Counterpoints: Richard Dawkins and David T. Lamb

Richard Dawkins: "The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully." [1]

David T. Lamb: "While I applaud Dawkins for bringing these problems into the open for discussion, I don't agree with his conclusions. He simply isn't reading his Bible well." [2]

Forthcoming- A review of God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist? by David T. Lamb

Stand firm in Christ,

Chase

Resources:

1. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 51
2. David T. Lamb, God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?, p. 16

Article: Do All Religions Lead to God? by Aaron Brake

Aaron Brake of Apologetic Junkie has written an excellent article dealing with the question Do All Religions Lead to God?

You can check it out here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Article- Stephen Law's "Evil God" Argument by Luke Nix

Luke Nix of Faithful Thinkers has written an interesting post addressing the "Evil God" argument used by Stephen Law in his recent debate with Dr. William Lane Craig.

You can find the article here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Article: 15 Ways to Detect Nonsense by Apologetics315

Brian Auten of Apologetics315 has posted an outstanding article entitled 15 Ways to Detect Nonsense.

Check it out here.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Book Review- The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is by N.T. Wright

In this book, as the title says, Wright sets out to rediscover who Jesus was and who He is. He writes:

"If even in a human relationship of knowledge and love there can be misunderstandings, false impressions, wrong assumptions, which need to be teased out and dealt with, how much more when the one to whom we are relating is Jesus himself" (p. 14).

Indeed, for the Christ follower, the desire to know more about Jesus will not be satiated until He is met face to face.

So, Wright presents a twofold challenge. He invites the reader to join the quest of looking at Jesus in a new light (through the lense of first century Judaism) and then use that new understanding of Him as a model of what the church is to be for the
world in the 21^st century.

He undertakes this quest by exploring the following questions found on page 33:

1. Where does Jesus belong within the Jewish world of his day?

2. What, in particular, was his preaching of the kingdom all about? What was he aiming to do?

3. Why did Jesus die? In particular, what was his own intention in going to Jerusalem that last fateful time?

4. Why did the early church begin, and why did it take the shape it did? Specifically, of course, what happened at Easter?

5. How does all this relate to the Christian task and vision today?

Answering the Questions

1. Where does Jesus belong within the Jewish world of his day?

I believe Wright sums up the answer to this question with the following statement:

"His place there...was the place of a prophet, warning that Israel’s present course was leading to disaster and urging a radical alternative upon her" (p. 73).

Israel was reading the wrong story and had lost sight of its purpose to which Jesus was calling them back to. Wright states:

"The story was never about Israel beating up her enemies and becoming established as the high-and mighty master of the world. It was always the story of how the creator God, Israel’s covenant God, would bring his saving purposes for the world to birth through the suffering and vindication of Israel” (p. 161-162).

2. What, in particular, was his preaching of the kingdom all about? What was he aiming to do?

Jesus was proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. Wright lays out the main thrusts of this kingdom-message:

- The End of Exile: The parable of the sower in Mark 4:1-20 and the story of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15 offer a few examples where Christ was saying Israel’s exile was ending.

- The Call of the Renewed People: Jesus was “telling his hearers to give up their agendas and to trust him for his way of being Israel, his way of bringing the kingdom, his kingdom-agenda” (p. 44). Jesus was reconstituting Israel around Him as seen in the summoning of the twelve, the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, and his radical acceptance and forgiveness.

- Disaster and Vindication:

Jesus announced…"that God’s judgment would fall not on the surrounding nations but on the Israel that had failed to be the light of the world. Jesus himself and his followers…were now the true, reconstituted Israel. They would suffer and suffer horribly, but God would vindicate them" (p. 49).

This is seen in Luke 19:41-44 and Mark 13 and its parallels in Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

Wright goes on to explain that Jesus attacked the symbols of the second-Temple Jewish worldview as obsolete, and having no place in the kingdom of God. In fact the symbols were being “redefined in and around him and his work” (p. 55). He also makes the following very clear:

"Jesus’ clash with the Pharisees came about…because his kingdom-agenda for Israel demanded that Israel leave off her frantic and paranoid self-defense, reinforced as it now was by the ancestral codes, and embrace instead the vocation to be the light of the world, the salt of the earth" (p. 57).

Wright’s thorough description of each of these symbols and the symbols Jesus replaced them with gives this reader a better sense of how radical Jesus was to the first century Jews who heard Him.

3. Why did Jesus die? In particular, what was his own intention in going to Jerusalem that last fateful time?

Wright sums up the answer to this question by repeating what he has written elsewhere for he feels he can do no better and this reader does not intend to sum it up any better either:

"Jesus’ underlying aim was based on his faith-awareness of vocation. He believed himself called, by Israel’s god, to evoke the traditions which promised YHWH’s return to Zion, and the…traditions which spoke of a human figure sharing the divine throne; to enact those traditions in his own journey to Jerusalem, his messianic act in the Temple, and his death at the hands of the pagans (in the hope of subsequent vindication); and thereby to embody YHWH’s return" (p. 121).

4. Why did the early church begin, and why did it take the shape it did? Specifically, of course, what happened at Easter?

Wright tackles this question in chapter six of the book by presenting a historical argument for the resurrection of Jesus that this reader finds very impressive. I will not explain it in this review as I encourage that it be read in full. As a teaser, however, it is based on 1 Corinthians 15 and the expectations of first century Jews.

The answer to the question though is the resurrection from the dead of all creation sparked by the resurrection of Jesus.

5. How does all this relate to the Christian task and vision today?

As I was reading through the last chapter of the book that addresses this question, I was reminded of the call philosopher John Mark Reynolds places upon Christians to engage culture by creating and building beauty. Wright is calling us to the same and further proposes that Jesus’ resurrection was the beginning of the new world which all creation has been groaning for since the Fall and that “everything done on the basis of Jesus’ resurrection and in the power of the Spirit already belongs to that new world” (p. 180).

Wright calls followers of Christ to build a new world through the Spirit. A world that is founded on Jesus. A world that, because of Jesus and His resurrection, has already arrived.

Conclusion

If you are looking to understand Jesus as He would have been understood by His Jewish contemporaries, this is a excellent book to read. I am now more able to look at what Jesus said and did in the Gospels through the eyes of a first century Jew. And if you want a better understanding of the full impact of how Jesus’ death and resurrection was the culmination of history (God’s story), again, this book is worth reading. This understanding adds to this reviewer’s insight into the absolute uniqueness of the God of Israel.

DVD Review

The book also comes with a DVD in which Wright explores the concept of resurrection in the ancient world. Wright discovers that a man rising bodily from the dead was unheard of before the first century. In the ancient world death was permanent. Death was a door that opened to a spirit world, a door that could not be opened again by the one who had gone through it. He goes on to state that even though the Jews believed in a bodily resurrection, this belief correlated with the end of the world. Wright concludes that the bodily resurrection of Jesus is the best explanation for a group of first century Jews (the early Christians) proclaiming Jesus had risen bodily from the dead in the present world. This reviewer found that the DVD further solidified Wright's historical argument for the bodily resurrection of Jesus found in the book.

Thanks to Intervarsity Press for the review copy.

Stand firm in Christ,
Chase

One Minute Apologist Interviews with Dr. Gary Habermas

1. Should Christians Be Surprised by Suffering?

2. Does the Bible Always Promise Escape from Suffering?

3. Were 1st Century Christians Delivered Suffering?

4. How Do We Suffer Well?

5. Was Jesus Married?

6. Are Near Death Experiences Possible?

7. Did Jesus Rise from the Dead or we are Delusional?

8. The Resurrection

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad

Chapter One Review: The Resurrection of Jesus- A New Historiographical Approach by Mike Licona

It is with great enthusiasm that I begin this chapter-by-chapter review of Mike Licona's latest book. This volume has already earning marked praise from numerous scholars and apologists such as Craig S. Keener of Palmer Theological Seminary who writes:

"This book is the most thorough treatment on the resurrection and historiography to date."

Introduction

Licona begins by conceding that when scholars have researched the historical account of the resurrection in the past, they have often come to very different conclusions on a number of issues. However, unlike many skeptics and critics, Licona is careful not to jump to the conclusion that no accurate portrait of the historical Christ can be uncovered.

On the contrary, the fact that numerous portraits of the historical Jesus exist only serves to drive Licona to ask more questions.

He writes:

"What approach should be taken for an investigation involving the historicity of the resurrection? When writing on the resurrection of Jesus, biblical scholars are engaged in historical research. Are they doing so without adequate or appropriate training? How many have completed so much as a single undergraduate course pertaining to how to investigate the past? Are biblical scholars conducting their historical investigations differently than professional historians? If professional historians who work outside of the community of biblical scholars were to embark on an investigation of the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, what would such an investigation look like?" [p. 19]

And as a result, Licona has written a book on the topic of the resurrection that is fresh and ground-breaking.

Licona writes:

"So how does my research differ from previous treatments? In the pages that follow I will investigate the question of the historicity of Jesus' resurrection while providing unprecedented interaction with the literature of professional historians outside of the community of biblical scholars on both hermeneutical and methodological considerations." [p. 20]

The Introduction concludes with Licona's summarizing the content of each chapter.

Chapter 1- Important Considerations on Historical Inquiry Pertaining to the Truth in Ancient Texts

This chapter begins by the author clarifying some key terms that will be used throughout the remainder of the book.

Most importantly:

• History- past events that are the object of study [p. 30]
  

• Historiography- matters in the philosophy of history and historical method [p. 31]

This reader was very impressed with the scope of topics that Licona was able to address in this first chapter. Anyone who has discussed the resurrection with a skeptic will surely appreciate Licona's points addressing questions such as:

• Is History Knowable?
• Isn't History Always Written by Winners?

Further, whenever discussing the problem of the historical resurrection, the topic of pre-suppositions [or "horizons," as Licona calls them] inevitable comes up. Licona's contribution to horizons and how the historian can successfully "transcend" them is invaluable material that this reader will continually reference in the future. In my opinion, this section of the book alone is worth it's price!

With candid transparency, the author acknowledges that the historian is challenged by their horizon. However, Licona proposes "six tools that, when combined, can be effective guides that bring us closer to objectivity."

These tools are:

• Method
  
• The historian's horizon and method should be public.
• Peer pressure
  
• Submitting ideas to unsympathetic experts
  
• Account for the relevant historical bedrock
  
• Detachment from bias

With these tools in the historian's tool belt, Licona contends that:

"Historians should search for evidence inconsistent with the preferred hypothesis before being willing to assert its truth. They should force themselves to confront data and arguments that are problematic to their preferred hypotheses. Historians must allow themselves to understand and empathize fully with the horizon of the author/agent and, furthermore, allow themselves to be challenged fully by that horizon to the point of conversion. They must achieve full understanding of and empathy for the opposing view. When this is maintained during an investigation, the historian is close to transcending her horizon. While full detachment may be unattainable, temporary detachment is attainable to some degree and provides value." [p. 60-61]

The author is not naive about the impact one's horizons can have on their historical inquiry, but argues persuasively that the historian can transcend their horizons for the sake of an accurate conclusion.

The chapter continues with Licona explaining the role of consensus in historical inquiry. Here, this reviewer appreciated how the author explained when a consensus is valuable, when it is not and the various limits a consensus can have on establishing a respected position.

Postmodern history, and it's main proponents, are then taken to task with professional courtesy. Licona examines "the reasoning and conclusions of the three foremost postmodern historians: Hayden White, Frank Ankersmit and Keith Jenkins." [p. 71] Then continues by revealing the numerous problems with Postmodernist History.

As he writes:

"As postmodern historians have referred to "the death of history," realist historians, which are by far the majority, feel justified in proceeding, though with caution. If history is truly dead, there are no means by which historians can distinguish fact from fiction and no way of weighing the plausibility of numerous hypothesis. Indeed, there are other consequences that are difficult for postmodernists to live with if their view of knowing the past is correct, such as a collapse of the legal system. Moreover, the arguments of postmodern historians are often self-refuting since they involve reasons for why we can know that we cannot know." [p. 126]

Next up is the consideration of "What is Truth?" The author explains that because of the challenges presented by postmodernists, realist historians (the majority) would do well to revisit the foundation of their views which includes the nature of truth itself. Two views of truth are considered here: a) correspondence theory of truth- for our descriptions of the world around us to be true, they must correspond to its conditions b) coherence theory- a proposition is true when all of its components cohere with other propositions believed to be true.

As the chapter progresses, Licona then examines the question, "What is a Historical Fact?" I appreciated the author giving attention to this oft overlooked question and found his definition of a historical fact satisfactory and fair:

"Richard Evans defines a historical fact as something that happened and that historians attempt to "discover" through verification procedures." This is the definition I hold and will use throughout this volume." [p. 93]

As the chapter continues, Licona takes an in-depth look at historians and what they actually do. The author tackles the tough questions of history head-on such as:

• Who Shoulders the Burden of Proof in Historical Inquiry?
• Is History a Science?
• What do Historians Do?

I must admit that this first chapter is simply a delight to read. One gets that the feeling that they are participating in an Ancient History 101 class with a very thorough instructor.

As the chapter nears closing, the author examines to methods historians use in their inquiries: 1) Arguments to the Best Explanation 2) Arguments from Statistical Inference. Here, the author maps out both approaches, explaining both their strengths and weaknesses, then explains for the question of Jesus and His Resurrection from the dead, he will argument to the best explanation.

The chapter ends with an excellent summary and conclusions.

I believe the closing of this first chapter demonstrates another reason why Mike Licona's investigation into the resurrection is unique among his other works on the topic. The author explains that he has done his best to "transcend" his horizons and look at the question of the resurrection as objectively as possible. Further, he admits to going through periods of serious doubt and struggle throughout his investigation. He even goes as far as to admit that for him to conclude that the resurrection did not happen would in fact be "embarrassing."

