Did the Resurrection Happen?: A Conversation with Gary Habermas and Antony Flew (Veritas Books)

This is one of the best books I have ever read on the subject of the resurrection. Since the first part is basically a transcript of an actual conversation between two of the most learned and influential people in their respective fields (one from a Christian perspective, the other from an atheist perspective), it is easy to read and extremely engaging. Because the basic context is one of historical evidence rather than a debate over interpretations of the bible, the information is thought provoking for Christian and atheist/agnostic alike. In my opinion, I believe Christians will find their faith strengthened and non-Christian readers will find answers to valid arguments on the subject. Most important, I found that even though some parts of the book (especially the final chapters) are highly intellectual in nature and use an extensive vocabulary, nevertheless the text flowed well, making the relative points easy to understand and follow.

I think this book is more for doubting Christians than died in the wool atheists. It certainly helps to bolster beliefs that are somewhat tentatively held. It is not all easy to read and there is a lot of repetition. It would have been helpful if all the sightings of Christ had been listed. There are still questions unanswered of course such as why God keeps himself so hidden and why are we left with such ambiguities? On the other hand when one considers the universe and like Flew one is confronted with the evidence then one simply asks - why? And the answer?

There really was not much of a conversation. Poor Tony could hardly get in a word between the Moderator and the bombastic preaching of Habermas, who clearly knew much more about the New Testament than did Flew. The primary purpose of the book seems to be an opportunity for Habermas to reaffirm his belief in Christianity to fellow believers than an honest debate on the historicity of the resurrection.I believe I could have made a better argument for Flew’s case than he did. Nothing was said about the huge discrepancies in the post resurrection activities of Jesus reported in the Gospels. The original Mark simply leaves us with an empty tomb. Matthew has the disciples go to Galilee where he appears to them on a mountain. In Luke he appears only to the two men on the road to Emmaus and the to the Eleven disciples before he ascends into Heaven. Although the same author states in Acts that Jesus stayed on Earth for forty days and gave proof to many that he was alive before he was taken up to Heaven. In John Jesus appears to his disciples who were hiding behind locked doors because they were afraid of the Jewish authorities and then he later appears to them to while they were fishing by the Sea of Tiberius. Jesus appeared to Paul in a vision, yet Paul believed enough to commit his life to preaching the Gospel of Christ. Then who’s to say the other disciples did not have similar visions? There have been many reports of appearances of the Virgin Mary and in 1968 thousands (including Egyptian President Nasser) witnessed Marian apparitions over the Coptic Orthodox Church of Saint Mary in the Zeitoun district of Cairo. So the appearance of Jesus to the 500 as reported by Paul would not seem unreasonable. No one can say for certain what happened on that Easter morning but the important thing is that, for whatever reasons, his disciples believed that Jesus had been resurrected and carried that message to the World.

Very interesting book. I found it very informative concerning the strength of the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I have given sermons at a few different funerals on the evidence from the scriptures of Christ's resurrection, which I know is very strong. But to learn about and read some of the debates by two eminent scholars from opposite viewpoints debate the issue was extremely enlightening. I did find some of the material was a little difficult for me to follow and got into material that I was not interested in or did not have the time to fully understand.

This book was recommended by Pastor Jonathan Fisk, the host of Worldview Everlasting, a Lutheran YouTube channel. Always having "known" Jesus had been raised from the dead by faith, it was an amazing experience to be shown the historical evidence for the resurrection, as well as the great commentary on Anthony Flew's conversion from Atheism to Deism. There are many footnotes throughout the book, giving the Christian even more material to dig deeper into the historical truth of our faith. I highly recommend this book!

Many agnostics and intellectuals, I fear, never give the Bible a fair consideration, thinking they would have to check their brain at the door to ever give Biblical Christianity credibility. This book should help them see that there are reasonable, rational paths to giving historic Scriptural Christianity fair consideration. As a Confessional Lutheran pastor, I do not believe we can prove someone into the Faith. But we can help remove stumbling blocks that may keep them from listening to the Word of God about Christ, thru which the Holy Spirit will bring them to faith in Christ.

This conversation between (2) friends that developed over 2+ decades is worth a read.It helps people understand that Love truly conquers all.

An outstanding book for those interested in the debate about whether or not we have good reason for believing it. The discussion occurs between two undeniable authorities for their respective positions, who are friends as well as sparring partners. I strongly recommend this book to anybody interested in the topic.

The resurrection in question (in case anyone should be in any doubt) is that of Jesus Christ.The book is in three parts. The first part is the transcript of a debate between Antony Flew and Gary Habermas held in 2003. The weakness of this as a debate is that Habermas does most of the talking and Flew’s responses include a lot of agreements. He never really challenges Habermas and I think that some of Habermas’ statements really do need challenging. Perhaps this reflects the fact that Flew (who died in 2010) was 80 years old at the time of the debate while Habermas was still in his prime at 53.In 2004 Flew announced that he was no longer an atheist but had become a Deist; he had come to believe in a God who had created the Universe but not in the revelatory God of Judeo-Christianity. Part II of this book consists of a conversation between Flew and Habermas on this change of belief and a review by Habermas of the book published in 2007 by Flew and R A Varghese; “There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind”. It is hard to see the relevance of this section to the subject of the book, since Flew still did not believe in the resurrection. Did the publisher’s include it simply to make the book longer?The third and longest part of the book is a review of the Habermas/Flew discussion by D Baggett. This is a helpful discussion of the philosophical and evidential problems of the resurrection and alternative explanations of the documentary evidence. Baggett is a philosopher and his discussion is insightful and balanced. (I suspect Baggett would wipe the floor with the likes of Richard Dawkins.) However, there is again no-one to present a robust alternative view.The part of the book which most impressed me was Habermas’ list of twelve historical facts relating to the resurrection on which the majority of Biblical scholars and historians agree (pp 22-23 and 109-110). Habermas and Baggett both argue that the best explanation for these facts is that Jesus rose from the dead. (They draw no theological conclusions from this.) None of the alternative explanations accounts for all twelve facts in a satisfactory way.If there had been a genuinely two-way discussion of these facts I would have given the book a higher rating. If it had not included the discussion by Baggett, I would have given it only one or two stars.

Great read. Very interesting

Siendo claro y preciso el relato utiliza demasiado los razonamientos lógico-filosóficos para tratar un tema que se pretende real con pruebas irrefutables. El autor no consigue convencer.