The Minimal Facts of Dr. Gary Habermas made Simple

In the book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, Dr. Gary R. Habermas and Dr. Michael R. Licona, present the Minimal Facts Argument for Jesus's resurrection. The "Minimal Facts Argument" only uses facts that are accepted by almost all New Testament scholars, even skeptical ones. For people who prefer lectures, Dr. Habermas also teaches an excellent course on the resurrection at Online Christian Courses. He details the minimal facts like this:

1. Jesus died by Roman crucifixion. Some of the skeptical scholars who accepted this: Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, and Marcus Borg.
2. Jesus primarily taught about the Kingdom of God and how to get there.
3. The disciples had experiences after the crucifixion that they believed were appearances of the resurrected Jesus.
4. Saul of Tarsus, an unbeliever who persecuted the early church, had an experience on the road to Damascus that he believed was an appearance of the risen Jesus.
5. James, the brother of Jesus, was a skeptic and did not believe in Jesus until after the crucifixion - when the risen Jesus appeared to him.
6. The disciples despaired immediately after the crucifixion.
7. The resurrection was proclaimed early on.
8. The resurrection of Jesus was the central proclamation of the early church and remains so to today.

Dr. Habermas breaks it down further and lists what he calls the "Top Tier" of the Minimal Facts Argument. Those facts are:

1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
2. The disciples had experiences which they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus.
3. Saul of Tarsus, a skeptic, became the Apostle Paul and wrote the majority of New Testament books. He converted to Christianity because he believed he had an experience with the risen Jesus.
4. The resurrection was proclaimed early on in the movement.
 
Although Dr. Habermas does not include the empty tomb in his minimal facts approach, since it is not as universally accepted by scholars, there are a large majority of scholars who do accept it, such as Dr. William Lane Craig. 

In addition to the minimal facts of Dr. Habermas, we have overwhelming textual evidence for the reliability and accuracy of the Bible. No other ancient document matches the New Testament in terms of manuscript evidence, and I covered those things in my book, Gehenna Revisited: Rebutting Francis Chan. 

In the video, Jesus of Testimony, Dr. Daniel Wallace, one of the foremost textual critics of today, says we have almost 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. There are over 10,000 Latin manuscripts and well over 1,000 manuscripts in the Egyptian Coptic language, plus hundreds of manuscripts in Syriac. There are manuscripts in many other languages as well—such as Arabic, Aramaic, Armenian, Georgian, and Gothic.

Dr. Wallace says when looked at in total, there are over 26,000 manuscripts of New Testament texts in various languages. The oldest complete manuscript of the New Testament is the Codex Sinaiticus, which is from the middle of the 4th Century, but there are numerous fragmentary manuscripts in existence prior to that time. Many of these fragments have quite a bit of text and date to 125 AD or perhaps earlier. It has been claimed by many textual scholars that they could reconstruct almost the entire New Testament from just the early quotations. That is easy to believe since Dr. Wallace says the church fathers quoted the New Testament over one million times.

Because there are so many manuscripts, scholars know where the textual variants are, and there are so many textual variants because there are so many manuscripts. Yet, any important variant is addressed in your Bible’s footnotes and in commentaries. Even Bart Ehrman, in the February 5, 2007 HarperOne Reprint edition of Misquoting Jesus, admits none of the textual variants affect any doctrine of scripture. He admits they have nothing to do with theology or ideology, “do not detract from the integrity of the New Testament,” page 87, and that most are “completely insignificant,” page 207.

In Greg Koukl’s CBN article, “Misquoting Jesus? Answering Bart Ehrman,” Koukl points out that the differences Ehrman points to—spelling errors, reversed words, etc.—do not affect the work of reconstructing the autographs. In the 20,000 lines of text, only forty of them are in any doubt, and none of those variants affect our core doctrines as Christians.  

