No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
How to speak with intellectual and theological decency on the resurrection of Christ?: A comparison of Swinburne and Wright
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 November 2008
Abstract
In recent scholarship the spiritual reading of the New Testament resurrection stories has come under pressure from new studies of the relevant data. In this article, two of the most conspicuous of these studies are compared and evaluated. First, Richard Swinburne's monograph opens our eyes to the fact that, in interpreting the resurrection stories, much more is at stake than is usually recognised in so-called ‘undogmatic’ exegesis. However, the rather crude way in which Swinburne deals with these stories, suggesting that they represent Jesus' resurrection as a bare fact not qualitatively different from other historical facts, neglects their peculiarity and displays insufficient hermeneutical sensitivity for their unique theological meaning. Second, Tom Wright's monumental volume is sometimes criticised for a similar single-minded focus on historical questions and a concomitant lack of attention to the eschatological character of Jesus' resurrection. As a result, George Hunsinger has argued, it becomes unclear why the resurrection reports embody life-transforming good news now. Close scrutiny of Wright's book, however, does not vindicate this criticism. Wright neither isolates the question of the resurrection's historicity from its theological meanings nor overlooks the fact that a plausible historical case for the resurrection does not in itself elicit faith. Still, he rightly argues that what people believe about what actually has happened often plays a vital role in their personal transformation. Moreover, the eschatological nature of the resurrection does not rule out the fact that it can be seen and discussed with integrity as a historical issue.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 2008
References
1 Updike, John, ‘Seven Stanzas at Easter’, first published in The Christian Century 78 (1961), p. 236Google Scholar; later included in e.g. Telephone Poles and Other Poems (New York: Knopf, 1963).
2 Swinburne, Richard, The Resurrection of God Incarnate (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wright, N. T., The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3) (London: SPCK, 2003)Google Scholar.
3 Avis, Paul (ed.), The Resurrection of Jesus Christ (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1993)Google Scholar; Barton, Stephen and Stanton, Graham (eds), Resurrection: Essays in Honour of Leslie Houlden (London: SPCK, 1994)Google Scholar; Bommarius, A. (ed.), Fand die Auferstehung wirklich statt? Eine Diskussion mit Gerd Lüdemann (Düsseldorf: Parerga, 1995)Google Scholar; D'Costa, Gavin (ed.), Resurrection Reconsidered (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 1996)Google Scholar; Davis, Stephen, Kendall, Daniel and O'Collins, Gerald (eds), The Resurrection: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Resurrection of Jesus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Longenecker, R. N. (ed.), Life in the Face of Death: The Resurrection Message of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998)Google Scholar; Porter, Stanley E., Hayes, Michael A. and Tombs, David, Resurrection (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999)Google Scholar; Tacelli, R. and Copan, P. (eds), Jesus' Resurrection: Fact or Figment? (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Avemarie, Friedrich and Lichtenberger, Hermann (eds), Auferstehung – Resurrection: The Fourth Durham–Tübingen Research Symposium (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001)Google Scholar; Bieringer, R., Koperski, V. and Lataire, B. (eds), Resurrection in the New Testament (Leuven: Peeters, 2002)Google Scholar; Peters, Ted, Russell, Robert J. and Welker, Michael (eds), Resurrection: Theological and Scientific Assessments (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002)Google Scholar.
4 See, for a slightly more elaborated description of this ‘dominant paradigm’, Wright, Resurrection, p. 7.
5 Swinburne, , The Existence of God (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979; rev. edn 1991)Google Scholar; cf. its popularised version Is there a God? (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).
6 Swinburne, Resurrection, p. 1 (numbers in parentheses in the text in this section refer to pages in this book).
7 It is possible for Swinburne to do this in a more or less fair and unbiased way, since no comparable claims concerning sin and suffering as motives for an incarnation are being made in connection with any of the more serious alternative candidates (e.g. Muhammad, the Buddha, etc.).
8 Martin, Michael, review of Swinburne's Resurrection of God Incarnate, Religious Studies 40 (2004), pp. 367–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
9 Ibid., p. 369.
10 Ibid., p. 370.
11 A fine example of a study uncovering the theological meanings of the resurrection stories (without denying their referential intentions) is Selby, Peter, Look for the Living: The Corporate Nature of Resurrection Faith (London: SCM Press, 1976), esp. pp. 82–125Google Scholar.
12 Migliore, Daniel L., Faith Seeking Understanding, 2nd edn (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004), p. 193Google Scholar; Migliore is inspired here by Hart, David Bentley, The Beauty of the Infinite (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), pp. 349, 389Google Scholar.
13 See also, however, Segal, Alan F., Life After Death: A History of the Afterlife in Western Religions (New York: Doubleday, 2004)Google Scholar; both volumes exceed 800 pp.
14 Williams, Stephen N., ‘The Resurrection of the Son of God’, International Journal of Systematic Theology 6 (2004), p. 421CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
15 Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, p. 611 (Mark is left out here because his eight-verse ending does not bring the risen Jesus on stage, p. 608).
16 Hunsinger, George, ‘The Daybreak of the New Creation: Christ's Resurrection in Recent Theology’, Scottish Journal of Theology 57 (2004), pp. 163–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Similar suspicions can be found in Williams, ‘Resurrection’, p. 430, and in Larry W. Hurtado, ‘Book of the Month’, Expository Times (2003), p. 84.
17 Hunsinger, ‘Daybreak of the New Creation’, p. 173.
18 Ibid., p. 172.
19 So rightly Williams, ‘Resurrection’, p. 429.
20 It is not easy to find Jenkins's oft misquoted phrase in its original context; for a somewhat later presentation of his views on the matter, see Jenkins, David E., God, Miracle and the Church of England (London: SCM Press, 1987), pp. 3–39Google Scholar.
21 Williams, Rowan, Resurrection: Interpreting the Easter Gospel, 2nd edn (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim, 2003), p. 110Google Scholar.
22 Wright, Resurrection, pp. 11–12.
23 Ibid., p. 737.
24 Ibid., p. 26. This point can be illustrated by the example of Jewish theologian Pinchas Lapide, whose recognition of Jesus' bodily resurrection as a historical fact did not turn him into a Christian; see his Auferstehung. Ein jüdisches Glaubenserlebnis (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1977).
25 Cf. Hunsinger, ‘Daybreak’, pp. 176–7.
26 Frei, Hans, The Identity of Jesus Christ: The Hermeneutical Bases of Dogmatic Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), p. 147Google Scholar; cf. Hunsinger, ‘Daybreak’, p. 176. For an instructive full-scale introduction to Frei's theology, see Higton, Mike, Christ, Providence and History: Hans W. Frei's Public Theology (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2003)Google Scholar.
27 Wright, Resurrection, p. 716; on the use of ‘inference to the best explanation’ in science as well as in (philosophy of) religion: see van Holten, Wilko, Explanation within the Bounds of Religion (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2003), pp. 133–42, 171–6Google Scholar.
28 Wright, Resurrection, p. 26
29 Pace Williams, ‘Resurrection’, pp. 430–1.
30 John 20:29.
31 Wright, Resurrection, p. 26.
32 Ibid., p. 22.
33 Moule, C. D. F., The Phenomenon of the New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1967), pp. 80–1Google Scholar (as quoted in Wright, Resurrection, p. 23).