|
Transcription of a television program. Edited for
publication.
Introduction
For 2,000
years, the Christian Church has proclaimed that, at the end of His life,
Jesus of Nazareth was crucified on a cross, honorably buried, and then
on the third day, rose from the dead.
But others
claim Jesus didn’t die on the cross. He simply passed out and revived in
the tomb. Some modern scholars claim Jesus’ body was taken off the
cross, thrown on a garbage heap, and devoured by wild dogs. The
so-called "Resurrection Appearances" of Jesus were nothing more than
hallucinations or "grief visions," not literal, physical appearances of
Jesus Himself.
What does an
examination of the historical evidence from both secular and Christian
sources reveal? What difference does it make in your life if the
evidence does lead to the conclusion that Jesus actually rose from the
dead?
We invite you
to join us for this special edition of The John Ankerberg Show and hear
world-class historians, theologians, and archaeologists address these
issues.
Dr. John
Ankerberg: I’d like to begin our program today
with an excerpt from our debate between Dr. Antony Flew and Dr. Gary
Habermas.
***
Ankerberg: Welcome! We
have two guests today that are very special that are debating the
topic: "Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?" They are: Dr. Antony Flew,
considered by many to be the world’s foremost philosophical atheist; a
man who has authored more than 23 books including Hume’s Philosophy
of Belief, God and Philosophy, Introduction to Western Philosophy, The
Presumption of Atheism and Other Philosophical Essays on God, Freedom,
and Immortality.
My second guest is Dr. Gary
Habermas, a renowned Christian philosopher and historian, who is
considered by many to be the foremost expert on the evidence, the
historical evidence, for Jesus’ resurrection. Gary has authored 21
books including The Historical Jesus, Ancient Evidence for the Life
of Christ, In Defense of Miracles, and Why Believe? God Exists!
Gentlemen,
we’re glad that you are here.
Dr. Habermas,
I think the people that are watching right now, we’re talking about,
"Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?" They’re saying, "Come on! I mean, you’re
saying there’s evidence? There’s facts in history?" When you see
magazines like Newsweek and Time that come out every six
or eight months it seems–here’s another one on "Visions of Jesus."
You’ve got all kinds of stuff in these magazines but they keep on
saying, "There’s very little evidence." Now, you come along and you
write this little book called The Historical Jesus and all of a
sudden, you talk about the fact that when you were at Michigan State
working on your Ph.D., you were a skeptic yourself and the facts brought
you to a belief in Jesus. You have said there are at least 12 historical
facts that are virtually agreed by all critical scholars today. I’d like
you to let us know what the case is. Start us off tonight.
Dr. Gary
Habermas: Well, John, just to name some of
those highlights.
[1] Virtually
everybody today thinks that Jesus died due to crucifixion. I mean, John
Crossan and others from the Jesus Seminar say it’s the most widely known
fact in the ancient world.
[2] He was
buried.
[3] Of course,
this event inspired some despair in the disciples.
[4] Now, the
fact that the tomb was empty is admitted by most scholars but not as
widely admitted as the rest in this list.
5] Probably
the single most important fact is that the disciples had experiences
that they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus.
[6] They were
transformed as a result.
[7] The
Resurrection was their central message.
8] They
preached in Jerusalem.
[9] The Church
was born.
[10] We have
some individuals like James and Paul, two former skeptics–one a family
skeptic, one an outsider who persecuted Christians–and they also came to
Christ by experiences that they believed were appearances of the risen
Jesus.
By the way,
there are a lot of other scholars today in the historical Jesus movement
way far to the left of me who also start with lists of facts just like
this as sort of a common ground from which we can deal with our data.
Ankerberg:
Now, Tony, what do you think about Habermas’ facts there?
Dr. Antony
Flew: Well, I don’t dispute those facts but I
want to say, yes, but.... And the evidential situation is in many
ways very unsatisfactory. For a start, no one knows in what year the
crucial event of the crucifixion and consequently the other events
occurred. And this is a very remarkable thing that no one knows the
birth date–well, there are a great many birth dates of important people
that are not known. The other lack is, all our evidence is based on
documents written by believing Christians, none of whom was himself an
eyewitness, and we have absolutely nothing from the rest of the
population of Jerusalem to tell us why it was they weren’t converted and
whether the earthquakes and other alleged miracles actually occurred or
not.
Ankerberg: What do you
think about that, Gary?
Habermas: Well, now,
when you say none of these early Christian authors were eyewitnesses,
of course I think from your writings you exempt Paul. Right? You
believe the Apostle Paul was an eyewitness?
Flew: Oh, gosh, yes. I
was thinking of the Gospel writers.
Habermas: Right. But
with Paul we have an authentic eyewitness.
Flew: Absolutely.
Habermas: You would
grant the number of authentic Pauline books.
Flew: Oh, yes. But he
wasn’t in Jerusalem, of course, at that time.
Habermas: Well, shortly
afterwards, of course, he was there when Stephen was stoned. But also
I would disagree about the extra-biblical data. I think we do have
extra-biblical data for most everything; I will say that everything on
that factual list that I gave, everything except probably the despair
of the disciples–which is a good psychological fact–but all the rest
of them can be established through Paul alone. But I think the
majority of them can be witnessed to in ancient extra-biblical
literature.
