AppReasons

WHY STUDY CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS?

Why Study Christian Apologetics?

First, what is Christian apologetics? The word itself is derived from the Greek work ‘apologia’ that means ‘a defense’. It certainly does not mean to apologize for Christianity and the English word similarity is unfortunate. So apologetics can be used to either defend or promote Christianity, but there is more.

Do faith and reason mix? How do I know Christianity is true? Well, it turns out that you can’t separate believing from reasoning and we need reason in order to have faith. Reason comes before faith in that you need to understand who or what you’re putting your faith in. We’ve got to use our minds to even be able to read the words in our Bibles, understand the gospel, and believe it is true.

We should study apologetics for several very good reasons. First, it is because the Bible commands us to several times. One of the clearest statements is in 1 Peter 3:15; “But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.” This verse is directed to believers – those who worship and serve Jesus as their Lord. There are two clear instructions for believers: we should be prepared to give reasons for our faith in Jesus, and we should do so with gentleness and respect.

Very clearly we are commanded to use our minds when we worship! For example, in Matthew 22:37-38 Jesus said: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment.” Worshipping with our minds is central to Christianity.

We see a good example of apologetics in action in Acts 17:2-3 – “And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, ‘This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.’ Paul made several references to the importance of using our minds, for example: Romans 14:5 and 1 Corinthians 14:20.

Why Defend the Faith? We should defend the faith because from the very beginning with Jesus; this was done using apologetic tools.

  • Jesus: gave people reasons to believe
  • Jude: “contend for the faith”
  • Luke: history helped establish truth
  • Peter: “be ready to give an answer”
  • Paul: persuaded Jews and Greeks

We are not called to naively trust everything that might be taught in our world today, even if some Christian teacher is the source! We are told to “test” teachings and spirits: see for example 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21 and 1 John 4:1. We’re expected to be critical, skeptical, and thoughtful. Biblical faith is not a blind faith and God wants us to know what we believe and why we believe it.

The second reason is that it is helpful in maintaining and growing our own personal faith. The cumulative case for the truth of Christianity is overwhelmingly powerful.

Third, a working knowledge of apologetics makes us better witnesses for Christ. Some unbelievers have an intellectual barrier to Christianity. People deserve to hear and understand the case for Christianity. When they raise intellectual objections, they should receive concrete, verifiable answers that support the authenticity of Christianity. When it comes to convincing non-Christians about the truth of Christianity, apologetics aims at getting to the heart through the mind. Generally, we can’t believe what we know to be untrue, and we can’t love what we believe to be unreal. Arguments may not bring a person to faith, but they can certainly keep a person away from faith.

Fourth, learning more about some of the things God has done makes us even more appreciative of the great God we worship. His majesty is on display for us to admire, appreciate, and worship. God can and does use apologetics to help believers whose faith is wavering and to ease the suffering caused by doubt. Apologetics can be especially reassuring to new believers seeking to rationally justify their step of faith. It is a wonderful and joyful experience to discover that one’s faith is firmly grounded on objective truths that are confirmed by sensible, verifiable evidence.

Additional materials:
Lending library books available at Baptist Campus Ministries:
Gravity, True for You But Not For Me
I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist
Cold Case Christianity

Other helpful resources:

Should Christians be Anti-Intellectual? (pdf to download)
http://knowwhatyoubelieve.com/believe/evidence/apologetics_introduction.htm
http://carm.org/eight-reasons-why-we-need-apologetics
http://www.bethinking.org/apologetics/what-is-apologetics-and-why-is-it-important

CAN I TRUST MY BIBLE? OLD TESTAMENT CANON FORMATION

How the Old Testament Canon Was Formed[1]

The documents that comprise the Old Testament were written by many different people over a period of approximately fifteen hundred years. Originally, the material circulated in independent units as scrolls. The present book-form (known as a codex) did not exist until after A.D. 100.

Criteria for Inclusion

Both objective and subjective criteria were part of the process of canonization. Some or all of the following considerations led to the acceptance of the works into the Canon:

  1. The document could be attributed to a writer who lived before 400 B.C.

Several sources written before or during the inter-biblical period (ca: 400-4 B.C.) present a belief that the time when direct prophecy was being heard had ceased. William Barclay notes, “It was a fixed Jewish belief that with Malachi, midway through the fifth century B.C., the voice of prophecy was silenced and never spoken again.” (Barclay, The Making of the Bible, 25).

