What do you think?
Rate this book
EVIDENCE FOR THE HISTORICAL JESUS: Is the Jesus of History the Christ of Faith
The search for the historical Jesus is a hot topic in both popular and academic circles today and has drawn a lot of attention from national magazines, such as Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report. Further, the media has given an undue amount of attention to the Jesus Seminar's outlandish statements, a self-selected liberal group representing a tiny percentage of New Testament scholarship. Dr. Gary Habermas will address the questions surrounding the debate over the historical Jesus and show a significant number of historical facts about Jesus in secular and non-New Testament sources that prove that the Jesus of history is the same Jesus of the Christian faith.The author of EVIDENCE FOR THE HISTORICAL JESUS is Dr. Gary Habermas, author of the book, The Historical Jesus and about twenty other volumes. He received his Ph.D. from Michigan State University. Dr. Habermas is chairman of the Department of Philosophy at Liberty University. He has written more than 100 articles, mostly on the life of Jesus, which have appeared in scholarly journals and elsewhere. Herein you will learn why Jesus is one of the most historically verified lives of ancient times.
110 pages, Paperback
Published November 28, 2020
58 people are currently reading
154 people want to read
About the author
Gary R. Habermas
62 books171 followersGary R. Habermas was born just outside Detroit, Michigan in 1950. Although he was raised in a Christian home and attended a German Baptist Church, he began having serious doubts about Christianity. For more than ten years, he faced uncertainty about key Christian claims and searched other religious and non-religious systems, especially naturalism. His studies centered chiefly on investigating various world views, occasionally getting close to what he thought might be the proper approach. During this time, as he explains, "The last thing I did at night was recall what I had learned that day to further my search. Early the next morning, it seems that the first thing that came to my mind was, 'Where did I end my studies last night?'" This continued for several agonizing years.
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Habermas' interest in the field of apologetics began early in his search when he realized that some religions made claims that could be either verified or falsified. He searched the various religious systems to ascertain if such claims were verifiable. After several years of study, he concluded that very few religious claims could be substantiated. Habermas concluded that even Christianity suffered in this sense. While certainly having more evidential considerations than other religions, there always seemed to be a reason why the argument could not be finalized. While Habermas conducted detailed studies of creation, fulfilled prophecy, archaeological discoveries, and the general reliability of the Old and New Testaments, he constantly asked if there were any "clinching" arguments.
Habermas especially studied the notion that Eastern metaphysics were confirmed by modern physics, as well as the claims made on behalf of various other holy books. He reached the conclusion that, while religious beliefs could be held by faith, they usually lacked great evidence and could not be "proven" to be true.
Habermas' search frequently took the form of debating with various adherents of non-Christian as well as Christian views. He told practitioners from both camps that their beliefs were not as grounded as they would like to believe. He especially recalls one encounter where an exasperated Christian told him that he was filled with demons! Once his mother called to see how he was doing, and he announced that he thought he was close to becoming a Buddhist, his latest research interest.
During this time, one subject began to appeal to Habermas more than any other. He realized that if Jesus had been raised from the dead, this would go a long way toward arguing that Christianity was true. He also studied the founders of the major religious traditions, along with some lesser-known figures, to see if there were other claims that someone had been raised from the dead. He was especially interested in whether there was any historical or other evidence for any such teachings. Thirteen hundred note cards later, he was well on the way to a lifetime of being "hooked" on the subject of Jesus' resurrection. Little did he know that his early years of study on this subject would begin his fascination with the topic that has never lessened.
Habermas continued his search as an undergraduate student at Tyndale College, graduating in 1972 with three majors and three minors. Foremost on his mind was still the question of whether it could be known if there was any basis for answering his religious questions. Habermas went straight to graduate school at the University of Detroit. Studying philosophical theology and the world religions, he earned an M.A. a year later, in 1973. After taking a year off, he pursued a Ph.D. at Michigan State University, graduating two years later (1976), after keeping up a torrid study schedule.
Studying relevant historical, philosophical, and religious questions, Habermas proposed an historical study of Jesus’ resurrection (what else?) for his Ph.D. dissertation. The topic was approved by his committee, but he was told specifically that he could not
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 21, 2024
Un libro corto pero bastante entretenido de leer.
No es primera vez que leo un libro en formato de entrevista pero me parece una lectura ligera por el mismo formato.
Los puntos que presenta el autor son bastante concisos, aunque considero que podía desarrollarlos un poco más.
Este libro es más que todo para alguien que ya tenga una base previa sobre la resurrección de Jesucristo, ya que el autor solo menciona lo de 12 puntos para los hechos mínimos, pero no los desarrolla completamente.
Me gustó mucho la comparación y aplicación de 1 de corintios 15, y galatas 1 y 2; fue bastante curioso ver como el autor expone el trasfondo de lo que sucede cuando Pablo escribe sus cartas.
Además me resultó bastante interesante leer sobre unos detalles de la cruxificcion que el autor expone.
El libro es bastante bueno como material complementario para estudios sobre la resurrección de Cristo. Lo recomiendo a aquellos interesados en el tema.
No es primera vez que leo un libro en formato de entrevista pero me parece una lectura ligera por el mismo formato.
