Investigating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: A New Transdisciplinary Approach

by Andrew Loke

This book provides an original and comprehensive assessment of the hypotheses concerning the origin of resurrection Christology. It fills a gap in the literature by addressing these issues using a transdisciplinary approach involving historical-critical study of the New Testament, theology, analytic philosophy, psychology and comparative religion.

Using a novel analytic framework, this book demonstrates that a logically exhaustive list of hypotheses concerning the claims of Jesus’ post-mortem appearances and the outcome of Jesus’ body can be formulated. It addresses these hypotheses in detail, including sophisticated combinations of hallucination hypothesis with cognitive dissonance; memory distortion; and confirmation bias. Addressing writings from both within and outside of Christianity, it also demonstrates how a comparative religion approach might further illuminate the origins of Christianity.

This is a thorough study of arguably the key event in the formation of the Christian faith. As such, it will be of keen interest to theologians, New Testament scholars, philosophers, and scholars of religious studies.

Genres: Theology, Christianity, History, Christian, Nonfiction, Religion, Philosophy

246 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2020

Reviews

[David Graieg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loke’s book Investigating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: A New Transdisciplinary Approach is an expansion of his article “The Resurrection of the Son of God: A Reduction of the Naturalistic Alternatives,” Journal of Theological Studies 60, no. 2 (2009): 570–584. The contribution of Loke’s book on Jesus’ resurrection is that it is the only book to cover all naturalistic alternatives of Jesus’ resurrection. Further, by utilizing a transdisciplinary approach, namely historical-critical studies, psychology, comparative religion, philosophy, and theology, allows this monograph to cover all relevant aspects required to evaluate Jesus’ resurrection. The book engages many recent works, including: Atkins, The Doubt of the Apostles and the Resurrection Faith of the Early Church, 2019; Carnley, Resurrection in Retrospect, 2019; Chilton, Resurrection Logic, 2019; Cook, “Resurrection in Paganism and the Question of an Empty Tomb in 1 Corinthians 15,” 2017; Lindemann, “The Resurrection of Jesus: Reflections on Historical and Theological Questions,” 2017; Novakovic, Resurrection: A Guide for the Perplexed, 2016; Carrier, On the Historicity of Jesus, 2014; and others. Loke does not engage in detailed exegesis of all biblical texts, rather he builds on existing works such as Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection, 1989; Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 2003; Allison, Resurrecting Jesus, 2005; Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus, 2010; Bryan 2011; Ware, “The Resurrection of Jesus in the Pre-Pauline Formula of 1 Cor 15.3–5,” 2014; etc. in order to evaluate the various alternatives to what best explains the data.

Loke argues that the historian can affirm “(I) there were people who claimed to have seen Jesus shortly after his crucifixion, (II) they had some kind of experiences, (III) what they experienced was not caused intra-mentally but extra-mentally, (IV) the extra-mental entity was not another person but the same Jesus who died on the Cross, therefore (V) Jesus resurrected.” Subsequently, the philosopher and theologian can consider whether (V) Jesus’ resurrection had a natural or supernatural cause.

Chapter 1 briefly surveys the history of interpretation of Jesus’ resurrection, assesses the historicity of the Christian and non-Christian sources, and lays out the various logical alternatives. Chapter 2 argues that the earliest Christians claimed to have witnessed the resurrected Jesus as opposed to the legends hypothesis. Chapter 3 argues that the earliest Christians experienced something which they thought was the resurrected Jesus against the no experience hypothesis. Chapter 4 argues that the earliest Christians witnessed an extra-mental entity contra the intramental hypothesis. Chapter 5 argues that the extra-mental entity was Jesus, who died on the cross against the mistaken identity, swoon, and escape hypotheses. Chapter 6 considers what happened to Jesus’ physical body by considering the eight possible naturalistic theories: escape, unburied, remain buried, removal by non-agent (i.e., an earthquake), removal by friends, removal by enemies, removal by a neutral party, and the swoon hypothesis. Chapter 7 evaluates various combinations of naturalistic hypotheses. Chapter 8 discusses objections related to the problem of miracles. Chapter 9 concludes stating, “The resurrection of Jesus is of fundamental importance to traditional Christian faith. In this monograph, it has been shown that a positive relationship between faith and reason and between history and faith can be established, and that there are good reasons for thinking that God has revealed himself through miraculously raising Jesus from the dead, thus vindicating his claims to be divine and confirming the salvific work that he has accomplished on the Cross.” Loke also highlights some of the implications of Jesus’ resurrection, including for the doctrines of revelation, God, Christ, salvation, church, and eschatology. For instance, believers will one day be raised and presently can find ultimate fulfillment in life through serving the risen Lord.

Loke argues that not only is it rationally permissible or reasonable to believe that Jesus resurrected, but that the evidence is strong enough that one can have historical certainty. This is a book that is worth engaging with for Christians and non-Christians, and will likely influence the discussion for years to come. (note I read a pre-pub copy)

[Nathan Ormond · Rating 2 out of 5]

Writes like a snarky asshole, assumes his conclusion, offers an inadequate straw man of views he disagrees with and then tears them down, asks skeptical questions and then doesn't answer them also boring.

[Peter · Rating 2 out of 5]

Vastly superior to the woeful Lee Strobel book the case due Christ. Still suffers from assuming the conclusion, definitively an academic bent though mistakes the bible writings as facts.

“at least 3,400 academic books and articles written since 1975 (Licona 2010, p. 19)—it has not yet been demonstrated in a single piece of work how all the naturalistic hypotheses can in principle be excluded. “

Make that at least 3,401

[Taylor Simpson · Rating 5 out of 5]

...a logically exhaustive reduction of all possible hypotheses has not been accomplished by any author before, hence my unique contribution to the discussion.

As I sit and reflect on Andrew Loke's Investigating the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (IRJC), I'm having a difficult time coming up with a reason to not give it five stars--so I did.

It's just fantastic.

I've read several 'pop level' apologetics defenses of the historical case for the resurrection of Jesus, and have even tried my hand at a few more 'scholarly' works in the genre. From my limited range of experience, I think Loke strikes nearly the perfect balance between the two.

The writing is clean, methodical, logical, and maybe even 'surgical' would be an appropriate word at times; and yet it's also concise, clear, and eminently attainable for those who don't yet have their Ph.D.s and only read technical journals for fun.

As I've noted my experience in the area of historical studies of the resurrection, I'll say that there is such a huge landscape of material to cover in order to compile an adequate account of Jesus' fate. Even so, if someone has read a couple of books on the topic, there is going to be a lot of overlap in the crucial details and core argumentation--and this can be a little boring, reading the same things over and over. Having read Craig, Licona, some of Habermas, Wallace, Dunn, and a handful of others, you start to get pretty familiar with a lot of the landscape, which is why it's recommended to make the venture into the more scholarly side of the material, if possible. This remains the case with a lot of IRJC--Loke covers a lot of the same ground as the authors just mentioned (along with many others), but this isn't necessarily a detriment to the book.

As the pull-quote above (and the subtitle) suggests, Loke has a lot of new content to place on the table--or, at least, new to me! With IRJC, you get a ton of references to the other 'giants' of resurrection scholarship (some of which I've mentioned above), and also the opponents (Ehrman, Carrier, etc.). Having read many of the main works he cites (at least on the 'proponent' side of the resurrection material), it's really great to have a work like this one that kind of synthesizes the main parts of the work from Craig, Licona, Habermas, McGrew, Wright, and others. I'm not saying you don't need the other works, but IRJC functions almost like the Sparknotes (is that still a thing?) for the prior compositions. The 'overlapping' material is summarized and utilized in very efficient and effective ways, making ample room for Loke's own analysis and additions.

The additions mainly come from (as mentioned in the above quote) the very in-depth exploration of the several non-theistic, naturalistic alternative hypotheses to the resurrection. Via the implementation of a few seemingly air-tight syllogisms, Loke manages to (apparently) address nearly every possible non-resurrection option that have been posited to explain the relevant data. Everything from twin brothers, to hallucinations, to wrong tombs, to earthquakes, to dogs, to aliens, to...whatever else you might be able to posit: Loke has, through the consideration of overarching categories of competing hypotheses, managed to compare and contrast the strengths and (many) weaknesses of the naturalistic options available to try to explain the resurrection data. Of course, his proposals and conclusions aren't indubitable, but I think they might be un-ignorable (if that's a word).

Loke is nothing if not thorough, and he's certainly done his homework with a steady hand. I don't yet know what 'actual resurrection scholars' (however you wish to define such a thing) have and have not considered, so I can't speak to them on this subject. But everyone else (which is essentially all other humans minus about 100 who belong in the prior category) needs to consider the information in IRJC, if they wish to seriously wrestle with the evidence for such a thing as important as the resurrection of Jesus.

I can't say at this point if I would recommend this book more than Craig's The Son Rises, but it certainly is on the same level in my mind. (I need to re-read the latter to make a fair comparison). Regardless of any kind of comparison like that, this book stands on its own in that near-perfect sweet spot between the popular and the scholarly.

The only other consideration I can think to mention here is that the book seems to be perpetually free (Kindle version, at least)! I got it several months ago for free and, as of the time of writing this review, it remains at $0.00! You LITERALLY can't beat that price, and I think it should be illegal to just GIVE AWAY books of this quality, so pick it up before the publishers and Amazon realize their mistake!

[Lucas G. · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this book, Loke presents an original approach for assessing the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. He structures the discussion by setting up a series of mutually exclusive alternatives for responding to various aspects of the resurrection narratives. He starts with whether or not anyone claimed to witness the risen Jesus. If they did, then either none of them actually had an experience that they thought was the risen Jesus, or at least some of them did. If some of them did, then the logic continues until ultimately all possible explanations are exhausted, up to and including Jesus rose from the dead.

