What do you think?
Rate this book
Did Jesus Rise From the Dead?: The Resurrection Debate
[This] is the most important question regarding the claims of the Christian faith. Certainly no question in modern religious history demands more attention or interest, as witnessed by the vast body of literature dealing with the Resurrection. James I. Packer says it well in his response to this 'When Christians are asked to make good their claim that this scheme is truth, they point to Jesus' resurrection. The Easter event, so they affirm, demonstrated Jesus' deity; validated his teaching; attested to the completion of his work of atonement for sin; confirms his present cosmic dominion and coming reappearance as Judge; assures us that his personal pardon, presence, and power in people's lives today is fact; and guarantees each believer's own reembodiment by Resurrection in the world to come' The Apostle Paul considered the Resurrection to be the cornerstone of the Christian faith. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, the whole structure, Christianity, collapses. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15:14-17, 'And if Christ has not been raised, 'our preaching is useless and so is you faith' More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God. . . . And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile [emphasis added]' The Christian faith-and its claim to be Truth-exists only if Jesus rose from the dead. The heart of Christianity is a living Christ.
212 pages, Paperback
First published March 1, 1987
About the author
Gary R. Habermas
62 books177 followersGary R. Habermas was born just outside Detroit, Michigan in 1950. Although he was raised in a Christian home and attended a German Baptist Church, he began having serious doubts about Christianity. For more than ten years, he faced uncertainty about key Christian claims and searched other religious and non-religious systems, especially naturalism. His studies centered chiefly on investigating various world views, occasionally getting close to what he thought might be the proper approach. During this time, as he explains, "The last thing I did at night was recall what I had learned that day to further my search. Early the next morning, it seems that the first thing that came to my mind was, 'Where did I end my studies last night?'" This continued for several agonizing years.
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
January 24, 2023
As I remember it, Habermas pretty thoroughly kicks Flew's ass because Flew isn't familiar with the latest historical scholarship for/against the resurrection. Flew is pretty persuasive when making philosophical arguments for atheism, but he's in over his head here.
August 12, 2024
THE FIRST (1985) DEBATE BETWEEN FLEW AND HABERMAS
Antony Garrard Newton Flew (1923-2010) was a British philosopher, and formerly a noteworthy advocate of atheism, until his 2004 change of mind (see 'There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind'). He wrote such influential books as 'God & Philosophy'; he also participated in debates/dialogues such as 'The Warren-Flew Debate on the Existence of God,' 'Does God Exist?: The Great Debate,' etc.
Gary Habermas (born 1950) is Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University, and is a foremost evangelical apologist who has written many books such as 'The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus,' 'The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ,' etc. These two philosophers also later met in debate in 2003 ('Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew) and 2004 ('Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew'). This book contains a transcript of the formal debate at Liberty University on May 2, 1985, followed by a dialogue the next day with Flew, Habermas, Terry L. Miethe, and W. David Beck. Finally, there are written responses to the debate by Wolfhart Pannenberg, Charles Hartshorne, and James I. Packer.
Habermas strongly endorsed the Shroud of Turin, saying that it "provides some empirically repeatable evidence for the Resurrection" (pg. 27-28); "it provides more strong evidence for Jesus' death" (pg. 69); but he also admits, "I will agree with you [Flew] that if the shroud can be legitimately carbon-dated, and it is not first century, that is going to have to be faced by anybody who says the shroud is authentic." (Pg. 119) [Habermas, of course, co-wrote two books on the Shroud: Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death & Resurrection of Jesus Christ and The Shroud and the Controversy; although in the latter book after the 1988 carbon testing of the Shroud he seemed less convinced, he still gave a "positive" lecture about it at the 2010 Evangelical Theological Society's annual meeting, that's currently posted on YouTube.]
In Flew's first rebuttal of Habermas, he said, "Dr. Habermas asked me whether I was an adherent of the swoon theory or any of these other accounts. No, I am not. My argument is that we are simply not in a position to reconstruct an account. I think the whole exercise of who moved the stone and so on is an impossible and misguided exercise because we have not got enough evidence of what actually happened in that undated year of the Easter events." (Pg. 33)
Later, Habermas argues, "you have to prove that Paul is saying that Jesus appeared to him in the same manner that he appeared to the disciples. I don't see that anywhere in Paul. I think Paul was arguing that Jesus literally appeared to him, period. I don't think Paul answers the question of whethe rhe could touch Jesus or whether he saw him eat. Paul just ignores those issues." (Pg. 57)
Habermas also admits, "there are approximately eighteen non-Christian writers who record more than one hundred events from the life, death, Resurrection of Jesus, and the beliefs of the earliest Christians. Now I suspect that Dr. Flew would say that they're comparatively late, because they are much later than the earlier creeds, and that's one reason why I prefer to use the core facts and the early creed in I Cor 15." (Pg. 65)
This book will be of keen relevance for anyone interested in Christian apologetics (including skeptics).
