Program 6: One of the Most Controversial Facts of Jesus’ Life--His Appearing to His Disciples After his Death

Introduction

Dr. John Ankerberg: The search for the historical Jesus is a hot topic in both popular and academic circles today and has drawn a lot of attention from national magazines, such as Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report. Further, the media has given an undue amount of attention to the outlandish statements of the Jesus Seminar, a self-selected liberal group representing a very small percentage of New Testament scholarship. Today we will address the questions surrounding the debate over the historical Jesus and show there are a significant number of historical facts about Jesus in secular and non-New Testament sources which prove that the Jesus of history is the same Jesus of the Christian faith.

My guest is world-class philosopher Dr. Gary Habermas, author of the book, The Historical Jesus and about twenty other volumes. He received his Ph.D. from Michigan State University. Dr. Habermas is chairman of the Department of Philosophy at Liberty University and has written more than 100 articles, mostly on the life of Jesus, which have appeared in scholarly journals and elsewhere. Join us for this edition of The John Ankerberg Show and learn why Jesus is one of the most historically verified lives of ancient times.

Ankerberg: Welcome. In the last few weeks Dr. Gary Habermas has been presenting and documenting 12 historical facts that virtually all critical scholars today believe about Jesus. He has gone even further and stated that if you accept just a half dozen of these acknowledged facts, they will provide you with a solid, historical foundation for believing in the traditional view of Jesus. Today we will examine one of the most controversial facts of Jesus’ life: his appearing to his disciples. This evidence confronted Dr. Habermas during his skeptical days, working on his Ph.D. at Michigan State University. Listen:

Habermas: Last week I made the comment that I spent 10 years in more of a skeptical mode, followed by more sporadic doubts for years after that. I argued with Christians especially regarding their basis for believing what they did about Scripture. I would respond: “But you can’t know this,” and “You can’t know that.” I would also accuse them of just quoting Scripture passages to me. But I couldn’t get rid of certain facts from my own research.

I ended up doing my Ph.D. at Michigan State University and my dissertation topic was the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. Several of my professors didn’t agree with where I was heading, and I imagine that they were not very excited about my proposal. But they never said so and they were very fair about it. As nearly as I could tell, two of my committee members were agnostics (one of those a Jewish scholar) and a third one was a skeptic. The skeptic told me after I received the committee’s approval, “Just don’t say that the resurrection happened because the Bible said so.”

I would never have argued like that anyway, because that wasn’t my view. So it came down to the historical facts that evidenced this event and whether or not it could be said that the resurrection was a historical fact.

We need to make one absolutely crucial note before moving on: when my professor told me not to say that the resurrection happened because the New Testament said so, neither he nor other critical scholars meant that the New Testament could never be cited at all. Christians seem to think quite frequently that this is what critics mean, but that is not the case at all. This is more than clear, since skeptics will almost always cite the relevant biblical texts when speaking on this topic, even if conservative scholars do not!

What he meant was, various passages could definitely be utilized, but only in cases where these were critically-attested passages, that is, the texts that were established according to critical standards. Believers often call this the “pick-and- choose” method, but critical scholars are usually very specific with regard to why particular passages are acceptable. These Scripture portions need to meet particular historical standards. Often, these same or similar standards are also applied to other ancient works.

Now then, how should we treat the New Testaments accounts of the resurrection appearances? We can begin precisely where critical scholars do, since virtually every one of them will admit and allow that the disciples had real experiences of some sort that convinced them that they had witnessed real appearances of the risen Jesus. It is generally recognized that these experiences and beliefs on their part were indisputable facts from the New Testament. Otherwise, many things that we know to be true could not be explained unless the disciples at least believed that they had seen the risen Jesus.

Why is this historical fact conceded? There are actually several reasons for this conclusion. For example, we have their reports, as we have already pointed out in detail. Were these things reported truthfully? For starters, it is usually recognized that when someone willingly gives their life for a cause, be it willingly dying for one’s country such as kamikaze pilots in World War II, or for an ideology, even a non- Christian one, we generally acknowledge that whether or not they were mistaken, they really believed what they died for. That’s the key each time. Nothing else adequately explains very well their actions, beliefs, and overall mindset. They believed their country, philosophy, or religious views were worth dying for.

Even critical scholars rightly extend that same conclusion to Jesus’ disciples. The best explanation by far is that they believed that Jesus was actually raised from the dead. No less a skeptic than Rudolf Bultmann himself, in his seminal essay on demythologization, “New Testament and Mythology,” determined that even secular historians would allow that Jesus’ earliest followers believed that they saw the risen Jesus, referring to it as a historical fact. That’s definitely the major fact here, and it is one that is freely admitted and allowed. Everything else flows from there to the actual post-death appearances of Jesus.

Ankerberg: Next, you’re probably saying, “I agree that it’s an indisputable fact that the disciples believed they saw Jesus, but the question is how we can get from “they thought they saw the risen Jesus” to “they actually saw him”? In his own skeptical days, Dr. Habermas had to wrestle with this question himself. Here’s what he discovered.

Habermas: Now, as Dr. Ankerberg just said, I imagine many folks who are listening might say, “Fine, I’ll grant you that the disciples believed that they saw the risen Jesus—they thought that they saw him. But people believe they saw all sorts of things and are clearly mistaken. So how in the world do you get from ‘they thought they saw him’ to ‘they really did see him’?”

Initially, recall those half dozen “Minimal Facts” that we listed and discussed in some detail, that are so well-evidenced and acknowledged as historical by virtually all critical scholars. Using these, there are several additional reasons here that point clearly to the fact that the disciples actually did see the risen Jesus. Not only was this reported by the very folks who thought they saw him when Paul interviewed them more than once, but this message was formalized very, very early in the pre-Pauline creeds and the Acts sermon summaries.

Further, their lives were changed thoroughly, to the point that they were willing to die for their faith (and early sources attest that many actually did so). Recall here that the resurrection was their central proclamation, as well—their foundational point -- hence, it was this specific belief that they were the most sure of and were the most willing to die for. It was the gospel, Paul attests, “as of first importance.” Then how do we get Paul the persecutor onboard except due to his thinking that he also saw the risen Jesus, as well? The exact same thing is true for James the skeptic, too. They were completely onboard and died for this same belief. How do all of these things happen? So that every one of these witnesses agreed that they saw the risen Jesus, as the center of their faith, and were willing to die for this belief, indicated that they really believed it! So I get it—anyone can “see” about anything. We know that—so we checked out those options, too. Here we need to remember my earlier comments that the longer list of twelve and especially the half-dozen historical facts in particular, along with the data that support these Minimal Facts, are enough to enumerate the major reasons why the key naturalistic theories fail to explain these facts other than by the resurrection. We even briefly explored some major natural options. Okay, so the disciples thought that they saw the risen Jesus, but some people simply say that they saw hallucinations. But we also pointed out in some detail how hallucinations are clearly unable to explain the appearances.

So then other “what if” scenarios may be attempted, too, such as, “That’s because they really did see him! Jesus never died in the first place, so he just showed up a little while later.” However, that clearly did not work, either, as we detailed briefly above. These are only some alternative examples, although they are major ones. In a similar way, all the naturalistic theories fail, and that’s more than just a statement. I have written about these alternative options and their problems in great detail, in hundreds of pages in fact.

What does Christianity have that no other religion does? Other major founders were believed to be messiahs or prophets of one sort or another, too. Anybody can be wrong about these things, as well. However, there was something different about Jesus’ disciples. They didn’t just say that Jesus was the Messiah, but that his resurrection from the dead was the evidence for it. Jesus had already said that earlier, too! And here’s another one of the keys: The disciples were the only persons in history who were in the position to know whether or not they really saw someone who had been raised from the dead. No other founder of any other belief system qualifies on this score, because there is no evidence that anyone else ever rose from the dead! The disciples’ central claim was, “We saw him after he died.” That’s unique in the history of religions. That’s why Paul was so sure that he declared after just repeating a list of the appearances, that, “If Christ has not been raised from the dead,” then our faith is vain.” [1 Cor. 15:14]

Now, let me tell a little story that might help to drive home a few of these points. Let’s talk about a very common human experience, say, shopping at the grocery store. Let’s say we both went separately to the store and I saw you there last night. I might recall a conversation we had and I reminded you of it: “Remember, we were talking about how to grill that steak?” Now, say that several of our buddies also happened to be there in a small group and we kept running into them throughout the store.

Once, several of us spoke with you. Another time, it was just me. Rounding another corner, five of us were all close and gathered around. Now let’s say for a more parallel case here, there were several such occasions over a month-long period of time one summer. Once, eleven or twelve of us all saw you in a different store.

Now, it would be pretty hard for someone to claim that we never saw you in these places. That would especially be the case if the other fellows confirmed the stories, in groups of twos and threes, or even as a larger group. For now, I’ll leave the story right here.

The disciples claimed further that “I believe his claims that he is the Son of God. I believe that God vindicated him as well as his teachings by raising him.” We have said that others have claimed that certain folks were prophets and so on.

However, Jesus’ disciples included something additional: “I saw you after you died. I touched you. And I wasn’t the only one there, either.” Parts of these times were rather ordinary experiences. “True, when you first appeared, I was shocked. But once that part was over, we all shared pretty normal times together.” The gospels report some of these things: Jesus walked around, he talked, and he even cooked a shore lunch. He did regular things, as in the grocery store example.

Now, as mentioned, several of us saw you both singly and in small groups in the grocery store last night, as well as other times and places throughout that summer. But here’s the “catch”: what if all of us also had been present at your funeral just a few days beforehand? What if several of us saw your body in the casket, and we saw one or two of your family members even reach over and touch you, confirming that you were indeed dead? Then came tonight, and we all saw you in the store? Now what? Many of your buddies saw you there together, too, and needless to say, we were stunned!

Now here’s the next question: how much evidence would it take to convince all of us that it was really you, present in that store? What about convincing somebody else who was not there, that we all saw you there a few days after your funeral? The point is, we could be convinced of two things: you were absolutely dead when we saw you last. And we also know that we all saw you in the store, walking around, smiling, and talking with us, even though we don’t know exactly how to explain it. But the circumstances were too easily noticeable to miss: like everyone else, we saw you picking up food. We saw you doing quite normal sorts of things. We even shook hands with you (several times!) and we couldn’t help but notice that the wounds from the car accident that killed you were all perfectly healed, too.

My point is that the disciples didn’t just say, “I believe that Jesus was a special individual.” They said something much more radical: “We saw Jesus alive again after he died in a pretty gruesome manner.” Somehow, we have to do justice to their confirmed statements that they had actually seen him again afterwards. The resurrection would have been miraculous. However, once that occurred, the walking, talking, smiling, and the shore lunch were pretty much normal events.

Now, let’s go back to our story. Seeing you in the grocery store was quite normal, as well. We did in fact see you there last week. I’m absolutely positive of that and you know what? I’ll remember that for the rest of my life. Every time I wonder about it, I’ll check it out with my buddies. “We saw him there” was the unanimous verdict. I think that’s what we’re dealing with here. Yes, the disciples believed that Jesus was the Messiah and they believed that he was raised from the dead. But besides that, they’ve got an additional punch here that nobody else has: what we might call the “We all saw you in the grocery store” scenario. If my faith is based on my seeing you at the store, I’m telling you, it’s pretty firm. After all, that’s what the disciples said as well: They saw the risen Jesus and seeing is believing. Tell me: what else could the disciples have done?

Ankerberg: Now, 250 years ago in his famous essay against the belief in miracles, David Hume said that people don’t accept miracles because “the preponderance of evidence outweighs such events.” That is, we’ve all had a lot of experience that has led us to the conclusion that people who die don’t come back to life again. But what new evidence could make us change our minds? Was this new exceptional evidence given to Jesus’ disciples? Dr. Gary Habermas says yes. Listen:

Habermas: I think that I would initially raise some problems with David Hume’s thesis itself. In the last couple of decades, the preponderance of studies specifically on his miracles essay have gone against him. He’s been criticized for several key, largely theoretical issues: a priori dismissals of evidenced data, totally misconstruing the nature of the inductive method and how data are gathered, not realizing that the answer to God’s existence could easily solve the miracles issue by itself (especially when other recent studies have shown that Hume himself was possibly if not probably a theist of some variety), and so on.

But back to the story that I have been developing here, I could be quite convinced especially of some largely mundane events such as my seeing you at the grocery store. But I am also equally positive that you were dead, as well, which may have been something like the process that the disciples went through. There are two main questions here—was Jesus actually dead? If that is answered positively, then did we all really, truly see him afterwards?

We might even be satisfied to leave it right there if I am positive of the answers to these two questions: that you died in an accident because I was at your funeral and remember well those bad scars, and if we were equally positive that several of us saw you alive again, healed scars and all, at the store and elsewhere. But because we are a potentially skeptical lot, we must go what may seem to us to be beyond the call of duty: Was this all a joke of some sort? Did you have a twin (with the same scars!)? Could it have been a hallucination?

But as we tick off the reasons against these “What if” scenarios in the case of Jesus, it might occur to us that we already have enough data here, especially when it is combined with Jesus’ overall world view (his claims to Deity, predicting his own death and resurrection, healing people regularly, and so on), to undergo a shift in thinking! He must have been raised from the dead!

Here’s my overall point about the state of the evidence. David Hume argued otherwise about 250 years ago, but in certain circumstances, we might know that supernatural events have actually occurred. In this case, we have many arguments that this man was raised from the dead. How would I know that? Such a shift in thinking could come due to the preponderance of the positive data--by an overwhelming piling up of the positive reasons. After all, what is so bad about a supernatural world view? Jesus Christ definitely held such a position, he was dead, and we definitely saw him again later, alive. It’s a theological version of 1 + 1 = 2! Therefore, David Hume’s general point, that dead men don’t rise, may be overridden in a very particular circumstance. Why? Because we have plenty of evidence that this man was dead three days ago, and today we have at least that much evidence if not more, that he was seen again, alive. But then the evidence grew as both singly and in groups, more people also witnessed him alive. Facts can add up like that until sometimes we just have to throw out hypotheses that say that these things cannot ever happen.

Now, going back to those half-dozen historical facts, what do we have here that indicates that Jesus was raised from the dead? Well, he was dead, asphyxiated, probably stabbed in the heart, without a sucking chest. To turn Strauss another way, coming back in anything but a raised body wouldn’t convince anybody of a resurrection anyway.

Then we have witnesses who keep saying, “I saw the risen Jesus.” This happened to individuals and groups alike.

Two of those who saw him included this person named Paul, on his way to kill and imprison Christians. He’s not in the mood to see the resurrected Jesus. Then, boom--Jesus is standing right there in front of him. Paul attested twice in 1 Corinthians that he had seen the risen Jesus. These events also included James, the insider, the family skeptic, who likewise met his risen brother.

Then their lives were transformed, not because of his teachings alone or due to some general euphoria, but because this event corroborated Jesus’ world view, as just mentioned. That means that God the Father of Jesus was involved and raised his Son in order to corroborate the truth of Jesus’ teachings. Therefore, with the presence of God’s actions, the event may be proclaimed as a miracle. Precisely because of the resurrection, the disciples’ faith was anything but vain. Now we can say that that also describes us today!

At each of these points, I’m saying that the inductive probabilities pile up further and further. The general rule, that dead men don’t rise, is looking less and less likely in this instance only, because it’s being outweighed by the specific facts— trumped by them, if you will.

We live our lives based on probabilities all the time anyway: Is it safe to drive home tonight, given the dangerous weather? Is this the very best medicine for this condition? What are the pros and cons of moving across the country? At many points we all have major, potentially life-changing decisions to make.

Now there’s this life-changing decision: Is Jesus Christ’s message really true?

Do we have enough evidence for his resurrection from the dead? Perhaps we are willing to conclude not just that these events probably happened, but that we should actually cry out, “Wow! He really was raised from the dead!” I think that we are there. I think this is what happened. The disciples witnessed the evidence upon evidence, what Luke calls “many convincing proofs” in Acts 1:3. So the question remains: are we ready to commit ourselves to Jesus Christ in light of his teachings—in effect, to say “I do” to him? Facts can make us inclined to decide something, but being sure is not the actual decision itself. After all, concluding that I should marry someone does not make me married!

Ankerberg: Next, a very important question for you personally. If you believe the historical facts about Jesus, does that make you a Christian? No. Well, then, what is faith? How does one become a Christian? Dr. Habermas answers these questions.

Listen:

Habermas: Now, just about this time I can picture an objection from the other side. Christians may be saying, “Whoa! This evidence is starting to look so good, what about faith? I mean, facts alone don’t push or even get us into the Kingdom of God.” But neither is faith a leap into the dark. In the New Testament, without exception, faith is based on trustworthy data. Paul said, back in 1 Corinthians 15:1-2, that when he came to Corinth, he preached the gospel message. On the factual side alone, definitions of the gospel in the New Testament include at least three truths. Present in the New Testament definition of the gospel are the Deity of Christ, his death, and his resurrection. Then Paul basically concluded here in this text, “If you believe these things, then you’re saved. If not, then you are not.”

In Christianity, there’s always some content to saving belief. We call that the gospel data: the Deity, death, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. But how does one move from the gospel data to salvation? Something is missing. The answer: facts plus faith equal salvation. But that’s not quite accurate enough. In the New Testament, we do not place our faith in the historical facts per se, but we place our faith in Jesus the person. I love history, but New Testament faith is not placed in history, it’s placed in the Jesus Christ of history. Or if you prefer, to get real exact here, the Jesus Christ of the gospel facts (his Deity, death, and resurrection) plus faith in him equals (leads to) one’s salvation.

Faith is placed in the person of Jesus Christ. I’ve mentioned that it is sort of like marriage. I could be convinced that a woman is the best possible person on earth for me to marry. She’s great here, she’s wonderful there, and over here, too— everywhere, in fact. But you know what? If I don’t say “I do,” then we’re not married. I think that’s somewhat close to the New Testament picture. It’s an analogy but a decent New Testament picture of what faith in Jesus Christ is. We could be convinced that Jesus did this and that he did that. He died for my sins, he was buried, and he rose again from the dead, too. He’s even the Son of God. But according to the New Testament, if I don’t say “I do” to him, if I refuse to say “I trust him,” if I don’t commit myself to him, then I’m not a Christian—just like I wouldn’t be married without the equivalent. We’re coming down now to what this means. The Jesus Christ of the gospel facts, plus faith, equals salvation. I think that’s Paul’s claim in the first two verses of 1 Corinthians 15:1-2.

Ankerberg: Gary Habermas said the facts plus faith equals salvation. Let me ask you, have you transferred your trust from yourself to Jesus for your salvation? The historical facts about Jesus are the foundation for anyone’s faith-commitment to him. But the facts alone won’t save you. Only the Jesus of the facts will save you. Each one who has ever become a Christian has realized via the facts that Jesus is real. But then they’ve experientially come to him in prayer and faith, telling him that they are sinners and transferring all of their trust to him. The Bible states that all men and women are separated from God because we have broken God’s moral laws; we have sinned against him.

Second, the Bible says when Jesus was on the cross, our sins were placed on him and he died in our place. He took the punishment that we deserve and could never repay, and paid it in full. It’s his gift to us. Now if you will come to Jesus and admit you are a sinner, and ask him to forgive you, he will do just that. You only need to say a prayer to him and entrust yourself into His hands. He will make you a Christian; he will forgive your sins and give you the gift of eternal life. The Bible says, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” [Acts 2:21] You say, “Don’t I have to work for it? Don’t I have to go to church first?” No. Eternal life is a gift. Paul says, “The wages of our sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” [Rom. 6:23] The Bible says God wants you to have his gift, the gift of eternal life, and there’s nothing you can do to earn it. That’s why it is a gift. And God will give you that gift the moment you place your trust in Jesus. All who have placed their trust in Jesus love him. It’s out of our love for Jesus after we are saved that we want to serve him, but we don’t serve him to get saved.

Now let me see if I can illustrate faith. Picture yourself on a two-story building. A fire starts on the first floor and you rush up to the roof. There’s no way to escape. The fire trucks come and the firemen get out and bring a net. They look up at you and they say, “Jump.” You look down at the firemen and the net, and you say, “I can’t. I’m afraid.” The firemen say, “Don’t you trust us? Don’t you have faith?” You say, “Yeah, but it’s two stories up.” And they say, “Well, what choice do you have?” And you see the smoke and the flames coming up around you.

Now, just understanding the facts that those firemen can save you, will you be safe? No. Understanding facts won’t save you. It’s only when you step off of that building and you entrust yourself to those firemen and the net down below that you get saved. Some of you know the facts about Jesus, but you haven’t entrusted yourself to him. You need to do that now.

But also, it’s not the amount of faith that saves you. Let’s say that you jumped off the building because you had faith and now you get about halfway down, and you notice the firemen don’t have a net, they’re just holding hands. What good is your faith then? Will faith save you if you have placed it in the wrong object, namely, a group of firemen that can’t save you? It’s not your faith that saves you. You better make sure that you’ve got real firemen and a real net down there first.

In terms of salvation, it’s not your faith that saves you but a real Jesus, who really did rise from the dead, the One who said that he was God and can forgive your sins and give you eternal life. He’s the One you must place your faith in. Faith is really sticking your hand out to Jesus and saying, “I have nothing. Please give me your gift of eternal life.” He promises He will.

Right now, would you pray and by faith, place yourself into Jesus’ hands and trust him to give you eternal life? You might say, “God, I know I’m a sinner. I know my sin has earned for me eternal separation from you. I believe Jesus died in my place when he died on the cross. I know that he rose again from the dead. I accept his death as the full payment for my sin. I accept him as my Savior. Thank you for saving me, in Jesus’ name I pray. Amen.” If you prayed that prayer, the Bible says, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Others of you may be saying, “I just can’t do that yet.” If you delay trusting Christ for yourself, Dr. Habermas has this final word for you. Listen:

Habermas: Now, if you’re sitting there wondering, “Look, I don’t know. I’m a Hindu. I’m a Buddhist. I’m an agnostic. I’m an atheist.” Sure, you can walk away and not believe in Jesus, but do you know what? I don’t think you can walk away and say there’s no data. I don’t think you can walk away and say that there are no facts. I really wonder if you want to throw out or to ignore these facts because we can get to each one of them independently and for multiple reasons.

But do you know where all this is going? Paul says that it’s because of the resurrection that death has no sting. It’s because of the resurrection that the grave has no victory. Because of the resurrection of Jesus we have the precious opportunity for eternal life. But we need to say “I do” to Jesus. It’s all in whether we make that commitment. You know, you may believe someone wonderful is standing right next to you. Still, if you don’t say “I do,” you’re not married. If you don’t say “I do” to Jesus, what do you have? You still haven’t trusted his teachings. “O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory?” [1 Cor. 15:55] I leave you with the words of Jesus: “Because I live, ye shall live also.” [John 14:19]

Prof Gary R. Habermas edited transcript from six programs on The John Ankerberg Show, copyright 2000 (by permission).