Risen Jesus

In this lecture at Texas A&M University, Dr. Licona discusses whether we can rationally believe in the resurrection of Jesus. He then engages with a panel of prominent students who ask tough questions about the resurrection.

According to Dr. Richard Carrier, Christianity arose among individuals who, due to their schizotypal personalities, believed that their hallucinations of a risen Jesus were reality. In his view, this naturalistic explanation accounts well for the resurrection claims and is like the reported mass hallucinations in cults led by charismatic leaders. In a 2010 debate at Washburn University, Dr. Michael Licona challenged these assertions and presented a case for the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection.

According to Dr. Richard Carrier, Christianity arose among individuals who, due to their schizotypal personalities, believed that their hallucinations of a risen Jesus were reality. In his view, this naturalistic explanation accounts well for the resurrection claims and is like the reported mass hallucinations in cults led by charismatic leaders. In a 2010 debate at Washburn University, Dr. Michael Licona challenged these assertions and presented a case for the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection.

In this episode of the Risen Jesus podcast, we join Dr. Michael Licona and Dr. Courtney Friesen as they discuss the verifiability of Christian claims are verifiable and if it even matters. Dr. Licona argues the affirmative case on both points, sharing several universally agreed-upon facts about Jesus held by Christian and non-Christian historians, and presents the case for the historicity of his resurrection. Dr. Licona concludes that the verifiability of the resurrection determines the truth of the faith, which in turn shows that we have value and that our lives have meaning. Dr. Friesen contends that the claims most central to Christianity fall outside the realm of verification and that the true power of Jesus’ resurrection is that, whether factual or not, it teaches the power of self-sacrificial acts to counteract the world's evils.

Where do miracles fit into historians’ examinations of the past? How do we define miracles? Is a miracle an event for which natural explanations are inadequate, or is it the least probable explanation of an occurrence? Most historians accept that Jesus was put to death by crucifixion. Does this support the claim that Jesus rose from the dead? Are Paul and the disciples’ reports that the risen Jesus appeared to them unique, or have others described similar experiences? Dr. Mike Licona and Dr. Bart Ehrman square off on these issues in their first-ever debate, held in 2008 at Midwestern Theological Seminary, where they argue whether the resurrection of Jesus can be proven as a historical fact or can only be taken as a theological conclusion.

If Jesus did not die by crucifixion, there was no atonement for sin, and Christianity is a false religion. If he did, Islam is the erroneous faith. In this episode, Dr. Michael Licona debates Muslim apologist Yusuf Ismail at the University in Potchefstroom, South Africa. Dr. Licona tackles Ismail’s claims of an absence of eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ death in the gospels, Jesus’ time on the cross being too short to have killed him, evidence of individuals surviving modern-day crucifixions in the Philippines, and documented occurrences of live people being mistaken for dead. He also provides six reasons why Jesus’ death by crucifixion can be taken as a historical fact.

Mike Licona is one of the world’s most recognized experts on the resurrection. Join us live to hear his toughts abou the gospels, inerrancy, historical evidences, and the validity of the gospels. We are so excited to host this conversation and be sure to join us during the call in section and hop into the conversation!

What are compositional devices? How do they affect our view of inerrancy? What does the Bible say about inspiration and inerrancy? In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona discusses his contention that the common evangelical definition of inerrancy, as outlined in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, may be based on an incorrect concept of inspiration which in turn renders it incorrect.

What are compositional devices? How do they affect our view of inerrancy? What does the Bible say about inspiration and inerrancy? In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona discusses his contention that the common evangelical definition of inerrancy, as outlined in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, may be based on an incorrect concept of inspiration which in turn renders it incorrect.

In this episode, Dr. Mike Licona walks the listener through some of the discoveries revealed in his new book Jesus, Contradicted. By examining Greco-Roman writings contemporary with the gospels, Dr. Licona has identified common writing techniques of the times that shed light on what we read apparently conflicting gospel accounts. He also discusses what authors meant by the term “God-breathed,” his understanding of biblical inerrancy, and argues that our view of Scripture must be consistent with what we actually observe in its text.