Browse / Scripture Commentary / Article

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

2021-04-05 book_highlights Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona

Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona — Kindle highlights from 'The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus'. 110 highlights.

kindle-sync: bookId: '11863' title: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus author: Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona asin: B001QOGJY0 lastAnnotatedDate: '2021-04-05' bookImageUrl: 'https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81TdnW9C+YL._SY160.jpg' highlightsCount: 110

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

Metadata

Highlights

The evidence suggests that God exists and has actually revealed himself to us in Jesus Christ. The evidence attests that Christians have the most accurate view of reality. — location: 60 ^ref-25029

Blomberg comments, "The problem is that other worldviews and religions make the same claims as we do. To defend your view in the marketplace of religious ideas, you have to be able to give reasons for why you believe the Bible's claims about itself."' — location: 115 ^ref-4854

Paul wrote that belief in Jesus' resurrection from the dead is required for eternal life.6 In fact, Paul was so adamant about the importance of Jesus' resurrection that he wrote, "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still under condemnation for your sins. In that case, all who have died believing in Christ have perished'"' For Paul, if Jesus did not rise from the dead, Christianity is false, we will be judged for our sins by the true God, and Christians who have died are lost. — location: 138 ^ref-47835

Jesus' critics asked him for a sign, and he said he would give them one-his resurrection.`' It is the test by which we could know that he was telling the truth. "' — location: 143 ^ref-14502

If Jesus did not rise from the dead, he was a false prophet and a charlatan whom no rational person should follow. Conversely, if he did rise from the dead, this event confirmed his radical claim. — location: 145 ^ref-25506

The external evidence of Jesus' resurrection confirms the truth we have received via God's written revelation. — location: 164 ^ref-5475

Where are such writings if not in the New Testament? Not only is the New Testament what we might expect it to be, but most of it comes from those who were in a position to be reliable witnesses of what Jesus said and did. — location: 172 ^ref-31784

Lack of attestation does not mean that the event did not occur, only that we have difficulty verifying it from an objective historical perspective. — location: 196 ^ref-23247

When it comes to history, we can only speak of probability, not 100 percent certainty. However, do not be discouraged that in historical terms Jesus' resurrection cannot be established with absolute certainty. For one, all worldviews share the same challenge. — location: 205 ^ref-16729

In historical inquiry, the historian combs through the data, considers all the possibilities, and seeks to determine which scenario best explains the data. — location: 213 ^ref-39376

Historians are also concerned with plausibility, a principle the legal community likewise employs. — location: 217 ^ref-18026

The accuser can meet the burden by offering a certain quantum of evidence, which varies depending upon the nature of the accusation, for example-in the context of legal disputes-proof beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal charges or, for civil charges, proof that makes the truth of an accusation more probable than not.2O — location: 220 ^ref-54966

The standards of evidence do not require that the case for something is irrefutable. Such 100 percent certainty is only possible in the rarest of circumstances. Rather, the standard requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases and proof that makes the truth of an accusation more probable than not in civil cases. If this is not understood, our criteria for proof may he unrealistic. — location: 222 ^ref-5416

But no matter how good the evidence, a saving belief still requires faith. — location: 255 ^ref-12825

  1. Multiple, independent sources support historical claims. — location: 275 ^ref-19797
  1. Attestation by an enemy supports historical claims. — location: 285 ^ref-49973
  1. Embarrassing admissions support historical claims. — location: 293 ^ref-16963

"Declarations againstinterest are regarded as having a high degree of credibility because of the presumption that people do not make up lies in order to hurt themselves; they lie to help themselves," — location: 301 ^ref-11670

  1. Eyewitness testimony supports historical claims. — location: 304 ^ref-37562

Historians must consider testimony of secondhand witnesses as they attempt to arrive at a conclusion regarding what happened. — location: 307 ^ref-37814

  1. Early testimony supports historical claims. — location: 308 ^ref-51846

While we hold that the Bible is trustworthy and inspired, we cannot expect the skeptical nonbeliever with whom we are dialoguing to embrace this view. So, in order to avoid a discussion that may divert us off of our most important topic, we would like to suggest that we adopt a "minimal facts approach." — location: 338 ^ref-2641

Believer and skeptic alike accept the facts I'm using because they are so strongly supported. These facts must be addressed." — location: 346 ^ref-57063

The side issues about alleged contradictions could have gone on endlessly. But we are not told in the Bible that one must believe in its inspiration or inerrancy in order to have eternal life. We are told that belief in Jesus'… — location: 355 ^ref-21947

Some skeptics of Jesus' resurrection persist in arguing for a far-fetched opposing theory, although there may be little or no support for it. If we look hard enough, we will find people who deny that we exist. Thus, our minimal facts include what nearly all scholars hold, including skeptical ones.… — location: 369 ^ref-49307

The first fact: Jesus died by… — location: 386 ^ref-16784

The second fact: Jesus' disciples believed that he rose and… — location: 400 ^ref-52879

Thus, Paul knew the apostles personally and reports that they claimed that Jesus… — location: 418 ^ref-25163

Paul is a source independent of the… — location: 422 ^ref-57338

Scholars identify several instances in which oral traditions have been copied into the writings that comprise the New Testament. These include carefully constructed creeds, hymns, story summaries, and poetry. These are significant, since the oral tradition had to exist prior to the New… — location: 425 ^ref-13104

One of the earliest and most important is quoted in Paul's first letter to the Corinthian church (c. A.). 55). He wrote in 15:3-5, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day… — location: 433 ^ref-19521

Sources that cannot be ignored are the Gospels themselves. No matter how skeptical the critic might be concerning the Gospels, it is well-accepted that all four gospels (i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke/Acts, John) were written during the first… — location: 446 ^ref-51076

Clement writes, "Therefore, having received orders and complete certainty caused by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and believing in the Word of God, they went with the Holy Spirit's certainty, preaching the… — location: 459 ^ref-57991

Irenaeus also makes mention of Polycarp in a letter to Florinus which is now lost but fortunately preserved by the early church historian… — location: 466 ^ref-60883

As with Clement, if Irenaeus and Tertullian are correct that Polycarp had been taught and appointed by the apostles, his statements concerning Jesus' resurrection can be linked to these apostles, since, as their central teaching, it makes the most sense that… — location: 474 ^ref-20836

To help remember this wealth of data when sharing with someone, use the acronym POW! ("Paul, Oral… — location: 479 ^ref-60932

After Jesus' death, the lives of the disciples were transformed to the point that they endured persecution and even martyrdom. Such strength of conviction indicates that they were not just claiming that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them in… — location: 491 ^ref-1857

Compare this courage to their character at Jesus' arrest and execution. They denied and abandoned him, then they hid in fear. Afterward, they willingly endangered… — location: 493 ^ref-56205

All of these sources, biblical and non-biblical alike, affirm the disciples' willingness to suffer and die for their faith.") Of course the conviction of the disciples that Jesus rose from the dead and had appeared to them does not necessarily mean they were right. The skeptic might object, "Followers of other religions and causes have willingly suffered and died for their beliefs. Even atheists have willingly died for the cause of communism. This does not mean that their beliefs were true or worthy." Agreed, but this misses the point: The disciples' willingness to suffer and die for their beliefs indicates that they certainly regarded those beliefs as true. The case is strong that they did not willfully lie about the appearances of the risen Jesus. Liars make poor martyrs. — location: 530 ^ref-55608

Modern martyrs act solely out of their trust in beliefs that others have taught them. The apostles died for holding to their own testimony that they had personally seen the risen Jesus. Contemporary martyrs die for what they believe to be true. The disciples of Jesus died for what they knew to be either true or false. — location: 537 ^ref-42739

Instead, all the reports testify to steadfast courage during suffering." — location: 544 ^ref-18698

Paula Fredriksen of Boston University comments, "I know in their own terms what they saw was the raised Jesus. That's what they say and then all the historic evidence we have afterwards attest to their conviction that that's what they saw. I'm not saying that they really did see the raised Jesus. I wasn't there. I don't know what they saw. But I do know that as a historian that they must have seen something."" — location: 550 ^ref-48046

A critic may claim that what they saw were hallucinations or visions, but he does not deny that they actually experienced something.70 — location: 555 ^ref-9869

Thus, Paul's notorious pre-Christian activities and conversion are multiply attested. We have Paul's own testimony, Luke's record in Acts, and a story that was circulating among Christians in Galatia.'We must now ask the question: What caused this change in Paul? Why did one who persecuted Christians suddenly become one? Both Paul himself and Luke report that it was because he believed firmly that he had experienced an encounter with the risen Jesus.' — location: 575 ^ref-56288

Paul's conversion is so interesting because he was an enemy of the church when he claimed to have seen the risen Jesus." — location: 578 ^ref-56211

However, the cause of Paul's conversion makes his different. — location: 582 ^ref-13621

The fourth fact: The skeptic James, brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed — location: 589 ^ref-29754

Second, regardless of the condition of his body, the enemies of Jesus would still have found benefit in producing the corpse. Even a barely recognizable corpse could have dissuaded some believers, possibly weakening and ultimately toppling the entire movement. — location: 628 ^ref-58642

Anything but an emptytomb would have been devastating to the Resurrection account. — location: 634 ^ref-18243

The empty tomb is attested not only by Christian sources. Jesus' enemies admitted it as well, albeit indirectly. Hence, we are not employing an argument from silence. — location: 637 ^ref-38151

When we come to the account of the empty tomb, women are listed as the primary witnesses. They are not only the first witnesses mentioned. They are also mentioned in all four gospels, whereas male witnesses appear only later and in two gospels.34 This would be an odd invention, since in both Jewish and Roman cultures, woman were lowly esteemed and their testimony was regarded as questionable, certainly not as credible as a man's. — location: 645 ^ref-61920

Given the low first-century view of women that was frequently shared by Jew and Gentile, it seems highly unlikely that the Gospel authors would either invent or adjust such testimonies. — location: 659 ^ref-43647

We may find the acronym J-E-T helpful in remembering our arguments for the empty tomb: the Jerusalem Factor; Enemy Attested; and Testimony of Women. — location: 671 ^ref-52118

Shortly after Jesus' death, his disciples believed that they saw him risen from the dead. They claimed that he had appeared to individuals among them, as well as to several groups. Two of those who once viewed Jesus as a false prophet laterbelieved that he appeared to them risen: Paul, the church persecutor; and James, the skeptic and Jesus' brother. Both of them became Christians as a result. — location: 681 ^ref-38385

grief hallucinations cannot account for the empty tomb or the conversion of the church persecutor Paul, — location: 688 ^ref-40431

When no plausible natural explanation is available-as is the case with Jesus' resurrection-and a historical context with obvious religious implications exists where a resurrection is at home-for example if Jesus performed miracles and claimed divinity'-there then are no reasons why a supernatural cause cannot be considered. — location: 713 ^ref-16180

It is also worthwhile to note that, just as the Christian can be expected to provide facts to support her claim that Jesus rose from the dead, the critic must do likewise for his opposing explanations. It is not good enough merely to state, for example, that Jesus' disciples hallucinated what they thought were actual appearances of the risen Jesus. The critic must provide good reason why thetheory that the disciples hallucinated offers a better explanation for the facts than does Jesus' actual bodily resurrection." — location: 720 ^ref-32446

The textual purity of the New Testament is rarely questioned in scholarship. It is well established and agreed among almost all who have seriously studied the ancient texts that the text is virtually the same as what was originally written.' Even critical scholars question very few words in the New Testament, and those words in question do not affect doctrinal issues. — location: 750 ^ref-21064

Fifth, if we look at the New Testament material on Jesus' resurrection, there are indicators that the accounts were meant to be understood as historical rather than mythical. Consider the two sermon summaries of Peter and Paul, recordedin Acts, that contrast King David's buried body with Jesus' resurrected body.13 They claimed that Jesus' body did not decay in the grave as David's did, but rather was raised up by God. It is difficult to imagine how Peter and Paul could have been any clearer if they meant to communicate a literal, physical resurrection. If a mythical genre was being employed, Peter and Paul could have easily said, "David died, was buried, his body decayed, but his spirit has ascended to be with God. Jesus likewise died, was buried, and his body now decays. But as with David, his spirit has ascended to be with God where he is now seated at the right hand of power." This would more closely resemble mythical or vision language. The language the apostles employed, however, seems to have been historical." — location: 782 ^ref-3701

Sixth, the responses of early critics imply that the early church understood the resurrection of Jesus to be historical. The Jewish leaders accused the disciples of stealing Jesus' body. Although later, the second century critic Celsus (c. A.D. 170) responded to claims of Jesus' resurrection by suggesting he and/or his disciples performed magic or deception.' These arguments indicate that these critics thought they needed to respond to a claim of a literal and bodily resurrection. — location: 788 ^ref-20318

Although it is true that other religions contain resurrection accounts, there are excellent reasons for accepting the story of Jesus' resurrection while rejecting the others. — location: 796 ^ref-28667

The first account of a dying and rising god that somewhat parallels the story of Jesus' resurrection appeared at least 100 years after the reports of Jesus' resurrection.'`' — location: 807 ^ref-3923

So the picture we get of Osiris is that of a guy who does not have all of his parts and who maintains a shadowy existence as god of the mummies. As a friend, Chris Clayton, put it, Osiris's return to life was not a resurrection, but a zombification. — location: 818 ^ref-49574

Furthermore, if the New Testament faithfully reports Jesus' words, he predicted that false christs and false prophets would come and deceive others." Based on his words, competing resurrection claims in non-Christian religions should not be a surprise. — location: 832 ^ref-32764

What is significant here is that all these competing resurrection claims occur after Jesus resurrection.

But this misses the point. It is not being argued that the sincerity of the apostles proves that Jesus rose from the dead. The point is that their sincerity to the point of martyrdom indicates that they were not intentionally lying. — location: 859 ^ref-26412

Second, a mere story propagated by the disciples would not have convinced Paul, who was an enemy of the church. — location: 864 ^ref-47996

Paul converted because he believed the risen Jesus had appeared to him. Fraud 2 fails to account for the appearance to Paul, which is far stronger evidence for Jesus' resurrection than is the empty tomb. — location: 878 ^ref-35620

Indeed, the gospel of John reports that Mary Magdalene immediately jumped to the conclusion that someone had stolen the body upon discovering the empty tomb. Her first thought was not that Jesus had risen.41 The gospels further report that Peter, upon seeing the empty tomb, was unconvinced as well.42 Thomas was unconvinced by reports of an empty tomb and reports of appearances by the risen Jesus to the others.43 It was the appearances that led to the disciples' belief that Jesus had risen from the dead.44 — location: 881 ^ref-54196

Sixth, the evidence suggests that the tomb's location was known, because a well-known man, Joseph of Arimathea, buried Jesus in his own tomb. If the burial by Joseph was an invention, then we might expect ancient critics to state that Joseph denied this version of the story. Or the critics could have denied the existence of Joseph if he had been a fictitious character. After all, Joseph was allegedly on the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish ruling body in the time of Jesus, and was therefore a public figure. Instead of questioning the place of burial, however, this group resorted to claiming that the disciples had stolen the body. — location: 899 ^ref-24405

The soldiers had seen hundreds of men executed by crucifixion. It was routine to know when the victim was dead. He was not pushing up any longer for air. — location: 935 ^ref-49868

So even if Jesus got off of the cross while he was still alive, the disciples would not have been convinced that he had risen from the dead, since the sight of hisbody and his slow and careful movements would have clearly indicated that he was a horribly hurting man. Upon seeing a swooned Jesus who was limping, bleeding, pale, and stooped over in pain, Peter would not have responded, "Wow, I can't wait to have a resurrection body just like that!" Rather the disciples would have said, "Let's get you a doctor. You need help!"" — location: 943 ^ref-44867

Put succinctly: An illusion is a distorted perception. A hallucination is a false perception. A delusion is a false belief. — location: 967 ^ref-34609

First, today we know that hallucinations are private occurrences, which occur in the mind of an individual. They are not collective experiences.' — location: 972 ^ref-53174

we might point out that the very experience cited by the skeptic in support of a subjective vision (Acts 9) contains details that rule out such an experience (e.g., Paul's traveling companions saw the same light, heard the same voice, and even fell to the ground). — location: 1055 ^ref-51525

Did Paul experience all three during the same period? The data suggests that he did not, since he does not fit into the psychological profile for conversion disorder, and he does not appear to have been in the frame of mind to hallucinate a risen Jesus. — location: 1077 ^ref-53523

in rejecting the Acts accounts, the critic would also reject any data he has for claiming conversion disorder. — location: 1081 ^ref-12462

Third, the hard life that Paul cheerfully lived as a Christian did not reflect a person who was out for self-gratification. Paul accepted multiple beatings, imprisonments, put his life in danger continuously, and lived a life close to poverty for the sake of the gospel. — location: 1120 ^ref-20771

Second, an epiphany experienced by Paul does not account for the empty tomb. Jesus' body should still have been lying there. Third, Christianity's critics responded to a literal interpretation of Jesus' resurrection rather than to an epiphany, implying this is what the witnesses were proclaiming. — location: 1142 ^ref-32920

First, combinations of theories generally lead to higher improbability, not a more probable solution. If a combination theory is to be true, all of its subtheories must be true. If one is not, then the theory fails to account adequately for all of the data. If one subtheory fails, the combination fails. — location: 1155 ^ref-38154

Third, the discrepancies in the Gospels may indicate that they were independent accounts, since copiers would have been more unified on the facts. From a historian's vantage point, this diversity adds to their credibility, since it indicates that the event is being attested by more than one source.e — location: 1184 ^ref-60339

First, Paul's testimony is stronger than that of a neutral witness of the risen Jesus, since his bias ran in the opposite direction. He was certainly not sympathetic to the Christian cause. — location: 1189 ^ref-23007

Second, the biases of James the brother of Jesus also ran contrary to Christianity. The Gospels report that he was an unbeliever during the life of Jesus. — location: 1195 ^ref-9659

Third, recognizing the bias of an author does not automatically merit the conclusion that he or she has distorted the facts." Modern Jewish historians of the Nazi holocaust have very carefully chronicled Nazi atrocities because they are passionately committed to exposing what really occurred, whereas revisionist historians (mostly Gentile) tend to downplay the facts. In this case, personal bias encourages historical accuracy.' — location: 1198 ^ref-48166

The authors of such works often would not be writing unless they had a personal interest. — location: 1201 ^ref-15179

Today's historians usually can evaluate bias and separate questionable material from the core material of the events described. — location: 1205 ^ref-41683

Fifth, the skeptic must be careful not to commit the genetic fallacy. We must recognize the difference between understanding why something is true versus understanding why something is believed or how one came to believe that it is true. — location: 1206 ^ref-17465

Bias does not mean lying. Someone may be biased and correct. — location: 1217 ^ref-64161

In the first century, people did not have access to all of our convenient ways to record and preserve the facts about events. Further, we know that much ofwhat was recorded in the past has been lost. — location: 1221 ^ref-39847

What we have concerning Jesus actually is impressive. We can start with approximately nine traditional authors of the New Testament. If we consider the critical thesis that other authors wrote the pastoral letters and such letters as Ephesians and 2 Thessalonians, we'd have an even larger number. Another twenty early Christian authors20 and four heretical writings mention Jesus within 150 years of his death on the cross.21 Moreover, nine secular, non-Christian sources mention Jesus within the 150 years: Josephus, the Jewish historian; Tacitus, the Roman historian; Pliny the Younger, a politician of Rome; Phlegon, a freed slave who wrote histories; Lucian, the Greek satirist; Celsus, a Roman philosopher; and probably the historians Suetonius and Thallus, as well as the prisoner Mara Bar-Serapion.22 In all, at least forty-two authors, nine of them secular, mention Jesus within 150 years of his death. — location: 1232 ^ref-20112

Two thousand years of attempts by critics to account for these facts by natural causes have failed. Most modern critics even grant this. Therefore, Jesus' resurrection from the dead is the only plausible explanation for the known facts. — location: 1249 ^ref-51397

You will notice that the objections included in this chapter are made apart from any investigation of the historical facts that may argue in favor of miracles, or Jesus' resurrection. In other words, they are philosophical considerations that are made without viewing the available evidences. Philosophers refer to these as a priori arguments. — location: 1282 ^ref-58104

However, it will not take long for you to recognize that the way you respond to an a priori argument is quite different from the manner in which you answer an a posteriori argument. For example, if I desired to argue on behalf of miracles, I might challenge the philosopher taking the a priori argument above by saying, "How do you know that miracles are impossible? The historical evidence that I am presenting may just be what we need to refute your theory." Better yet, I might walk onto the philosopher's home turf and challenge the reasons for holding such a philosophical position in the first place. In this chapter we will use both approaches. — location: 1288 ^ref-11364

The first major problem with this objection is that the scientific method is limited in its ability to observe and test. Like history, this is simply part of the rules of research. — location: 1303 ^ref-56166

Second, to claim that truth is found only in what science can test and "prove" is self-refuting. — location: 1308 ^ref-43924

The rule that science is the only way to know something is itself unscientific; it cannot be tested. — location: 1314 ^ref-3304

Third, to require that historical events be predictable or repeatable also turns out to be self-refuting, since these are just different ways of stating that science is the only way to know something. — location: 1316 ^ref-14149

Fourth, while science perhaps cannot measure God's activity, there is no reason why we cannot consider non-supernatural portions of claims concerning the Resurrection. For example, did Jesus die? Was he seen alive at some later time? — location: 1323 ^ref-42075

First, what science has shown is that a person is not going to rise from the dead by natural causes. But this does not apply to Jesus' resurrection, since we are not claiming that Jesus came back to life naturally.9 — location: 1334 ^ref-46859

Second, the Resurrection is not an isolated event; it occurred in an interconnected religio-historical context that helps to provide meaning. — location: 1335 ^ref-8197

Interestingly enough, without a workable opposing theory, the skeptic must be careful not to substitute a "naturalism of the gaps" view. This occurs when critics have little ground on which to oppose the Resurrection, yet they conclude that it still could not have happened (which is a mere denial). Or they simply refuse to believe in spite of not having a viable counter response. — location: 1356 ^ref-25587

Another reason to keep an open mind is that we cannot apply the scientific method to a supernatural occurrence if one comes along. That is a limitation on science, not on our ability to know. — location: 1385 ^ref-58091

The result of this critique is that historical evidence might, for a brief time, actually supersede scientific evidence, since it means that, at that very moment, God intervened in nature. — location: 1397 ^ref-28211

he is arguing in a circle because he assumes his naturalistic stance in order to pronounce judgment on other conceptual issues. — location: 1403 ^ref-15214

We need another yardstick, besides the event itself, to indicate that God performed it. And we have just these sorts of pointers in the case of the Resurrection. — location: 1410 ^ref-8452

During the past few decades, however, dozens of more credible reports have been documented of individuals who returned to consciousness after being comatose or at the point of clinical death. — location: 1455 ^ref-12811

People blind from birth have correctly recalled visual details of things around them and outside their presence. Many of these near-death details were of events occurring when the individual had no heartbeat or brain wave activity, as indicated by "flat" EKG and EEG readings, sometimes over lengthy periods of time.33 — location: 1459 ^ref-22992

Paul writes that when Christ returns, he "will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body" (Phil 3:21 NN). It is our lowly and mortal body that will be "transformed," not eliminated. — location: 1539 ^ref-62263

In Colossians 2:9, Paul writes that in Christ, "all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form."4 We may notice that Paul here uses the present tense. For him, the very essence and nature of God not only belongs to Jesus; it presently dwells in his body. — location: 1546 ^ref-11679

This is a very good point.

Third, it should be noted that the disciples' experiences occurred prior to Jesus' ascension to the throne of God. Paul's experience occurred after this event. Whether the critic believes in the ascension is irrelevant. The account of the appearance of a post-ascension, glorified Jesus to Paul issufficient to explain why Paul's experience was different than those of the disciples. — location: 1557 ^ref-55979

in I Corinthians 15, Paul clearly is not contrasting a material body with an immaterial one. Rather, he's contrasting a body that is holy with its spiritual appetites, with one that is weak with both its fleshly and sinful appetites. — location: 1632 ^ref-35907

Your Tags

Personal labels you apply to any item — separate from system topics. Tags are shared across all databases. Visit /tags to browse all your tags.

...more

Scripture References

Colossians 2:9 Phil 3:21

Topics

Christology Apologetics Resurrection
Ask Claude about this