What do you think?
Rate this book
The Resurrection of Jesus: A Sourcebook
The event of Jesus resurrection is like the event of creation: There were no eye-witnesses. So how does one make sense of the story of the resurrection or rather stories, for not one but many diverse reports survive from early Christianity? Brandon Scott suggests that we must begin by erasing all Christian art about the resurrection from our memory. And then forget all the sermons we heard at Easter. The best way to understand the resurrection, he argues, is to arrange the texts chronologically and observe how the story itself developed. The Resurrection of Jesus: A Soucebook begins with just such a list, compiled with commentaries by Robert W. Funk. It proceeds to a report of the Jesus Seminar s votes on the resurrection, followed by a collection and discussion by Robert Price of resurrection stories found in the Greek culture of Jesus day, and an in-depth study by Arthur Dewey of a little-known resurrection story in the Gospel of Peter. The final essays in the volume, by Roy W. Hoover and Thomas Sheehan, explore the origins of belief in Jesus resurrection and help put the pieces back together again, in ways that make sense in the modern world.
128 pages, Paperback
First published December 4, 2008
1 person is currently reading
14 people want to read
About the author
Robert W. Funk
60 books12 followersRobert Walter Funk (July 18, 1926 – September 3, 2005), was an American biblical scholar, founder of the controversial Jesus Seminar and the non-profit Westar Institute in Santa Rosa, California. Funk, an academic, sought to promote research and education on what he called biblical literacy. His approach to hermeneutics was historical-critical, with a strongly sceptical view of orthodox Christian belief, particularly concerning historical Jesus. He and his peers described Jesus' parables as containing shocking messages that contradicted established religious attitudes.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 8, 2023
SEVERAL ‘JESUS SEMINAR’ FELLOWS COMMENT ON THE RESURRECTION STORIES
The Introduction to this 2008 book by editor Bernard Brandon Scott states, “What should be your first step if you want to understand what resurrection meant in early Christianity? I would suggest that the first step is to excise from your imagination all of the Christian art you have seen about the resurrection…. Then forget all the sermons you have heard at Easter. If you want to understand what resurrection meant and how it emerged in early Christianity, the first step is to arrange the relevant texts in chronological order so that you can see the pattern that develops. Since popular piety ignores this essential step, the dramatic scenes found in the gospels of Luke and John… have come to dominate people’s thinking, especially because the Easter lectionary readings and famous artworks come predominantly from these two gospels. To come to terms with the early Christian experience concept of resurrection, we must struggle against the distortions thus created. In short, we must let early Christian experience and faith emerge from the text, not impose later positions or views on it. This ‘Jesus Seminar Guide’ is a sourcebook on resurrection. It provides you with the texts and discussions of those texts so that you can come to an informed opinion concerning the emergence of the Christian view of resurrection in the first two centuries.” (Pg. 1)
Robert Funk says of Paul’s list in 1 Cor 15:3-8, “Several things about Paul’s list are worthy of note. First, the list is something Paul himself did not apparently create; he had received it, or part of it, as lore passed on to him after his own conversion. We do not know how old it is. We can only say that Paul knew of it at the time he established the congregation in Corinth, about 50 CE… Second, we cannot tell how much of the list Paul learned from his predecessors and how much is his own addition or additions… The third thing to notice is that Paul provides no information about where these appearances occurred or when they occurred. Moreover, he does not tell us anything about their nature, other than what he says about resurrection generally in his discussion … in the rest of chapter fifteen.” (Pg. 11-12)
He notes, “the earliest narrative allusion to Jesus’ resurrection is the story of the empty tomb preserved in Mark. What is narrated here is usually interpreted as an angelophany… However, it is possible that this figure in Mark is to be understood merely as a young man, perhaps the one who had accompanied Jesus during his final hours.” (Pg. 14)
