The Resurrection Fact: Responding to Modern Critics

by John J. Bombaro, Adam S. Francisco (Editor)

As this team did with the book Making The Case For Christianity (CPH), Drs. Bombaro and Francisco bring together a variety of contemporary Lutheran apologists to respond to a wide array of challenges to the heart of the Christian Faith.

Each chapter addresses a specific argument from a popular, non-Christian author and offer a clear and concise rebuttal and argument for the resurrection.

The editors have found able representatives from the disciplines of biblical studies, history, philosophy, and the legal profession to write each chapter. The Resurrection Responding to Modern Critics is accessible, written for a broad audience, and is ultimately designed to equip its readers for the apologetics task.

Genres: Theology

248 pages, Paperback

Published August 31, 2016

Reviews

[Kris · Rating 4 out of 5]

An anthology of essays that considers the evidence for the historical resurrection. Many authors refute claims from atheists and Christians that the resurrection did not occur, or was only “spiritual” in nature. I found the essay on myth really helpful. Some of the details here you would also see in books like The Case for Christ.

[Christopher Lawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

THE RESURRECTION FACT reminds me a lot of the classical works on evidential apologetics--especially the classic by John Warwick Montgomery, [[ASIN:0840756410 Faith Founded on Fact: Essays in Evidential Apologetics]]. I found the THE RESURRECTION FACT to be a well-written book, which discusses the historical evidence for key beliefs of the Christian faith--especially the Resurrection. I'm not sure I saw anything really new or enlightening, but it's a solid set of essays on classical evidential apologetics.

There's an interesting section--don't miss it! It's in Chapter 2, "Explaining the Empty Tomb." In this chapter, the author briefly mentions the question of presuppositions. In discussing Ehrman's rejection of miracles, the author notes that Ehrman starts with the presumption of naturalism, and of course, then disparages any miraculous events. Ehrman, on the other hand, accuses the Christian of believing in miracles--not because of historical fact, but just beause of their prior believe.

I wish the above subject of starting assumptions would have been explored more deeply; it's a really critical subject, which goes to the heart of apologetics. It's a little bit of a tricky subject, but worth the investment of time.

The non-believer professes to take a scientific view of history, but what is the basis for their research? On what grounds to they invetigate or come to conclusions about ANYTHING? If the universe is one giant accident, the entire foundation of science is undermined. Anything can happen at any time; there is no reason to think anything should be the same from one minute to the next. There is no "uniformity of nature."

Here's the apologetic key: An unbeliever, in order to begin to argue historical events, has to first assume the Christian's position in a God of order and design, in order to have any foundation to argue anything at all! (And of course, any basic for morality is gone surely gone down the drain as well.) If the Christian allows the unbeliever to begin discussing historical evidence, he is "giving away the store."

Anyone interested in Christian apolgetics would be wise to become familiar with presuppositional apologetics. I recommend in particular the fun read by Greg Bahnsen [[ASIN:0915815281 Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith]]. Probably not as much "fun" but excellent are the meaty works by Cornelius Van Til.

If you get a chance, listen to the classic audio debate on the existence of God, which took place at UC Irvine in 1985: [[ASIN:0967831776 The Great Debate: Does God Exist?]].

Advance Review copy courtesy of the publisher.

[Kendall Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Generally well done. Good introduction to some of the specific arguments put forward by critics of the resurrection. The authors have done their homework and do a good job of guiding the reader through both the critical scholars and orthodox scholars on the topic. There are probably few books out there that are accessible to the average educated layperson that will get this specific in responding to the views of particular skeptical scholars of a variety of stripes.

The approach is generally rather evidentiary which from my perspective has both advantages and disadvantages. A few essays seemed to miss the point of what the scholar they were criticizing was saying.

Essays that particularly stand out are the essays by Parton, Mumme, and Armstrong/DeLoach. In particular the Armstrong/DeLoach essay is more than worth the price of admission.

[Jeff · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm not giving my rating based upon the arguments presented. I actually came away with a greater appreciation of the resurrection of Christ. I'm rating it two stars because it's fairly heavy reading and I found it challenging to get through to the end. Really, by the final chapter, I was just reading to finish it and get it off my plate, so to speak. If you want a meaty book that addresses and refutes modern arguments against the reality of the physical resurrection of Christ, then by all means, give this book a try. But in my case, it was heavier reading than I expected and I am glad to have finished it and set it aside.

[Bob Hayton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Spring is in the air. The days are getting longer. Green grass and the hint of leaves on the trees — and is that a flower blooming already?

With the season comes one special holiday: Easter. This is the time that Western culture dedicates to the special remembrance of bunnies and Easter eggs, candies and chocolates — oh, and jelly beans. But once upon a time, we used to remember the real meaning of Easter.

Jesus Christ, his betrayal and mournful death on Good Friday, followed by the brightness of Resurrection Sunday. “He is risen! He is risen indeed!” once sounded on many lips. Sadly the only time we have for Christ now is a documentary or two rehashing old denials of the empty tomb. A religious expert and scholar spins a witty yarn about how gullible people were back in the dark ages. We enlightened people don’t need a Risen savior now. The empty tomb was a mistake, and Jesus’ corpse must have lain somewhere else – forsaken and neglected until years later, imaginations ran wild…

It is to this sad modern state of affairs, that Christians in the West are called to minister. We are to upend the malaise and awaken the sleepy populace with the wonder of the Risen Son of God.

A new book from New Reformation Publications, and the 1517 Legacy Project, aims to help us in this daunting task. In The Resurrection Fact: Responding to Modern Critics, John J. Bombaro and Adam S. Francisco bring together an intriguing mix of Lutheran churchmen, theologians, and experts in philosophy and legal practice to tackle modern criticism of the resurrection head on.

The centrality of the resurrection for Christian faith and practice is underscored, even as attempts to downplay the importance of the bodily resurrection are countered. Specific arguments by Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, Michael Martin, Robert Price, Dale Allison, Gerd Lüdemann and others are addressed and several lists of additional resources are shared with the reader. The result is an accessible introduction to the debate surrounding the resurrection.

At times the book is a bit repetitive: several of the contributors treat us to the same explanation of David Hume’s influence behind the bias toward antisupernaturalism so prevalent today. Occasionally, there seemed to be an over-dependence on secondary sources and a tendency to summarize rather than quote the arguments of the critic being addressed. There was even a wholesale borrowing of significant parts of N.T. Wright’s research on the resurrection, particularly evident in the chapter by Jonathan Mumme in his critique of Dale Allison. Wright’s work (specifically his book The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3, Fortress Press, 2003) is credited and pertinent to the discussion for sure, but perhaps overly relied on in the space of one chapter. Wright is second only to C.S. Lewis in the number of references found in the book’s index.

Quibbles aside, this is a sound book with a wealth of information and excellent references for further research. Many readers may encounter this book without much exposure to the arguments being raised against the historicity of Christ’s bodily resurrection. This book will educate and equip the reader to stand firm in an age of unbelief. Another helpful theme throughout the book is the idea of myth not being simplistically dismissed as the opposite of rational fact. To the contrary, Christianity is both myth and fact. This idea expounded by C.S. Lewis, Tolkien and Chesterton, can be helpful in responding to attempts to classify Christianity as just a myth, no different from other ancient belief systems.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by New Reformation Publications for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

[Jonathan Roberts]

I have read many books on the resurrection, and this one was by far the most specific. What do I mean by that? Well, rarely does one find a book that addresses just one critic's views of the resurrection, but this book does that. There are lots of books on my shelves that contain collections of essays about Christianity, from Contending with Christianities Critics to Come Let us Reason and many more. But this book was even more specific in that each author addressed a specific critic and his/her specific work. Authors such as Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, Michael Martin, Matthew McCormick, etc. Now don't get me wrong, these chapters are very good, but they may not hit the mainstream apologetics audience that some of the other books I have read do. Highly recommended if you have read any of these critics, and a good high quality work.

[Bledar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good response to modern critics with reading not for the average reader.

Because the resurrection is the center of Christian Faith, Satan will continue to attack it. The goal will remain the same, but the approach will be different. "The Resurrection Fact: Responding to Modern Critics" comes into scene to address the challenge. To illustrate the new challenge I am giving and example. If at one point the sceptics tried to find new ways to explain the empty tomb, for the new critics Jesus doesn't make it to the tomb at all. The book answers modern critics very well, but the language is not for the average reader.

I am not paid for this review, but I did receive a free copy in exchange for a review by CrossFocusedReview.com I was not asked to write either positively or negatively about it.

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book Review: The Resurrection Fact

The Resurrection Fact: Responding to Modern Critiques is a collection of essay by various scholars addressing critiques and demonstrating the evidences for the resurrection of Jesus. Because the resurrection is so central to the Christian faith it resfacbecomes the bases upon which the church stands or falls. As the apostle Paul says in his letter to the church in Corinth, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.” Such a significant point of the faith has not been left without evidences and these evidences should be shared if for no other reason than to exalt the Lord of glory.

What I found interesting about the book is the contributors to the volume. Each of them comes from a specialized field of study (Law, History, Philosophy, etc.) which they apply in their responses to topics such as, skepticism of the New Testament, the events of Good Friday and Easter, the role of faith and evidence for the resurrection, and the historicity of the resurrection. Each contributor is in dialogue with a modern day critic which I found to be very useful. This is not a rehashing of the same old arguments. The writers of the Resurrection Fact are dealing with contemporary critics which offers a fresh new look at these important issues.

As far a my own criticism goes I can’t think of any. However as tradition would have it they wont come to me till after I have completed the review. However, I can anticipate someone being apprehensive about reading a book on apologetics written by academicians. My response is to not be. It is important to have individuals who understand the issues write a response. That is a given. However, reading above your comfort level will only make you a better reader and thinking.

I personally rank this book a 5 out of 5.



Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”