The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas, Gary. and Michael Licona,

Resurrection of Jesus Christ
Introduction
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas and Michael Licona is divided into four parts, each part examining some aspect of the subject of the Resurrection of Christ. Part 1 examines the significance of the subject and why it matters. Part 2 explores the facts regarding the Resurrection and the evidence that is available to prove or disprove the Resurrection. Part 3 examines the rebuttals and arguments of those who wish to deny the Resurrection. Part 4 explains the Resurrection by situating it within the larger context of God’s plan and Who Christ Himself believed Himself to be—a necessary addition to the chapter in the light of recent media, such as The Last Temptation of Christ and other books and films, which posit that Christ struggled with a sense of his own divinity or was not fully aware of His mission or purpose from the beginning. Habermas and Licona make it clear that Christ was always fully aware of Who He was and what His mission was—from the time He stayed behind to teach the elders in the Temple when just a child to the time that He suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane and undertook His Passion in order to expiate for the sins of mankind. This paper will provide a critical summary of The Case for the Resurrection by summarizing and evaluating the arguments that the authors make, interacting with the key points of the reading, and critically evaluating the positive and negative aspects of the work overall.
Summary
The book first provides the framework for the examination of the facts by setting out the case for why the facts matter in the first place. This is an important framework because it is one that allows the discussion to move forward. If there is no groundwork or no understanding of why the facts need to be examined, the purpose becomes fruitless. Thus, the authors do well to lay this groundwork out first. The authors then move on to examining the facts. They do this by discussing what they call a “quintet of facts” or the 4+1 facts, which prove the Resurrection.[footnoteRef:2] These facts include evidence from historians, eye witnesses, the Church itself, the Bible as an historical artifact, and the fact that no other evidence to the contrary has even been given—only unverifiable claims. The facts are laid out effectively and convincingly. The authors then explore the counter-arguments and these are also examined fairly before they finally move on to a fuller explanation of the Resurrection by examining the Person of Christ and why it makes perfect logical sense to believe in the Resurrection, based on Christ’s works prior to the Resurrection and based on the life of the Church after their Resurrection. The entire schematics of the narrative, viewed from this vantage point, reveal a totally comprehensive, coherent and consistent story. This is the most effective portion of the book in terms of underlying the meaning of the subject. [2: Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004), 213.]
Why the Book Matters
The authors make the claim that the subject (and the book for that matter) is significant to human history because the central thesis and claim underlying the Resurrection is that all of mankind’s hopes depends upon this one event. If the Resurrection did not take place, then men have no hope and it is very likely that God is dead, just as Nietzsche said in the 19th century. If the Resurrection did take place, it means that the story of Christ is very real and that mankind has to adhere to the teachings of Christ in order to attain Heaven.
The argument is a valid one and a critical one to put in context especially for modern readers. It really does come down to an either/or choice: either Christ was God and did as the Church says He did, or he was not and all his teachings were fanciful and unrealistic and his own death proves as much. If Christ rose from the dead, then everyone who doubted must be like Thomas, understand the reality, and reform—because the way of the Cross is the way of Christ and following that way is all that matters in life. If Christ did not rise from the dead then he was not god and he may be dismissed as a liar and idealist.
As the authors state in the preface, the point of the Resurrection is really most essential for faith to be a matter of life and death. The authors asks, for example: “Is Christianity really true? Are there any good reasons to know which religion is true? Could it be that God does not really exist?” and they note these questions pose certain theological parameters, whether found to be true or false: “After all,” they state, “if atheism is true, then why should we subject ourselves to the teachings of Jesus? Why should we insist on views that alienate others, especially the claim that Jesus is the only way to heaven?”[footnoteRef:3] Thus, the authors do an adequately effective job of framing the significance of the subject for a modern reader. [3: Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004), 7.]
The Arguments
When it comes to the arguments the authors make, they rely on two types of data—factual evidence and contextual understanding. They show not only that the evidence for the Resurrection is quite strong, but they also show why the Resurrection makes sense from a historical and theological point of view. They show that no resurrection would be more inconsistent with the history of God in the world, the prophecies put forward in the Old Testament and the life of the Church since the time of Christ. They argue, for instance, that the life of the Church as it has existed for 2000 years simply would not have been possible had the miracle of the Resurrection not occurred. That aside, they also rely on a bevy of factual evidence to make their case to the reader.
This two-pronged approach is particularly helpful and does provide the reader with both a sense of what happened and why it had to happen the way that tradition has said it happened. The key points that the authors make here are that history is quite clear on the details. For instance, it is known where Christ was buried—i.e., the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea—which in and of itself is a highly important point: “Joseph was allegedly on the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish ruling body in the time of Jesus, and was therefore a public figure.”[footnoteRef:4] Had Christ not been buried there, Joseph would have denied it and an historical account of this denial would have been recorded—but none was. Thus, the claim stands—and that is why the Jews did not refute it. Instead, they claimed that the body of Christ was stolen from the tomb of Joseph—and that that is why His followers could say He rose from the dead. But what evidence supports this narrative of the Jews? The authors show that there is zero evidence to support this fanciful claim and, on the contrary, a host of evidence to support the argument that the Resurrection did occur—such as eye witness testimony, numerous miracles that happened, the conversion of the disciples and the sudden expansion of the Church through their vigorous and relentless preaching (preaching in many cases through persecution and even unto their own deaths). The authors show that these were the same disciples who, after the crucifixion, fled and were hiding in fear because they worried they too might be arrested. Some were even going away completely—before being stopped by the risen Christ. The fact is, as the authors show, that Christ’s Resurrection changed the hearts and minds of the disciples once and for all and finally gave them the hope and courage they needed to devote the rest of their lives to Christ and to the way of the Cross. The Resurrection was the fact upon which the expansion of the Church was able to based so quickly and miraculously by what had previously been a bunch of scared and frightened disciples. This is the main key point that is most important in the book and it is the one that the authors emphasize considerably well. [4: Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004), 68.]
Positives and Negatives
The book has very many positives and few negatives, but both are worth mentioning in order to understand the impact of the work overall. First, the positives of the work are that it proceeds in a logical and coherent manner that is plainly spelled out at the beginning so that the reader knows exactly where the authors are going to take him and what material they are going to offer with regards to the topic. First, they explain the significance, then they provide the factual evidence, then they examine the counter-arguments (which is one of the best parts of the book because it gives the skeptical reader the opportunity to have some of his own likely questions and concerns answered by the authors), and finally they provide the theological grounding for the Resurrection and why it makes sense both historically and theologically.
The authors even answer objections such as alien theory, which is actually a popular argument among people today because modern culture has been steeped in science-fiction and people want to know how Christ fits in with the idea of life on other planets. As the authors notes, “A skeptic who brings up an objection like this may be grasping for any argument”[footnoteRef:5]—i.e., the skeptic is not really debating in good faith and is not willing to consent to the facts placed before him. The authors even give a bit of advice for the reader: “If you believe that the person is not truly seeking the truth at this point, smile and say something like, ‘It may be better to deal with the academic criticisms first, and if there is any time left over, we can look at the fun ones.’ This lets the person know that such a theory should not be given much merit, without being insulting.”[footnoteRef:6] This is one of the best aspects of the book: it is not just written for the modern reader who wants to know the truth, it is also written with the Christian apologist who already has the faith and wants to know how to better argue for the case of the Resurrection. [5: Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004), 94.] [6: Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004), 94.]
The main negatives of the book are that it is simply too short. Many of the points that are made, one feels, could actually be explored in a more thorough way. The authors include many pages of endnotes to show where their information is sourced from—which means that the reader can go back to these sources for more information if desired, but what would really be nice would be if the information from these sources were incorporated more fully into the book. That would make the book a much larger volume and give it the characteristic of being a definitive work or a work that one could point to as a book that is a must-read. As it is, the book is rather light reading and could be used to help one develop better arguments, but more input into the actual events and the actual sources that matter most could have made it even more compelling.
Conclusion
The book by Habermas and Licona effectively treats on the subject of the Resurrection of Christ by getting to the heart of the matter in terms of the evidence, the counter-arguments, and the big picture, and showing why it matters from the ultimate either/or perspective. Either Christ rose from the dead and did as they say He did, or he did not and he was never God in the first place. The Resurrection is thus seen as a point in history that has to be considered fully and exclusively in order for one to know how to live one’s life. The authors show that it has to be considered from an historical point of view because it is a matter of history—because faith does rest on reason and does require man to use logic to arrive at the point where he will assent to the proofs and express faith in Christ. Every reader is like Thomas to some degree: Thomas wanted proof—physical, tangible proof that Christ had risen and he said he would not believe until he could put his finger in the wound and touch it and see that Christ was indeed alive once more. This is exactly what happened, and Thomas was converted. The doubts were removed because he finally was able to see the evidence for himself. The evidence is still there—that is the argument that the authors make. They do it convincingly by pointing to the history of the Church (which never could have survived so miraculously had it not been guided by God and motivated by the Resurrection). The authors are able to make this argument because they can situate the Resurrection within the larger compass of history and show how lies are eventually exposed and how people who go to the deaths for a cause or an idea do so because they know it to be true.
Bibliography
Habermas, Gary. and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand
Rapids, MI: Kregell, 2004.