Although the resurrection is the keystone dogma of Christian belief, and Sunday churchgoers rarely if ever think to question it, scholarly research shows with the utmost clarity that from a historical standpoint Jesus was not raised from the dead. In fact, it is almost universally recognized among scholars of New Testament textual criticism that the gospel narratives descrAlthough the resurrection is the keystone dogma of Christian belief, and Sunday churchgoers rarely if ever think to question it, scholarly research shows with the utmost clarity that from a historical standpoint Jesus was not raised from the dead. In fact, it is almost universally recognized among scholars of New Testament textual criticism that the gospel narratives describing the resurrection appearances are not reliable eyewitness accounts, but expressions of faith written by the first Christian believers long after the death of Jesus.In this thorough exegesis of the primary texts dealing with the resurrection of Jesus, New Testament expert Gerd Lüdemann (University of Göttingen) presents compelling evidence that shows the resurrection was not a historical event and further argues that this development leaves little, if any, basis for Christian faith as presently defined.Beginning with Paul’s testimony in 1 Cor. 15: 3-8, in which the apostle declares that Jesus "has been raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures," Lüdemann systematically evaluates every reference to Jesus’ resurrection in the New Testament, as well as apocryphal literature. He examines the purpose of the text writers, the ways in which they reworked tradition, and the historical value of each account. Through this approach, he offers a reconstruction of the probable course of events as well as the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ death on the cross, the burial of his body, his reported resurrection on the third day, and subsequent appearances to various disciples.Since the historical evidence leads to the firm conclusion that Jesus’ body was not raised from the dead, Lüdemann argues that the origin of the Easter faith must be sought in the visionary experiences of Christianity’s two leading apostles. From a modern perspective this leads to the inescapable conclusion that both primary witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection, Peter and Paul, were victims of self-deception.In conclusion, he asks whether in light of the nonhistoricity of Jesus’ resurrection, thinking people today can legitimately and in good conscience still call themselves Christians....
|Title||:||The Resurrection Of Christ: A Historical Inquiry|
|Number of Pages||:||248 Pages|
|Status||:||Available For Download|
|Last checked||:||21 Minutes ago!|
The Resurrection Of Christ: A Historical Inquiry Reviews
I think Ludemann makes a lot of statements that are unsubstantiated. He regards a verse as "tradition" rather than as an event that actually happened. But he gives little or no reason why this verse might be attributed to Mark, but that verse is 'clearly' (in his words) "tradition." Also, he a priori rules out the mirculous (including the resurrection). I think he writes under the guise of enlightenment thinking, but that very posture closes him off from a possible avenues to be searched.
Sound and fury signifying nothing. Luedemann leans far too heavily on Bultman and you're better off reading RB to get pretty much the same exact ideas but in a far more readable package. (Not that I agree with either one)
Not one of his best books. Didn't really have anything new to offer.