What do you think?
Rate this book
I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus
*** please read this *** Ships from Ohio - no marks - next day shipping - tracking provided - 4-C-42
156 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1975
1 person is currently reading
55 people want to read
About the author
George Eldon Ladd
57 books56 followersGeorge Eldon Ladd (1911–1982) was a Baptist minister and professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.
Ladd was ordained in 1933 and pastored in New England from 1936 to 1945. He served as an instructor at Gordon College of Theology and Missions (now Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary), Wenham, Massachusetts from 1942–45. He was an associate professor of New Testament and Greek from 1946–50, and head of the department of New Testament from 1946–49. In 1950–52 he was an associate professor at Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, Calif, becoming professor of biblical theology in 1952.
Ladd's best-known work, A Theology of the New Testament, has been used by thousands of seminary students since its publication in 1974. This work was enhanced and updated by Donald A. Hagner in 1993.
Ladd was a notable, modern proponent of Historic Premillennialism, and often criticized dispensationalist views. His writings regarding the Kingdom of God (especially his view of inaugurated eschatology) have become a cornerstone of Kingdom theology. His perspective is expressed in The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, R. G. Clouse, editor (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1977) and the shorter and more accessible The Gospel of the Kingdom (Paternoster, 1959).
Ladd was ordained in 1933 and pastored in New England from 1936 to 1945. He served as an instructor at Gordon College of Theology and Missions (now Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary), Wenham, Massachusetts from 1942–45. He was an associate professor of New Testament and Greek from 1946–50, and head of the department of New Testament from 1946–49. In 1950–52 he was an associate professor at Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, Calif, becoming professor of biblical theology in 1952.
Ladd's best-known work, A Theology of the New Testament, has been used by thousands of seminary students since its publication in 1974. This work was enhanced and updated by Donald A. Hagner in 1993.
Ladd was a notable, modern proponent of Historic Premillennialism, and often criticized dispensationalist views. His writings regarding the Kingdom of God (especially his view of inaugurated eschatology) have become a cornerstone of Kingdom theology. His perspective is expressed in The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, R. G. Clouse, editor (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1977) and the shorter and more accessible The Gospel of the Kingdom (Paternoster, 1959).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
January 9, 2023
"...Paul...[designated] the resurrection of Jesus the "first fruits" of the eschatological resurrection at the end of the age. This has led us to designate Jesus' resurrection as an eschatological event. It is an anticipation of the end. To speak crudely, it is a piece of eschatology split off from the end and planted in history. The end has begun; the future is present. It remains obvious then that if Jesus is not raised from the dead, one can no longer argue from the present to the future. If Jesus is not raised, I know nothing about resurrection at the end of the world. The hope of resurrection, the idea of a world to come, remains theological speculation, with no firm foundation in human experience. History has no meaning, no goal, no purpose. As a human race, we are going nowhere. However, Paul has himself met the resurrected Jesus, and he knows many others who have had the same experience. Therefore he can write with confidence, "But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep" (1 Cor. 15: 20)."
Stellar treatment from George Ladd on the resurrection of our Lord. Would quibble with him on some elements of how he draws continuities and discontinuities between the pre-post resurrection bodies, particularly as it played out in how he understands the resurrection/ascension as really one thing. Standout chapters were the "Witness of the Gospels," the "Witness of Paul," and "Does it Matter?" The resurrected Christ is the central figure of human history. He is risen indeed!
Stellar treatment from George Ladd on the resurrection of our Lord. Would quibble with him on some elements of how he draws continuities and discontinuities between the pre-post resurrection bodies, particularly as it played out in how he understands the resurrection/ascension as really one thing. Standout chapters were the "Witness of the Gospels," the "Witness of Paul," and "Does it Matter?" The resurrected Christ is the central figure of human history. He is risen indeed!
