This chapter opens with another tale and has the accurate statement “[Strobel:] …an empty grave does not a resurrection make.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 245). While I’m not sold on the story Strobel has told so far, I can at least, agree with the sentiment. Sadly, in the next sentence, Strobel makes a claim that I cannot agree with, that “[Strobel:] …Dr. William Lane Craig has already elicited powerful evidence that the tomb of Jesus was empty” (Strobel, CFC, P. 245).
In this chapter, Strobel interviews Dr. Gary Habermas. As with any intro, Strobel spends several pages giving filler on who this guy is.
Dead People Don’t do That
To determine whether Jesus had resurrected, Dr. Habermas says “[Dr. Habermas:] …here’s how I look at the evidence for the Resurrection: First, did Jesus die on the cross? And second, did he appear later to people?” (Strobel, CFC, P. 248).
By now, I have shown multiple times that I do not believe the gospels to have been reliable, and this chapter also appears to be leaning heavily into gospel narrative. Reread the problems with chapters 2 and 3 for my take. Because the second claim by Dr. Habermas is new, I’m going to examine that rather than the first.
First, Dr. Habermas tries to equate sciences with what he is about to do by saying “[Dr. Habermas:] We don’t see dinosaurs; we study the fossils. We may not know how a disease originates, but we study its symptoms. Maybe nobody witnesses a crime, but police piece together the evidence after the fact.” (Strobel, CFC, P.248 ). This is called looking at physical evidence to reach a conclusion. We can be assured that dinosaurs did exist because we can examine the physical evidence for them. Dr. Habermas offers no physical evidence throughout this entire chapter which makes this a terrible analogy.
Dr. Habermas cites other parts in the new testament as proof that Paul saw Jesus after he died, and so did the disciples. However, seeing people after they have died is not a phenomenon specific to the bible, nor is seeing people after they died evidence that they really came back to life. The fact that people claimed to see Jesus after he supposedly died doesn’t even provide proof that Jesus existed or died. It merely establishes that people thought they saw, or claimed to see, Jesus after he died.
To use a contemporary figure that people claim to have seen, let’s examine Elvis Presley. Elvis died in 1977 with the earliest known sighting of him being in 1980[1]. Since then, till at least 1999, people have claimed to see him walking around, talking to people, giving things to people, etc. Do these appearance constitute evidence of a risen king? And yes, pun very intended.
Based on Dr. Habermas’ line of reasoning, we should believe that Elvis has been resurrected “[Dr. Habermas:] …because dead people don’t normally do that.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 248). Obviously, this would be a ridiculous conclusion. The claims of seeing Elvis do not provide any evidence that Elvis was resurrected. They show that people who were familiar with Elvis, possibly even obsessed over Elvis like the disciples are shown to do over Jesus, believe they have seen Elvis walking around after his death.
Dr. Habermas attempts to lend credence to Paul’s story, saying “[Dr. Habermas:] …he encountered the resurrected Christ. …he says…. ….”Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? And he says… …Last of all, he appeared to me also.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 249). What Dr. Habermas fails to tell is that all encounters that Paul had with Jesus were visions. Paul never directly met Jesus meaning his entire narrative is suspect.
Much of the “evidence” in this book rests on the claim that it takes decades, if not centuries, for legendary development to happen. The tale of Elvis is a counter example that shows that it does not take long.
Convince me it’s a Creed
Strobel asks Dr. Habermas to prove that 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is truly a creed. This is a bit pointless as the only thing the proving this is a creed would do is prove that the people preaching believed that Jesus was resurrected. This does nothing to prove that anyone was really resurrected.
Also, claiming that Paul is a firsthand eyewitness does not hold water. Visions of Jesus are not the same as having met Jesus. Just because “[Dr. Habermas:] …Paul personally affirms that Jesus appeared to him as well…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 251) does not mean Paul ever met Jesus. I could have a vision of Elvis, but that does not make me an eyewitness to anything related to Elvis related. If I formed a creed based off my “Elvis revelations”, people should rightly think I went mad. Paul may have talked to others who knew Jesus, but he is not an eyewitness or firsthand account. He is a preacher basing his creed off of a vision, not a disciple.
Claiming “[Dr. Habermas:] …the evidence in support of the creed is so strong that it ‘may be considered as a statement of eyewitnesses.’ ” Strobel, CFC, P. 251) is going to require some proof and evidence of that statement. It does nothing to provide any proof for the story of the resurrection, only that people believed it at the time. Just because Dr. Habermas thinks someone else made a compelling case for the creed being reliable doesn’t mean I should accept that. I’d like to review the documents he appears to be referencing. If he has none, then he shouldn’t make this claim.
