*** SHOW NOTES (not a transcript) ***

Lead:

Four reasons that rebut the idea that Jesus’ resurrection was a story that developed over time.

Intro:

A couple months ago I went to my high school reunion, and I had the pleasure of catching up with a friend who I used to be in a band with (so long ago that someone still owed Moses five bucks). As we were catching up, he made it clear that his take on the whole Jesus thing is that Jesus was a good moral teacher, but he doesn’t buy the whole resurrection thing. In his view, the whole resurrection thing is just a myth.

Today in our All Our Minds segment, we’re going to do a little work in thinking like an apologist, an ambassador for Christian truth claims. And I’m going to share with you four short lines of reasoning that will sharpen your skill at seeing how something like the resurrection is defensible as a reality of history. Oh, and today’s lesson comes out of the Apologetics Study Bible, and as I was grabbing the affiliate link I saw that you can get the Kindle version for less than nine bucks. I would highly recommend it.

But as we always do here, we start with the Bible just like you and I were sitting at a table sharing a cup of coffee or a microbrew or something.

The book of Acts is like Luke, part 2. Luke ends with Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances, and Acts opens up with a shorty recount and then quickly gets to a sermon delivered by Peter that theologians view as the birth of the church. Oh, and since we’re starting a new book, there’s a new Bible Project video, too — just go to forthehope.org and find this program, episode number 903.

Sponsor:

You! If you’re enriched by what we do, would you kindly share it with others or give us a review or rating on your favorite podcast app? And if you buy a book from one the affiliate links in the sources below, that supports this ministry, too. THANK you.

Bible Segment:

Passage: Acts 1-2
Translation: NASB (New American Standard Bible)
Verses: 73
Words: ~1701

All Our Minds Segment:

Could the resurrection accounts have developed later as mere stories that grew over time? A few of the potential responses should be adequate. Here again, the fact that the disciples truly believed they had seen the risen Jesus is highly problematic for this view, since it indicates the original accounts were derived from the eyewitnesses themselves, not from some later stories.
Further, the fact that these appearances were reported extremely early, within just a few years of the crucifixion, attests that at least the core message was intact from the outset.
Moreover, the empty tomb would be a constant physical reminder that this was not just some ungrounded tale.
Both James and Paul again provide even more insurmountable problems for this view, for these skeptics were convinced that they had also seen the risen Jesus; tales developing years later fail to account for their conversions.(1) (emphasis mine)

The bottom line

Remember this: theologians study the Bible as God’s word and derive a whole-Bible perspective on what it might say about a topic. Apologists, though, use reason to think critically and formulate arguments/defenses for such truth claims as the resurrection. These four reasons aren’t all the possible reasons to reject the idea that the resurrection was just a story that developed and got embellished over time, but they’re solid as part of your ability to help remove roadblocks for someone who might have other voices in their life repeating such objections.

Wisdom Segment:

Passage: Psalm 94
Translation: NASB (New American Standard Bible)
Verses: 23
Words: ~377

Love you!

-R

ForTheHope is a daily audio Bible + apologetics podcast and blog. We’ve got a passion for just keepin’ it real, having conversations like normal people, and living out the love of Jesus better every single day.

Roger Courville, CSP is a globally-recognized expert in digitally-extended communication and connection, an award-winning speaker, award-winning author, and a passionately bad guitarist. Follow him on Twitter -- @RogerCourville and @JoinForTheHope – or his blog: www.forthehope.org.

Sources and resources:

Thank you for supporting this ministry should you choose to use the Amazon affiliate link behind the citation.

(1) Gary R. Habermas, “Can Naturalistic Theories Account for the Resurrection?,” in The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith, ed. Ted Cabal et al. (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007), 1622. (link)

#904: Acts 1-2 | Resurrection a myth? | Psalm 94