All posts by Wintery Knight

https://winteryknight.com/

What are the historical arguments for the post-mortem appearances of Jesus?

Eric Chabot of Ratio Christi Ohio State University has a great post up about the post-mortem appearances of Jesus.

The post contains:

  • a list of the post-mortem resurrection appearances
  • quotations by skeptical historians about those appearances
  • alternative naturalistic explanations of the appearances
  • responses to those naturalistic explanations

Although there is a lot of research that went into the post, it’s not very long to read. The majority of scholars accept the appearances, because they appear in so many different sources and because some of those sources are very early, especially Paul’s statement of the early Christian creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, which is from about 1-3 years after Jesus was executed by the Romans. Eric’s post lists out some of the skeptical scholars who the appearances, and you can see how they allude to the historical criteria that they are using. (If you want to sort of double-check the details, I blogged about how historians investigate ancient sources before)

Let’s take a look at some of the names you might recognize:

E.P. Sanders:

That Jesus’ followers (and later Paul) had resurrection experiences is, in my judgment, a fact. What the reality was that gave rise to the experiences I do not know. “I do not regard deliberate fraud as a worthwhile explanation. Many of the people in these lists were to spend the rest of their lives proclaiming that they had seen the risen Lord, and several of them would die for their cause. Moreover, a calculated deception should have produced great unanimity. Instead, there seem to have been competitors: ‘I saw him first!’ ‘No! I did.’ Paul’s tradition that 500 people saw Jesus at the same time has led some people to suggest that Jesus’ followers suffered mass hysteria. But mass hysteria does not explain the other traditions.” “Finally we know that after his death his followers experienced what they described as the ‘resurrection’: the appearance of a living but transformed person who had actually died. They believed this, they lived it, and they died for it.”[1]

Bart Ehrman:

It is a historical fact that some of Jesus’ followers came to believe that he had been raised from the dead soon after his execution. We know some of these believers by name; one of them, the apostle Paul, claims quite plainly to have seen Jesus alive after his death. Thus, for the historian, Christianity begins after the death of Jesus, not with the resurrection itself, but with the belief in the resurrection.[2]

Ehrman also says:

We can say with complete certainty that some of his disciples at some later time insisted that . . . he soon appeared to them, convincing them that he had been raised from the dead.[3]

 Ehrman also goes onto say:  

Historians, of course, have no difficulty whatsoever speaking about the belief in Jesus’ resurrection, since this is a matter of public record.[4]

Why, then, did some of the disciples claim to see Jesus alive after his crucifixion? I don’t doubt at all that some disciples claimed this. We don’t have any of their written testimony, but Paul, writing about twenty-five years later, indicates that this is what they claimed, and I don’t think he is making it up. And he knew are least a couple of them, whom he met just three years after the event (Galatians 1:18-19).[5]

Marcus Borg

The historical ground of Easter is very simple: the followers of Jesus, both then and now, continued to experience Jesus as a living reality after his death. In the early Christian community, these experiences included visions or apparitions of Jesus. [8]

The references to Paul are because of the early creed he records in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, and his conversations with the other eyewitnesses in Galatians. Eric has another post where he goes over that early creed, and it is something that every Christian should know about. It’s really kind of surprising that you never hear a sermon on that early creed in church, where they generally sort of assume that you believe everything in the Bible on faith. But skeptical historians don’t believe in the post-mortem appearances by faith – they believe it (in part) because of 1 Corinthians 15:3-7.

If you want to see a Christian scholar make the case for the resurrection appearances in a debate, then here is a post I wrote with the video, audio and summary of the William Lane Craig vs James Crossley debate on the resurrection.

Good news: Gavin Newsom loses battle against Christian preschool

Mary from Marin tweeted out this article about California last night.  I expected it to be bad news, but it was good news. Gavin Newsom tried to force a preschool in El Cajon to deny their Christian convictions, and accept his atheist convictions. The school filed a lawsuit, they had a trial, and the school won. Pretty surprising for California! But this was more towards the San Diego end of it.

The article is from California Family Council:

The Newsom Administration’s California Department of Social Services (CDSS) tried but failed to force an El Cajon Christian preschool to abandon its religious beliefs on sexuality and gender or be kicked out of participating in a federally funded USDA food program. After the church filed a federal civil rights lawsuit, Attorney General Rob Bonta’s Justice Department refused to defend the state’s actions and settled for nearly $200,000.

It’s wonderful that we have so many Christian lawyers. I know that I harp on how everyone has to do STEM degrees, but if you have a lot of family support, then it might be better to go to law school. Because look what you can do with that degree:

Attorneys for the Church of Compassion and its Dayspring Christian Learning Center were represented by the National Center for Law and Policy (NCLP), Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and Advocates for Faith and Freedom (AFF). They filed a lawsuit and motion for preliminary injunction against the Biden administration and California state officials last year, challenging the suspension of the Church’s preschool from a federal food program due to their beliefs about human sexuality.

Comment from the ADF:

“Ironically, in the name of combatting discrimination, government officials have excluded the church and preschool from serving the El Cajon community based solely on their religious beliefs and exercise,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jeremiah Galus. “This is antithetical to the First Amendment’s promise of religious freedom and only hurts needy families and children.”

So, the Christians who work at that school were seen as “good enough” to pay taxes to the government for this program, nut not good enough to be eligible for any grants. That’s always the way with the secular left. They think that taxpayers are smart enough to earn the money, but not smart enough to spend it. We need the secular left to tell us how to spend it.

Here’s the final result of the lawsuit ruling:

The settlement reinstated Dayspring in the Food Program, reimbursed suspended funds, removed the preschool from the National Disqualified List, and required the CDSS to issue clear guidance regarding the existence of exemptions for religious institutions in California’s food programs. The CDSS also agreed to pay $160,000 in legal fees. This outcome is a significant win for religious freedom in California and sets a precedent for similar religious institutions.

I thought this was interesting – the discrimination was caused by Joe Biden:

After the Biden administration expanded the definition of “sex” in Title IX to encompass sexual orientation and gender identity, California’s Department of Social Services (CDSS) implemented new mandates. But these new rules restricted religious organizations from participation in the food program if their orthodox biblical views on human sexuality affected they way they operated their church or ministry.

It’s so strange to me that people who claim to be religious vote for Joe Biden. And yet here he is going after people who take the Bible seriously. I guess the religious people who support him don’t really care about taking the Bible seriously.

Image credit: Babylon Bee

Secular left funding new David French / Russell Moore church curriculum

If there is one person who you have to follow on Twitter, because of her amazing reporting on the state of Christian churches in America, it’s Megan Basham. Megan Basham comes out with absolute bombshell news stories every 1-2 months. She punches back at all the weakling appeasement evangelical leaders who are ruining the reputation of Christianity in America.

This time, she takes on 2 of the people who try to present themselves as Christians, even as they are doing everything they can to destroy Christianity in America: David French and Russell Moore.

Here’s her latest report in First Things:

Secular news outlets from NPR to the New York Times are hailing Tim Alberta’s new book, The Kingdom, The Power, and the Glory, for furthering the popular thesis that evangelicals have abandoned themselves to political idolatry. By “political idolatry” they mean “political conservatism,” as neither Alberta’s book nor the many prestige outlets enthusing over it have a word of criticism for Christians who advance left-wing causes. However, a curious passage in the book suggests that those leveling this charge may be most guilty of infecting the church with partisanship.

Alberta reports on The After Party, a forthcoming program led by Duke Divinity consulting professor Curtis Chang and developed with New York Times columnist David French and Christianity Today editor in chief Russell Moore. The program offers pastors and small groups a curriculum “reframing Christian political identity from today’s divisive partisan options.”

According to Alberta, during its germination phase, the project hit a roadblock. Evangelical donors had little interest in funding an explicitly political Bible study. Thus, to get The After Party off the ground, the trio (all frequent critics of evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump) turned to “predominantly progressive” “unbelievers.” In fact, they turned to secular left-wing foundations.

I don’t want to say any more about what she found out in this post. I want you to read it yourselves – the whole thing. It’s just what you would expect, though. Wealthy left-wing billionaires, LGBT activists, pro-abortion activists, gender ideologues, transgender activists, and more.

She adds this, though:

Does anyone really believe these secular progressive grant-makers are interested in developing a church curriculum about politics without an eye toward affecting policy? Or that this curriculum will strengthen evangelicals’ commitment to the very causes progressives despise? Between 2013 and 2014, the Ford, Rockefeller, and Tides foundations contributed a combined $1.3 million to the Evangelical Immigration Table’s “Bibles, Badges, and Business” initiative, launched to mobilize evangelical support for amnesty legislation such as the failed Gang of Eight bill. Hewlett and a host of other major left-wing donors bankrolled the Evangelical Environmental Network’s Evangelical Climate Initiative with the aim of generating churchgoer support for cap and trade legislation. Secular progressive foundations have not hesitated to leverage new evangelical ministries to sway Christians to their political will.

Today, it’s a rare church that does not have some group of people who are trying to drag the church leadership to the left. They say it’s because of “empathy” or because of the need to gain respect from the secular left. But what it means in practice is that the church is stepping away from the Bible’s teachings. What we need are rank-and-file Christians to know what is going on, and speak up to make sure that their churches aren’t being led by secular leftists.

The funny thing about the secular leftists and their puppets David French and Russell Moore. They don’t realize this, but any Christian faith that is divorced from the Bible, and wedded to the Democrat party, loses it’s ability to save. There are people in this country who have dug themselves into a hole. Sometimes because of their parents. Sometimes because of their friends. Sometimes because of their teachers. And they need the hard truths and the hard moral boundaries in the Bible to step out and out of where they started. They don’t just need Jesus the Savior, they need Jesus the Lord, and that means submitting to his leadership. By trying to curry favor with the secular left, French and Moore are robbing people of that leadership. The secular left will never accept the truth claims of Jesus, but that’s what people who are lost need.