It's well-written, although it assumes a fair amount from the reader: it is a more academic work than popular. Wright interacts with a number of resurrection skeptics and supporters. While my own convictions in the matter are firmly settled (Jesus really did rise physically from the dead; there is no other suitable explanation for Christianity), Wright addresses the literature in pretty convincing fashion.
He advances his case in the following fashion:
- Arguing that the resurrection may be interrogated by historians (i.e., that metaphysical naturalism isn't a precondition to studying historical events).
- Examining the notion of death and resurrection in the pagan context (he concludes that the word used for resurrection always implies bodily resurrection—a physical resurrection).
- Examining various Jewish notions of death and resurrection (outlining the differences between the Pharisees and Saducees).
- Looking at the concept of resurrection in Paul, whose work is agreed to be the earliest in the NT.
- Looking at the concept of resurrection in the rest of the NT (the other letters first, then the gospels individually).
- Briefly considering various other explanations of the growth of Christianity.
- Finally, concluding that the physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth from the dead is the best historical explanation of the Christian church.
There is a gripping corporeality to Christianity that's so compelling. It begins with the physicality of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead and concludes with an eternity in a physical (Wright would say transphysical) heaven, not a gnostic fantasy of spirituality. It's so good to be a Christian.
SHLURPP.
ReplyDelete