In order for a document to be included in the Jewish category of inspired writings, it had to be associated with the period when people were still receiving messages from God. After the fourth century B.C., the common belief that the prophetic age was over created a natural skepticism toward materials known to have been written after that date.

  1. The document received wide acceptance throughout the Jewish community.

The fact that the material was transmitted and reused in an oral age when written messages were not the norm gave the surviving material added credibility. “The books of the Old Testament took their place as sacred Scripture, not because of the ‘fiat’ or decision of any council or committee of the Church.

  1. The documents were originally written in Hebrew. While certain parts of the Old Testament include influences from Aramaic, the bulk was written in Hebrew.

  1. The writing carried an authoritative message. Often this quality was related directly to an internal claim such as, “thus sayeth the Lord”; yet, even when explicit statements of authority were not made, the acceptable book presented a dynamic message capable of transforming lives.

Three Jewish Divisions of Scripture

Many biblical scholars have used the three Jewish divisions or classifications of Scripture as evidence that the various parts of the Old Testament came to Canonical status in stages. One of the earliest statements of these three divisions and their contents was in a baraitha (a tradition from the period A.D. 70-200) quoted in the Babylonian Talmud (F. F. Bruce, 30). This recognized the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible, which correspond to the 39 books of the Protestant Old Testament. The higher number in the latter results from counting the 12 minor prophets separately, and dividing Samuel, Kings, Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah into two each.

While the Jewish classification included Law or Torah (the preferred Jewish designation of the first five books, a term meaning “instruction”), Prophets (the former prophets included Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings while the latter prophets included Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and twelve minor prophets), and the writings (for example the Psalms, Proverbs and Job), the two final classifications were an amplification of the first. The Law was the centerpiece of Jewish Scriptural authority. Many of the New Testament references to the Jewish scriptures are to “the Law” or “the Law and the Prophets”. However, in Luke 24:44 Jesus referred to “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms”, indicating that the three divisions were in existence at that time.

The Hebrew canon at the time of Christ was the same as today’s Protestant Old Testament. These are the scriptures that Jesus referred to when He said: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished (Matthew 5:17-18).

Writing around 90 A.D., the Jewish historian Josephus made a very important statement concerning Jewish Scripture: “From Artaxerxes until our time everything has been recorded but has not been deemed worthy of like credit with what preceded, because the exact succession of the prophets ceased.

If the Artaxerxes to which Josephus referred can be identified as the same ruler mentioned in Nehemiah 2:1, Josephus’ statement would reinforce the idea that the prophetic message had disappeared by 400 B.C.

Theories of Inspiration

A consideration of Canon formation leads to the issue of inspiration. There are three basic views that have been used to characterize the inspiration of the Bible.

  1. Some people mean by inspiration of Scripture that the Bible is inspired like any other great piece of literature. In the sense that it inspires, it is inspired. This would be natural inspiration in contrast to supernatural inspiration.

  1. The mechanical dictation theory suggests that God utilized humanity as the “keyboard” or mechanism by which He produced the message.

  1. A third view emphasized that God inspired humans. The recorded message reveals divine authority and human transmission. The divine authority insures inspiration that was accommodated to the human agencies whose personalities and backgrounds are reflected in the message.

Additional resources:

“How can I trust that the Bible is reliable?” 8-Minute Video from the White Horse Inn
http://is.gd/dlB0hM
What is the difference between the Old Testament vs. New Testament?
http://is.gd/5T2d6O
F. Bruce The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1988)
http://www.gotquestions.org/canon-of-Scripture.html
[1]http://is.gd/NojpGF(This article was adapted from this more detailed article. You may want to read the entire article.)

CAN I TRUST MY BIBLE? OLD TESTAMENT CHANGE OVER TIME?

Did the Old Testament Change Over Time?

In Cold Case Christianity, J. Warner Wallace discusses the careful transmission of Biblical texts. A number of his cold case investigations began with a careful examination of the original police reports and records. He got these documents from the police Records Division, where they were carefully collected and maintained for many years. Careful protocols were established to guarantee the preservation of these documents. In one particular case, he had the chance to test this preservation process. After retrieving a report from Records, he called the original detective to ask a series of questions. This particular detective was conscientious enough to keep copies of his reports from his unsolved cases. He brought his copy with him for their interview. His copy from Records was exactly the same as the detective’s. The Records Division had done its job, maintaining an accurate and reliable copy of the original documents for over 30 years.