***
Ankerberg:
This discussion is typical of conversations between Christians and
non-Christians concerning the question, "Did Jesus really rise from the
dead?" Non-Christians usually claim there is not enough historical
evidence, there are no eyewitness testimonies, and the Gospels were
written long after Jesus lived by those who didn’t even know Him.
Further, there is no evidence from secular or non-Christian sources that
substantiate the historical outline about Jesus as found in the Gospels.
They then conclude, "How is it that if Jesus was so important, we do not
even know the birth date of Jesus nor when He was crucified?" Concerning
this last question, I talked with Dr. Darrell Bock, Professor of New
Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary.
***
Ankerberg: Peter
Jennings opened his special by saying, "We suspected that reliable
sources would be hard to come by." And he said that not only are there
reliable sources hard to come by, he said there’s a lack of evidence
concerning Jesus’ life in terms of the historical Jesus. Is that true?
Bock: No. Not really.
There actually is quite a bit of historical evidence, especially
concerning how obscure at one level a figure Jesus was. He was tucked
away in a rural part of the Roman Empire and as He was tucked away in
that rural part in the context of a vast empire, one would think you
would know very little about Him. But in fact, He pops up in a whole
lot of places.
Ankerberg: A lot of
people say that there are no secular non-Christian sources about Jesus
that confirm the historical facts that are found in the New Testament.
Is that true or false?
Bock: No. That’s false.
We have several sources outside the Bible that confirm the existence
of Jesus and they say very important things about Jesus.
Ankerberg: Such as?
Bock: We have Tacitus
who says that Pontius Pilate was responsible for the execution. That’s
a Roman historian talking about a Roman governor. We have Josephus, a
Jewish historian, saying Pontius Pilate is responsible for the
execution of Jesus and "our people" put him up to it. So that’s a
Jewish historian talking about the Jewish contribution to the
discussion. We have Jewish sources that talk about Jesus as a magician
and sorcerer, acknowledging that He did unusual works. That’s
something that Josephus also tells us. So not only do we have
corroboration, in some cases we have double corroboration.
***
Ankerberg:
Concerning Antony Flew’s question, "When was Jesus born?," most
historians have concluded Jesus was born before April of 4 B.C. Why? In
Matthew 2:1 and Luke 1:5 we are told Jesus was born while Herod the
Great was still living. According to Matthew 2:15, Herod died while
Jesus was less than two years old. On the basis of Roman records,
historians have calculated Herod’s death occurred in 4 B.C. Then
Josephus records an eclipse of the moon the year Herod died. That
eclipse has been dated by astronomers as happening March 12 of 4 B.C.
Josephus also tells us that the Passover in 4 B.C. occurred soon after
Herod’s son, Archelaus, assumed the kingship. Historians know the
Passover occurred on April 17 of that year. If we put all these facts
together, since Jesus was born before Herod died, the evidence shows He
must have been born before April 4 B.C., or possibly a short time before
that in 5 B.C.
Now,
concerning the next question, "How accurate are the four Gospels and
were any of them written by eyewitnesses?" I’d like you to listen to a
clip from our program with Dr. John Warwick Montgomery, a man who holds
two Ph.D.’s and is a practicing trial attorney.
***
Dr. John W. Montgomery:
The first Gospel was written by Matthew Levi, a tax collector, who
became an apostle, a disciple of Jesus, and who wrote on the basis of
his own observation of what Jesus said and did. The fourth Gospel was
written by John who was the youngest of the disciples and lived the
longest. We have independent evidence that he died in the city of
Ephesus around the year 95. We have records of two of his students
where they indicate to us that John was in fact the author of that
book, and he passed on information to them about the authorship of the
other major Gospels. The second Gospel was written by John Mark who
was a companion of Peter, one of the apostles, and Luke’s Gospel was
written by the physician who accompanied the Apostle Paul on his
missionary journeys. And Paul was accepted by the original eleven
apostles as a legitimate apostle in his own right.
Ankerberg: And of
course you’ve got James and Peter.
Montgomery: Those as
well.
Ankerberg: That’s
right. So you have seven eyewitnesses that said they were either there
or checked out other witnesses and gave us information, which is what
we have in the New Testament. But then I can hear many of the folks
that are listening in right now, they would be saying, "But Dr.
Montgomery, you know those were all the disciples of Jesus. Those were
His friends. Didn’t they pad the case? I mean, didn’t they really kind
of make it up and lift Jesus up? And we really don’t have any skeptics
in the group there, we just have good friends of Jesus. How do we know
that they actually are telling us the truth about what Jesus actually
did?"
Montgomery: That’s one
of the central questions, and it seems to me we need to face that
directly, and there are two things we need to see about it. First of
all, these people did not start out as believers. In fact, after
Jesus’ crucifixion, they were back at the old fishing nets. They quite
obviously had not arrived at the belief reflected in the writings that
they produced later. What changed their minds was the resurrection
itself. We see this in the case of Thomas, who wouldn’t believe unless
he could touch the nail prints in Jesus’ hands and thrust his hand
into His side after the resurrection. That’s the first thing.
