Ankerberg Show

Building on the previous session, Dr. John Ankerberg continues the discussion with Dr. Antony Flew and Dr. Gary Habermas, diving deeper into the historical evidence and philosophical implications of Jesus' resurrection.

Gary Habermas: So, if we've got good arguments for God's existence, if we have evidence for God writing scripture, if we have evidence for him acting in time, if Jesus does miracles, then he rises from the dead. And if today, we see cases of double-blind experiments where we can answer a medical journal publishes answers to prayer, where 21 out of 26 categories the person is statistically better. We see some healing examples, of which we had time to go into. Near-death experiences.

And then we talk about the evidence for the resurrection. I think the Christian's point is the resurrection is not isolated. It's part of a big picture, what we would want to call a theistic worldview.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Dr. Flew, are you aware of the fact that every disciple, including Paul, died a martyr's death? I mean, horrible deaths because they believed and taught about the resurrected Christ. James was thrown from the Temple Mount. Peter was crucified upside down. Paul was beheaded. I believe it was Thomas who was skinned alive. Do you think that they would have died horrible martyr's deaths if they were believing a hallucination? Every last one of them?

Antony Flew: Well, I'm afraid that if it had seemed absolutely real to them, then it might have done. The crucial thing is how it seemed to them in human behavior, isn't it?

Dr. John Ankerberg: The problem is, if it was just a hallucination, the body was sitting over in the grave. They could have checked it out, and the message would have been squashed down pretty good in Jerusalem because you can't stand up in Jerusalem and say, Jesus is alive, we saw him, when the body's three blocks over.

Antony Flew: I think the same thing is the case. The crucial thing is what people believe themselves.

Dr. John Ankerberg: My question to you would be that then the fact is if Jesus' body was in the tomb, how do these boys get away with spreading this message when it would have been so easy to disprove it? Even the Jewish sources down through the years reported that the tomb was empty. Why would they do that? I mean, it just piles up higher and higher and higher that it's not probable to hold to that other view. It's more probable to believe Jesus actually came forth from the dead.

Antony Flew: But the more persuasive you make the case for the resurrection, the greater difficulty you have in explaining why so many people in Jerusalem at the time, who were in a position to know this, apparently did not believe it. I don't know what the answer is.

Gary Habermas: Several shots. Number one, a really intriguing verse, Acts chapter 6, verse 4b, says many priests became obedient to the faith. We're not told why. That's one insight. But secondly, we can't argue from non-evidence. We don't know who didn't believe. I mean, as far as we're concerned, maybe the majority of people believed. I mean, we don't know because we don't have data.

Third shot, I think philosophical worldviews overpower evidence in many cases. I think people don't believe because they don't want to believe. That doesn't touch the evidence one iota.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Another way of saying it would be, let's say that you had kind of an Agatha Christie scenario where the police broke into this room that had one door and it's locked. They come in and they find a person that's dead on the floor and it's cut up into 18 equal pieces. There's the person standing over the body with a big knife and it's blood dripping right off of her hands. Okay, so they bring this person into court and they give all the testimony and the jury goes to the jury room and they come on back. You know, it's a quick trial because the evidence is so clean cut.

The fact is they ask the foreman of the jury, "Please give the verdict." The guy stands up and he says, "Your Honor, we find the defendant over there completely innocent." Whereupon His Honor wakes up for the first time in four hours and says, "I need an explanation here." The guy says, "Well, I'll tell you what, even though you had all of this evidence, it's certainly possible, isn't it, that something else happened? I mean, it's possible that a Martian came down here and took his ray gun and he cut up that body into 18 equal pieces and because he's such an ornery Martian, he pinned it, he made it look like this person did it."

His Honor would have apoplexy because he told those people to draw attention only to the evidence, not everything that could be possible. What we're talking about here is you got to deal with the evidence. Does that make sense?

Antony Flew: Yes, but one's confronted with a case that some people reporting something that is not possible, a resurrection.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Not possible has to be defined. What is possible?

Antony Flew: Well, look, unless you think that it was practically impossible, there's nothing to be excited about at all.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Isn't that where near-death experiences come in, near-death experiences and these prayer deals and healing cases and things like that? Aren't they outside the box? Don't they open the door?

