Resurrection: A Guide for the Perplexed

Guides for the Perplexed

by Lidija Novakovic

This volume examines what the followers of Jesus meant when they declared that he was raised from the dead. This claim, which lies at the core of Christian faith, is one of the most controversial topics in Christianity. Jesus' resurrection has no analogy in human history. Although many 1st-century Jews expected the resurrection of the dead at the end of time, the Christian claim that this had already happened to one individual within the realm of history was unprecedented. Moreover, an affirmation of Jesus' bodily resurrection contradicts the known laws of nature. Additional difficulty comes from the nature of the available evidence. The New Testament sources not only mirror the worldview of ancient authors but also differ with regard to who saw him alive, what was the nature of his risen body, and whether the empty tomb was a widespread knowledge or an assumption based on prior beliefs. Novakovic presents all these issues in a clear and methodical way. She examines the literary sources and addresses various questions related to historical investigations of Jesus' resurrection.

Genres: Biblical Studies

224 pages, Hardcover

First published April 21, 2016

Reviews

[Toby · Rating 3 out of 5]

Compared with the doorstoppers of N.T. Wright's The Resurrection of the Son of God and Michael Licona's The Resurrection of Jesus, Lidija Novakovic's short guide to resurrection is barely a chapter - which is of course the point of these books. Novakovic covers much the same ground as Wright and Licona, taking us through Second Temple Judaism's views on Resurrection (possibly more ambiguous than we might think), Paul's focus on the resurrection appearances, but not the empty tomb and the Gospel accounts of the empty tomb and (Mark excepted) the appearances of the risen Jesus. She deals with some of the arguments for and against, although obviously not in the same detail as other works, concluding that the empty tomb is not as important as some might suggest and that ultimately the probability of Jesus' rising from the dead is simply not something that history can make an assessment of. In this respect it is a less certain and trenchant work than Wright and Licona's, although by no means sceptical in the way of John Dominic Crossan or Gerd Ludemann.

I am inclined to the view that Paul did know of the empty tomb and that 1 Corinthians 15:3 presupposes it. Paul is not writing primarily to convince the Corinthians that Jesus has risen from the dead - at least not in the way of a modern apologist - but instead to argue against some of their more erroneous conclusions that they have reached from Jesus resurrection or otherwise. In this respect the empty tomb simply does not serve Paul's argument. After all he claims that he has personally seen the risen Jesus. Of what relevance is the empty tomb against that claim? Only for us who have to persuade others of the resurrection without the benefit of a first-hand witness does the empty tomb become useful as evidence (not proof).

In terms of the balance of the book I would have preferred a little less on Second Temple Judaism, enlightening though this was. A little more emphasis on the theological ramifications of the claim that Jesus has physically risen from the dead would have been welcome. The final chapter touches on this but there is much more that could be said.