Rating: 
Summary: The ball is no longer in orthodoxy's court...
Review: The pseudo-scholarship of The Right Rev'd John Spong (who is neither "right" nor to be revered, and who is hardly a biblical scholar!) and many other more credible biblical scholars (Borg, Crossan) will no doubt have to wrestle hard with Wright's new book on the Resurrection. This book clearly demonstrates that the first century disciples would have aboslutely no idea what some authors (especially Spong) are talking about when they claim to be believe that the resurrection is nothing more than Christ's "ideals" being "raised" in the minds of his followers.
Wright proves that the earliest believers thought of the resurrection in a clearly Jewish fashion--namely, that it was indeed a physical occurance. And though a resurrected body had different characteristics than a mere "resusitated" corpse, Wright carefully and meticulously shows that first century Jews did not think of the concept of resurrection as many modern authors do. The ball is no longer in orthodoxy's court. I believe that this book is a rather definitive work on the topic of Christ's resurrection. This marvelous work has totally deflated the "scholarship" of John Spong, and has thrown down the gauntlet at the feet of Borg, Crossan, and the like. This is a must read for anyone who is serious about Christian theology and history.
Rating:
Summary: The ball is no longer in orthodoxy's court...
Review: The pseudo-scholarship of The Right Rev'd John Spong (who is neither "right" nor to be revered, and who is hardly a biblical scholar!) and many other more credible biblical scholars (Borg, Crossan) will no doubt have to wrestle hard with Wright's new book on the Resurrection. This book clearly demonstrates that the first century disciples would have aboslutely no idea what some authors (especially Spong) are talking about when they claim to be believe that the resurrection is nothing more than Christ's "ideals" being "raised" in the minds of his followers.
Wright proves that the earliest believers thought of the resurrection in a clearly Jewish fashion--namely, that it was indeed a physical occurance. And though a resurrected body had different characteristics than a mere "resusitated" corpse, Wright carefully and meticulously shows that first century Jews did not think of the concept of resurrection as many modern authors do. The ball is no longer in orthodoxy's court. I believe that this book is a rather definitive work on the topic of Christ's resurrection. This marvelous work has totally deflated the "scholarship" of John Spong, and has thrown down the gauntlet at the feet of Borg, Crossan, and the like. This is a must read for anyone who is serious about Christian theology and history.
Rating:
Summary: Best book on the subject!
Review: This book is necessary reading for anyone who questions his or her faith and that of early Christians. N.T. Wright, in this book has made the resurrection of Christ historically plausible. Wright shows how the rise of the church could not have come by such flimsy theories as "cognitive dissonance" as developed by Leon Festinger, or a "new experience of grace" proposed by Edward Schillebeeckx. It becomes very clear that only an empty tomb on Easter morning and seeing the physically risen Jesus of Nazareth could have brought about the rise of early Christianity. One good point-out of many Wright makes-is how all other so-called messianic movements of the time died out with its leader being executed, but the Jesus movement only became stronger when Christ was crucified. It seems unlikely the early followers would be willing to die for a dead man, but for the resurrected Son of God, it is highly understandable. These are only a few things covered in the book on the subject. I will say after reading it you will walk away with fresh look at your faith
Rating:
Summary: An excellent presentation on "Resurrection"
Review: This book is not only about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, but also gives excellent summaries of the understanding of the term "resurrection" from pagan, Jewish, and Christian standpoints in the ancient world. The author successfully and decisively demonstrates with an impressive repertoire of evidence in each case that: the concept of "resurrection" in the ancient world through the 1st century A.D., for pagans, Jews, and Christians, was always understood to be a physical, bodily event; the ancient pagans did not believe in "resurrection" but rather believed in a permanent disembodied afterlife that was not referred to by the term "resurrection"; ancient strands of Judaism, particularly Pharisaic Judaism, believed in "resurrection" as a physical, bodily event; the early Christians understood Christ's resurrection and the subsequent resurrection at the end of the world to be a physical, bodily event. The author also demonstrates compelling arguments favoring the reliability of the resurrection narratives found at the end of each Gospel as well as evidence favoring the historicity of the empty tomb and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ. A couple of alternative, naturalistic theories to the resurrection of Jesus Christ that have gained popularity in the last half century or so are also soundly debunked. This book is a slow read, but still worth the while of an apologist or scholar seeking advanced insight into the early Christian understanding of "resurrection." It also provides the reader with excellent background information as to how the term was understood by the ancient pagans and Jews.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent presentation on "Resurrection"
Review: This book is not only about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, but also gives excellent summaries of the understanding of the term "resurrection" from pagan, Jewish, and Christian standpoints in the ancient world. The author successfully and decisively demonstrates with an impressive repertoire of evidence in each case that: the concept of "resurrection" in the ancient world through the 1st century A.D., for pagans, Jews, and Christians, was always understood to be a physical, bodily event; the ancient pagans did not believe in "resurrection" but rather believed in a permanent disembodied afterlife that was not referred to by the term "resurrection"; ancient strands of Judaism, particularly Pharisaic Judaism, believed in "resurrection" as a physical, bodily event; the early Christians understood Christ's resurrection and the subsequent resurrection at the end of the world to be a physical, bodily event. The author also demonstrates compelling arguments favoring the reliability of the resurrection narratives found at the end of each Gospel as well as evidence favoring the historicity of the empty tomb and post-resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ. A couple of alternative, naturalistic theories to the resurrection of Jesus Christ that have gained popularity in the last half century or so are also soundly debunked. This book is a slow read, but still worth the while of an apologist or scholar seeking advanced insight into the early Christian understanding of "resurrection." It also provides the reader with excellent background information as to how the term was understood by the ancient pagans and Jews.
Rating:
Summary: The definitve work on resurrection of this generation
Review: This work should be required reading in seminaries the world over. Whether one agrees with Wright's thesis or not, no responsible student of the New Testament or Christian history can ignore this work. Wright traces the development of the Christian belief in resurrection by contrasting it with the prevailing notions of life after death in the Jewish and Greek cultural worlds. What emerges is clear: nothing quite like the resurrection stories in the Gospels was ever in view before the evangelists wrote them down. He argues cogently that the differences in the resurrection stories in the gospels, far from proving their lack of trustworthiness, point toward a sense of awe and wonder that everyone involved felt regarding Jesus' appearances. This should be expected when someone has an experience that is literally the first of its kind in human history. As a methodological point, I especially appreciate Wright's assertion that history is not made up of repeatable events, but unrepeatable events, such as Caesar crossing the Rubicon. No one expects Julius to march on Rome again any time soon, but no one seriously doubts the he did just that. The same criteria should be extended to the resurrection of Jesus. I also enjoyed his point that dead people stayed dead in the ancient world just as in the modern (or is it post-modern?) one. Modern NT scholarship often assumes no one who lived in the first century knew anything at all about the world or how it operates, and therefore their understanding of the world needs correction through the lenses of the enlightenment. As always, Wright writes with an almost devotional warmth and never slides into the dreaded trap of speaking theologese, though it's clear that he could if he so chose. This work is likely to offend fundamentalists and liberals alike, which is always refreshing. Buy this book. You may hate it or it may change your life, but Wright's work is worth your money.
Rating:
Summary: Comprehensive, authoritative, indispensable
Review: Tom Wright continues to bring an extraordinary level of erudition, careful argument, and old-fashioned work in the scholarly woodshed to his magnum opus, Christian Origins and the Question of God, the series in which this book is the third. What is most unique about Wright's project is the way that he is applying the discipline of history to theological territory with considerably more rigor than previous (and current!) searchers for "the historical Jesus," while also developing a theological argument that is both innovative and faithful to the Christian tradition. While many other theologians who wish to maintain a vigorous form of Christian belief find it necessary to escape into pietism or ahistorical formulations of that belief, Wright has reclaimed the intellectual high ground. The burden of proof--that the resurrection did not happen, that Christian origins have mundane historical roots, that a post-Enlightenment dismissal of Christian claims can be taken for granted--is now solidly on the side of Wright's opponents. In one hundred years (or perhaps even ten years) this series may be seen as marking as much of a turning point in New Testament studies as Bultmann's work was in the early twentieth century.
