Resurrection Of Jesus

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, while others have come to believe that we simply do not have th adequate methods to make the controversial results of the field of any use. Could there be any new and promising approach to this problem?

Yes, answers Michael Licona. And in The Resurrection of Jesus: A Historiographical Approach 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 in general, and the particular problem of investigating claims of miracles. This alone is a valuable contribution to the ongoing struggle for methodoloical viability in historical Jesus scholarship.

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 foundational historical evidence, Licona critically weighs tegh viability of others’ 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.