However, he is determined not to allow these facts to hinder his inquiry:

"Because of the position I have taken in previous work, I would experience a bit of personal embarrassment if I were to arrive at the more modest conclusion of a historical question mark. I would also most likely disappoint two scholars who have not only been very influential in my life but have also become close friends: Gary Habermas and William Lane Craig. Even given all this, I am convinced that my interest in truth supersedes my fear of embarrassment and disappointment. If the resurrection of Jesus could not be confirmed historically, my specifically Christian faith could still survive. But a disconfirmation of the resurrection would lead me to abandon it...all historians of Jesus have something on the line in this discussion. Now that I have reported my experiences and laid bare my hopes, readers may assess the following discussion in terms of my approach and whether it was created, consciously or unconsciously, to achieve the results I desire rather than being a genuine attempt to conduct an objective historical investigation." [p. 132]

Conclusion

The first chapter of Mike Licona's The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach is mind food, plain and simple. This reviewer found Licona's approach transparent, thorough and concise. I can say with confidence that I now better understand just what history can and can not tell us, the job of the historian and what methods are best for historical inquiry.

I enjoyed this first chapter so much that I simply can't wait to being chapter 2 that deals with History and Miracles.

Many thanks to Intervarsity Press for the review copy.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad

Forthcoming: A review of Chapter 2- History and Miracles.

Article: Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead? by Mike Licona

This article was taken directly from the Apologetics Study Bible for Students:

Science has taken us to the moon, allowed us to see DNA, and show us that people who are assuredly dead do not return to life by natural causes. Since the apostle Paul wrote that Christianity is a false religion if Jesus was not resurrected (1 Co 15:17), has science disproved Christianity? Is there any good evidence that Jesus' resurrection actually occurred? Despite the hesitation of skeptics concerning the four Gospels, nearly all Bible scholars are confident that there are at least three sure facts concerning what happened to Jesus.

1. Jesus was crucified on the orders of the Roman governor and died as a result.

2. Jesus' disciples honestly believed that He rose from the dead and appeared to them beginning on Sunday morning.

3. A sworn enemy of the Christians named Saul (later called Paul) had an experience that he believed was an appearance of the risen Jesus, prompting him to become a Christian. This would be similar to Jesus appearing to a Muslim who then leaves Islam and becomes the next Billy Graham! Saul become the opposite of what he'd been because of the risen Jesus (see Ac 9).

Unbelieving scholars form theories that attempt to explain away the above facts. Some used to claim that Jesus' disciples lied about the resurrection appearances or that the reports of Jesus' resurrection were legends that developed over time. But once the second fact above was admitted, that Jesus' original disciples sincerely believed He had risen and appeared to them shortly after His death, the legend and fraud theories fell apart. Today they have been largely abandoned.

Now the theory most commonly held by non-Christian scholars is that the appearances of the risen Jesus were hallucinations resulting from the disciples grief over Jesus' death. But this theory does not explain the third fact (Saul's conversion experience) since, rather than grieving over Jesus' death, he hated Jesus so much that he arrested and killed Christians. And while a hallucination could conceivably explain an appearance of Jesus to an individual like Peter (Lk 24:34; 1 Co 15:5), it does not explain the appearances to Jesus to groups, such as the Twelve, more than 500 at one time, and to all of the apostles when they were together (1 Co 15:5-7). Why not? Hallucinations are like dreams. Just as a friend cannot actually join you in one of your dreams, friends cannot join others in their hallucinations.

In contrast to the theories of skeptics, Jesus' genuine resurrection from death explains how Jesus' devastated disciples and, later on, one of the his best-know enemies, came to devote their lives to proclaiming that Jesus had risen from the dead. By far, this is the best explanation of the three commonly accepted facts listed above.

So, while science has proved that the dead do not return to life by natural causes, historical investigation suggests that Jesus rose supernaturally three days after His execution. Since there are many religions competing for your devotion, Jesus' resurrection verifies that His promises are words upon which you can bet your life and soul.

Courage and Godspeed,

Chad A. Gross

For more of Mike Licona's work, see here.

John Mark Reynolds and Objective Beauty

If you have not heard philosopher John Mark Reynolds, you should make a point to do so. During a conference I attended a few weeks ago at Mt. Airy Bible Church, Dr. Reynolds argued that beauty was objective. I found the arguments fascinating.

In this post, I want to highlight a 5 article series in which Dr. Reynolds outlines his case for objective beauty.

1. What my Nana Taught Me! Beauty matters!

2. Beauty in a Cynical Age

3. Beauty and Rat House

4. Beauty and the Abbotsford

5. Beauty and the Bible

Enjoy!

Courage and Godspeed,
Chad