As it turns out, we can examine the competency of the ancient Jewish “Records Division” and test the ability of ancient scribes to accurately copy (and maintain) the Old Testament with a similar comparison. It’s clear the Jewish people guarded Scripture with extreme care and precision. The Old Testament Scriptures were revered and protected, largely because early believers considered them to be the Holy Word of God. The Masoretic tradition gives us a glimpse into the obsessive care Jewish scribes historically took with their sacred texts. Scribes known as the Masoretes (a group of Jewish copyists living and working primarily in Tiberias and Jerusalem) took over the precise job of copying the ancient Scripture and transmitting it for later generations.

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Qumran confirms their amazing ability. In 1947, a Bedouin herdsman found some unusual clay jars in caves near the valley of the Dead Sea. The jars contained a number of scrolls revealing the religious beliefs of monastic farmers who lived in the valley from 150 BC to AD 70. When this group saw the Romans invade the region, they apparently put their cherished scrolls in jars and hid them in the caves.

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain fragments of almost every book in the Old Testament, and most importantly, a complete copy of the book of Isaiah. This scroll was dated to approximately 100 BC; it was incredibly important to historians and textual experts because it was approximately one thousand years older than any existing Masoretic copy of Isaiah. The Dead Sea Scroll version of Isaiah allowed scholars to compare the text over this period of time to see if copyists had been conscientious. Scholars were amazed by what they discovered.

According to Gleason Archer (author of A Survey of Old Testament Introduction), a comparison of the Qumran manuscripts of Isaiah “proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text.” Some of the 5 percent differences were simply a matter of spelling (like you might experience when using the word favor instead of favour). Some were grammatical differences (like the presence of the word “and” to connect two ideas or objects within a sentence). Finally, some were the addition of a word for the sake of clarity (like the addition of the Hebrew word for “light” to the end of verse 53:11, following “they shall see”). None of these grammatical variations changed the meaning of the text in any way.

What compelled the ancient scribes to treat these documents with such precision and meticulous care? It was clearly their belief the documents themselves were sacred and given to them by God. The ancient Jewish scribes didn’t have access to photocopiers, microfiche, or digital imaging like modern police-department Records Divisions do, but they understood the importance of Divine record keeping, and they used the first-century equivalent in technology (the meticulous tradition of their Masoretes) to carefully guarantee the accuracy of the texts.

  1. Warner Wallace is a Cold-Case Detective, a Christian Case Maker, and the author of Cold-Case Christianity.

To this work by Jim Wallace we would add just one thing. Jesus himself attested to the veracity of the Old Testament: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17-19)

Other Resources:
Gleason L. Archer A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1994)
Old Testament transmission
coldcasechristianity.com-Establishing_the_Reliability_of_the_Old_Testament_A_Timely_Test_of_Transmission

 

 

More…

CAN I TRUST MY BIBLE? NEW TESTAMENT CANON FORMATION

How the New Testament Canon Was Formed[1]

The term “canon” is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process conducted by early church leaders and scholars. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was subsequently a matter of God’s leading the early church to discover which books should be included in the Bible.

The books of the New Testament stand out as distinctive because they are the earliest Christian writings we possess and thus bring us the closest to the historical Jesus and to the earliest church.   If we want to find out what authentic Christianity was really like, then we should rely on the writings that are the nearest to that time period. This is particularly evident when it comes to the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  These are the only gospel accounts that derive from the first century.

Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18 quotes both Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16;1 Thessalonians 5:27).

All of the New Testament books were cited, alluded to or named by church fathers in the first three centuries AD. For example, Clement of Rome cited, alluded to or named at least ten New Testament books (c. A.D. 95-97). Ignatius of Antioch cited or alluded to six books (c. A.D. 110). Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle, quoted or alluded to 18 books (c. A.D. 110-150). Later, Irenaeus, who as a young boy had heard Polycarp speak, named as authentic 17 books and cited or alluded to 6 more (c. A.D. 130-202). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235).

The New Testament books subject to the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John and Revelation. It is important that we be reminded of such disputes and debates lest we conceive of the history of the canon in an overly sanitized fashion.

However, we should not overestimate the extent of these disputes.  Origen, for example, simply tells us that these books were disputed by some. But, in the case of 2 Peter, Origen is quite clear that he himself accepts it.  Thus, there are no reasons to think that most Christians during this time period rejected these books.  On the contrary, it seems that church fathers like Origen were simply acknowledging the minority report. Generally, it was the authorship of these books that was in dispute.

The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in A.D. 170. The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books with the exception of Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter and possibly 3 John. This means that at a remarkably early point (end of the second century), the central core of the New Testament canon was already established and in place.

The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit:
1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle?
2) Is the book being accepted by the body of Christ at large?
3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching?
4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect the work of the Holy Spirit?

Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, issued the earliest known list containing the 27 books of today’s New Testament in A.D. 367.

Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God’s imparting to His followers what He had already decided. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, and despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Additional Resources: 

“How can I trust that the Bible is reliable?” 8-Minute Video from the White Horse Inn (note: This is from White Horse Inn and they have moved their link several times…please report any broken links…Thanks!)
http://is.gd/dlB0hM
What is the difference between the Old Testament vs. New Testament?
http://is.gd/5T2d6O
The cumulative case for the reliability of the Gospels
http://is.gd/36tKRC
Bible canon references:
“How and when was the canon of the Bible put together?”
http://is.gd/i9nGMa
Ten Basic Facts About the NT Canon that Every Christian Should Memorize
http://is.gd/tEyYJj
Constantine Didn’t Influence the Canon
http://is.gd/FiEGaR
10 Misconceptions About the NT Canon
http://is.gd/oJmIvD

Books:
F. F. Bruce The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1988)
Michael J. Kruger The Question of Canon: Challenging the Status Quo in the New Testament Debate (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2013)
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody, 1986)
[1] This article was adapted from: http://biblehub.com/library/barrows/companion_to_the_bible/chapter_xxvii_formation_and_history.htm’
It might benefit you to read the entire article.

CAN I TRUST MY BIBLE? NEW TESTAMENT CHANGE OVER TIME?

 

Did the New Testament Change Over Time?

Often the charge is made that the New Testament was altered, deliberately or not, over the last 2000 years. How do we know the content of these books has not changed?

Despite critics’ innuendoes, the evidence is incredibly robust these books are as originally written. First, there is just the sheer number of copies available, now over 5795 Greek copies (the original language they were written in). It is because there exist so many copies that textual critics can identify variants (and a very few scribal additions) within the text. Actually, there is even more supportive evidence in the form of the early church fathers’ writings that liberally quoted from the earliest copies and perhaps the original documents.

Unfortunately, we no longer have the original copies (autographs) of the New Testament books. Some critics say that we, therefore, cannot know what was written. While it is true we do not have the original writings, it is not true that we do not know the text is reliable. These documents simply wore out as they were actively passed from church to church. It is estimated that would have lasted perhaps 100-150 years. However, churches would typically make a copy of the documents that were sent to them.

There are many slight variations amongst the 5795 Greek manuscripts mentioned earlier. Geisler and Nix report the number of variants to be around 200,000. It should be recognized that if, for example, there is a spelling error in 2500 copies, that counts as ‘2500’ variants. The overwhelming majority of the variants have no bearing on our ability to reconstruct the original content of the New Testament.

Here are some of the reasons for variants:

  1. Confusion of common letters

  2. Substitution of similar-sounding words

  3. The omission of letter or word

  4. Letters/words written twice

  5. Incorrect word division

  6. Scribe attempts to clean up spelling or grammar

  7. Scribe attempts to harmonize passage or remove difficulties

Most importantly, no variant has any Christian doctrinal significance.

Reconstructing the original text is not a real problem as we have third-generation copies and many later reproductions. There also exists a solid chain of custody for these books (see graphic below) in the form of the early Church Fathers’ prolific writings. Again, because there are so many copies, errors can be identified and are tagged in many of today’s bibles.

The second aspect of our assurance the gospels are as written is the precise nature of the ‘chain of custody’ regarding this information. Scholars have been able to trace back the historical path these books took from earliest writing to the formation of the New Testament canon (please see the second graphic.)

There is one more very key point to be made. According to Gary Habermas (the world’s foremost authority on the resurrection of Jesus), there has never been a time in the history of Christianity that the resurrection was not claimed to have happened.

From the Bible itself, Dr. Habermas draws the timeline of the first Christian creed’s development (1 Corinthians 15: 3-7, please read this passage) to within one year of Christ’s resurrection! Obviously, people who claim the late development of Christ’s divinity need to know about this.

 

Other Resources: 

Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody, 1986)
Jonathan Morrow Questioning the Bible: 11 Major Challenges to the Bible’s Authority (Chicago: Moody, 2014)

Book review of the above book and other interesting material:
http://is.gd/ABZwFc
Testing the Gospels from John to Hippolytus
http://is.gd/aBp3xa
Why the ancient Christian record about Jesus is the most reliable:
http://is.gd/vTjuOO
What were the disciples saying about Jesus prior to writing the Gospels?
http://is.gd/PMdLYH
Is the Message of the New Testament Lost?
http://is.gd/ycyx3U

 

 

 

THE RESURRECTION – WHAT OF THE ‘OTHER’ THEORIES?

From the resurrection itself, there were alternate theories put forth attempting to deny this historical event. First, the Jews put forth the theory that Jesus’ disciples came at night and stole the body (Matthew 28:11-15). Obviously if the guard was asleep, they would have not known who ‘stole the body’.

Over the centuries other theories have been put forth to explain the empty tomb. There are specific criteria that historians use in evaluating and assessing competing hypotheses of things that occurred in the past. They are:

  1. Explanatory scope
    It (the hypothesis) will explain more of the evidence.
  2. Explanatory power
    It will make the evidence more probable.
  3. Plausibility
    It will fit better with true background beliefs
  4. Less ad hoc
     It will be less contrived, it will require fewer new beliefs
  5. Compatibility with accepted beliefs
    It will be disconfirmed by fewer accepted beliefs.
  6. Outstrips rival hypothesis
    The best explanation will meet conditions 1-5 so much better than the others that there is little chance one of the competing hypotheses being true.

Once you have the list of facts, you need to explain why the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead is the best explanation for the facts. This is done by showing that the hypothesis is consistent with all of the available data.

An atheist is likely to jump in at this point with an alternative explanation of the facts. Their explanations will not involve any miracles – instead, they try to account for the facts by proposing a naturalistic hypothesis. Here is a list of a few together with my defense against them.

  1. Jesus wasn’t really dead
    – crucifixion is lethal and you can’t fake being dead
    – this doesn’t explain the early belief in the resurrection, since
    a half-dead Jesus would not inspire a belief in the resurrection
  2. Jesus’ disciples moved the body and lied about it
    – it doesn’t explain the appearance to Paul, etc.
    – it doesn’t explain why the early church was willing to be persecuted
  3. The Jews moved the body and lied about it
    – they had no interest in helping a rival sect
    – it doesn’t explain the appearance to Paul, etc.
  4. The Romans moved the body and lied about it
    – they had no interest in helping a trouble-making sect
    – it doesn’t explain the appearance to Paul, etc.
  5. Somebody else moved the body
    – it doesn’t explain the appearance to Paul, etc.
    – there is no evidence to support the claim
  6. The early church hallucinated the appearances
    – group hallucinations are impossible
    – it doesn’t explain the empty tomb
    – it doesn’t explain the theological mutations about “resurrection”, since seeing a ghost does not imply a bodily resurrection.

Note that the above is just a superficial treatment of the problems with alternative explanations; there is considerable more detail available.

There is one more area we should explore. Dr. Gary Habermas (Liberty University) is generally regarded to be the world’s foremost authority on the resurrection. He makes his arguments from just 5 or the twelve generally believed facts accepted by most scholars. Here are those items:

  1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
  2. He was buried.
  3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.
  4. The tomb of Jesus was empty.
  5. The disciples had experiences that they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus.
  6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
  7. The resurrection was the central message.
  8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.
  9. The Church was born and grew.
  10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.
  11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus.
  12. Paul was converted to the faith.

The ‘minimal facts’ approach considers only data that meet tow criteria:
The data are strongly evidenced.

  1. The data are granted by virtually all scholars on the subject, even including the skeptical ones.

Dr. Habermas offers a quintet of facts (4+1) and here they are:

  1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
  2. The disciples had experiences that they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).
  3. Paul was suddenly converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).
  4. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).
  5. The tomb of Jesus was empty (the most contested).

This last fact is the +1 and does not rise to the standard of the first four as ‘only’ 75% of the scholars agree to that one. The first four facts are attested to by over 90% of today’s scholars! Dr. Habermas has for years maintained a database of all writing on this subject in the U.S. and Europe so as to make this claim with certainty.

From these few facts the arguments are developed that the only best explanation of events is that of the Gospel accounts. You are strongly encouraged to review this material in the book by Dr. Habermas, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (the book is in your Lending Library.)

More Information:

Books:
The Case of the Resurrection of Jesus by Dr. Gary Habermas and Dr. Michael Licona

Article:
“Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ” by William Lane Craig
http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth22.html

Audio Presentation by Dr. Habermas:
The Minimal Facts Approach to the Resurrection of Jesus: Gary Habermas gives an overview of the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.
http://garyhabermas.com/audio/audio.htm