Geisler adversus Geisler

It’s essential!

Indeed, contrary to Licona's claim that this Matthew 27 issue "was outside the primary thesis of the book," for the resurrection of these saints was directly connected to the resurrection of Christ and listed as a result of it (see Matthew 27:50-53).  So, the two events are interwoven.  Hence, to deny the literal historical nature of the saints who were resurrected as a result of Christ's resurrection, is also to deny the literal historical nature of the cause of their resurrection, namely, Christ's resurrection itself.

http://www.normangeisler.net/public_html/responseMLIII.html

No, it’s not essential

Why should the enemies of Christians focus on this relatively minor byproduct of Christ's resurrection when the major issue was whether Christ had risen bodily from the grave. Neither did they concentrate on attacking the resurrection (resuscitation) of Lazarus or others who came back from the dead by the hands of Jesus and the apostles. After all, the essential truth of Christianity did not rest on these resurrections, as it did on the resurrection of Christ (1 Cor. 15:12-19).

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1JRVDOPM7776Y/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0830827196&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=