case approaches) can agree on the biblical nature and effectiveness of this broader definition.
Reading through the New Testament it is hard to deny the fact that both Jesus and the apostles backed up their claims by appeals to facts and evidence. In other words, they were evidentialists.
As you read the verses below pay particular attention to how often reference is made to the resurrection of Christ, especially in the book of Acts. This really shouldn't be surprising. After all, it was Jesus Himself who said,
An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (Matt. 12:39-40).
In other words, the Resurrection is the sign given to mankind as evidence for the truthfulness of the Christian faith.
