The Resurrection Debate: Crossan and Borg vs. White and Renihan

Answering Muslims: Gary Habermas: Contemporary Muslim Apologetics and the Resurrection of Christ

Answering Muslims: Gary Habermas: Contemporary Muslim Apologetics and the Resurrection of Christ

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?

Evidence Jesus is Alive by Timothy McGrew - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted Dr Frank Turek's interview of Dr Timothy McGrew about what evidence we really have for Jesus' Resurrection. Dr McGrew discussed an acrostic to make five points of evidence easy to remember: A.L.I.V.E.

A - Appearances of Jessus
L -  Low Status of Women
I -   Immediate Proclamation
V - "Voluntary sufferings undergone by the first witnesses"
E - Empty Tomb

Follow the link to hear the interview. 

Evidence Jesus is Alive by Timothy McGrew - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• Who are you to judge? Answering the challenge of moral relativism (winteryknight.wordpress.com)
• The Hitchhiker's Guide to Apologetics? (joshchalmers.wordpress.com)
• Curses! He's King! (a PG-13 apologetic for the Resurrection) (pasturescott.org)

Top Ten Myths About the Resurrection - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has written a post summarizing links to videos that debunk the myths about Jesus' Resurrection.  Follow the link to his post!



Top Ten Myths About the Resurrection - Apologetics 315

ID.Plus: William Lane Craig - Reasonable Faith Tour: Southampton lecture on the Resurrection of Jesus

Dr Peter S. Williams posted the following lecture by Dr William Lane Craig on Jesus' Resurrection from Dr Craig's "Reasonable Faith Tour" last fall.




ID.Plus: William Lane Craig - Reasonable Faith Tour: Southampton lecture on the Resurrection of Jesus

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)

Debunking Christianity: Oprah Winfrey's Half-Sister and The Odds of The Resurrection of Jesus

John Loftus has posted his thoughts about why one should not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ. I disagree - vehemently. The arguments truly illustrate a faceplant. Let's watch said faceplant in :"slow motion".

There are a lot of things that happen to people that go against the overwhelming odds. Let's take the example of Oprah Winfrey's revelation in November 2010 that she has a half-sister named Patricia who was adopted out by her mother shortly after being born. What are the odds of someone discovering late in life that she has a half-sister? I don't know, but surely it's extremely rare. It wasn't a miracle, that's for sure. Things like that do occur from time to time. By contrast, if Jesus arose from the grave then such a thing was a miracle, and as such has even less of a chance of happening than a sister discovering she had a half-sister, by far!

Right out of the gate: What is a miracle? A miracle is not just an improbability. A miracle is not just a rare occurrence. A miracle by definition must contain some impossibility and carry with it the knowledge that it wasn't brought about human interaction or contrivance. I agree that discovering a half-sibling later in life is rare but not miraculous. I would also agree that Jesus' Resurrection is a miracle

Incredibly rare events within the realm of the natural world take place all of the time, like people getting stuck by lightning, winning the lottery, finding a bottle with a note in it that washes up on a beach, or living through a disaster that should have killed them. Yes, these things are all extremely rare, but they happen, all of the time.



How can something  be "extremely rare" and yet simultaneously "happen all the time"? Definitely a stumble here at a logical paradox. I think also what's missing here is forgetting that God is involved in each of these occurrences. And I'm not sure how living through a disaster despite all logic that says death was imminent would not be a "miracle".

In a like manner, a natural explanation for the resurrection should almost always be preferred over any claim that Jesus arose from the dead, so long as it has a minimal degree of plausibility (i.e., aliens did not do it). It's the rational thing to conclude. Even if we cannot produce a natural explanation of what actually happened from the so-called evidence, it's still far more reasonable to say we don't think Jesus arose from the dead. Why? Because incredible things happen all of the time.


So any alternate explanation for the Resurrection of  Jesus Christ should be preferred as long as it's plausible to someone - doesn't matter if it's true or not. From a stumble to trip. And the first faceplant comes at the assertion that the explanation does not need to be supported by evidence because incredible things happen a lot. Couple of problems here. 