Antony Flew: Well, any of these things are things awaiting explanation, yes.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Now we have a very special question. Gentlemen, this question is for Dr. Flew. Jesus clearly was a conundrum to the religious leaders of his day. They didn't understand him. They couldn't explain him. They asked him repeatedly who he was. According to the Gospels on many occasions, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. The basis of his claims were the miracles that he performed. He said on more than one occasion, "If you don't believe me because of the words that I speak, then believe me because of the miracles that I perform."

The miracles of Jesus are a recorded event for both secular and religious historians and writers, as is the performing of miracles on the part of the disciples in the name of Jesus. These miracles are also recorded events that Luke wrote about in Acts the second chapter when he said this. Luke wrote, "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know."

Do you not agree that it would have been fatal to Luke's purposes of evangelism to point to these miracles and wonders and signs, as well as these well-known historical events that had occurred, "among you," unless he was confident that his readers had personally witnessed these supernatural events and that they would confirm these remarkable events to others? My question simply is this: If Jesus was not who he claimed to be, by what power did he perform such miracles? If his miracles were real, if he claimed to be the Son of God, should it not be unreasonable to believe that Jesus rose from the dead?

Antony Flew: If he performed these miracles, then it would be not unreasonable, but in all this, if this is right, why didn't more people believe in this?

Dr. John Ankerberg: I can give you a clear answer from my point of view and from the little reading that I've done. More people didn't believe in this because they were looking for a different kind of Messiah to come. The people in Jesus' day were looking for a Messiah that would save them from the tyranny of Rome. Jesus clearly made it plain to them that his kingdom was not of this earth, his kingdom was a heavenly kingdom. A great deal transpired between the day that he rode into Jerusalem on the back of a donkey with the people of Jerusalem crying "Hosanna," to a few days later when they crucified him.

What would cause them to go from a people in mass who wanted to make him king to people in mass who cried "crucify him"? The answer, very simply I believe, is found in the scripture and that is when the people understood that Jesus wasn't going to set up a kingdom on this earth, that he wasn't going to deliver them from the tyranny of Rome, they changed their cry from "Hosanna, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" to "crucify him."

The other way of asking the question would be, going back to our trial illustration, the question is not how many people didn't see the fellow pick up the gun and shoot the other guy. The question is always how many guys saw him pick up the gun and shoot the other guy. We keep coming back to this thing, apart from Habermas's witnesses here, you got nothing. It seems like he's got an awful lot. It's not what we don't have, it's what he's got that's awfully important here.

It seems to me, Dr. Flew, also that the claims of Jesus to be the Son of God in his own words were founded on the miracles that he performed. He said, "Believe me because of the works that I do. Forget what I'm saying. The blind see, the deaf hear, the lame walk, the dead are raised to life. Believe me, if for no other reason than the works you see." Those miracles are recorded facts by secular and religious historians and writers. By whose power has any man before or since done those?

When Jesus allegedly died and allegedly was raised again, in whose name did his disciples again perform those miracles? Jesus, in the name of Jesus. So my point very simply is the Lord himself said, "I am who I claim to be by virtue of the works that you see me do." If Jesus was able to perform those miracles, he clearly had to be the Son of God. If therefore the Son of God, it should be no surprise to us that God would raise him from the dead without regard to who saw him or didn't see him. Gary, what do you think?

Gary Habermas: I agree with your logic. I think the resurrection is a greater miracle than the others. But I think you're quoting, if I'm not mistaken, you're quoting Acts 2:22 because if you read the next two verses, Acts 2:22 says he's a man approved among you by the miracles he does. Next two verses, he died on the cross, God raised him from the dead. So Luke, Peter speaking there, Luke giving Peter's words, according to Luke, the supreme miracle was the resurrection because his argument is: miracles, death, resurrection.

I agree. So I think Luke says the big one here is the resurrection, but people of course are believing all along. But I like John's point too. What we have to deal with is the data we do have, not the data we don't have. Any final words from you fellows?

Dr. John Ankerberg: I'm still waiting for an answer to that. Tony, talk to us here.

Antony Flew: This is his stage and he's not going to let you walk off it.

Dr. John Ankerberg: There's no debate over whether the miracles of Jesus took place. So by whose power did he perform those miracles? From the beginning of recorded time until now, in whose name other than the name of Jesus have miracles ever been performed? He had to be who he said he was or he could not have done the works that he did. Therefore, if he was who he said he was, surely as he said of himself, his Father would not leave him in the grave.

Antony Flew: Yes, I think granted the premises, this conclusion follows, yes.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So you agree he was who he said he was.

Antony Flew: Granted the premises, I would agree with that, yes. I just don't believe these miracles happened.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So the secular and religious writers who recorded them were seeing hallucinations of themselves? Luke of himself, why would Luke write to the people who was making an attempt to evangelize people and convert people to Christianity, why would he write to them and say, "Ye men of Jerusalem, you know this man, Jesus of Nazareth, who's performed these miracles among you"? If Jesus had not performed those miracles among them, they would have said, "Who are you talking about? You're crazy. We never saw any miracles."

Antony Flew: But didn't some of them?

Dr. John Ankerberg: No. By the way, even the Jesus Seminar today, the miracles of Jesus are in right now. Marcus Borg gives three reasons for accepting Jesus' miracles. One of them is the enemies couldn't do anything about it. The enemies admitted them. Marcus Borg, the co-founder of the Jesus Seminar. He has a hard time with the supernatural element, but he believes that many of the things that the Gospels reported.

What do they do with the creeds, the critics that aren't evangelical Christians, but look at the creeds of Acts, say one through five, one through ten, where Peter is preaching and he's preaching to other eyewitnesses and pulling them in on that? What do the critics make of that?

Gary Habermas: They struggle. They especially struggle with 1 Corinthians 15. In fact, Marcus Borg takes the 1 Corinthians account very seriously. He says, reading Paul in a straightforward manner, I have to assume he saw something. He definitely believed it was Jesus. I don't know what else to say. In a couple places in the Gospels, he said Jesus supposedly raised the dead. Now this is the co-founder of the Jesus Seminar. He said Jesus supposedly raised the dead. He said, "Can I deny that?" He said most of my colleagues deny it. But he said, "I don't think we can be quite so fast here." He said he was an extraordinary man and "I'm not sure what he did and what he couldn't do." That's Marcus Borg.

Dr. John Ankerberg: And didn't Charlesworth make a statement about Josephus lately at Princeton? Tell me about that.

Gary Habermas: James Charlesworth of Princeton said that the Josephus account from what we know from history, we can be as sure as any historical conclusion can warrant, that Josephus referred to all these things that the disciples believed he was Messiah. That disputed passage which includes the disciples believed he was raised from the dead. Good data.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So again, historical evidence that piles up. Anything else? Well, I'm not wanting to be unkind, but I'm still looking for a direct answer. By whose power did Jesus perform those miracles? If by the power of God, and if his words were true, "Believe me for the very works that you see me do," then he claimed to be and in fact was the Son of God.

Antony Flew: Yes, well, I think if you believe in the miracles, this is a rational conclusion.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So in other words, it's possible to believe in secular and religious writings of historical events. On what basis do we have selective choice of what we believe from history? In other words, we want to believe in certain writers and certain historical accounts, but then there are other writers and their historical accounts that we dismiss as being unfathomable.

Antony Flew: Well, basically, I don't believe in anyone's accounts of a miracle, period.

Dr. John Ankerberg: So no matter who wrote them or how often they wrote them. I don't think you want to say that, Tony, do you?

Antony Flew: No, this is in fact the methods of critical history. You try to discover what actually happened, guided by your best evidence as to what was probable and improbable, possible or impossible. The miracles are things that you take to be impossible.

Dr. John Ankerberg: I would say this: I'm neither a scholar, nor a theologian, nor an attorney here this evening, but I would tell you from a legal perspective, and I would challenge an attorney to contradict this, the evidence as supported by those who were eyewitnesses to, forget the resurrection, the miracles alone, would be overwhelmingly enough to convict this man of the words that he spoke.

