Risen Jesus

Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Willian Lane Craig contend that the texts about Jesus’ resurrection were written to teach a physical, historical resurrection because when understood in their first-century Jewish Palestinian context, there is no other way the writers would have conceived of them. Dr. Spangenberg and Dr. Wolmarans disagree, arguing that they are later developed stories and myths taken as fact. This episode of the Risen Jesus podcast features a 2010 debate between the four scholars on this important topic.

Muslim professor Dr. Ali Ataie, a scholar of biblical hermeneutics, asserts that before the formation of the biblical canon, Christians did not believe that Jesus was killed. He argues that this claim was not, as held by some, originally a Muslim idea found in the Quran. In this episode, he debates Dr. Michael Licona, who refutes Ataie’s claim while contending that four solid historical facts provide sufficient evidence for Jesus’ death by crucifixion and later resurrection.

Is it reasonable to believe that Jesus rose from the dead? Dr. Michael Licona claims that if Jesus didn’t, he is a false prophet, and no rational person should follow him. In this episode, Licona argues a case for the resurrection using the historical method and based on five facts gleaned from Paul’s writings. Former Christian minister, now agnostic philosopher and writer Dr. Abel Pienaar disagrees, citing biblical discrepancies, a pre-scientific worldview, the lack of hard evidence, and parallel stories of ancient gods and heroes coming back to life, as indicating that the resurrection of Jesus is a myth. Listen to the two scholars debate this critical topic in this episode of the Risen Jesus Podcast.

In this episode, Dr. Licona provides a positive case for the resurrection of Jesus at the 2017 [UN]Apologetic Conference in Austin, Texas. He bases his argument on contentions that 1) empirical data strongly suggests that reality has a supernatural dimension and 2) that historical data strongly suggests that Jesus rose from the dead. Mr. Dillahunty, an atheist activist and former Christian, disagrees, positing that there is not sufficient evidence for this conclusion. Instead, those who believe in Jesus’ bodily resurrection are committing the fallacious argument from personal incredulity. This means they take on this belief because they can’t find a better explanation for the historical evidence. Licona responds that Dillahunty is steeped in methodological naturalism, and the debate continues.

In this episode, Dr. Licona provides a positive case for the resurrection of Jesus at the 2017 [UN]Apologetic Conference in Austin, Texas. He bases his argument on contentions that 1) empirical data strongly suggests that reality has a supernatural dimension and 2) that historical data strongly suggests that Jesus rose from the dead. Mr. Dillahunty, an atheist activist and former Christian, disagrees, positing that there is not sufficient evidence for this conclusion. Instead, those who believe in Jesus’ bodily resurrection are committing the fallacious argument from personal incredulity. This means they take on this belief because they can’t find a better explanation for the historical evidence. Licona responds that Dillahunty is steeped in methodological naturalism, and the debate continues.

In this episode, a 2004 debate between Mike Licona and Richard Carrier, Licona presents a case for the resurrection of Jesus based on three facts that are strongly evidenced and acknowledged by the majority of scholars: 1) Jesus’ death by crucifixion, 2) the empty tomb, and 3) the experiences of Jesus’ disciples and his enemy Saul that they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus. Carrier contends that the earliest Christians only held that Jesus’ soul was exalted and that the idea of a bodily resurrection, and the gospel testimony in favor of this, came later through Paul. Who makes the stronger case?

In this episode, a 2004 debate between Mike Licona and Richard Carrier, Licona presents a case for the resurrection of Jesus based on three facts that are strongly evidenced and acknowledged by the majority of scholars: 1) Jesus’ death by crucifixion, 2) the empty tomb, and 3) the experiences of Jesus’ disciples and his enemy Saul that they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus. Carrier contends that the earliest Christians only held that Jesus’ soul was exalted and that the idea of a bodily resurrection, and the gospel testimony in favor of this, came later through Paul. Who makes the stronger case?

In this lecture at Texas A&M University, Dr. Licona discusses whether we can rationally believe in the resurrection of Jesus. He then engages with a panel of prominent students who ask tough questions about the resurrection.

According to Dr. Richard Carrier, Christianity arose among individuals who, due to their schizotypal personalities, believed that their hallucinations of a risen Jesus were reality. In his view, this naturalistic explanation accounts well for the resurrection claims and is like the reported mass hallucinations in cults led by charismatic leaders. In a 2010 debate at Washburn University, Dr. Michael Licona challenged these assertions and presented a case for the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection.

According to Dr. Richard Carrier, Christianity arose among individuals who, due to their schizotypal personalities, believed that their hallucinations of a risen Jesus were reality. In his view, this naturalistic explanation accounts well for the resurrection claims and is like the reported mass hallucinations in cults led by charismatic leaders. In a 2010 debate at Washburn University, Dr. Michael Licona challenged these assertions and presented a case for the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection.