Reliability of the Gospels, Bart Erhman and the problem of evil with Mik...

Bart Ehrman's strongest objection to the Resurrection | Highlight

Is Jesus God in the Gospel of Mark?

Why Jesus' Resurrection Matters

Did Jesus Predict His Own Death? A Historical Problem for Islam

Did Jesus Exist?

Truthbomb Apologetics: Video: The Power of Oral Tradition in Oral Cultures

Truthbomb Apologetics: Video: The Power of Oral Tradition in Oral Cultures

Michael Licona on Bible Contradictions (MP3) - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has recently posted an interview of Dr Michael Licona by Dr Frank Turek. They discussed Licona's most recent research into how ancient first/second century historians like Plutarch wrote and recorded history and how their historiography and writing relates to and mirrrors how the Gospels were written. Good stuff linked below.


Michael Licona on Bible Contradictions (MP3) - Apologetics 315

Update #2 - Licona & Martin: Did Jesus Believe He Was Divine? - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a debate between Dr Michael Licona and Dr Dale Martin regarding whether or not Jesus considered himself divine. I agree with Dr Licona that Jesus taught that he was divine and that his followers knew he was too. The deity of Christ is an important point and a defining part of Christianity. Christianity itself revolves around who Jesus is and what he did and what he taught. Without Jesus, there is no Christianity. I am amazed that Dr Martin can claim to believe in the essential doctrines of Christianity yet reject the Bible as foundational for those beliefs.


Licona & Martin: Did Jesus Believe He Was Divine? - Apologetics 315

Update: Dr James White has reviewed the debate on the past two episodes of his webcast.. He wrote

...as there is so much that could be observed, but instead stuck to our review of the Licona/Martin dialogue on whether Jesus recognized His own deity. I think this is an important exercise in examining the presuppositions of what is truly "worldly wisdom." 

Listen to the webcast at the following links:

Yesterday on the Dividing Line

Continuation of Licona/Martin Dialogue on the Deity of Jesus on Today's DL

Today on a Special Friday Morning Dividing Line

Michael Licona vs. Dale Martin: Did Jesus Physically Rise From the Dead? - Apologetics 315

Recently Brian Auten posted Dr Michael Licona's debate with Dr Dale Martin on the whether or not Jesus was physically raised from dead or does the Resurrection mean something else. It was really interesting. I think it strange that someone can claim to be a Christian and re-interpret the New Testament such that Jesus' Resurrection was not physical. This  was Dale Martin's position, but I don''t agree. I think Dr Licona did a good job in dialoguing with him. But I don't think any of the first or second generation of Christians who were following Jesus would have understood the Resurrection the way he does.


Michael Licona vs. Dale Martin: Did Jesus Physically Rise From the Dead? - Apologetics 315

Second Responding Post to Jonathan Pearce on the Veneration of Jesus' Tomb

Jonathan Pearce wrote a blog post making a point that a lack of veneration of Jesus' tomb as evidence that there was no tomb from which Jesus rose from the dead three days after the Crucifixion. I disagreed. You can read the original response I posted at the end of this post. There has been some back and forth in the comments section on that post. Pearce's latest comments brought up some issues that I think takes more space than are appropriate for the comments sections which is why I started another blog post. I had written: Better folks have already ripped such arguments [that there were no guards at the tomb] to shreds, It's been 2000 years do you really think that none of those ideas have been trotted out or answered before?

"ripped to shreds"? By who?

Please don't tell me you refer to Craig who all but admits agnosticism in his article, and this is the article which is used to defend this position by so many other apologists!

I have seen much of the same muddled thinking on the Debunking Christianity blog many times. Do people like Pearce really believe that William Lane Craig is the only Christian scholar that  has ever lived? Dr William Lane Craig is indeed brilliant and respected and correct in much of what he says and teaches but he doesn't speak for all Christians and he is not right about everything. The Bible is right. God is right. You, me, and him are only right when we obey God and speak the truth.  I find it shocking that Pearce is not better acquainted with the work of Christian scholars. 

