resurrection

[T.A.G.]

I am trying to find a scholarlly attempt to argue the resurrection.
I was listening to William Craig on it but then I heard his main evidence was a pre-mark I got disinterested in it. Thus, I kinda closed down and didnt listen to the rest. Any others out there that I should listen to or read on this (again I am not talking about a mcdowell or stroble type guy)

thanks

 

[FenderPriest]

I believe what you're looking for is N.T. Wright's Resurrection of the Son of God. Essentially, from what I understand, it's the book in working through all the issues of the resurrection from a scholarly point of view. In my own use of it, it's rather massive and thorough. A great book to have, despite the authors errors in other areas.

 

[T.A.G.]

thanks i will be buying it

 

[T.A.G.]

So i just got finished reading the last two sections

My question that I was hoping he would answer is why did the guards know about Christ claims of raising from the dead but not His own apostles understood this?

Overall, the book in proving the lost part of mark, the theme of resurrection in matthew and luke etc was great!

 

[MarieP]

I am trying to find a scholarlly attempt to argue the resurrection.
I was listening to William Craig on it but then I heard his main evidence was a pre-mark I got disinterested in it. Thus, I kinda closed down and didnt listen to the rest. Any others out there that I should listen to or read on this (again I am not talking about a mcdowell or stroble type guy)

thanks

Why do you need "a scholarly attempt"? Once you put God into the equation, that pretty much changes everything.

If you must find a scholarly account for someone, I haven't read it yet, but N. T. Wright's The Resurrection of the Son of God is the way to go.

 

[T.A.G.]

Yes as you can read I just read the last couple of sections of that book.

I dont need to hear someone argue it to believe in it
i believe in it because the word of God says
but i am interested in studying what others have to say
you never know if you will need to brush of any prejudical conjectures

 

[jwright82]

I will just tell you from Van Til/Bahnsen point of view why they doubted this argument, and why I doubt it too.

Suppose you prove that Jesus absolutly raised from the dead, what does that really prove? Only that a person came back to life. How do you know that some mysterious scientific proccess didn't miraculously bring him back ro life? The answer is you don't. I don't want to be negative or burst your argument or anything but if I was an atheist that is how I would argue away the evidence. You need to prepare yourself for such a responce or you will be left speachless. Attack the unbeleiver's very notion of science itself showing that on their own presupposotions science is impossible, yet we use it everyday. Show that from a christian theistic position it is perfectly and orderly possible for God to bring someone back from the dead, He is God after all.

 

[cih1355]

When Paul spoke before King Agrippa, he said, "Why is it considered incredible among you people if God does raise the dead?" (Acts 26:8). Given the Christian worldview, it is reasonable to believe that God can raise the dead.