When other ancient manuscripts are compared to the Bible, they fall short in every way. In an article at God and Science, “Is Our Copy of the Bible a Reliable Copy of the Original?”, Rich Deem charts the manuscript evidence for ancient writings. There are ten manuscript copies of Caesar’s Gallic Wars written between 100-44 BC. The earliest copy was made in 900 AD, a time span of 1,000 years. The earliest manuscript copy of Plato’s Tetralogies, written between 427-347 BC, was in 900 AD. That is a time span of 1,200 years, and there are only seven manuscripts of Plato’s Tetralogies. Yet, how many bestsellers have you seen or read that question the authenticity or accuracy of the Gallic Wars or the Tetralogies? The New Testament, on the other hand, was written, approximately, between 40-90 AD during the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses. One of the earliest copies was made about 35 years after the autograph in 125 AD. That copy was made during the lifetimes of those who knew the eyewitnesses.  Errors would have been pointed out quickly both by critics and defenders alike.

Even though there are approximately 26,000 manuscripts, many more have yet to be cataloged and more are discovered regularly. Nothing else in history compares to the New Testament. Yet, it is constantly criticized and doubted. It is not because of a lack of manuscript evidence though. The manuscript evidence is there, and the material is early. 

These facts give good evidence for the resurrection of Jesus and the New Testament, and the resurrection of Jesus gives Christians a good reason to believe the gospel message. The gospel message is that Jesus is God; He died on a Roman cross for the sins of the world, and He was resurrected three days later. If those things are true, and there is good evidence that they are, then Christianity is true. We have a reliable Bible with excellent manuscript evidence and careful copying procedures, and we have a set of facts—accepted by the vast majority of New Testament scholars—that give good reasons for our faith. 

Christmas 2022 is less than two weeks away. As we approach this day, set aside to remember the birth of our Savior, be assured that your faith is grounded in facts. It is not a blind faith. We are told to be ready to give an answer to all who ask the reason for our faith. (1Peter 3:15.) So be prepared, and even if it is not the actual date that Jesus was born, it is the date we celebrate His birth. That is something worth celebrating. 

Merry Christmas! And may we all have a safe, happy, and healthy New Year. 

Roe v. Wade is over but the fight isn't

It is hard for me to believe that there are Christians who support abortion and protest the end of Roe v. Wade. They must be biblically illiterate or they would know the Bible defends the life of the unborn. (Exodus 21:22-23.) It seems that many people deliberately deceive themselves about abortion. They don't believe the unborn baby has a soul, but Luke 1:41-44 argues against that. They also want to believe the baby does not feel pain, but there are ultrasounds of babies flinching and trying to move away from pain. If the baby can feel pain, the baby can feel fear as well.

When testifying before congress, Dr. Levatino described the process of aborting a 22 week-old baby. The baby is the length of your hand plus a couple of inches. The baby has been kicking for several weeks. The mother has been sedated and is unconscious so that she feels no pain or fear. However, the baby is not as lucky. The doctor inserts a 14-inch suction catheter. When a woman is 12-weeks pregnant or less, the entire procedure can be done with the suction catheter and the doctor would just pull the baby apart by suction force. The amniotic fluid is first suctioned out, and that is when the baby first realizes the danger he or she is in. (I say he or she because there are only two genders.) Then the doctor inserts a long stainless steel clamp. It has rows of sharp teeth on the end so that anything it grabs -- in this case a living, breathing, kicking baby -- cannot break free. The doctor then grabs whatever he can and pulls, and he has to pull hard because he is ripping a baby apart limb by limb. A leg pops out and he puts it on the table. He then inserts the clamp again and pulls out an arm. Then he tears out the spine, the intestines, the heart and lungs. The head on a baby at that stage is about the size of a large plum. The doctor knows he just grabbed the head because white material runs out of the mother's cervix. That was the baby's brains. Then the doctor pulls out skull pieces. The doctor describes that sometimes he pulls out an intact face that stares back at him.

Congratulations, mom, you've just successfully exercised your right to choose. Perhaps a better choice would have been abstinence.

That is only one type of abortion, some are even more gruesome. There is no easy way to end a life, including the lives of unborn babies. Here are some statistics from Live Action: Only one percent of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood are of rape or incest victims. Seventy percent of all women who were raped, or victims of incest, chose life. They kept their babies.

It is sad that so many "Christians" do not have a Biblical worldview, and it is clear that the Bible values the unborn. This website does a good job of presenting that case: https://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion A woman's conscience also testifies against her. James 4:17 says, "If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn't do it, it is sin for them." Most women regret having abortions. They realize it was wrong and their conscience testifies against them. But, since 70% of women who are raped, or victims of incest, keep their babies, they don't have that guilt to live with. Instead, they have a precious child to live with who has committed no crime. Roe vs Wade was based on a lie. There had been no gang rape. Anyone who still believes that abortions should be legal should listen to Dr. Levatino's full testimony before congress.