In the 20th century, if he was being charged for murder, he'd be found guilty. Too many eyewitnesses, too many things that they saw, too many miracles were performed. Too many people saw them, too many people wrote about them, not all of which were religious, not all of which were believers. Many of which were, in fact, secular people who didn't believe he was the Messiah but clearly admitted to the miracles that they saw him perform. So it's not a question of whether I believe that they took place. It's a question of reading from historical fact, the writings of those who said, "I was there, I saw these things happen."

All right, I want interaction between the two of you on what David has said. Gary, what would you say to your buddy? Is he being unreasonable?

Gary Habermas: Tony said something to me going to the airport, if he recalls this. 1985, I was taking him to the airport to drop him off and I said, "How much evidence would it take you to believe? Do you wish there was more?" And he said no. And I said, "Why not?" And he said, "Christians believe because they want to believe, atheists don't believe because they don't want to believe." I don't know if you remember saying that.

But I'm guessing that's where he is. It's a volitional matter and he chooses not to believe. And we don't, you can't twist anybody's arm. Jesus never did. I think you make your decision.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Maybe the answer, Gary, is that we still believe in miracles today and we will still therefore hold Dr. Flew in our prayers that God will do a miracle in his life.

Antony Flew: Well, thank you.

Dr. John Ankerberg: I'd like to have a closing comment from both of you. Gary, you want to go first?

Gary Habermas: I think the best case for the resurrection is one that builds on facts which critics accept for two reasons. It's a common ground that we can both talk about as we did tonight. And secondly, we accept only evidences which are multiply attested for a lot of reasons. When you go with those facts, you have to make a decision based on that data.

And if the evidence seems to indicate that Jesus was raised, I think you have to be strict, I think you can be a skeptic, but I think there's a point at which you have to say all the evidence we have is in its favor, none of the first-century evidence is against. Then you narrow this list almost arbitrarily down to four, five, six facts. These facts can disprove the naturalistic theories, these facts can show that Christ was raised from the dead, evidences. You do it on this minimal basis.

Tonight, I think we've shown and he doesn't like most of the naturalistic theories, but even hallucination, I think there's serious problems with it. Here's what everybody agrees, here's the bottom line: Every critic believes that the disciples thought they saw the risen Jesus. So here's the issue: If the disciples thought they saw the risen Jesus and hallucinations doesn't work, as far as we know nothing else works, all we have is this is an incredible event.

There's got to be a time at which we say what they gave evidence to occurred, especially if this is a world where I can see God, prayer, healing, life after death. And now I'm saying this looks like the Son of God. I do think the resurrection evidences who Jesus claimed to be.

Back to my wife, I do think in 1995, 2,000 years later, the resurrection says if Jesus was raised and he offered that to everybody else. I think when the disciples saw Jesus, they saw walking, talking eternal life. They saw heaven walking on earth. That allows me to say someday I will be able to see my wife. On the authority of the resurrection, every ounce of evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is evidence for my resurrection if I believe.

Dr. John Ankerberg: One last thing before Tony talks and that is what is the message that Jesus gave? Let's assume for a moment that it's not just intellectual facts that we're trying to have people accept here. How would you illustrate the fact of what real belief is versus just the historical evidence?

Gary Habermas: I think your example of marriage is fantastic. I think what Christianity is about is saying "I do" to Jesus. You gather data about somebody, nobody would suggest getting married in a vacuum. You learn facts about somebody and then you exercise faith and you say "I do." You don't know if this is going to be a perfect marriage, but you have facts and you say "I do."

I think that's the case with Jesus. He's invited us to check him out and there's a point at which you've got to say "I do" or "I don't." The point at which you say "I do" is what Christianity is all about. It's not something, I mean there's something mystical there, but for all intents and purposes, that's about as mystical as marriage is. We've got data to go on and we make a decision.

All I can say is after 10 years of skepticism myself, I'm not trying to stand up here and say I'm special, but I'm just saying God gave me a shot and I said "I do." God gave C.S. Lewis a shot and he said "I do." I think we can just make a decision based on the data and not on data we don't have.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Tony, I just really appreciate you being here and coming all the way from England in your busy schedule. Give us your closing remarks. Summarize the evidence because that's what we've been trying to go on.

Antony Flew: Well, I think the most important thing I said was that what it is rational to do about any evidence depends on what you already believe with good reason. And therefore, what it is rational for people with the background of Jews at the time of the events in Jerusalem is very different from what it is rational for people from a completely different background of belief and knowledge.

Dr. John Ankerberg: But you would admit now, let's kind of summarize where we're at, is that that hallucination theory needs a lot of work, doesn't it?

Antony Flew: Oh yes. But this idea that there is something impossible about saying that it was a hallucination, if you believe that people had some experience and they believed that they were seeing something and you believe that the something wasn't there, this seems to me just what a hallucination is. I don't see, I mean you may say that that sort of thing doesn't occur, but what I'm claiming, if I claim that people believed they saw something that wasn't there, I am just claiming that they had that sort of belief in something that wasn't there.

Dr. John Ankerberg: But the data, if the data say these are the last people to see hallucinations, say Paul with conversion disorder, the disciples who saw Jesus in groups, if hallucination doesn't work, then what do you do?

Antony Flew: Well, it does work in individual cases. So you've got to weigh. This is the first mention of those 500. And as this is the first evidence we have, it seems to me if there had really been a collective thing of 500 people, we'd have heard something about this in the Gospels.

Dr. John Ankerberg: But Paul predates the Gospels.

Antony Flew: Exactly so. We have it in Paul. Exactly so. And if this really occurred and Christians were talking about it, it's impossible to explain why the story is not repeated.

Gary Habermas: By the way, you have an appearance in Galilee with an unspecified number of people. You have an appearance in Jerusalem before the Ascension with an unspecified number. Some people think those are one of the big groups. But we do know there were 12 and the Gospels say that too. So even 12 individual hallucinations would be incredible. Hallucinations are rare.

Dr. John Ankerberg: Guys, I'm going to cut it off here. I just want to say thanks for both of you spending the time and presenting the facts and debating the facts. And those of you that are watching, I hope that you will examine these facts and you will draw your own conclusions. We appreciate you being with us.

Now just a final personal word to you. Do you think that Jesus rose from the dead? Well, the historical facts indicate that Jesus died by crucifixion, he was buried, and a few days later his tomb was discovered empty. Then suddenly, Jesus' cowardly disciples started proclaiming that Jesus had appeared alive to them. They had touched him, talked with him, and eaten with him.

Jesus proved to them that he had conquered death, and he told them that while he was on the cross, he had paid the penalty required for everyone's sins. He commissioned them to go and tell everyone in the world who he was and that he was willing to forgive their sins if they would ask. Now, I think that you have to make a decision concerning Jesus and it should be based on the facts of history.

If you think the evidence indicates Jesus was raised from the dead, then you're also face to face with the person who claimed to be the Son of God. Jesus says that you and I, we are sinners, and in our own strength we can't pay the penalty God requires for our sins. But Jesus paid that penalty and he is willing to freely forgive us the moment we transfer our trust from ourselves and put all of our faith in him.

The Apostle said, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Now if you enter into a faith relationship with Jesus, he promises to give you eternal life and he proved he can give you this gift by coming back from the dead himself. What I'm asking you right now is, what do you think about Christ? Who do you think that he was? Did he really come back from the dead?

If you think that he did and you'd like to put your faith in Christ and start a personal relationship with him right now, then admit to him in prayer you've broken his laws, that you're a sinner, you know that you're separated from God. Then pray and say to him, "Lord, from this moment on, I transfer my trust from myself to you. I believe that you paid for all of my sins on the cross and I ask that you forgive me of all my sins and give me your gift of eternal life."

Jesus promised that if you pray that prayer, he says, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live even though he dies." In John 10:28 Jesus said, "I give them eternal life and they shall never perish." If you prayed that prayer and asked Christ to be your Savior, he promises he heard that prayer and he made you a Christian. I'd also like to invite you to write to us and tell us of your decision. I'd like to send something to you that will encourage you in the next steps as you walk with the Lord.

Stay tuned as we revisit these timeless discussions and join us in celebrating the wealth of knowledge that continues to encourage and educate. To learn more, please visit JAshow.org. That's JAshow.org or subscribe to us on YouTube.