Second thing is, it doesn’t
really make any difference whether a writer about Jesus or a writer
about anything else is a friend of the person that he writes about, if
he produces his writings in an environment where there are hostile
witnesses. The fact is that the early apostles went out and presented
what we have in the New Testament in a primarily Jewish audience,
particularly in the synagogues. And the Jewish religious leaders had
been the primary opponents of Jesus’ message. Now, it is
inconceivable that the disciples, friends of Jesus or not, could have
gotten away with incorrect information about Jesus in the presence of
hostile witnesses who had themselves had contact with Jesus’ life and
who had what we lawyers call "means, motive and opportunity" to
destroy that picture.
Ankerberg:
We are examining the historical records of Jesus’ life to see if we can
discover if the evidence shows Jesus actually rose from the dead. At the
beginning of the program, Dr. Gary Habermas referred to twelve
historical facts that virtually all critical scholars today accept. I
asked him to share those facts with you. Listen.
Habermas: Most scholars
will give you a list of facts surrounding the events that Christians
call the Gospel: the trial, the death, the burial, the resurrection of
Jesus. I think there are at least 12 facts, at least 12. I mean, the
vast majority of scholars will give you more than these, but there are
at least 12 facts that critical scholars admit. Virtually every
scholar will admit virtually every one of these.
1. Jesus died by
crucifixion.
2. He was buried. Nothing
strange about these things. Most people die. Most people are buried.
3. His death caused the
disciples to despair and lose hope, believing His life had ended. What
would you say if your best friend died and very suddenly?
4. Now, I admit this one is
not as widely held, but many scholars believe that the tomb in which
Jesus was buried was discovered to be empty just a few days later.
5. The disciples had
experiences–and I’ll say this the way that even the critics will be
able to accept it, I think–the disciples had experiences which they
believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus. They thought
Jesus appeared to them.
6. Because of these
experiences, they [the disciples] were transformed from doubters–they
were afraid of their own shadow, so to speak, and certainly afraid to
identify themselves with Jesus–into bold proclaimers of His death and
resurrection.
7. This message was the
center of preaching in the early Church. Remember what Paul said–"Of
first importance": death, burial, resurrection of Jesus.
8. This message was
especially proclaimed in the environs of Jerusalem where Jesus died
and was buried just shortly before.
9. As a result of this
preaching, the Church was born and it grew.
10. Sunday became the
primary day of worship. And that’s significant for Jewish believers.
11. James, who had been a
skeptic, was converted to the faith when he also "believed" that he
saw the resurrected Jesus.
12. A few years later, Paul
was converted by an experience which he likewise "believed" to be the
appearance of the risen Jesus.
What I’m saying here is
that, with the exception of the empty tomb, virtually all critical
scholars accept this list as historical, and most of them will even
grant the empty tomb. And if you want to check some of the writings
I’ve done on this, The Historical Jesus and some of the books
by others, you can find lists of critical scholars who accept all of
these things.
Now, you might say, "Now,
wait a minute. Twelve? That’s not bad, but can we cut this list down?
Can we get some more skeptics involved by being even more picky in
what we take?
All right. I’ll arbitrarily
reduce this list to say four, five, six–somewhere in there. And if I
were to reduce this list, I would say something like the following:
[1] Jesus died due to crucifixion. [2] The disciples had experiences
that they believed were the appearance of the risen Jesus. [3] Their
lives were transformed because of that, and [4] later, a man named
Saul of Tarsus believed that he was converted to Jesus by an
appearance, a personal appearance of the risen Jesus to him.
These are four tough facts
that virtually anybody is going to give you. And I think that we can
build a case for that central proclamation of the death and
resurrection of Jesus based on just these four facts alone.
***
Ankerberg:
Now, these are just 12 facts that are accepted by all critical scholars.
Some skeptics will even concede 20 or more. But from these 12 facts Dr.
Habermas believes you only need four of them to establish a strong
historical basis for saying Jesus lived, died on the cross, and rose
again from the dead. Listen as he explains why.
Habermas: Now, we just
got done listing four facts which I think are going to be admitted by
the vast majority of critical scholars, folks in the middle and on the
left hand side of the scale. We might add a couple of others in here:
the Resurrection is the center of early Christian preaching. What do
you do with a fellow like James, the brother of Jesus–a skeptic who
comes to Christ? The fact that the Resurrection of Christ was
proclaimed very early, what do you do with these four facts?
Now, here’s my point. Some
critics are going to give you a longer list. Some of them...some
skeptics might give you 20. And I said, "I don’t need 20. I only need
12." And for those who think, "Can you do it with any less than 12?"
I’m saying, "I’ve got four, five, six, seven–somewhere right in
there." And it’s an arbitrary number. Why? Because nobody, virtually
nobody gives you only those facts. But I’m saying I’m arbitrarily
reducing the list to 12, and then to four, five, six. And here’s my
contention. With these data and the data that modify these facts that
are admitted by all, we have enough of a basis to say that Jesus died
and that He was raised again from the dead. You can sort of take home
the whole pie with just these facts.
|