Antony Garrard Newton Flew (1923-2010) was a British philosopher, and formerly a noteworthy advocate of atheism, until his 2004 change of mind (see 'There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind'). He wrote such influential books as 'God & Philosophy'; he also participated in debates/dialogues such as 'The Warren-Flew Debate on the Existence of God,' 'Does God Exist?: The Great Debate,' etc.
Gary Habermas (born 1950) is Professor of Apologetics and Philosophy and chairman of the department of philosophy and theology at Liberty University, and is a foremost evangelical apologist who has written many books such as 'The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus,' 'The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ,' etc. These two philosophers also later met in debate in 2003 ('Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew) and 2004 ('Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew'). This book contains a transcript of the formal debate at Liberty University on May 2, 1985, followed by a dialogue the next day with Flew, Habermas, Terry L. Miethe, and W. David Beck. Finally, there are written responses to the debate by Wolfhart Pannenberg, Charles Hartshorne, and James I. Packer.
Habermas strongly endorsed the Shroud of Turin, saying that it "provides some empirically repeatable evidence for the Resurrection" (pg. 27-28); "it provides more strong evidence for Jesus' death" (pg. 69); but he also admits, "I will agree with you [Flew] that if the shroud can be legitimately carbon-dated, and it is not first century, that is going to have to be faced by anybody who says the shroud is authentic." (Pg. 119) [Habermas, of course, co-wrote two books on the Shroud: Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death & Resurrection of Jesus Christ and The Shroud and the Controversy; although in the latter book after the 1988 carbon testing of the Shroud he seemed less convinced, he still gave a "positive" lecture about it at the 2010 Evangelical Theological Society's annual meeting, that's currently posted on YouTube.]
In Flew's first rebuttal of Habermas, he said, "Dr. Habermas asked me whether I was an adherent of the swoon theory or any of these other accounts. No, I am not. My argument is that we are simply not in a position to reconstruct an account. I think the whole exercise of who moved the stone and so on is an impossible and misguided exercise because we have not got enough evidence of what actually happened in that undated year of the Easter events." (Pg. 33)
Later, Habermas argues, "you have to prove that Paul is saying that Jesus appeared to him in the same manner that he appeared to the disciples. I don't see that anywhere in Paul. I think Paul was arguing that Jesus literally appeared to him, period. I don't think Paul answers the question of whethe rhe could touch Jesus or whether he saw him eat. Paul just ignores those issues." (Pg. 57)
Habermas also admits, "there are approximately eighteen non-Christian writers who record more than one hundred events from the life, death, Resurrection of Jesus, and the beliefs of the earliest Christians. Now I suspect that Dr. Flew would say that they're comparatively late, because they are much later than the earlier creeds, and that's one reason why I prefer to use the core facts and the early creed in I Cor 15." (Pg. 65)
This book will be of keen relevance for anyone interested in Christian apologetics (including skeptics).
January 17, 2018
Habermas was quite good. Flew was quite bad. Seemed like they ganged up on him, poor fellow. I commend the book (and the debates on youtube) but I think it's better that you go read Habermas's book instead. I love the way he argues for the resurrection. I think it spot on.
April 26, 2018
Habermas argues well (nothing surprising), but Flew argues in circles and avoids the issues so badly that much of the argument is frustrating and feels like it's getting nowhere.
August 12, 2019
And the Truth wins by a landslide!
June 15, 2010
I couldn't stand finishing it. The sheer acrobatics and tricks employed by the apologists made me sick to my stomach. Plus, the "panel of judges" is comprised mostly of Christians/theologians. So, guess who was declared the "winner" of the debate by them? Hint: Not atheist Anthony Flew. This is a book that will satisfy Christians, most of whom are unfamiliar with basic logical concepts and unwilling to be truly skeptical.
August 22, 2014
Strange book. Flew presents a series of philosophical points. Habermas a series of historical points, which Flew has little interest in. The talk past each other. There is little getting to grips with the evidence. It comes across as an example of modern fundamentalist apologetics. Disappointing.
August 12, 2016
Certainly an interesting read, not much of a debate. Falls apart a bit when Habermas' claims are looked into (12 known historical facts).
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? I still doubt it.
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? I still doubt it.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews