What do you think?
What Really Happened to Jesus: A Historical Approach to the Resurrection
Dissatisfied with what he regarded as evasive answers given by theologians and scholars about the nature of the resurrection of Jesus, Gerd Ludemann subjected the New Testament traditions to a thorough investigation. In particular, Ludemann was concerned with the story of the empty tomb and the subsequent appearance stories first related by Peter. Ludemann reaches surprising and somewhat radical conclusions. This book, written for nonspecialists, presents Ludemann's provocative conclusions. Readers will find a positive, albeit revolutionary, new way of viewing the resurrection.
- GenresChristianity
147 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1995
About the author
Gerd Lüdemann
71 books13 followersGerd Lüdemann is Professor of New Testament at the University of Göttingen, Germany, Director of the Institute of Early Christian Studies, and Founder and Director of the Archive Religionsgeschichtliche Schule at the University of Göttingen. He has also served as Visiting Scholar at Vanderbilt Divinity School in Nashville, Tennessee, and as co-chair of the Society of Biblical Literature Seminar on Jewish Christianity. He is a Fellow of the Westar Institute.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
August 25, 2024
A GERMAN NEW TESTAMENT SCHOLAR CALLS THE RESURRECTION "COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY”
Gerd Lüdemann (born 1946), is a German scholar who taught New Testament from 1983 to 1999 at the University of Göttingen. After complaints from churches, his Chair of New Testament was renamed the "Chair of History and Literature of Early Christianity"; his research funding was also cut and his teaching was no longer part of the curriculum. He has also written books such as 'Virgin Birth?: The Real Story of Mary and Her Son Jesus,' 'The Great Deception,' 'Jesus After 2000 Years: What He Really Said and Did,' etc.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1995 book, "My book Resurrection of Jesus: History, Experience, Theology... [was] passionately rejected in circles which regarded questioning of the bodily resurrection of Jesus as a betrayal of the gospel, and legal proceedings against the author were called for. For others... what the book said about the corruption of the body of Jesus went too far... However, some people have complained that the book is too academic, too detailed and difficult for lay people to understand... The more popular version offered here is meant to meet the often-expressed desire for the results of academic research to be made more easily accessible to non-specialists."
He observes, "Roman legal practice provided for someone who died on the cross to rot there or to be consumed by vultures, jackals or other animals. This was to be a warning to the living. This conclusion is excluded for Jesus, as the traditions agree in relating that his body was taken down from the cross... So the 'burial of Jesus' may be one of those cases in which the Roman authorities released the body. The Jewish writer Philo... reports such exceptions. Presumably Jews took Jesus down from the cross, because someone who had died from crucifixion might not hang on the cross overnight... and because a feast day (=Passover) was imminent." (Pg. 23)
He suggests, "So specifically, 'Jesus appeared to Paul' means that Paul saw the risen Jesus in his glory, which need not tell against an inner vision of the outward vision. This vision was felt to be an extraordinary event and a revelation. This is expressed by the character of the event as 'light.'" (Pg. 105) After citing 1 Cor 12, he states, "We now know that Paul often had visions. He must assume that his conversion experience before Damascus, in which the risen Christ appeared to him, was also a vision." (Pg. 125-126)
He argues, "Despite their independence from each other there are clear parallels between the two original visions of Peter and Paul: 1. In both, the vision of Jesus is inseparably related to the denial of Jesus or the persecution of his community. 2. In both a feeling of guilt is replaced by the certainty of grace. 3. Both figures may have put forward a doctrine of justification which was similar... However, this means that God must no longer be assumed to be the author of these visions... Rather, these were psychological processes which ran their course with a degree of regularity---completely without divine intervention... this means that the assumption of a resurrection of Jesus is completely unnecessary as a presupposition to explain these phenomena. A consistent modern view must say farewell to the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event." (Pg. 130) He adds, "let us say quite specifically: the tomb of Jesus was not empty, but full, and his body did not disappear, but rotted away." (Pg. 135)
Lüdemann's opinions are obviously controversial, but his arguments---particularly the detail with which he focuses on the resurrection---are important to study for anyone investigating the historical Jesus... whether one agrees with him or not.
Gerd Lüdemann (born 1946), is a German scholar who taught New Testament from 1983 to 1999 at the University of Göttingen. After complaints from churches, his Chair of New Testament was renamed the "Chair of History and Literature of Early Christianity"; his research funding was also cut and his teaching was no longer part of the curriculum. He has also written books such as 'Virgin Birth?: The Real Story of Mary and Her Son Jesus,' 'The Great Deception,' 'Jesus After 2000 Years: What He Really Said and Did,' etc.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1995 book, "My book Resurrection of Jesus: History, Experience, Theology... [was] passionately rejected in circles which regarded questioning of the bodily resurrection of Jesus as a betrayal of the gospel, and legal proceedings against the author were called for. For others... what the book said about the corruption of the body of Jesus went too far... However, some people have complained that the book is too academic, too detailed and difficult for lay people to understand... The more popular version offered here is meant to meet the often-expressed desire for the results of academic research to be made more easily accessible to non-specialists."
He observes, "Roman legal practice provided for someone who died on the cross to rot there or to be consumed by vultures, jackals or other animals. This was to be a warning to the living. This conclusion is excluded for Jesus, as the traditions agree in relating that his body was taken down from the cross... So the 'burial of Jesus' may be one of those cases in which the Roman authorities released the body. The Jewish writer Philo... reports such exceptions. Presumably Jews took Jesus down from the cross, because someone who had died from crucifixion might not hang on the cross overnight... and because a feast day (=Passover) was imminent." (Pg. 23)
He suggests, "So specifically, 'Jesus appeared to Paul' means that Paul saw the risen Jesus in his glory, which need not tell against an inner vision of the outward vision. This vision was felt to be an extraordinary event and a revelation. This is expressed by the character of the event as 'light.'" (Pg. 105) After citing 1 Cor 12, he states, "We now know that Paul often had visions. He must assume that his conversion experience before Damascus, in which the risen Christ appeared to him, was also a vision." (Pg. 125-126)
He argues, "Despite their independence from each other there are clear parallels between the two original visions of Peter and Paul: 1. In both, the vision of Jesus is inseparably related to the denial of Jesus or the persecution of his community. 2. In both a feeling of guilt is replaced by the certainty of grace. 3. Both figures may have put forward a doctrine of justification which was similar... However, this means that God must no longer be assumed to be the author of these visions... Rather, these were psychological processes which ran their course with a degree of regularity---completely without divine intervention... this means that the assumption of a resurrection of Jesus is completely unnecessary as a presupposition to explain these phenomena. A consistent modern view must say farewell to the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event." (Pg. 130) He adds, "let us say quite specifically: the tomb of Jesus was not empty, but full, and his body did not disappear, but rotted away." (Pg. 135)
Lüdemann's opinions are obviously controversial, but his arguments---particularly the detail with which he focuses on the resurrection---are important to study for anyone investigating the historical Jesus... whether one agrees with him or not.
January 12, 2026
This brief but highly dense book by German New Testament professor Gerd Lüdemann is actually a condensed version from an earlier book and is supposedly less academic and easier to understand. If that is, indeed, the case, I am happy I didn't attempt to read the original version. This version is filled with line-by-line analysis of Biblical passages as they relate to the Resurrection, including the tomb stories and visions experienced by Jesus' disciples and others. It is an intensely detailed examination of this subject, and to be honest, is an extremely difficult read. To truly understand it, one would need to take copious notes and study everything with great care. It would be worthy of a master's or doctorate level series at a university.
I did glean quite a bit of information and knowledge from reading the book, but in no way absorbed even a small fraction of what the author presents. For serious students only.
I did glean quite a bit of information and knowledge from reading the book, but in no way absorbed even a small fraction of what the author presents. For serious students only.
Read
February 24, 2018Fascinating
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews