The resurrection of Jesus Christ and the Case for the historical jesus

[evangelist6589]

I have to admit CAL vs. Armin, eschatology, LS vs. Free Grace, Alcoholic Beverages, and Bible translations causes lots of division on this board. Perhaps a new type of discussion is needed and one that all christians can agree on. At the Calvinist men's fellowship a brother was strongly recommending a new book on the resurrection of Christ by Josh McDowell called The resurrection factor. I do not have the book and frankly do not want to buy anymore books. I checked my library and have the book Resurrection by Hanagraaf which may include all the same information. Or does it?

We live in a day of skepticism and being a street evangelist and engaging in apologetics as I do often perhaps it may be wise to get to know this kind of a topic better. Skeptics do not care about the CAL vs. Armin debates that dominate almost every post on this board. I do not usually have answers to these kinds of debates with skeptics on the street but instead use the 10 commandments and if they do not want to hear it, I conclude that they may not be elect, however perhaps a foolish move.

Anyways I am aware that liberal scholars try and discredit the historical Jesus and say He was not whom he said He was, as well as the resurrection of Christ. Has anyone studied more into this field of study and can you educate us or myself please? I am humble and am not all that knowledgeable in this area of theology other than what the Bible tells me. But I have not studied nor read a book on the historical Jesus or the resurrection.

 

[RLBosley]

This is a great topic, and something that gets over looked a lot in churches not just this board. I have read a couple great books on the topic The Case for Christ, the Case for the Real Jesus, More than a Carpenter (I actually just gave out copies of this to the Youth Group), etc. I don't recall all the facts but I do know that the information there cemented in my mind the absolute certainty of Jesus life, death and resurrection and the truthfulness of the NT scriptures.

I think these apologetic books are more useful for believer than non believers. They help assure us of our faith and strengthen us. An unbeliever will disregard or explain it away. I read one time that an evangelist was debating with a guy on the street about the historicity of the resurrection. Finally the guy said, "Alright, you've convinced me that Jesus rose from the dead. But that doesn't mean Christianity is true - Science will one day explain that too." (I assume it was a real event, but I have nothing to say it wasn't anecdotal.) That is why we must rely on the power of the Spirit to convict and draw people to the Lord, we cannot and will not ever argue anyone into becoming a Christian.

 

[evangelist6589]

This is a great topic, and something that gets over looked a lot in churches not just this board. I have read a couple great books on the topic The Case for Christ, the Case for the Real Jesus, More than a Carpenter (I actually just gave out copies of this to the Youth Group), etc. I don't recall all the facts but I do know that the information there cemented in my mind the absolute certainty of Jesus life, death and resurrection and the truthfulness of the NT scriptures.

I think these apologetic books are more useful for believer than non believers. They help assure us of our faith and strengthen us. An unbeliever will disregard or explain it away. I read one time that an evangelist was debating with a guy on the street about the historicity of the resurrection. Finally the guy said, "Alright, you've convinced me that Jesus rose from the dead. But that doesn't mean Christianity is true - Science will one day explain that too." (I assume it was a real event, but I have nothing to say it wasn't anecdotal.) That is why we must rely on the power of the Spirit to convict and draw people to the Lord, we cannot and will not ever argue anyone into becoming a Christian.

I agree or I would not be a Calvinist. What is the difference between the case for Christ and the Case for the Real Jesus?

 

[RLBosley]

I agree or I would not be a Calvinist. What is the difference between the case for Christ and the Case for the Real Jesus?

The Case for Christ is very much like More than a Carpenter, it focuses more on how we know we can trust the NT, and evidence for the existence of Jesus. The Case for the Real Jesus touches on some of that as well, but also argues against false representations of Christ like the gnostic gospels. That's all that comes to mind ATM. I haven't read the books in about 4 years.

 

[JamesL]

John, are you looking for more on the historical Jesus, or the resurrection, or both?

