Assessing The New Testament Evidence For The Historicity Of The Resurrection Of Jesus

This volume is the sequel to its companion volume The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus during the Deist Controversy. It comprises a thorough examination of the New Testament materials undergirding the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection, focusing on Jesus’ empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the origin of his disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection. This revised edition includes Appendices in response to the competing views of J. Robinson, J. D. Crossan, G. Lüdemann, and D. Allison.

This text draws on the evidence of Paul and the Gospels to present the case for accepting the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

Edited by Paul Copan and Ronald Tacelli, this is a lively and provocative debate between Christian philosopher William Lane Craig and New Testament scholar and atheist Gerd Lüdemann on the historical truth of the resurrection.

This updated edition by one of the world's leading apologists presents a systematic, positive case for Christianity that reflects the latest work in the contemporary hard sciences and humanities. Brilliant and accessible.

Is the Christian message of Jesus Christ and his resurrection true? Using ten lines of historical evidence, Dr. Craig defends the probability that Jesus was resurrected following his crucifixion. He examines the origin of the Christian movement, and more provocative subjects, such as the Shroud of Turin, parapsychological phenomena and hallucinations.

This volume provides the historical background to its companion volume, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus. It traces the history of historical apologetics for Jesus’ resurrection from the first century through the twentieth century, focusing on its apogee during the Deist controversy in Europe. It explores which of the traditional arguments on behalf of the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection are obsolete and which still merit consideration today. It includes a discussion of the problem of miracles, both their possibility and identification, which forms the backdrop for any contemporary case for the resurrection.

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.

The question of the historicity of Jesus' resurrection has been repeatedly probed, investigated and debated. And the results have varied widely. Perhaps some now regard this issue as the burned-over district of New Testament scholarship. Could there be any new and promising approach to this problem? Yes, answers Michael Licona. And he convincingly points us to a significant deficiency in approaching this question: our historiographical orientation and practice. So he opens this study with an extensive consideration of historiography and the particular problem of investigating claims of miracles. This alone is a valuable contribution. But then Licona carefully applies his principles and methods to the question of Jesus' resurrection. In addition to determining and working from the most reliable sources and bedrock historical evidence, Licona critically weighs other prominent hypotheses. His own argument is a challenging and closely argued case for the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, the Christ. Any future approaches to dealing with this 'prize puzzle' of New Testament study will need to be routed through The Resurrection of Jesus.