Why Ben Shapiro found William Lane Craig’s resurrection rationale ‘uninteresting’

We are just six months away from the projected release date of The Passion of the Christ: Resurrection. Jim Caviezel said it will be the “biggest film in history.” And a columnist for The Washington Times recently highlighted Christ’s resurrection with this candid headline: “The Most Important News Story in Human History.”

Ben Shapiro is a political commentator and an Orthodox Jew. William Lane Craig is a Christian apologist. The two men sat down a few years ago and discussed the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Dr. Craig presented “three great independently established facts which are supported by the historical evidence ... After his crucifixion and burial by a member of the Sanhedrin named Joseph of Arimathea, Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty on the first day of the week by a group of his female followers. Secondly, various individuals and groups of people then witnessed appearances of Jesus alive; and finally number three, the original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe that God had raised Jesus from the dead despite having every predisposition to the contrary.”

Dr. Craig continued, “The vast majority of scholars have come to accept as convincing the evidence in support of those three facts, not assuming biblical inerrancy or inspiration, but treating the Gospels as ordinary historical documents. You can show, for example, that the fact of the discovery of the empty tomb is attested by at least six independent sources in the New Testament, some of which are extraordinarily early. No scholar denies that individuals and groups saw postmortem appearances of Jesus.”

Ben Shapiro cordially responded that he finds these historical arguments for Christ’s resurrection to be “relatively uninteresting.”

Why so little interest in these verifiable facts of history? At the very least, one would think Ben Shapiro would find this credible evidence intriguing and worthy of investigation. It is illogical for an Orthodox Jew to dismiss the unassailable evidence for Christ’s resurrection as uninteresting and unworthy of serious consideration. There must be something deeper going on here.

Why do you suppose many Jewish people are so quick to write off the well-documented resurrection report concerning the most famous Jew who ever walked on this planet?

One key factor: Many Jewish children are taught that Jesus is the God of Gentile Christians, but certainly not the God of the Jews. In reality, “The Jewish Messiah Didn’t Start a New Religion,” as I explained in a CP op-ed last year.

Rather than encouraging their children to pray to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in a sincere effort to know the truth about Yeshua (Jesus), Jewish children are taught that Jews do not need Jesus for salvation.

When children are inculcated with an extreme bias against Yeshua, they find it extremely difficult to break free later in life. As a result, a relatively small number of Jews choose to investigate the Messianic prophecies and the resurrection of Yeshua with an open heart and a curious mind.

Scripture describes the veil which covers the hearts of Jewish people who do not yet know Yeshua as Messiah. “We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away” (2 Corinthians 3:13-16).

The strong evidence for Christ’s resurrection seems uninteresting when a veil is covering your mind. This veil is a supernatural spiritual barrier to belief in Jesus Christ as Messiah. The power of God can demolish this barrier and bring a person to faith in the Savior. The Gospel message rescues Jewish and Gentile captives from the spiritual bondage of unbelief.

The Apostle Paul wrote, “I am not ashamed of the Gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes; first for the Jew, then for the Gentile” (Romans 1:16).

When Yeshua converted Saul on the Damascus road, (Acts 22:1-10) the Lord spoke of Paul's future work as an apostle: “I am sending you to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me” (Acts 26:17-18).

Satan’s supernatural power is blinding. “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers so that they cannot see the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4). This is the same fallen angel who tempted Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, (Genesis 3:1-6) and who “afflicted Job with painful sores from the soles of his feet to the top of his head” (Job 2:7).

Nevertheless, multitudes of Jews and Gentiles over the centuries have been healed of their spiritual blindness. For example, Jonathan Bernis of “Jewish Voice,” testifies how as a Jewish person he met Christ. And Israeli “Pop Idol” star, Birgitta Veksler, shares how a near-death experience brought her to the feet of her Messiah and freed her from fear.

If you have not yet experienced the grace and love of Yeshua, then I encourage you to open your heart and mind to the historical and prophetic evidence for the Messiah's resurrection, and to the good news of the Gospel.

Yeshua said, “God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).

Jews have a right to stick to Judaism

Most though are just Jewish as a birthright and pay scant attention to the books

A lot of Catholics do that too

Very high drop out rates both

I wish my Jewish friends accepted Christ but it’s unlikely

The family pressure against it and not without some justification is big

But it happens

Vice Versa rarely happens except the shiksa appeasing husbands family on the birthright of the spawn like Ivanka

I do know one gal from college who was a traveling dead head for 20 years who converted to Judaism

She ran with a bunch of yankee Jews in that group and rejected her authoritarian Pentecostal preacher daddy and upbringing in rural Mississippi in doing so

She took a Hebrew name and went to Israeli and studied and worked kibbutz

She’s more Jewish practicing today with a goy husband in Atlanta than most Jews I know

So it does genuinely happen

Christians like Hagee think Jews are de facto saved anyhow

I don’t pretend to know

I do think this polar opposites between Jewish woke and Christian social conservatives has always been providential

And the end game for Jews after death is above my pay grades knowledge

I hope for them despite their wrongheadedness politically as a rule

Why so little interest in these verifiable facts of history? At the very least, one would think Ben Shapiro would find this credible evidence intriguing and worthy of investigation. It is illogical for an Orthodox Jew to dismiss the unassailable evidence for Christ's resurrection as uninteresting and unworthy of serious consideration. There must be something deeper going on here.

Why do you suppose many Jewish people are so quick to write off the well-documented resurrection report concerning the most famous Jew who ever walked on this planet?

You can thank Bishop Boobbie Barron and VC II for reinforcing Shapiro's vincible ignorance:

No. The Catholic view — go back to the Second Vatican Council — says it very clearly. Christ is the privileged route to salvation, that God so loved the world He gave his only son that we might find eternal life ….

However, Vatican II clearly teaches that someone outside the explicit Christian faith can be saved. Now they are saved through the grace of Christ indirectly received, so the grace is coming from Christ, but it might be received according to your conscience. So, if you’re following your conscience sincerely, or in your case, you’re following the commandments of the law sincerely, yeah you can be saved.

BEN SHAPIRO: ... but I get this question a lot:
As a Jew, how does it feel that there are other religions that don’t think you’re getting into heaven?
So let me ask you: What’s the Catholic view on who gets into heaven and who doesn’t?
I feel like I lead a pretty good life, a very religiously based life,
in which I try to keep not just the Ten Commandments but a solid 603 other commandments as well,
and I spend an awful lot of my time promulgating what I would consider to be Judeo-Christian virtues,
particularly in Western societies.
So, what’s the Catholic view of me?
Am I basically screwed here?

BISHOP BARRON: No [i.e., Ben is not “basically screwed”].
The Catholic view, go back to the Second Vatican Council, says it very clearly.
Christ is the privileged route to salvation:
“For God so loved the world he gave His only Son that we might find eternal life.”
So, that’s the privileged route.
However, Vatican II clearly teaches that someone outside the explicit Christian faith can be saved [cf. Lumen Gentium 16].
Now, they’re saved through the grace of Christ, indirectly received.
So the grace is coming from Christ.
But it might be received according to your conscience.
So, if you’re following your conscience sincerely, or in your case,
you’re following the commandments of the Law sincerely, yeah, you can be saved.
Now, that doesn’t conduce to a complete relativism.
I mean we [Catholics] still would say the privileged route
and the route that God has offered to humanity is the route of his Son.
But you [a non-Christian] can be saved.
Even Vatican II says an atheist of good will can be saved in following his conscience.

John Henry Newman said the conscience is the “aboriginal vicar of Christ in the soul.”
It’s a very interesting characterization, that [the conscience] is in fact the voice of Christ.
If he’s the logos made flesh, if he’s the divine mind or reason made flesh,
then when I follow my conscience, I’m following him whether I know it explicitly or not.
So, even the atheist, Vatican II teaches, of good will, can be saved.

From WOF:
Why does Bishop Barron refer to Christ as the “privileged route” to salvation?
The surrounding context of the discussion makes it clear:
he was talking not about Christ himself, but about explicit faith in Christ.
First, note how Ben’s initial question was whether he was “basically screwed” in terms of salvation since he’s a practicing Jew.
That was his fundamental question.
And the Catholic teaching, articulated by Vatican II and the Catechism (CCC 847)
and presented by Bishop Barron, is “no.”
A non-Christian—“someone outside the explicit Christian faith”—can be saved.
(And notice how he repeatedly emphasizes the word “can”—
because this only means that such salvation is possible,
not that it is unconditional or likely or easy.

He also goes on to point out that this does not conduce to religious relativism—
because ”the fullness of the means of salvation” [CCC 830] is on offer only in the Catholic Church.)
Second, Bishop Barron immediately clarifies that anyone who is saved is saved through the grace of Christ.
In other words, Christ is unquestionably the only route to salvation (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).
It would have been an absurd self-contradiction for Bishop Barron to add this point,
which underscores the necessity of Christ for salvation,
if he really believed that one could be saved outside of Christ.

Lastly, Bishop Barron has written and preached often about the uniqueness and centrality of Christ for the salvation of the world,
and in fact, has made Christocentrism the cornerstone principle of the Word on Fire movement.
For example, in his homily “Getting St. Peter’s Sermon Right” (which offers a helpful summary of this question), he says:
“Salvation, as God fully intends it, is on offer in Jesus and in him alone.”
If you watch this full segment, interpreting Bishop Barron’s words in context and with charity
(instead of employing the hermeneutic of suspicion),
it’s clear that he was simply affirming the teachings of Vatican II about the possibility of salvation for non-Christians.

If someone still disagrees with the content of his response,
it’s not Bishop Barron they’re fundamentally disagreeing with,
but Catholic teaching.

(It also has to be noted that, compared to its relationship with people of other religions or no religion,
the Catholic Church’s relationship with the Jewish people,
“the first to hear the Word of God” [CCC 839]
and a common target of violent discrimination throughout history, is unique.
It calls for—as Pope Benedict XVI has said—
“a humble and sensitive” witness based on dialogue.
This is why, beginning with the publication of Nostra Aetate in 1965
and continuing over the decades of subsequent papacies,
the Church has acknowledged its closeness to the Jewish people
and emphasized greater dialogue with the Jewish community.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.