In my opinion, if you're looking to be better equipped to handle arguments from skeptics, there are multiple approaches. The first approach is to argue from scripture. With that approach, you also need to be able to demonstrate that the bible is reliable in the first place. Because as soon as you say that more than 500 people saw Him alive after He rose, you're bound to be asked, "says who?" Then you reply that 1Cor 15:6 says it. Then you're like, "Oh I forgot...you don't believe the bible is reliable."

Bible reliability is found in fulfilled prophecy, which is broader than only relating to Christ.

The second approach is from non-biblical evidence, such as Josephus, the Talmud, Pliny, Tacitus, and other early references.

Then there's reason and logic, incorporating the historical setting, etc

I think the best is to be versed in many lines of defense, and you should be prepared to invest 400-500 hours easily

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Strobel also has a great book out that continues his "The Case for ... " theme. This one is "The Case for Easter." Our church passed them out this past celebration of the Resurrection, with Strobel providing the medical evidence, the fact of Jesus' body not being found, the evidence of His numerous appearances to the faithful over the next 40 days before His Ascension. I find that skeptics have more difficulty believing the Resurrection than anything. They can accept that Jesus was "a good man," or a "good teacher," but they have difficulty with His deity. Stroble addresses these issues in a simple, understandable way.

 

[InTheLight]

An unbeliever will disregard or explain it away. I read one time that an evangelist was debating with a guy on the street about the historicity of the resurrection. Finally the guy said, "Alright, you've convinced me that Jesus rose from the dead. But that doesn't mean Christianity is true - Science will one day explain that too."

Already been done. I read this book (or attempted to read it, it's very dense with mathematics) while studying for my degree in electrical engineering.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0385467990/?tag=baptis04-20

 

[evangelist6589]

John, are you looking for more on the historical Jesus, or the resurrection, or both?



In my opinion, if you're looking to be better equipped to handle arguments from skeptics, there are multiple approaches. The first approach is to argue from scripture. With that approach, you also need to be able to demonstrate that the bible is reliable in the first place. Because as soon as you say that more than 500 people saw Him alive after He rose, you're bound to be asked, "says who?" Then you reply that 1Cor 15:6 says it. Then you're like, "Oh I forgot...you don't believe the bible is reliable."



Bible reliability is found in fulfilled prophecy, which is broader than only relating to Christ.



The second approach is from non-biblical evidence, such as Josephus, the Talmud, Pliny, Tacitus, and other early references.



Then there's reason and logic, incorporating the historical setting, etc



I think the best is to be versed in many lines of defense, and you should be prepared to invest 400-500 hours easily

Both. I believe I have the books just need to study them sometime.

More than a Carptender
New evidence that demands a verdict

A case for faith

When skeptics ask

Jesus among other gods & Christ among other gods

Also some by Hanagraaf

I do not spend allot of time reading these type of books since I went Calvinist but anyways the best books in this section go to the Arminian whom are more evidence based.

I was looking at Josh McDowell yesterday and very evidence based. Perhaps I should study more of these arguments as many these days do not believe the Bible and they usually laugh at the 10 commandments or just don't believe it. But imagine how many love science and support naturalistic views.

 

[RLBosley]

Already been done. I read this book (or attempted to read it, it's very dense with mathematics) while studying for my degree in electrical engineering.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0385467990/?tag=baptis04-20

Interesting.

 

[Yeshua1]

Both. I believe I have the books just need to study them sometime.

More than a Carptender
New evidence that demands a verdict

A case for faith

When skeptics ask

Jesus among other gods & Christ among other gods

Also some by Hanagraaf

I do not spend allot of time reading these type of books since I went Calvinist but anyways the best books in this section go to the Arminian whom are more evidence based.

I was looking at Josh McDowell yesterday and very evidence based. Perhaps I should study more of these arguments as many these days do not believe the Bible and they usually laugh at the 10 commandments or just don't believe it. But imagine how many love science and support naturalistic views.

Believe that Josh wrote 2 excellent books on this subject, one was for jesus and his resurrection, other for the reliability of the Bible!

Think evidence that demands a verdict, and more evidence that demands a verdict!

Footnotes in each wrote pric eof the book!

 

[evangelist6589]

I have the combined volume