No Offense intended but in addition to William Lane Craig, I'd count Gary Habermas, Timothy McGrew, Mary Jo Sharp, Michael Licona,  Darrel Bock,   Craig Evans, James White, and J.P. Holding as knowing more about the Resurrection than Pearce and whose scholarship carries considerable more weight! If you want to see such anti-Resurrection arguments, you can start with them and branch out. There have been many people in the past 2000 years ripping such drivel to shreds.

Why would Paul, Peter, John or any of the first Christians would venerate a tomb of a man they knew to be alive and had told them to get busy doing evangelism?

One would assume that all the Apostles would have known the whereabouts, as well as the various Marys and Salomes and others who the various Gospels disagree as visiting.

Disagree? How do the Gospels disagree? If I tell you that Sally, Jane, and Martha went to the store, but tell another person that Martha went to the store how is that a contradiction? It might be a disagreement but it's not a contradiction. So we don't know how many women were at the tomb Easter morning. So what? 

We don't have their names or titles. That does not mean they were not there. Not worth basing an argument against the Resurrection on.

The fact that the evidence points towards Joseph of Arimathea being fictional should lead one to conclude that his tomb most probably is too, especially given the utterly improbable scenario of sentencing a man to death and then asking the people who sentenced him to death for the worst possible crime to release his body for an honourable burial!

Evidence? How does Pearce know Joseph of Arimathea was fictional? He can't  prove that. There is evidence that tells us Joseph of Arimathea was a real person. And we know that if a man had enough clout he could ask for the body of an executed person. Josephus was allowed to stop the execution of  his three friends who were being crucified.

 A tomb to which women seemed to know, visit but have NO WAY of being able to roll away the stone, and no forethought to find a way, but HEY, luckily angels are on hand to help.

That really is a really not the only assumption you could make. They would have known the soldiers had been  placed there at the tomb. I would think they thought that they could ask the guards to open the tomb for them enough to enter and take care of Jesus' body. 

 A tomb to which they are travelling to anoint an already anointed body. A tomb at which guards are incredibly unlikely to be posted, who contrive to be bribed (a fate worthy of execution) to deny the most incredible thing they ever would have seen (and yet not be converted by).

Miracles themselves are not enough to convert a man from a sinner to a child of God. With all the evidence around us of God's existence and power, people still continue to disbelieve. Why would the guards be better or smarter than Atheists today? Wait. Maybe some of them did become Christians because of the experience. Pearce is wrong. We can't say one way or the other.

Around which an earthquake unattested by any other source takes place. And during which, according to Matthew again, a parade of resurrected dead Saints swan around a municipal city without anyone else noticing or reporting it.

I wonder if Pearce ever really read the Gospels. The texts do not tell us how far outside of Jerusalem was the earthquake felt. And other people around Jerusalem did notice the dead saints walking around.

⁵¹ At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split ⁵² and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. ⁵³ They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and^[e] went into the holy city and appeared to many people. - Matthew 27:51-53

And so, this tomb, the most holy place on earth (for if that happened now, given that Graceland, without bones, is venerated; and given that other such places, with no body or bones, are venerated such as Međugorje; Basilica of the Shrine of Our Lady of Aparecida; Lourdes; Shrine of the Three Kings; Mount Tabor; House of Peter; Mount Carmel; Nazareth; Bethany (resurrection of Lazarus)!!!; the Jesus Trail; Galilee etc etc), is forgotten for 300 odd years. And this is not odd to you. This, with all the other odd information, half of which I have not mentioned, is not odd?

I find it odd that you would think that Pearce would imagine any of those places as holy. Venerating a place or an object does nothing to deepen my relationship with God or helps anyone. I'm sure the first Christians thought the same way. Notice that in the New Testament there is nothing and no one venerated but Jesus Himself. We don't see all the fodder examples Pearce props up until Christianity becomes the state religion and people join bringing in their paganism without being converted.  And some people compromised and added other ideas and concepts into Christianity in order to get converts. You know...same thing happens today.

You are exhibiting an extraordinary amount of cognitive dissonance here. Wow!

That said, nothing I say will ever convince you as a dyed-in-the-wool, head-in-the-sand sort of person.

I just find it sad that people such as yourself spend so much time accepting possible over probable so that your belief-system is a tapestry of possibilities absent of any kind of strong plausibility.