1. Something is incredible because it's outside of normal experience and

2.  By definition incredible means it doesn't happen all the time - if it did then it would be "credible".

 
In what follows I'll offer a very brief natural explanation of the claim that Jesus resurrected. Compare it with the claim he physically arose from the dead. You cannot say my natural explanation lacks plausibility because I already admit that it does.

So  by his own admission, Loftus' natural explanation is worthless. 

As I said, incredible things happen all of the time. What you need to say is that my natural explanation is MORE implausible than the claim that Jesus physically arose from the dead, and you simply cannot do that.

So I'm just supposed to accept Loftus' imagination because it seems more plausible than what the Bible says?!!!!! That's what you call trying to get up from a faceplant and falling down again.

My natural explanation is that the early disciples were visionaries, that is, they believed God was speaking to them in dreams, trances, and thoughts that burst into their heads throughout the day.

No place can you find that in scripture before the Crucifixion among the Apostles.  Toe stub while trying to get up.

Having their hopes utterly dashed upon the crucifixion of Jesus they began having visions that Jesus arose from the dead. They began preaching this to people who subsequently had these same kinds of visions.

The problem is that no one began preaching until after the tomb was found empty - and the whole city of Jerusalem knew the tomb was empty. And until the Apostles saw Jesus, they didn't default to belief in the Resurrection.

In these visions they thought Jesus was speaking to them, so they began preaching what they learned from him (Acts 2:17-21; I Cor. 14; 2 Cor. 12:1-10).

So they all had the same visions and heard the same messages? I don't think so. Bad conjecture -  another trip.

The most obvious of these revelations was Paul's claim that he learned the Gospel and the Lord's Supper directly from Jesus himself, not from men (Galatians 1:11-12; I Cor. 11:23). The author of Revelation wrote down seven dictated letters from Jesus as the result of his vision (Rev. 2-3).

That doesn't make Paul and John subjected to visions and not having seen Jesus themselves after the crucifixion. "Implausible" doesn't even begin to describe how bad this reasoning is.

They "saw" Jesus. They preached what he "revealed" to them. There was no objective evidence for any of this, so there is no reason why we should take their word on it. After all, these visions were subjective experiences.


I don't think there is any such thing as objective evidence that Loftus would accept given that he wants to throw out and disregard eye witness testimony.
 
With this as a basis for their faith anything can be believed and taught with the authority of Jesus speaking from heaven. All one needs to do is compare this phenomena with the rise of Mormonism.

The origins of Mormonism is quite different. If Loftus wants to make such a comparison as to how Joseph Smith's testimony came about and was transmitted with the Bible, he should be prepared to produce the Golden Plates and the seer stones because the Bible has plenty of historical and manuscript evidence backing it up. FacePlant number 2.

It can also be believed that there was an empty tomb on the basis of a vision from someone who is thought to receive this revelation from Jesus himself. We call these people "liars for Jesus," and we know plenty of them who have claimed they found Noah's Ark.




Either the tomb was empty or it wasn't. Vision? Really?? Does he really want to go there - calling the first 3000+ Christians Liars? People who would know if the tomb was empty or not because they were in Jerusalem when Jesus was crucified and buried? What would they have gained by lying? They weren't making money. They were beaten, jailed, and executed. Oh yeah, I'd lie to get that. More and and more fail. FacePlant number 3.

My natural explanation doesn't require a conspiracy, or that Jesus didn't die on the cross. All it requires is one liar for Jesus, and I think this liar is the author of Mark, the first gospel. He invented the empty tomb sequence. That's it. The rest is history among superstitious people who were wanting to have hard evidence for their claim and would believe Mark's Gospel based upon the visions of a visionary. Just think of Joseph Smith who started the Mormon church. It's the same claim.

No it's not the same claim. Joseph Smith built a theology based on himself. The Apostles pointed to Jesus Christ and said that Jesus has all the answers and didn't leave a book that has so many historical errors and lies like Joseph Smith did. Try again, Mr Loftus. 
 

Stranger things have happened.

Name one.

But a miracle is simply more incredible than my natural explanation, by far. Therefore no reasonable person should believe Jesus arose from the dead. Just as it was utterly incredible but non-miraculous that Oprah would discover she had a half-sister, so also there is no reason to punt to a miracle when it comes to the early church claim that Jesus physically arose from the grave.



Another faceplant. Who said that visions are more plausible than the physical Resurrection? It's not because visions don't reconcile all the facts that we do know. Let's be honest. Lying for the Devil is just as bad as lying for Jesus and Jesus will hold people account for both.

And if my natural explanation doesn't work there are a number of them, any one of which has more probability to it than that Jesus physically arose from the dead. 

Good thing for unbelievers there are other explanations because punting to visions and accusing the first Christians of being liars is pretty silly. Other have indeed tried to do better than that. All have failed.

Debunking Christianity: Oprah Winfrey's Half-Sister and The Odds of The Resurrection of Jesus

Related articles

• Who is Jesus? (habtamukitaba.wordpress.com)
• Apologetic Sound Bites: 'How can you believe in miracles?' (timchester.wordpress.com)
• Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? (hwnsurf.me)
• Resurrection Realities From The Book Of Romans (scripturenuggets.wordpress.com)

The Crossan/Borg vs. White/Renihan 2005 Debate on the Resurrection

The Crossan/Borg vs. White/Renihan 2005 Debate on the Resurrection

Truthbomb Apologetics: One Minute Apologist Interviews with Mike Licona

Here is a list summarizing a list of one-minute interviews of Dr Mike Licona. Thanks, Chad

Truthbomb Apologetics: One Minute Apologist Interviews with Mike Licona

Related articles

• Free Book on the Church History Blog (lexloiz.wordpress.com)
• Evidence for God (str.typepad.com)

Sunday Quote: Ben Witherington on the Historical Resurrection of Jesus - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten has posted a great quote from Dr Ben Witherington on the important of the fact of Jesus' Resurrection. His comment flies in the face of scholars like Dr. Dominac Crossan who I heard once say that Jesus' physical resurrection plays no part in his Christianity.

“Any position in which claims about Jesus or the resurrection are removed from the realm of historical reality and placed in a subjective realm of personal belief or some realm that is immune to human scrutiny does Jesus and the resurrection no service and no justice. It is a ploy of desperation to suggest that the Christian faith would be little affected if Jesus was not actually raised from the dead in space and time.

A person who gives up on the historical foundations of our faith has in fact given up on the possibility of any real continuity between his or her own faith and that of a Peter, Paul, James, John, Mary Magdalene, or Priscilla. The first Christian community had a strong interest in historical reality, especially the historical reality of Jesus and his resurrection, because they believed their faith, for better or for worse, was grounded in it.”

- Ben Witherington

I agree with Dr Witherington. Without the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, there is no Christianity (1 Corinthians 15).

Sunday Quote: Ben Witherington on the Historical Resurrection of Jesus - Apologetics 315

Apologist Interview: David Wood - Apologetics 315

This week Brian Auten posted his interview with David Wood! I'm a huge fan of David's work and I continue to marvel in astonishment at the breadth and width God is working in his ministry. I really have learned a lot from David and his partners in ministry Sam Shamoun and Nabeel Qureshi. I can't recommend this interview highly enough.

Apologist Interview: David Wood - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• being an apologist: part one (jude3project.org)
• book review: the battle belongs to the lord (daytonhartman.com)
• book review: defending the faith (jude3project.org)

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

dangerous idea: Straw Men Burning: Tim McGrew on Misinterpretations of the McGrews' article on the Resurrection

I've been following the discussion on using Baye's Theorem for calculating a probability for Jesus' Resurrection. The paper was originally written by Doctors Tim and Lydia McGrew. Dr William Lane Craig also made a similar argument in his debate on the Resurrection against Dr Bart Ehrman much to Ehrman's consternation. Tim McGrew wrote a response to the criticism posted on Dr. Victor Reppert's blog. Follow the link to read it.

dangerous idea: Straw Men Burning: Tim McGrew on Misinterpretations of the McGrews' article on the Resurrection

In addition Dr. Reppert wrote a short post explaining how he sees the role of probability theory philosophy of religion.

dangerous idea: On the use of probability theory in the philosophy of religion

Debunking Christianity: Did You Know? Odds on the Resurrection of Jesus Are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1

I'm not really one to argue statistics  but it's amazing to me that John Loftus posts the following 

Debunking Christianity: Did You Know? Odds on the Resurrection of Jesus Are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1

which in turn is linked to the following:

Odds on the Resurrection of Jesus: 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1

I tend to not argue from statistics because you can make it say whatever you want. Given the way you spin it you can make something seem likely or not so likely.  Deane Galbraith tries to debunk Dr Tim McGrew and Dr Lydia McGrew on a paper they did in which they argued that from a statistics point of view Jesus' Resurrection was very probable. He tries but in my opinion fails. For me the Resurrection isn't about probabilities. Either it happened or it did not. I believe it did. End of story. There is enough historical evidence and personal experience with the resurrected Jesus to insure that it makes sense to base your life around the fact of Jesus. I did also find an interview Dr. Lydia McGrew did regarding Philosophy, Apologetics, and this paper. The link to it follow.

Lydia on The Probability of Christianity

Related articles

• I AM the RESURRECTION and the LIFE (jesusmylordandsavior.wordpress.com)

Resurrection of Jesus: Interview with Gary Habermas - Apologetics 315

Brian Auten posted this interview of Gary Habermas by Rob Bowman. This is an audio in which Dr Habermas explains why we should accept the Resurrection as a believable historical event. Follow the link.


Resurrection of Jesus: Interview with Gary Habermas - Apologetics 315

Related articles

• I AM the RESURRECTION and the LIFE (jesusmylordandsavior.wordpress.com)
• What do biblical scholars make of the resurrection? (vridar.wordpress.com)
• Where is Jesus Between His Death and Resurrection? (adw.org)
• Colored Eggs, Scavenger Hunts, or the Resurrection (christianitymatters.wordpress.com)

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)

The Dunamis Word: Lee Strobel, The Resurrection Took Me From Atheist To Apologist

Elder Harvey Burnett has written a really good review of an article Lee Strobel in which he addressed an article by Ricky Gervais who attempts to argue that he is a better "Christian" than most Christians because he keeps the ten commandments. I agree with Strobel's approach instead of picking on Gervais' silliness (I'll save that for later), Strobel instead gives his testimony and follows up with summarizing his research regarding the Resurrection. This is a good post from Elder Burnett and a great article from Lee Strobel. Strobel's article is called "How Easter Killed My Atheism".

The Dunamis Word: Lee Strobel, The Resurrection Took Me From Atheist To Apologist

Related articles

• Controversy: Gervais (rachaelsaathoff.wordpress.com)
• The weird world of straight-to-DVD Christian film (salon.com)

A Mural of the Resurrection of Christ | Dr. Claude Mariottini – Professor of Old Testament

I just heard from Dr. Claude Mariottini's blog that artist Ron DiCianni has drawn the largest mural of Jesus' Resurrection ever. DiCianni mural will be displayed at the Museum of Biblical arts in Dallas, Texas.

A Mural of the Resurrection of Christ | Dr. Claude Mariottini – Professor of Old Testament

Related articles

• Resurrection Is What Makes Christ Unique (christianbusinessdreamer.wordpress.com)
• The difference is he rose again... (screaminggoose.wordpress.com)
• The Good News Of The Resurrection (samuelatgilgal.wordpress.com)