Framing the discussion in this way is a brilliant contribution to the dialogue. By setting up a series of mutually exclusive alternatives, Loke ensures that he addresses all possible alternatives since any alternative will fall into one leg of the logic sequence based on how it answers questions like whether or not the tomb was empty or whether or not the disciples experiences had any external referent. This allows Loke to systematically eliminate all possible naturalistic hypotheses by simply stepping through the logic and assessing which response the evidence favors for each set of alternatives. Ultimately, he demonstrates that Jesus being resurrected from the dead is the only alternative that explains the evidence, and therefore is the most reasonable conclusion.

Loke also includes a lengthy section addressing arguments against miracles. He covers everything from Hume to Ehrman, succinctly revealing the philosophical blunders of those who argue either that miracles cannot happen or that historians cannot conclude that a miracle occurred. In the end it is fairly clear that the honest investigator has to allow for the possibility of a miracle when assessing an historical event like the resurrection.

It is clear on every page that Loke has done his research. He is able to effectively reference scholars who have made relevant contributions regarding each set of alternatives in his logic series. This includes interacting with leading proponents of each category of naturalistic hypotheses. This is significant because it demonstrates how Loke's contribution enhances the best scholarship in order to make the resurrection hypothesis even more obviously superior to any naturalistic hypothesis.

Overall, this is a phenomenal book. If you are interested at all in the question of the resurrection, you need to read this. And at the time I'm writing this review it is free on Kindle, so there's no excuse for not reading it. While some discussions are brief, the brevity does not come at the expense of depth. Loke does not write a word without it serving a purpose, so every sentence is packed with valuable content. And for those who want more, the bibliography is excellent.

[Andy Febrico Bintoro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Apologetics

This is a good and comprehensive apologetics about the ressurection issues. Although some of the arguments not very clear, but this book show off all the possibility on what really happened after the cross.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although thorough, it is also a negative, as it is very structured on a very specific topic the same arguments seem to reappear time and time again. In a book like this, it seemingly has to be like that even if it makes the reading very formulaic. One can later use the book as a great source. Loke has used a lot, and I mean a lot, of sources into writing this book and he tries to refute all the claims done against the resurrection of Christ and so prove it in the process. Definetly the most comprehensive look at all the sides and evidence I've seen so far. As a believer, I think he succeeds, but I can see that even some arguments here are not as strong as they are let to be. Facts, stories, legends, myths, memory, oral transmission, lies, editing, all this can end up in a believable and coherent looking narrative when it is put together, but we do not know the exact path and thus it is difficult to be sure about the specifics to be as they are written.

[Collin Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was skeptical of Loke's claim that he would address all possible naturalistic explanations for the resurrection, but the syllogisms he lays out in the introduction does just that. These syllogisms were probably the most unique and interesting part of the book because of how well they frame how one might think through the evidence for the resurrection. This books packs so much material into a relatively short space compared to other treatments of the resurrection. Loke has conservative views and argues for a high probability, and even historical certainty, that Jesus resurrected. The language and arguments can get pretty academic at some points, but are very understandable. The best part is that this book is free on kindle.

[Arun Prasad · Rating 5 out of 5]

A doctoral thesis, which covers allmost all sceptical views of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, on which the Christian world view stands. A reference and study material for theologians, Apologists and for those who doubt resurrection. The arguments, bibliography, and listing of counter arguments and the response thereof, are logically presented. There are some other books one should consider by Dr. Mike Licona and By Dr. William Lane Craig, to have a broad spectrum of understanding. Well done Dr. Andrew Like.

[Eric Hamilton · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book attempts to systematically account for all possible historical explanations for what happened to the Historical Jesus, and weigh whether such explanations are tenable or not, using textual and historical criticism, as well as logical deduction. Anyone who wants to seriously consider the evidence would benefit from this book's nearly comprehensive outlook. Though, that is also where the book suffers a little. It does feel repetitive at times because it occasionally has to retread conclusions it has made before, because it is attempting to be comprehensive.

[Linda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dr. Loke's prose reminds me of one of those high-school or college professors who could take a lecture on a very interesting topic and turn it into an instant cure for insomnia.

"Alive: a Cold-Case Approach to the Resurrection" by J. Warner Wallace covers the same points as Dr. Loke, but (in my opinion, anyway) presents the evidence in a more interesting manner.

[Tellef Granaas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Answering questions I did not know I had.

A deep dive into the argumentation for the case for Jesus resurrection. I’m thankful for this book even though it is not for everyone to read.

[JC Pacheco · Rating 5 out of 5]

El libro más completo que he leído sobre el tema (no el mejor, ni mucho menos), pero abre el panorama a todas las ramas que se ocupan de dar respuesta a la pregunta de resurrección. Me encantó.

[Anna Tan]

it's gonna take me a million years to get back to this, so I'm gonna clear it off my currently-reading list for now.

[Lee S. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dull, couldn't finish it.

[Christopher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Phenomenal multidisciplinary study of the Resurrection! It is also free, so check it out! (See link below).

Andrew Loke is a brilliant philosopher and Theologian. He is also a remarkable Christian! Check out his work!

https://www.academia.edu/42985421/Lok...

[Virginia · Rating 4 out of 5]

⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.