The Mystery of the Five Hundred
This section tries to show how likely it is that Jesus appeared to a crowd of 500 people. Once again, Strobel’s own authorities give us reasons to their authority on the subject, doubt the historical reliability of the gospels, and doubt the story that Strobel has tried to craft. Let’s look at why.
Dr. Habermas makes three claims as to why the tale must be true.
- “[Dr. Habermas:] …even though it’s only reported in one source, it just so happens to be the earliest and best-authenticated passage of all!” (Strobel, CFC, P. 252)
- “[Dr. Habermas:] … ‘most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.’…you would never include this phrase unless you were absolutely confident that these folks would confirm that they really did see Jesus alive.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 252)
- “[Dr. Habermas:] …when you have only one source, you can ask, ‘Why aren’t there more?’ But you can’t say, ‘This one source is crummy on the grounds that someone else didn’t pick up on it.’ ” (Strobel, CFC, P. 252)
Dr. Habermas’ first claim is problematic precisely because there is only one source with no corroborating evidence for it and it is in a book that is known to be historically unreliable. What evidence does Dr. Habermas have for this book being well authenticated? And when he says authenticated, bear in mind that only means it’s accurate to the source material… not that the claim contained inside are true.
When reading about claims of dead people being resurrected and showing up to hundreds of people, the default response should not be “This must be so!” Instead, one should look for evidence for those claims, and, when finding no reference to it outside that book, disregarding the claims as bunk.
As to the second point, if this event truly did happen, and people did take up Paul’s offer “[Dr. Habermas:] …to check it out for themselves…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 252), then we would see mention of it somewhere. This would render no need for point number 1 to even exist. I can make any claims I want about supernatural phenomenon and claim that thousands saw it. If I never provide any particular people to go talk to, though, it’s impossible interview anyone who saw it. Especially if I just made up a large number to strengthen my claim like millions of propagandists do. See what I did there?
The third point also ties into the first somewhat. When we only have one source for a claim, it’s natural to want corroborating evidence for that claim, especially when that claim is about an extraordinary, supernatural occurrence. Trying to “downgrade” the single source simply because no one else picked up on it is not what happens. Instead, you look at the source and try to determine if the things claimed are likely to have happened, have any reasonable cause for have happened, and if there is any reason to doubt the narrative.
With the single source in this case, the claims are unlikely to have happened, have no reasonable cause, and seem to be written as religious propaganda. Of course I’m going to discard the supernatural claims within, and by extension, additional works by the same author that show the same problems.
Way back in chapters 1 and 2, Dr. Blomberg assured us that an oral tradition is an adequate way to preserve a story for a long time (I forget exactly how long he claimed). Here, Dr. Habermas tells us “[Dr. Habermas:] How long do local stories circulate before they start to die out?” (Strobel, CFC, P. 253). If we’re to believe Dr. Habermas, writing 60 years after an event is plenty of time for stories to die out or be changed. So which is it, a long time or 60 years?
The Testimony of the Gospels
Given that there is no reason to believe the mythical accounts in the bible, there is no reason to believe that the appearances in the bible are anything more than claims made to further the religious propaganda. Dr. Habermas claims that we can trust the sightings in the gospels because they are “[Dr. Habermas:] …lacking in many typical mythical tendencies.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 254). If, as Dr. Habermas says, we can believe things that lack mythical tendencies, should we believe Elvis sightings as evidence that Elvis rose from the dead? They lack mythical tendencies too. Therefore, we should give them just as much weight as the gospel account of sightings.
Rather than Acts providing any evidence for the resurrection story as Dr. Habermas claims, it merely provides evidence that the preachers at the time certainly believed it to be true. No evidence for the resurrection has been brought forth so far.
Marks Missing Conclusion
I’ve stated many many times already that Mark is missing verses 16:9-20 in the oldest manuscripts. Strobel brings this up to Dr. Habermas, who says “[Dr. Habermas:] I don’t have a problem with that whatsoever.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 257). It appears that Dr. Habermas sees no problem putting faith in these gospels that he understands contain later fabrications.
Dr. Habermas wins Strobel by corroborating the order of appearances saying “[Dr. Habermas:] This agrees with 1 Corinthians 15:5, which confirms that Jesus did appear to Peter, and Luke 24:34…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 257)The fact that the gospels corroborate with 1 Corinthians is no surprise either. 1 Corinthians came before the gospels were written which means the gospels could have drawn on their information for source material.
Are There any Alternatives?
