Resurrection Debate

909 Words4 Pages
This book is comprised of a dialogue between two philosophers Gary R. Habermas and Antony Flew and was edited by David Baggett. David Baggett is a professor of Philosophy in Lynchburg, VA. Habermas is a research professor of the department of Philosophy and theology at Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA. Habermas is also one of the world’s leading experts on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Flew was one of the world’s most prominent atheists in 2004 before he became convinced of the existence of God. Flew has taught philosophy at many major universities such as Oxford University, University of Aberdeen, and many more. The main topic of this book is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Both authors present their case within…show more content…
The majority of the book is a recording of the debate that took place in 2003 at California Polytechnic State University. Habermas is arguing for a physical account of the resurrection based off historical and textual evidence. Flew, while acknowledging that there is a God, is very skeptical of the resurrection. Within the debate there are three parts Resurrection Debate Between Antony Flew and Gary R. Habermas, Antony Flew's Journey to Theism, and Resurrection Matters: Assessing the Habermas/Flew Discussion. Part one covers historical evidence of the resurrection, assessing the claims of the resurrection, and is belief justifiable. Historical evidence is based off the claims found within scripture. Habermas argues that these claims are true based of the reliability of the text. Flew and Habermas both evaluate the claims made within scripture to see if they are reliable. The argument is made that belief can be justifiable based on the evidence presented. Part two describes Flew’s journey from Atheism to Theism. In 2004 told Habermas that he had become a theist. Flew still denies any spiritual revelation. His only conclusion was the there is a…show more content…
The tone in part three could be misconstrued for one to think otherwise. The evidence in part three almost suggests to be addressed to Flew. Baggett presents information that leads one to believe there was a victor in the debate. This portion of the book seemed out of place and heavily slanted towards one sided. Baggett spends most of the third section reiterating the evidence and findings of Habermas. While this is not a bad thing, Baggett spends a lot of time trying to convince the reader of all of the evidence for the resurrection instead of presenting both sides equally. He places a lot of emphasis on why Atheists should become believers based on the evidence found. The section on “Why Flew should become a Christian,” presented a valid point. Flew has already acknowledged that there is a God; the next obvious step would be surrendering his life to this God as Lord. With this section, Baggett falls into the category of pushy evangelism by trying to present a good case for why Flew should believe. Flew does not need to be convinced of all the facts presented in this portion. He has spent a lifetime studying and debating these facts. This approach would not convince him of God being his

More about Resurrection Debate

Open Document