September 6, 2024
THE NEW TESTAMENT SCHOLAR LOOKS IN DEPTH AT THE RESURRECTION
George Eldon Ladd (1911-1982) was a Baptist minister and professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary; he wrote many other books such as 'The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture,' 'The Last Things: An Eschatology for Laymen,' 'The Presence of the Future,' etc.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1975 book, "It is the thesis of this book that there must be interaction between historical evidences and faith. Faith is not a blind leap in the dark without any historical evidences. Neither will historical evidences DEMAND faith, for the man of unbelief will always come up with different historical explanations. However, faith is supported and reinforced by historical evidences... In this book we propose to use the inductive historical method of study rather than the 'scientific' historical-critical method. We must first appreciate the importance of the doctrine of the resurrection... Then our primary task is to try to explain the rise of the resurrection faith." (Pg. 12-14)
After quoting Luke 24:21 ['We had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel'], he says, "Is this not a flat contradiction? Does this not mean that Jesus' predictions of his death are surely ... prophecies after the event... formations of the early Christian church, and not historically trustworthy? Is it possible that Jesus on several occasions actually foretold his death and resurrection with complete lack of success in preparing his disciples for that event? Are we not to conclude that NEITHER the disciples NOR Jesus foresaw his death---much less his resurrection, and that the alleged predictions were put into the mouth of Jesus by the post-Easter community? We have already touched on this problem, but it demands a thorough investigation." (Pg. 61)
Of the "Suffering Servant" passage in Isaiah 52:13--53:12, he says, "This passage was interpreted as referring to the Messiah by the New Testament church... but in its OWN Old Testament context, it was not a prophecy of the Messiah. It pictures an unnamed Suffering Servant who will redeem his people by his sufferings and death... Isaiah 53 speaks not about Messiah, who is a conquering Davidic King, but about a servant of the Lord... Furthermore it is of the greatest importance to know that Judaism before Christ never interpreted this passage as referring to the sufferings of the Messiah... Isaiah 53 was thought to tell of the sufferings of God's people, Israel; and this interpretation can be found in modern Jewish interpreters." (Pg. 66)
He admits, "Modern scholarship is almost unanimously agreed that [Mark 16:9-19] were not part of the original gospel but were added at an early date because it was recognized that Mark ended abruptly with no appearances of the risen Jesus." (Pg. 83) He adds, "One fact is clear. Our gospels represent distinctly different traditions... Mark is the oldest gospel and ... Matthew and Luke made use of Mark. However, in the resurrection accounts, both Matthew and Luke go their own ways, forsaking their source...
"All this means that at the few points in which the gospels agree, that agreement is all the more striking. There are numerous divergences between the Gospels... John mentions only Mary Magdalene as though she were alone. It is not impossible, however, that a group of women came early to the tomb and found the stone rolled away; whereupon Mary rushed off to tell Peter and John while the other women stayed in the garden.
"A more serious difficulty is met in the statements about the purpose of the women's visit to the tomb... Furthermore, many critics point to the unnatural situation in which the women would anoint a body which had been dead for two nights and a day, especially since the tomb was sealed with a heavy stone... Another minor discrepancy is the response of the women to the announcement of the angel that Jesus had risen... [Mark] tells us that they fled from the tomb... It is possible that that the initial reaction of the women was fear... and only after meeting Jesus did they go to tell the disciples what they had seen. On the other hand, this may be one of the unimportant discrepancies which mark the Synoptic Gospels." (Pg. 84-85)
He observes, "The question remains: What specific scriptures would Paul have had in mind when he says [I Cor 15:3-4] that Christ was raised on the third day 'in accordance with the scriptures'? The clearest possible reference is to Hosea 6:2: 'After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up that we may live before him.' In their Old Testament context, these words express the hope of a speedy restoration from national death in captivity... We cannot be certain as to what specific texts, if any, Paul had in mind. He may have had in mind the frequency with which 'three' appears in the Old Testament. We cannot know." (Pg. 108)
Ladd's in-depth study does not shy away from the "difficult" questions, and for that reason is all the more valuable to students of apologetics, as well as Christians studying the Resurrection.
George Eldon Ladd (1911-1982) was a Baptist minister and professor of New Testament exegesis and theology at Fuller Theological Seminary; he wrote many other books such as 'The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture,' 'The Last Things: An Eschatology for Laymen,' 'The Presence of the Future,' etc.
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1975 book, "It is the thesis of this book that there must be interaction between historical evidences and faith. Faith is not a blind leap in the dark without any historical evidences. Neither will historical evidences DEMAND faith, for the man of unbelief will always come up with different historical explanations. However, faith is supported and reinforced by historical evidences... In this book we propose to use the inductive historical method of study rather than the 'scientific' historical-critical method. We must first appreciate the importance of the doctrine of the resurrection... Then our primary task is to try to explain the rise of the resurrection faith." (Pg. 12-14)
After quoting Luke 24:21 ['We had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel'], he says, "Is this not a flat contradiction? Does this not mean that Jesus' predictions of his death are surely ... prophecies after the event... formations of the early Christian church, and not historically trustworthy? Is it possible that Jesus on several occasions actually foretold his death and resurrection with complete lack of success in preparing his disciples for that event? Are we not to conclude that NEITHER the disciples NOR Jesus foresaw his death---much less his resurrection, and that the alleged predictions were put into the mouth of Jesus by the post-Easter community? We have already touched on this problem, but it demands a thorough investigation." (Pg. 61)
Of the "Suffering Servant" passage in Isaiah 52:13--53:12, he says, "This passage was interpreted as referring to the Messiah by the New Testament church... but in its OWN Old Testament context, it was not a prophecy of the Messiah. It pictures an unnamed Suffering Servant who will redeem his people by his sufferings and death... Isaiah 53 speaks not about Messiah, who is a conquering Davidic King, but about a servant of the Lord... Furthermore it is of the greatest importance to know that Judaism before Christ never interpreted this passage as referring to the sufferings of the Messiah... Isaiah 53 was thought to tell of the sufferings of God's people, Israel; and this interpretation can be found in modern Jewish interpreters." (Pg. 66)
He admits, "Modern scholarship is almost unanimously agreed that [Mark 16:9-19] were not part of the original gospel but were added at an early date because it was recognized that Mark ended abruptly with no appearances of the risen Jesus." (Pg. 83) He adds, "One fact is clear. Our gospels represent distinctly different traditions... Mark is the oldest gospel and ... Matthew and Luke made use of Mark. However, in the resurrection accounts, both Matthew and Luke go their own ways, forsaking their source...
"All this means that at the few points in which the gospels agree, that agreement is all the more striking. There are numerous divergences between the Gospels... John mentions only Mary Magdalene as though she were alone. It is not impossible, however, that a group of women came early to the tomb and found the stone rolled away; whereupon Mary rushed off to tell Peter and John while the other women stayed in the garden.
"A more serious difficulty is met in the statements about the purpose of the women's visit to the tomb... Furthermore, many critics point to the unnatural situation in which the women would anoint a body which had been dead for two nights and a day, especially since the tomb was sealed with a heavy stone... Another minor discrepancy is the response of the women to the announcement of the angel that Jesus had risen... [Mark] tells us that they fled from the tomb... It is possible that that the initial reaction of the women was fear... and only after meeting Jesus did they go to tell the disciples what they had seen. On the other hand, this may be one of the unimportant discrepancies which mark the Synoptic Gospels." (Pg. 84-85)
He observes, "The question remains: What specific scriptures would Paul have had in mind when he says [I Cor 15:3-4] that Christ was raised on the third day 'in accordance with the scriptures'? The clearest possible reference is to Hosea 6:2: 'After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up that we may live before him.' In their Old Testament context, these words express the hope of a speedy restoration from national death in captivity... We cannot be certain as to what specific texts, if any, Paul had in mind. He may have had in mind the frequency with which 'three' appears in the Old Testament. We cannot know." (Pg. 108)
Ladd's in-depth study does not shy away from the "difficult" questions, and for that reason is all the more valuable to students of apologetics, as well as Christians studying the Resurrection.
May 27, 2009
Excellent.
December 29, 2017
A great amalgamation of the Gospel accounts of the resurrection.
March 11, 2020
The last two chapters are the best
January 18, 2010
This is an excellent little book and a firm affirmation in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. What I love about Ladd's books is they are always text driven. He is well read in other writings whether biblical, theological, other religions or extra-biblical text and responds to them. But he always goes back to the need to understand what the text is saying, not what others are saying about the text. This is truly biblical theology. He is not afraid to wrestle with the critical questions nor afraid to express his faith in the the Scriptures to speak to these issues. The book may be date but the exegesis is not. Great defense of the resurrection.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews