I just got finished reading another book by Gary Habermas. This book, “The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus” is co-authored by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona. The book is aimed at preparing believers in their interactions with skeptics. The book, along with the accompanying interactive CD, is essentially a guide/instructions in presenting the evidences that exist for the resurrection of Jesus to non-believers. This books is similar to Habermas’ other book, “The Historical Jesus”, in that it has many of the same evidences and argument (Minimal Facts Approach). The book is full of data, and has a ~100 page note section. The book is not a “quick read” but is more of a text book style.
The authors first go over some historical principles in order to set up the arguments latter in the book. Next they go over what Habermas is know for, what he calls “The minimal Facts Approach”. This approach only considers data that is strongly evidenced and that is accepted by virtually all scholars, even the skeptical ones. The authors then go through 5 facts: 1) Jesus died by crucifixion; 2) Jesus’ disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them; 3) Paul, a persecutor of Christians, was suddenly changed; 4) James, a skeptic, was suddenly changed; 5) the empty tomb. (The fifth one, according to Habermas, is only accepted by ~75% of scholars, not virtually all like the other four).
Habermas and Licona then go over many objections and alternatives to Jesus’ resurrection. They then briefly go over a variety of other topics such as the nature of the resurrection, self-understanding of Jesus, “Intelligent Design”, some miscellaneous objections that didn’t fit elsewhere, and how the believer should present this information to non-believers.
I generally enjoyed this book. I primarily enjoyed the nice outline and summary of many of the evidence for the resurrection. I also liked that the book contained their rebuttals to many of the objections to the resurrection. It is a nice one stop type book, but because of this style, there were many times I wish the authors could have gone more in depth on a subject. However, the note sections usually gave references and notes of where to go for more details.
I’ll show my bias by saying that the biggest weakness in this book was Chap 11. In this chapter the authors discuss and support intelligent design. Needless to say this was a big disappointment for me. When theologians and historians start writing about science–reader beware. For instance, on page 178 they write, “Of many amino acids in the body, only twenty types are useful for life. Of those, only four types are found in DNA.” When the basics of biology are not understood, yet one goes public and supports an unscientific “theory” like intelligent design, it tarnishes the rest of the book. I am not saying that the rest of the book is wrong, it just makes someone who already doubts the resurrection think twice about what they call facts.
Overall I would recommend this book, but would also recommend that they tear Chap 11 out. I found the book to be a good starting point in my research. (Check out the wiki page for my not so complete notes).
Hey Mark,
I noticed you hadn’t been posting over at Jesus Creed during the last few science threads, so I thought I’d come over to your blog and see how things were going. There’s so many books showing how evolution and Christianity are compatible nowadays for RJS to review, that I think we will be discussing this topic for awhile over there.
Anyways, I’m very busy in life right now (just had a moving sale yesterday and am transitioning from China to another country in Asia over the next few weeks), so I’ll only have intermittent internet connections and I’m not sure if I’ll be able to keep up with the conversation in this thread. So I apologize up front if this is my only comment.
If you don’t mind, I’d like to share some concerning a few of your recent posts:
1. First, you are absolutely right that doubt can be destructive. I’ve been there and it can be hard, especially when we let it consume our thoughts. Ultimately, the most difficult part is not the doubts themselves, but what you let them become. My doubt may begin as a serious question, but quickly becomes the destructive thoughts that you mentioned in your previous post. Questions lead to other questions that lead to other questions (often that could easily be answered if I just took the time to work through the initial question). Instead, I spend my time thinking through new questions and doubts when I should have been answering the initial question! Often in these situations, I am simply thinking the same things over and over again and getting nowhere. Usually these are big issues and take time, and we need to realize that up front. Obsessing over the doesn’t help the process either. It’s hard to do, but you need to force yourself to change topics in your mind occasionally. I know that I’m blessed with the opportunity to have access to a ton of books, and the privilege to spend a lot of time researching and reading, but let me assure you that sufficient answers are there if you only are patient and work through your questions rationally.
2. As for your evolution post, I remember from discussions over at Jesus Creed that this is a really big issue for you. You’ve been studying evolution for years, so why the recent issues between it and your faith? As you know, since the beginnings of humanity understanding evolution, there have been Christian theologians who have gladly accepted it as fact. Your list of Even some of the greatest conservative theologians like B.B. Warfield accepted it as fact. That’s good…it is a fact, haha. It’s not like any of the comments you make about how evolution challenges your faith (I’m thinking of that list in particular) are new challenges to Christianity and many people who are evolutionist and Christian have answered them before. Unfortunately, in all fundamentalist and some sectors of evangelical American Christianity these are still major issues. I would once again simply encourage you to keep studying the theology side of the issue. I can tell from your comments though that they are biased by your doubts. For instance, you say, “Most of Genesis can’t be taken literally…” Scholars would disagree with that statement. The majority would say Genesis 1-4 are not literal, about half would continue and say that 1-11 are myth, but most would take 12-50 as literal. Which scholars have you read on the topic to make the statement that most can’t be taken literally? In my research I simply haven’t found that to be the case. Have you read C. John Collins on Genesis 1-4? I know he at least has a M.S. from MIT (maybe more) as well as his Ph.D. in Old Testament, so his work on the topic is interesting. There are plenty of others I can suggest if you ask.
Also, as per your links on the side, I can tell that you read Christian and anti-Christian apologetics blogs. If I were you, for the time being, I would stick to reading books. Apologetics for or against Christianity on blogs, and particularly their comments, usually stay at a very shallow level. Shallow answers from Christian apologists will only feed your doubts as well as the shallow arguments from sites like Debunking Christianity. Instead, books usually offer a sustained argument that builds and doesn’t include all of the rhetoric of a blog. As you know, there are Christian scholars and scientists coming out with books that support evolution and orthodox Christianity almost monthly, so most of them deal with the issues you mention. Be open to what they have to say and don’t let what you always thought Christianity taught be the final say. As I’ve shared in the past, my movement away from Young Earth Creationism in high school to theistic evolution actually didn’t come from science, but from studying the Hebrew text itself…the Bible simply didn’t support YEC or even ID…but this isn’t the place to share that entire story, so I’ll let you look into this topic on your own!
3. I’m glad you enjoyed the Licona/Habermas book. When Habermas is speaking about his field of expertise (biblical studies of the resurrection), he’s outstanding. Unfortunately, he almost always veers off into talk about ID or NDEs, which makes me sigh and wonder why books on the history of the resurrection should even include these arguments. When he sticks to the evidence in favor of the resurrection, he knows his stuff, and even those on the extreme, opposite end of academia greatly respect his knowledge on the topic. Licona is also a very sharp guy, who I’ve really enjoyed reading and listening to in the past.
Ultimately, although textbookish (is that a word?), this book is written for laity and doesn’t dig as far down at times as I would have liked. For some, it says enough, for others it says more than enough…for me, I want more specifics. There are plenty of others that give specifics if you’re willing to take the plunge. I know plenty were mentioned in the notes of this book, but I’d personally recommend James D. G. Dunn’s “Jesus Remembered” and N.T. Wright’s “The Resurrection of the Son of God.” Unfortunately, both are nearly 1000 pages long, and the latter makes best sense after reading the two previous books in the series, which are just as long. Both scholars are highly respected by first century historians as well as others in the field of biblical studies. At the types of universities where they teach (Oxford, Durham, Harvard, Cambridge, etc.) they don’t let you get away with shotty scholarship or atheist/evangelical apologetical assumptions. They show that there is sufficient reason to believe the resurrection as an historical event, even without presupposing Christian assumptions. I could probably list another twenty or thirty books in this field as well, but I’d particularly recommend Geza Vermes’ recent book Resurrection. He’s a non-Christian, religious historian at Oxford, and although the book is less thorough compared to the others, he comes to the point at the end where he admits the empty tomb, post-Easter experiences, etc. and simply says that the evidence points toward the resurrection as the most plausible explanation, but he’s not willing to make that leap. I respect that greatly, because he admits the evidence is there but that he won’t believe it. Just like with any event in history, there are no proofs. You still have to believe, and whereas there is clearly sufficient evidence for the resurrection to sustain a researched and articulate belief in it…faith can’t be forced.
Thanks for sharing on this blog and over at Jesus Creed. I hope that I’ll get a chance to discuss these more in depth in the future. If you send me an e-mail response there’s a greater chance that I’ll have some time to respond. Blessings.
Kyle,
Thanks for your comment. You hit on some great topics. I’ll try to address them.
I haven’t posted over at Jesus Creed because of time, and when I have some time I have been trying to hit the books. I had started N.T. Wright’s book, but I found myself falling asleep too often. It’s not specifically the book, I think it is more that history and theology are not my best subjects, and 7 kids 9 and under wears me out. Maybe I should take up coffee again. . .
Regarding evolution, it really hasn’t been a big problem with me. The problem was more of Christians denying evolution. This lead me to doubt what other things Christians said were true. I have also seen that the topic of evolution is a large part of why many people have doubts and have eventually left their faith. So that is why I still talk about it from time to time, to help others work through this too. You mentioned that many Christian’s have answered these questions before. Would you recommend a book that dealt with human evolution? There are many that accept evolution, but don’t go all the way and talk about the implications of human evolution.
I looked back at my post and saw that I put “most”. That was a bad word to use. I should have just said Gen 1-11, but how can I say that Gen 1-11 is mythical and 12-50 is literal? But anyway this is on my shelf of things to think through at a latter time.
Regarding distractions, I completely agree. This new year I am trying my best to try to stay focused. I’m concentrating on the resurrection, maybe I’ll pick up N.T. Wright’s book again. . .
Regarding Christian and anti-Christian apologetics blogs I agree with you to a point. They were initially great in focusing and refining key areas of my doubt. They also helped me see that there are a lot of cluttering and distracting topics. I also have gotten many great book recommendations and contacts. However like you said sometimes they can be very shallow and sometimes not well written or researched (like mine), but they are a starting point. So yeah, I spend the vast majority of my time now reading book (yes, it’s singular—I’m a slow reader).
Regarding Habermas, I agree with your comments. I wish he would have been a one topic guy and stuck with the resurrection. Talking about near death experiences and ID definitely dilutes his message. I would recommend his other book “The Historical Jesus” more. Thanks so much for the other recommendations!
Hey Mark,
I’ve only got a second so let me quickly suggest a few authors:
1. John F. Haught – He’s a theologian doing some good work in this area and has been working on it for at least 15 years.
2. Denis Alexander – He’s written a good recent book called “Creation or Evolution: Why Do We Have to Choose?” that deals with some of your questions. He’s also the director of the Faraday Institute (which I’m sure you’re aware of) which has hundreds of hours of lectures from scientists and theologians discussing this very issue.
Finally, you’ve probably checked it out before, but Dr. Vinson’s site has a ton of resources and suggestions for people looking at the intersection of evolution and theology (http://science.drvinson.net/).
Thank you both for the book recommendations and for the thoughts on apologetics blogs vs. books. Very helpful!