Strobel opens this by saying “[Strobel:] …if you were to call each one of the witnesses to a court of law to be cross-examined for just fifteen minutes… …listening to 129 straight hours of eyewitness testimony, who could possibly walk away unconvinced?” (Strobel, CFC, P. 258). Ignoring the fact that we don’t have any eyewitnesses to give testimony of Jesus, let’s apply the same logic to Elvis sightings. Say we only have 120 people who have seen Elvis since his death. After listening to 30 hours of evidence, who couldn’t be convinced? 30 hours of corroborating evidence is still quite a lot!
Possibility 1: The Appearances Are Legendary
Dr. Habermas argues that the appearances are not legendary, stating “[Dr. Habermas:] …you’re forgetting that the I Corinthians 15 creed predates any of the gospels, and it makes huge claims about the appearances” (Strobel, CFC, P. 259). This argument uses the same fallacious argument that early sources can’t have legendary material. Rather than allowing Dr. Habermas to claim “[Dr. Habermas:] That creates problems for the legendary-development theory” (Strobel, CFC, P. 259), this supports the legendary development theory strongly. It is a direct admission that legendary development of Jesus happened before the gospels were written.
Dr. Habermas also mentions that “[Dr. Habermas:] …not everybody believes Mark is the earliest gospel… …admittedly in the minority, who believe Matthew was written first.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 258) The fact that Matthew and Luke use Mark as a source[2] provides evidence against this claim.
Dr. Habermas dismisses the idea that the resurrection story itself is indication of legendary development without providing any evidence. He does this by saying “[Dr. Habermas:] …it only proves that legends grew up over time-it can’t explain away the original belief that Jesus was risen from the dead.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 259). I can provide a reasonable explanation that doesn’t require any supernatural claims: The originator simply made the story up and hid the dead body. That would provide immediate legendary development and the belief that Jesus was resurrected. Other theories exist as well, but I’m moving on.
As to the “[Dr. Habermas:] …what about the empty tomb?” (Strobel, CFC, P. 259) “proof” that Dr. Habermas proffers, I’d like to have proof offered that an empty tomb even exists. As shown in the last chapter, no evidence for the empty tomb has been provided so far. So, what about the empty tomb? Did it exist? Did it not? Can you point me to it? If so, how was it verified? No claims that actually refute the legendary development theory were offered in this section, but Strobel continues on.
Possibility 2: The Appearances were Hallucinations
Dr. Habermas hands a note from Gary Collins, a psychologist, that makes the claim that “…hallucinations are individual occurrences… Neither is it possible that one person could induce a hallucination in someone else… others cannot witness it” (Strobel, CFC, P. 260). If we take this as fact, then the appearances to 500 people are quite clearly a matter of legendary development.
Rather than deciding, as Dr. Habermas does that we can trust “[Dr. Habermas:] …the gospel accounts as being reliable…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 260), we should be throwing the entire story into question. If hallucinations are not a reliable answer, no evidence for the tomb or resurrection given, and no additional sources telling us that appearances happened, then there is no reason to take any of the appearances as fact.
Dr. Habermas also states “[Dr. Habermas:] …there are several reasons why the disciples couldn’t have talked each other into this. As the center of their faith, there was too much at stake; they went to their deaths defending it.” (Strobel, CFC, P. 261). As I’ve pointed out before, just because someone dies for their beliefs does not mean that belief is right. It is merely an indication that the person believes the belief to be right. It’s entirely possible that the disciples could have been honestly deluded. The only “evidence” we have telling us the disciples were martyred are the bible and church traditions. Furnish some proof of this claim from external sources.
As a plea to Dr. Habermas, and other Christians, please stop bringing up the empty tomb. What about the empty tomb? Unless you can direct me to it, there is no sense in shouting “What about the empty tomb?” all the time. Repeating this meaningless phrase ad nauseum is starting to annoy me a lot.
Dr. Habermas claims that “[Dr. Habermas:] Even the more skeptical historians agree that for primitive Christianity … the resurrection of Jesus from the dead was a real event in history…” (Strobel, CFC, P. 261). I’d like to know which historians he is referring to. Once again, if Dr. Habermas is going to continue making this claim, he must put forth some evidence for it. Theorizing based on textual analysis of the bible is not a valid way to provide evidence.
No Rational Doubt/The Resurrection of Debbie
Strobel closes this off with yet another heartwarming, anecdotal story to give you them Christian feels. Nothing in this section adds any actual evidence, and Strobel tries his hardest to lead you to the conclusion that he has already drawn for you. However, drawing conclusions based on a simple textual analysis of the bible without providing conclusive evidence is meaningless. In this chapter, Dr. Habernas has simply assumed the authority and accuracy of the scriptures and argued from there without providing any evidence. Strobel the Objective did not challenge him on any of it.
Citations