Best evidences for the resurrection?
- Thread starter KGP
- Start date
- Status
Ryan&Amber2013
Puritan Board Senior
May this bless you. https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/eight-reasons-why-i-believe-that-Jesus-rose-from-the-dead
Haeralis
Puritan Board Freshman
https://www.whitehorseinn.org/article/resurrection-fact-or-fiction/
This essay from the journal for Modern Reformation does an excellent job compiling the evidence for the resurrection. In short, the evidence is so slanted in our favor that all of the godless theories demand even more remarkable leaps of logic to believe than do the one miracle of the resurrection.
This essay from the journal for Modern Reformation does an excellent job compiling the evidence for the resurrection. In short, the evidence is so slanted in our favor that all of the godless theories demand even more remarkable leaps of logic to believe than do the one miracle of the resurrection.
Ray
Puritan Board Freshman
I heard tonight by a Minister the best book he read and is continuing reading is by N.T. Wright on the Resurrection. And yes he knows he’s heretical on Justification. But on the Doctrine of the Resurrection he said he’s the best he’s read. In his opinion. Pretty sure some on here have good resources or book recommendations on the Doctrine.
Jake
Puritan Board Senior
Yes, The Resurrection of the Son of God by N.T. Wright is the definitive work written from an evangelical perspective: https://www.amazon.com/Resurrection.../ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=
Wright is not confessionally Reformed, but this work of him is excellent and him at his best.
Too bad that he is exactly the opposite of being good in His New Pauline perspective .
Steve Curtis
Puritan Board Senior
I'm most intrigued by the change of the apostles -- from cowering and denying Christ to martyrdom.
McDowell borrows heavily from CS Lewis -- you'd be better off with the original. In any case, evidential apologetics cannot account for every "what if" and relies heavily on the ability of man to rationally see his way to God. You're always better going with what God has revealed about Himself.
McDowell borrows heavily from CS Lewis -- you'd be better off with the original. In any case, evidential apologetics cannot account for every "what if" and relies heavily on the ability of man to rationally see his way to God. You're always better going with what God has revealed about Himself.
My senior pastor knows him personally, as he was one of his professors at Tyndale College here in Mi.
Dr Habermas has been to our church twice so far to preach/teach on the resurrection, and find that his works are quite good, but are written not at a high technical scholarship level, but much more to a lay level.
I would suggest Evidence that deamds a verdict, theone by NT Wright, and Dr Habernas the Case for the resurrection of Jesus.
Apologist4Him
Puritan Board Freshman
It's okay for a general overview of historical apologetics. There are quite a few good free online resources. Simply doing a search at Monergism a few selected results:
Verifying The Resurrection: Six Evidences by James Montgomery Boice
Why the Resurrection Matters by J. Ligon Duncan
If Christ Has Not Been Raised: Reasoning Through the Resurrection by Kenneth R. Samples
The historical and evidential apologetics for the resurrection of Christ are mostly useful in directly addressing specific "scholarly" errors like those produced by the "Jesus Seminar". I prefer to go after the underlying assumptions and presuppositions underneath the claims, it's basically cynicism and skepticism and secular scholarship from a semi-agnostic perspective. I might be inclined to implement C.S. Lewis' "Lord, Liar, Lunatic" argument. I think it has a way of sifting the wheat from the chaff. But it ultimately comes down to monergistic regeneration and whether a person has been given ears to hear, eyes to see, and a softened heart.
ReformedChristian
Puritan Board Freshman
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Michael Licona.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