Of John 20:1-31, he comments, “Verses 1-13 are the story of Mary of Magdala’s visit to the tomb on Sunday morning. In this version there is only one woman. Into this story the author has inserted the visit of Peter and ‘the other disciple’ to the tomb. The function of this insertion is to elevate ‘the other disciple’ to Peter’s level in the struggle for ascendancy in the community. The story is clearly intrusive, since in v. 11 we return to Mary still at the tomb as though nothing had happened since v. 2, and she makes her report to the disciples in v. 18.” (Pg. 24)
At the Seminar’s Spring 1995 meeting, “Gerd Ludemann … argued in a public address that the body of Jesus undoubtedly decayed in the usual way. The Fellows approved this thesis overwhelmingly. They found that Jesus’ corpse probably rotted in some unknown grave, a view supported by most Associate members. More than ninety percent of the Fellows, and a huge majority of Associates, agreed that Jesus’ resurrection did not involve the resuscitation of his corpse…. It was the unanimous judgment of the Fellows that belief in Jesus’ resurrection did not depend on what happened to his corpse.” (Pg. 45) Later, “The Fellows are inclined to the view that Joseph of Arimathea was a fictional character. Those Fellows who think Joseph was not a fiction doubt that he was a disciple of Jesus and Jesus’ undertaker.” (Pg. 46)
Robert M. Price wrote, “Christian apologists often produce the imagined trump card that the resurrection appearances could not have been hallucinations since, we are told, groups ranging from two to over five hundred beheld the resurrected Jesus… It seems clear to us now that, in the Easter stories, the visit to the tomb is fully as fictional as the appearance of angels. Likewise we do not take for granted that Peter, Mary, and the rest actually saw anything on some far-off Easter morning. So the question of whether they saw Jesus himself or an hallucination is moot… Apologists reasonably argue that a group of people could not see the very same hallucination unless we posit some type of telepathy. But the fact is that people can share visions in the manner of a contagious chain reaction.” (Pg. 57)
Roy W. Hoover states, “If the claim that God raised Jesus from the dead originated as an affirmation of faith, where did the Easter stories about the empty tomb come from? The answer is, I suggest, that the faith that God raised Jesus from the dead generated the empty tomb stories, the empty tomb stories did not generate that faith… We should also take note of the fact that neither here not anywhere else in his letters does Paul mention the story of the empty tomb.” (Pg. 80)
He continues, “The first indication that the Easter stories in the gospels are not as early as they appear to be is that Paul seems never to have heard of them… Further, he tells us that he spent two weeks as Simon Peter’s houseguest in Jerusalem just three years after his conversion and calling… probably less than five years after Jesus’ death. If the amazing stories about an angel or two loitering in or near Jesus re-opened and empty tomb early on that Sunday morning were literally true, Peter would surely have known about them…. It seems reasonable to infer from this that Pater did not report the empty tomb stories to Paul… because Peter had never heard those stories either.” (Pg. 82)
He goes on, “the gospels also differ in their representations of the announcing angel sitting in the tomb…. It is noteworthy that Matthew does not report that anyone actually saw Jesus walk out of the tomb after the angel rolled back the stone… Mark anticipates such an ‘appearance,’ but reports none!... Only excruciating exercises in harmonization can turn these different stories into one, consistent factual account.” (Pg. 83-84)
Thomas Sheehan suggests, “ For the first four decades of Christianity, the best we have about Easter are brief proclamations of faith in Jesus’ victory, accompanied by not historical information about where or when or how this victory took place. Only by 70 CE, in Mark 16:1-8, do we finally get the first story about the events that allegedly occurred on Easter Sunday morning, complete with legends about an empty tomb and an angel’s proclamation of Jesus’ ‘resurrection.’” (Pg. 98)
He adds, “Fundamentalists like Professor [Gary] Habermas seem supinely ignorant of the category mistake they make when they take God’s supernatural, eschatological act---rescuing the crucified Jesus from death and appointing him the coming Son of Man---and reduce it to the status of an allegedly historical event in space and time. If this were done intentionally, we would call it blasphemy.” (Pg. 102)
This book will appeal to those who accept ‘critical’ views about Jesus.
The Introduction to this 2008 book by editor Bernard Brandon Scott states, “What should be your first step if you want to understand what resurrection meant in early Christianity? I would suggest that the first step is to excise from your imagination all of the Christian art you have seen about the resurrection…. Then forget all the sermons you have heard at Easter. If you want to understand what resurrection meant and how it emerged in early Christianity, the first step is to arrange the relevant texts in chronological order so that you can see the pattern that develops. Since popular piety ignores this essential step, the dramatic scenes found in the gospels of Luke and John… have come to dominate people’s thinking, especially because the Easter lectionary readings and famous artworks come predominantly from these two gospels. To come to terms with the early Christian experience concept of resurrection, we must struggle against the distortions thus created. In short, we must let early Christian experience and faith emerge from the text, not impose later positions or views on it. This ‘Jesus Seminar Guide’ is a sourcebook on resurrection. It provides you with the texts and discussions of those texts so that you can come to an informed opinion concerning the emergence of the Christian view of resurrection in the first two centuries.” (Pg. 1)
Robert Funk says of Paul’s list in 1 Cor 15:3-8, “Several things about Paul’s list are worthy of note. First, the list is something Paul himself did not apparently create; he had received it, or part of it, as lore passed on to him after his own conversion. We do not know how old it is. We can only say that Paul knew of it at the time he established the congregation in Corinth, about 50 CE… Second, we cannot tell how much of the list Paul learned from his predecessors and how much is his own addition or additions… The third thing to notice is that Paul provides no information about where these appearances occurred or when they occurred. Moreover, he does not tell us anything about their nature, other than what he says about resurrection generally in his discussion … in the rest of chapter fifteen.” (Pg. 11-12)
He notes, “the earliest narrative allusion to Jesus’ resurrection is the story of the empty tomb preserved in Mark. What is narrated here is usually interpreted as an angelophany… However, it is possible that this figure in Mark is to be understood merely as a young man, perhaps the one who had accompanied Jesus during his final hours.” (Pg. 14)
Of John 20:1-31, he comments, “Verses 1-13 are the story of Mary of Magdala’s visit to the tomb on Sunday morning. In this version there is only one woman. Into this story the author has inserted the visit of Peter and ‘the other disciple’ to the tomb. The function of this insertion is to elevate ‘the other disciple’ to Peter’s level in the struggle for ascendancy in the community. The story is clearly intrusive, since in v. 11 we return to Mary still at the tomb as though nothing had happened since v. 2, and she makes her report to the disciples in v. 18.” (Pg. 24)
At the Seminar’s Spring 1995 meeting, “Gerd Ludemann … argued in a public address that the body of Jesus undoubtedly decayed in the usual way. The Fellows approved this thesis overwhelmingly. They found that Jesus’ corpse probably rotted in some unknown grave, a view supported by most Associate members. More than ninety percent of the Fellows, and a huge majority of Associates, agreed that Jesus’ resurrection did not involve the resuscitation of his corpse…. It was the unanimous judgment of the Fellows that belief in Jesus’ resurrection did not depend on what happened to his corpse.” (Pg. 45) Later, “The Fellows are inclined to the view that Joseph of Arimathea was a fictional character. Those Fellows who think Joseph was not a fiction doubt that he was a disciple of Jesus and Jesus’ undertaker.” (Pg. 46)
Robert M. Price wrote, “Christian apologists often produce the imagined trump card that the resurrection appearances could not have been hallucinations since, we are told, groups ranging from two to over five hundred beheld the resurrected Jesus… It seems clear to us now that, in the Easter stories, the visit to the tomb is fully as fictional as the appearance of angels. Likewise we do not take for granted that Peter, Mary, and the rest actually saw anything on some far-off Easter morning. So the question of whether they saw Jesus himself or an hallucination is moot… Apologists reasonably argue that a group of people could not see the very same hallucination unless we posit some type of telepathy. But the fact is that people can share visions in the manner of a contagious chain reaction.” (Pg. 57)