 I often wonder if people like Pearce ever really stop and think about what they believe. On one hand admitting that Christianity may be true but rejecting it because in their opinion it isn't plausible. Further opining that they can't reason it as being probable. Hello!? A miracle, by definition, cannot be probable. So you cannot use that determine if it's true or reasonable. I don't think my head is in the sand. I have sifted through evidence. Studied a lot of Science and History, and I have concluded that the Bible is true. And if that makes one who disagrees a liar, then they are a liar. I have to say that one who find  arguments like the ones Pearce uses compelling should look very closely without the arrogance of thinking that you get to determine what is enough evidence and just look at what God has provided for us objectively. You will find that Jesus was right. 

¹⁹ This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. ²⁰ Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. ²¹ But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God. - John 3:19-21

What had happen' was.....: FacePalm of the Day - Debunking Christianity: Why was Jesus' tomb not venerated?

How Should We Understand the Resurrection Narratives? - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted links to both video and audio of a debate from May 2010, where William Lane Craig and Michael Licona debated Sakkie Spangenberg and Hansie Wolmarans on the resurrection of Jesus at the University of Petoria in South Africa. The topic: How Should We Understand the Resurrection Narratives? I'm glad Brian Posted this. Follow the link to get the debate!


How Should We Understand the Resurrection Narratives? - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• Mike Licona and Bart Ehrman debate the resurrection of Jesus (winteryknight.wordpress.com)
• Michael Licona and Shane Puckett debate the resurrection of Jesus (winteryknight.wordpress.com)
• The case for the historicity of the empty tomb narrative (winteryknight.wordpress.com)
• 20120219 Rising Fear (emilfeng.wordpress.com)
• Christians Do Have a Reasonable Faith (withalliamgod.wordpress.com)

Geisler's Christmas Carol - YouTube

I don't know if you have been following the fiasco brought about Dr Norman Geisler's attack on Dr. Michael Licona revolving on Biblical inerrancy and what it means. The following video explains the situation very clearly and I would also direct you to read the video's description.






I want to clearly say that, I disagree with the way the video predicts the future of Christianity should people listen to Norman Geisler's saber rattling against Michael Licona. I too disagree with his saying that Matthew did not intend the raised-from-the-dead saints in Matthew chapter 27 to be understood historically. I think it is meant to be historical. But arguing that it's not does not equate to saying the Bible is errant. I think one thing missing from the discussion that the people who were raised, were known around Jerusalem. That means that they had not long been dead and I would take their raising to be like the ones who had been raised to life and then later died - like Lazarus. Dr James White takes this position and I think he makes a good point. I also don't think that Geisler's behavior (as bad as it is) will lead to apostasy and cause people to loose their faith and be swayed by Bart Ehrman and people like him. God is in control. It is God who saves us and keeps us saved. Don't  people credit. The credit is God's imputed to us through faith because of God's mercy.

Paul Wrote:

⁷ Now we pray to God that you will not do anything wrong—not so that people will see that we have stood the test but so that you will do what is right even though we may seem to have failed. ⁸ For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth. ⁹ We are glad whenever we are weak but you are strong; and our prayer is that you may be fully restored.- 2 Corinthians 13:7-9

And even better, Jesus said.

¹⁷ Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. ¹⁸ And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. ¹⁹ I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” - Matthew 16:17-19

Given that the gates of Hades don't stand a chance, I doubt we have to worry about Bart Ehrman, or Norman Geisler for that matter.

Geisler's Christmas Carol - YouTube

Related articles

• An Opportunity Lost: Why Geisler's Critique Missed the Mark (westernthm.wordpress.com)
• Can Christian Scholars Be Objective? (crossexaminedblog.com)
• Michael Licona Responds to the Accusations of Norman Geisler (zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com)
• Can Christian Scholars Be Objective? (galileounchained.com)
• michael licona, norm geisler and biblical inerrancy (daytonhartman.com)

Dr Michael Brown interviews Michael Licona on the Resurrection of Jesus

Dr Michael Licona was interviewed by Dr Michael Brown on his radio show about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

line_of_fire_06_07_11.mp3 (audio/mpeg Object)

Related articles

• Michael Licona on Bart Ehrman (goodnewsnow.wordpress.com)
• With faith like this, who needs doubt? (insightscoop.typepad.com)
• Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Debate by Accomplished Historians - Mike Licona vs Richard Carrier (rodiagnusdei.wordpress.com)
• The Resurrection of Jesus (wglcpodcasts.wordpress.com)
• Help for Those Doubting Their Salvation (godsbreath.wordpress.com)

Michael Licona vs Stephen Patterson Debate: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted an audio recording of Michael Licona and Jesus Seminar fellow Stephen Patterson debating the topic: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?