Live Action has done amazing work educating people about the horrors of abortion. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvC6KqMFj7ifnd-JH7hYtQA

The "Epistle of Barnabas" (not to be confused with the "Gospel of Barnabas") is either a first or early second century Christian work. It is not considered canon now, but it may have been at one time. It is in the Codex Sinaiticus, but it might have just been there as a reference text of some sort. In 19:5 it says, "Thou shalt not doubt whether a thing shall be or not be. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain. Thou shalt love thy neighbor more than thine own soul. Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born. Thou shalt not withhold thy hand from thy son or daughter, but from their youth thou shalt teach them the fear of God." That's pretty explicit. If those early Christians, who were so close to Christ and the apostles, did not support abortion or infanticide, then Christians today shouldn't either. There is forgiveness in Christ, though. If you have the guilt of abortion in your life, Jesus took it at the cross. Confess your sin and trust Him to cleanse you of that sin. He doesn't turn anyone away. (John 6:37.)

One last thing, as for women who have been raped or victims of incest, many of them do not want to compound the violence with more violence. Most women who aborted those babies regretted it. Women in that horrible position do not need to raise the baby if they cannot face the child, but they can put the child up for adoption. That is a choice too. It is a choice for all women who are considering abortion, and it is a noble choice.

The Mountain of Curses

In the 1980s, archaeologist Adam Zertal uncovered an altar from the time of Joshua. However, because of the dominance of the Minimalist camp in archaeology, which will not allow any finds that validate the Bible, it was never admitted that the site could possibly be an altar. And because Minimalists do not even believe that Joshua or Moses existed, it certainly couldn't be the altar that Joshua built at the command of Moses in Joshua 8:30-31. However, the discovery of a small lead tablet in December 2019 at the same site has now become a small lead bullet in the forehead of secular archaeologists. (And the Minimalist camp of archaeology in general.)

Researchers used a Tomographic scan to reveal the lettering on the small lead tablet. That text has now been deciphered, and it affirms that Mount Ebal is in fact the mountain of "curses" that the Bible said it was all along. 

Score one for the Bible. 

Again.

The amulet reads:

    Cursed, cursed, cursed – cursed by the God YHW.
    You will die cursed.
    Cursed you will surely die.
    Cursed by YHW – cursed, cursed, cursed.

According to the Associates of Biblical Research, pottery shards and other items found with the amulet, date this tablet to the Iron Age I or the late Bronze Age. This puts it squarely during the time of Moses and Joshua. It brings us to the book of Deuteronomy where Moses commanded Joshua to declare blessings and curses associated with obeying or disobeying the Law when the Israelites entered the land.

Deuteronomy 11:29, (NKJV), "Now it shall be, when the Lord your God has brought you into the land which you go to possess, that you shall put the blessing on Mount Gerizim and the curse on Mount Ebal." 

The Bible is true and historical. This is just a tiny find, but it has huge ramifications. It is further proof for the the truth of God's word and the dishonesty of the Minimalist camp of Archaeology. 

The below videos cover this amazing archaeological discovery from Mount Ebal in Israel. I recommend these videos, and the One for Israel ministry, wholeheartedly. The video from Associates of Biblical Research has very poor audio in the beginning, but it quickly improves (with occasional issues).

.

Commentary on Matthew 10:23

Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko
from Pexels

Matthew 10:23 is one of those verses that once disturbed me, and I know it disturbs others. At first glance, it makes Jesus look like a false prophet. Was He saying He would return in the rapture or the second coming while His disciples were still alive and had not even finished preaching in Judea and Samaria? Here is the verse, "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another. For assuredly, I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." What did Jesus mean in that verse? At its simplest, it could mean He would overtake them on the road before they finished their preaching. However, the phrase, "before the Son of Man comes," hints at a bigger meaning than "I'll catch up with you later." There have been a lot of different views from commentators, and I have included Matthew Poole's Commentary on this verse below, but I personally believe we have an answer in Acts 1:4-8 and 9-11. 

"And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” 

We see the resurrected Lord in verse 8. He has conquered death and has been among His disciples teaching them for 40 days. We also see in the verse that they had not yet gone into all Judea and Samaria, so that is something yet future, but we also see that they have witnessed the resurrection of the Lord and His return to them after death. Now they are witnessing His ascension and have learned from an angel that His return would be in the same manner:

Verses 9-11, "Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”

In Matthew 10, Jesus is sending the disciples to the Jewish people to preach that the Kingdom of Heaven is near. They were joined with Jesus again before they had gone throughout all the cities. They would not return to their task of preaching in all of Jerusalem until after the resurrection and Pentecost. In the opening verses of Acts, we see that not only has the Son of Man come back from the dead, and they have witnessed it, they have witnessed what the return of Christ will look like. In effect, they have seen the return of Jesus in His ascension. However, they have not yet received the Holy Spirit, and they cannot commence their teaching of the full gospel until that time. It will be different this time, though. Matthew 10 was prior to the crucifixion and resurrection and the full revealing of the gospel. I think the prediction of Matthew 10:23 resumes or commences in Acts 1:4-11, and is finalized in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. That is when the disciples began their preaching about the death and resurrection of the Son of Man, which they had witnessed. That is when they began to preach the full Gospel. 

I think one problem that arises with Matthew 10:23 is that most people assume it is talking about Christ's return in the rapture or in His return to earth at the Second Coming. It cannot be speaking about those things because Jesus said in Matthew 24:36 that He did not know that day nor hour -- only the Father did. Yet, in Matthew 10:23, He knew something about the timing of the events He was telling His disciples about. That is why I do not think it points to the rapture or the second coming but to the events in the first and second chapters of Acts. 

After Pentecost, the disciples immediately began preaching -- (the persecution Jesus predicted began immediately as well). There is also the fact that Jesus said this gospel would be preached to all nations, and that is still happening and it's been nearly 2,000 years. There may be some hair splitting here. There are still people today who have never heard the gospel. Far too many. According to the ministry Faith Comes by Hearing, there are 7,141 languages spoken all over the world, but the Bible has only been translated into approximately 3,000 languages. However, 70% of the world's population live in oral communities, and as many as 50 to 98% of them are functionally illiterate. They would not be able to read the Bible in their own language even if they had one. That is why Faith Comes by Hearing is producing audio Bible in as many of the earth's languages as possible, and their goal is to have audio Bible's in all languages by 2033. I wish all Christians would support this ministry because the most important thing we have to offer is the Word of God. The testimonies at the site are profound and speak to the power and life-changing impact of God's Word.

I want everyone to be able to hear or read the Bible in their own language. However, this prophecy does not say all languages will have Bibles. It says the gospel will be preached in all nations before the end comes, and it has been. But if this prophecy somehow includes languages and Bibles, and not just nations hearing the gospel message, then even it is not fulfilled yet. Jesus' disciples were told they would go to the end of the world as witnesses, and Jesus' disciples are still doing that. Will we finish all of our tasks before He returns? I don't think so. But all nations have heard the gospel, even if not all people within those nations have.  

Here is Matthew Poole's Commentary on Matthew 10:23.

"Till the Son of man be come. There is a wonderful variety of interpreters’ senses of this text, founded upon the various comings of Christ mentioned in holy writ. He was already come in the flesh, so as it, speaking of a time to come, could not be meant of that: nor can it be understood of his second coming to judgment, for they have gone through the cities of Israel long ago. Christ is therefore said in Scripture to come, when he appeareth in some great work of providence, whether of judgment or mercy. This makes some interpret it of the destruction of Jerusalem; in which sense some think the coming of Christ is mentioned, Matthew 24:1-51. Some, of the resurrection of Christ, from whence they say Christ’s epocha commenced. Others understand it of the effusion of the Spirit in the day of Pentecost; this they ground on John 14:17,18, where they think Christ’s coming, promised John 14:18, is the coming of the Spirit, promised John 14:17. Undoubtedly, in the general, our Saviour means, till the time be accomplished when you must leave preaching to the Jews and go to the Gentiles, and my kingdom shall be further extended than it is at present; which dispensation of God may for aught I know be called the coming of Christ, being an eminent act of God’s providence, by which Christ was more showed to the world, and his kingdom further extended."