Los puntos que presenta el autor son bastante concisos, aunque considero que podía desarrollarlos un poco más.
Este libro es más que todo para alguien que ya tenga una base previa sobre la resurrección de Jesucristo, ya que el autor solo menciona lo de 12 puntos para los hechos mínimos, pero no los desarrolla completamente.
Me gustó mucho la comparación y aplicación de 1 de corintios 15, y galatas 1 y 2; fue bastante curioso ver como el autor expone el trasfondo de lo que sucede cuando Pablo escribe sus cartas.
Además me resultó bastante interesante leer sobre unos detalles de la cruxificcion que el autor expone.
El libro es bastante bueno como material complementario para estudios sobre la resurrección de Cristo. Lo recomiendo a aquellos interesados en el tema.
October 10, 2021
Excelente apologética
Me gusto mucho el formato del libro, textualmente sacado de una entrevista. Los puntos a tratar son muy contundentes, es ideal para aquellos que buscan evidencias de forma sincera.
Me gusto mucho el formato del libro, textualmente sacado de una entrevista. Los puntos a tratar son muy contundentes, es ideal para aquellos que buscan evidencias de forma sincera.
April 15, 2024
A Better Approach Is Available!
This book tries to establish the historicity of the Christian faith by building a sequence of likely inferences on a minimal number facts that a majority of critical (aka skeptical) scholars agree upon. In that way the author’s arguments for the foundation of Christianity (i.e. the death, resurrection, and deity of Jesus Christ) can be inferred with high likelihood and thereby have a strong case for Christianity as a whole. My problem with the minimal facts approach is; 1) it ultimately depends on a foundation of human academics giving their approval for these facts although the author does give some “common sense” reasons for why the academics accept these facts. 2) consequently is subject to the limitations of idiosyncratic and corrupt human judgment and discernment. Just consider the corruption in modern academia where indoctrination is rampant, research results are rife with fraud (c.f. Science Fictions by Stuart Ritchie), “political maneuvering” is common, etc. Why should I trust the opinions of people (including “critical scholars”) embedded in a system like that?
A better (and objective) approach is taken by Lydia McGrew in her book “Hidden In Plain View: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels and Acts” where she gives a large number of instances where the same events are described from different perspectives (including adding offhand details) and alluded to by other New Testament documents written by different authors at different times. This gives a very high likelihood these were actual events that took place (including miraculous events). In that regard, if these numerous events are recounted with a high degree of historical accuracy, it establishes the likelihood the remaining events described in the Gospels and Acts are also historically accurate. This would establish the historicity of the Christian faith is highly likely. This approach is independent of human opinion and is dependent only upon probabilistic likelihoods of textual content. Also, in her books “The Mirror of the Mask: Liberating the Gospels from Literary Devices” and “The Eye of the Beholder: The Gospel of John as Historical Reportage”, Lydia McGrew addresses the minimal facts approach to establishing Christian historicity which this book by Gary Habermas is based upon.
This book tries to establish the historicity of the Christian faith by building a sequence of likely inferences on a minimal number facts that a majority of critical (aka skeptical) scholars agree upon. In that way the author’s arguments for the foundation of Christianity (i.e. the death, resurrection, and deity of Jesus Christ) can be inferred with high likelihood and thereby have a strong case for Christianity as a whole. My problem with the minimal facts approach is; 1) it ultimately depends on a foundation of human academics giving their approval for these facts although the author does give some “common sense” reasons for why the academics accept these facts. 2) consequently is subject to the limitations of idiosyncratic and corrupt human judgment and discernment. Just consider the corruption in modern academia where indoctrination is rampant, research results are rife with fraud (c.f. Science Fictions by Stuart Ritchie), “political maneuvering” is common, etc. Why should I trust the opinions of people (including “critical scholars”) embedded in a system like that?
A better (and objective) approach is taken by Lydia McGrew in her book “Hidden In Plain View: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels and Acts” where she gives a large number of instances where the same events are described from different perspectives (including adding offhand details) and alluded to by other New Testament documents written by different authors at different times. This gives a very high likelihood these were actual events that took place (including miraculous events). In that regard, if these numerous events are recounted with a high degree of historical accuracy, it establishes the likelihood the remaining events described in the Gospels and Acts are also historically accurate. This would establish the historicity of the Christian faith is highly likely. This approach is independent of human opinion and is dependent only upon probabilistic likelihoods of textual content. Also, in her books “The Mirror of the Mask: Liberating the Gospels from Literary Devices” and “The Eye of the Beholder: The Gospel of John as Historical Reportage”, Lydia McGrew addresses the minimal facts approach to establishing Christian historicity which this book by Gary Habermas is based upon.
Read
January 12, 2023I’m not rating research books, whether I agree or not with any scholar’s conclusions.
January 5, 2026
El Jesús de la historia es el mismo que el Jesús del Nuevo Testamento.
Excelente repaso del dr. Habermas al respecto de la vida de Jesús, y cómo esta coincide con lo que los apóstoles predicaron los años posteriores de la crucifixión y resurrección.
Excelente repaso del dr. Habermas al respecto de la vida de Jesús, y cómo esta coincide con lo que los apóstoles predicaron los años posteriores de la crucifixión y resurrección.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews