In this episode, Dr. Licona provides a positive case for the resurrection of Jesus at the 2017 [UN]Apologetic Conference in Austin, Texas. He bases his argument on contentions that 1) empirical data strongly suggests that reality has a supernatural dimension and 2) that historical data strongly suggests that Jesus rose from the dead. Mr. Dillahunty, an atheist activist and former Christian, disagrees, positing that there is not sufficient evidence for this conclusion. Instead, those who believe in Jesus’ bodily resurrection are committing the fallacious argument from personal incredulity. This means they take on this belief because they can’t find a better explanation for the historical evidence. Licona responds that Dillahunty is steeped in methodological naturalism, and the debate continues.

In this episode, Dr. Licona provides a positive case for the resurrection of Jesus at the 2017 [UN]Apologetic Conference in Austin, Texas. He bases his argument on contentions that 1) empirical data strongly suggests that reality has a supernatural dimension and 2) that historical data strongly suggests that Jesus rose from the dead. Mr. Dillahunty, an atheist activist and former Christian, disagrees, positing that there is not sufficient evidence for this conclusion. Instead, those who believe in Jesus’ bodily resurrection are committing the fallacious argument from personal incredulity. This means they take on this belief because they can’t find a better explanation for the historical evidence. Licona responds that Dillahunty is steeped in methodological naturalism, and the debate continues.

In this episode, a 2004 debate between Mike Licona and Richard Carrier, Licona presents a case for the resurrection of Jesus based on three facts that are strongly evidenced and acknowledged by the majority of scholars: 1) Jesus’ death by crucifixion, 2) the empty tomb, and 3) the experiences of Jesus’ disciples and his enemy Saul that they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus. Carrier contends that the earliest Christians only held that Jesus’ soul was exalted and that the idea of a bodily resurrection, and the gospel testimony in favor of this, came later through Paul. Who makes the stronger case?

In this episode, a 2004 debate between Mike Licona and Richard Carrier, Licona presents a case for the resurrection of Jesus based on three facts that are strongly evidenced and acknowledged by the majority of scholars: 1) Jesus’ death by crucifixion, 2) the empty tomb, and 3) the experiences of Jesus’ disciples and his enemy Saul that they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus. Carrier contends that the earliest Christians only held that Jesus’ soul was exalted and that the idea of a bodily resurrection, and the gospel testimony in favor of this, came later through Paul. Who makes the stronger case?

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.