Rating:
Summary: What the first christians really said about Jesus
Review: We finally have with us the third volume of Tom Wright's great work. If after reading the second volumen, Jesus and the victory of God, anyone thought that Tom wasnt interested or didnt believe in the resurrection of Jesus, now is the time to find out. Important in his exposition is making clear that when Paul and the evangelists talked about Jesus being raised and/or resurrected, they were NOT talking about a post-mortem spiritual existence or Jesus's continued prescence in the early church. They werent either talking about a mere resucitation or using the word resurrection as another way of saying that he was dead and resting with God. They were literally speaking about death's reversal, about someone being dead and then being alive again, with a (trans)physical body. My favorite chapter was the one devoted to what Paul actually said about his encounter with Jesus. You might be surprised to learn that there was no falling from the horse in the road to Damascus, and that the narrative in Acts about a blinding light and a voice is only a biblical model to tell about an encounter with God's sphere. Tom Wright is more interested in what Paul himself said, not Luke. And Paul's words cannot be read in another way: he says that he saw Jesus. If the early christians were wrong or right about Jesus being raised from the dead is another point. Tom puts the evidence in front of us and lets us decide. What remains clear at the end is that those 1st century christian-jews really believed that Jesus raised from the tomb in the first Easter.
Rating:
Summary: an unexpected treasure
Review: while nodding in approval to what the other reviewers have said thus far:
having devoured the first two works in Wright's _Christian Origins and the Question of God_ series, i was eagerly anticipating the third volume, which i expected to be on the life and theology of St. Paul; thus i was somewhat disappointed by the subject matter of the third volume when it finally (at last!) appeared. i kept asking myself (with my head slowly shaking), "an entire volume on the resurrection?"
but my doubts were quickly laid to rest when i received the work. Wright offers us here a masterpiece on the resurrection, as theologically deep as it is historically broad in scope. Wright not only persuasively argues for the fact of the resurrection, but places it firmly in context as he brings to light the many aspects which constitute it, and upon which it bears definitive influence. the "world-affirming" nature of Wright's conclusions, which he highlites continually throughout the text, actually reminded me something of Maximus Confessor.
which brings up my final point: N. T. Wright is an unusually excellent exegete. so often, New Testament exegetes are simply dull; such is not the case with Wright. his work is saturated in wit and laced with solid reason. one always leaves his work feeling somewhat "charmed". but the best thing about Wright, in my opinion, is that he is capable of actually being an exegete and a theologian at the same time (yes, this is in fact uncommon in our day and age). thus we are left with not simply an argument based on texts, or dry analyses stacked one atop another; rather, we see perhaps the finest New Testament scholar of our era approaching the texts with a master's touch, and the reader is thus in a position wherein the full radiance of the subject matter can be perceived.
the only critique i have is that it is somewhat repetitive; it almost seemed as though it would be better to consult its various chapters in reference format--as needed--rather than "reading it straight through". yet considering the above mentioned breadth of scope, this is certainly a small price to pay.
in sum, this book is highly recommended--there are few New Testament scholars who can be placed alongside Wright, and those of us who are interested in this field are certainly blessed that he chose to write an enourmous work on this particular topic. with this work, Wright has succesfully placed the Resurrection of the Son of God where it belongs--in the center of Christian theology, world history, and the cosmos itself.
... which makes the wait for his work on Paul (if on Paul it be) all the more nerve-racking.
five stars, without a doubt.
Rating:
Summary: Breathtaking!
Review: Who else combines this level of conviction with this level of scholarship? This book was written with brilliance, sincerity and joy. Pick it up, read it, or read in it -- put it down when you've had too much, and then pick it up again. Wright's works are monumental, and the prose is elegant and graceful and beautiful. Of course, the arguments are utterly convincing. Jesus rose from the dead. Anne Rice, New Orleans, La.
|