Michael Licona vs Stephen Patterson Debate: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? - Apologetics 315

Hidden Gems in Old Apologetics Literature by Tim McGrew - Apologetics 315

Dr Tim McGrew was recently interviewed by Dr Mike Licona on his work on studying the history of Apologetics. I loved the interview. Not only did we learn more about Dr. McGrew's amazing family but how important it is not to forget the work of previous apologists and scholars. It reminds me of how valuable the older works of scientist and engineers in their own work and not just what modern writers say what they discovered. For example, reading Einstien's papers on relativity or Enrico Fermi's book on thermodynamics is way cooler than just reading about them in a current textbook.

McGrew shows that some of the most famous and useful literature from previous centuries have been forgotten and makes me wonder if today's great works might be forgotten in 100 years.

Be sure to visit the Library of Historical Apologetics for more classical apologetic works.

Hidden Gems in Old Apologetics Literature by Tim McGrew - Apologetics 315

James White on the Ehrman/Licona Resurrection Discussion on Unbelievable

This last week on Dr James White's podcast, the Dividing Line, he reviewed the April 16, 2011 discussion between Dr Bart Ehrman and Dr Michael Licona about the historical evidence of Jesus' Resurrection. The exchange was broadcast on the Unbelievable? radio program. Hearing Dr. White's views on the exchange is extremely useful. Given that James White has debated Bart Ehrman in the past. Follow the links below to listen to the webcast.

Part 1 - April 19, 2011
You've Got Mail, George Bryson Attacks, and the Ehrman/Licona Resurrection Discussion on Unbelievable

Part 2 - April 21, 2011
Continued Examination of the Licona/Ehrman Discussion on Unbelievable

Related articles

• Bart Ehrman on Textual Reliability of the NT? (war-on-error.xanga.com)
• Ehrman's Overblown Claims - Again (str.typepad.com)
• Michael Licona on Bart Ehrman (goodnewsnow.wordpress.com)
• Licona on Erhman (str.typepad.com)

Confident Christianity: What Jesus Said About Resurrection

Mary Jo Sharp has announced that she was interviewed, along with many scholars and Apologists regarding what Jesus said about Resurrection. Follow the link to her post.

Confident Christianity: What Jesus Said About Resurrection

Related articles

• The Death of Death (freshlyground.wordpress.com)
• The difference is he rose again... (screaminggoose.wordpress.com)
• Death put to Death (accblogz.wordpress.com)
• Death and Resurrection! -- A Lectionary Meditation for Easter (pastorbobcornwall.blogspot.com)
• I Am the Resurrection and the Life". (greatriversofhope.wordpress.com)

Evidence for the Resurrection with Michael Licona - Apologetics 315

Image via WikipediaMichael Licona is an excellent scholar. I enjoy his work and his resources. Today, Brian Auten posted links to a good video online series Dr. Licona has made available that walks people through the evidence for Jesus' Resurrection. Follow the link to Apologetics 315 to get the series.

Evidence for the Resurrection with Michael Licona - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach (christmyredeemer.wordpress.com)
• Arguing for the Resurrection (sandwichesforsale.blogspot.com)
• Licona on Erhman (str.typepad.com)
• Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? Answers to Common Objections to the Resurrection (grantgaines.net)
• Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? Answers to Common Objections to the Resurrection (brushyforkbaptist.com)

Interview: Dr. Nabeel Qureshi on Islam - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted an interview of Dr. Nabeel Qureshi by Dr. Michael Licona. Dr. Qureshi talks about Islam and how he became a Christian, converting from Islam. Follow the link to hear the audio.

Interview: Dr. Nabeel Qureshi on Islam - Apologetics 315