Roy W. Hoover states, “If the claim that God raised Jesus from the dead originated as an affirmation of faith, where did the Easter stories about the empty tomb come from? The answer is, I suggest, that the faith that God raised Jesus from the dead generated the empty tomb stories, the empty tomb stories did not generate that faith… We should also take note of the fact that neither here not anywhere else in his letters does Paul mention the story of the empty tomb.” (Pg. 80)
He continues, “The first indication that the Easter stories in the gospels are not as early as they appear to be is that Paul seems never to have heard of them… Further, he tells us that he spent two weeks as Simon Peter’s houseguest in Jerusalem just three years after his conversion and calling… probably less than five years after Jesus’ death. If the amazing stories about an angel or two loitering in or near Jesus re-opened and empty tomb early on that Sunday morning were literally true, Peter would surely have known about them…. It seems reasonable to infer from this that Pater did not report the empty tomb stories to Paul… because Peter had never heard those stories either.” (Pg. 82)
He goes on, “the gospels also differ in their representations of the announcing angel sitting in the tomb…. It is noteworthy that Matthew does not report that anyone actually saw Jesus walk out of the tomb after the angel rolled back the stone… Mark anticipates such an ‘appearance,’ but reports none!... Only excruciating exercises in harmonization can turn these different stories into one, consistent factual account.” (Pg. 83-84)
Thomas Sheehan suggests, “ For the first four decades of Christianity, the best we have about Easter are brief proclamations of faith in Jesus’ victory, accompanied by not historical information about where or when or how this victory took place. Only by 70 CE, in Mark 16:1-8, do we finally get the first story about the events that allegedly occurred on Easter Sunday morning, complete with legends about an empty tomb and an angel’s proclamation of Jesus’ ‘resurrection.’” (Pg. 98)
He adds, “Fundamentalists like Professor [Gary] Habermas seem supinely ignorant of the category mistake they make when they take God’s supernatural, eschatological act---rescuing the crucified Jesus from death and appointing him the coming Son of Man---and reduce it to the status of an allegedly historical event in space and time. If this were done intentionally, we would call it blasphemy.” (Pg. 102)
This book will appeal to those who accept ‘critical’ views about Jesus.
February 4, 2014
The resurrection of Jesus; is it an historical fact or a myth? An evaluation by Jesus Seminar
The dramatic stories of the gospels of Luke and John have dominated Christian belief since second century. This is strengthened by weekly sermons, Easter lectionary, artwork of last supper & holy sacrament. In this book, the Jesus Seminar, a group of academics, examine the apocrypha, historical documents and determine the influence of Jewish culture and Old Testament and suggest that the myth has become an historical fact. A quick reference to the New Testament illustrates that resurrection stories in gospels, acts and epistles are not only different but they appear in different chronological order. Jesus Seminar argues that resurrection is not uniquely a Christian phenomenon but culturally and historically enshrined in ancient Jewish traditions. Herakles, son of Zeus; Apollo's son Eeneas; son of Venus, Romulus; and son of Mars, Apollonius of Tyana (a contemporary of Paul), all suggested to have been resurrected.
The emergence of a cosmic figure from tomb is depicted in the gospel of Peter 9-10. In Hebrews 9, Jesus hands over his shroud to a slave of the high priest and then appearing to James. The appearances described in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, Luke 24, John 20-21, transfiguration story, Acts 7, and Revelation are not necessarily original but some are duplicates. It is hard to determine which one is the original and correct description. In probing the issues of resurrection of Jesus, the Seminar concludes that the empty tomb is not based on historical memory. Mark and Matthew describe resurrection in Galilee, but Luke says it is Jerusalem; John cites resurrection appearances in both cities. The earlier sightings of Jesus were luminous visions as described by Paul and later supported by Luke but as the traditions developed, the resurrection became more palpable and physical.
Paul who claimed to have received an appearance of the risen Jesus (1 Cor 15:8), was blinded by intense light. He heard only a voice on his way to Damascus (Acts 9:4, 22:7, 26:14). Later Paul refers to this as an apocalyptic revelation and not a visual appearance. By 70 CE, the gospel of Mark was written; in Mark 16:1-8, we come across the events that is supposedly occurred on Easter Sunday morning complete with empty tomb and angels proclamation of Jesus resurrection. Finally 85-95 C.E., saw the books of Matthew, Luke and John. These texts exploded with elaborate narratives of Easter and the events of the following weeks.
Easter lasted few days to several years depending upon the text. According to Paul of Tarsus, the resurrection happened after 4 or 5 years. Luke suggests 40 days in the book of Acts, Secret gospel of James for 550 days, and the Pisitis of Sophia for 11 years. The physical unrecordability of these miraculous events comes down to one thing; the gospel stories about Easter are not historical accounts but religious beliefs. The suffering and vindication of the righteous one is the story of crucifixion and resurrection. Repentance, forgiveness and redemption are the key concepts in the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Resurrection and the holy sacrament offer a powerful story for believers.
The dramatic stories of the gospels of Luke and John have dominated Christian belief since second century. This is strengthened by weekly sermons, Easter lectionary, artwork of last supper & holy sacrament. In this book, the Jesus Seminar, a group of academics, examine the apocrypha, historical documents and determine the influence of Jewish culture and Old Testament and suggest that the myth has become an historical fact. A quick reference to the New Testament illustrates that resurrection stories in gospels, acts and epistles are not only different but they appear in different chronological order. Jesus Seminar argues that resurrection is not uniquely a Christian phenomenon but culturally and historically enshrined in ancient Jewish traditions. Herakles, son of Zeus; Apollo's son Eeneas; son of Venus, Romulus; and son of Mars, Apollonius of Tyana (a contemporary of Paul), all suggested to have been resurrected.
The emergence of a cosmic figure from tomb is depicted in the gospel of Peter 9-10. In Hebrews 9, Jesus hands over his shroud to a slave of the high priest and then appearing to James. The appearances described in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, Luke 24, John 20-21, transfiguration story, Acts 7, and Revelation are not necessarily original but some are duplicates. It is hard to determine which one is the original and correct description. In probing the issues of resurrection of Jesus, the Seminar concludes that the empty tomb is not based on historical memory. Mark and Matthew describe resurrection in Galilee, but Luke says it is Jerusalem; John cites resurrection appearances in both cities. The earlier sightings of Jesus were luminous visions as described by Paul and later supported by Luke but as the traditions developed, the resurrection became more palpable and physical.
Paul who claimed to have received an appearance of the risen Jesus (1 Cor 15:8), was blinded by intense light. He heard only a voice on his way to Damascus (Acts 9:4, 22:7, 26:14). Later Paul refers to this as an apocalyptic revelation and not a visual appearance. By 70 CE, the gospel of Mark was written; in Mark 16:1-8, we come across the events that is supposedly occurred on Easter Sunday morning complete with empty tomb and angels proclamation of Jesus resurrection. Finally 85-95 C.E., saw the books of Matthew, Luke and John. These texts exploded with elaborate narratives of Easter and the events of the following weeks.
Easter lasted few days to several years depending upon the text. According to Paul of Tarsus, the resurrection happened after 4 or 5 years. Luke suggests 40 days in the book of Acts, Secret gospel of James for 550 days, and the Pisitis of Sophia for 11 years. The physical unrecordability of these miraculous events comes down to one thing; the gospel stories about Easter are not historical accounts but religious beliefs. The suffering and vindication of the righteous one is the story of crucifixion and resurrection. Repentance, forgiveness and redemption are the key concepts in the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Resurrection and the holy sacrament offer a powerful story for believers.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews