The Resurrection of Jesus: do extra-canonical sources change the landscape?
The resurrection of Jesus is assumed by the New Testament to be a historical event. Some scholars argue, however, that there was no empty tomb, but that the New Testament accounts are midrashic or mythological stories about Jesus.� In this article extra-canonical writings are investigated to find ou...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Afrikaans |
| Published: |
AOSIS
2005-10-01
|
| Series: | Verbum et Ecclesia |
| Online Access: | http://verbumetecclesia.org.za/index.php/VE/article/view/254 |
| Summary: | The resurrection of Jesus is assumed by the New Testament to be a historical event. Some scholars argue, however, that there was no empty tomb, but that the New Testament accounts are midrashic or mythological stories about Jesus.� In this article extra-canonical writings are investigated to find out what light it may throw on intra-canonical tradition. Many extra-canonical texts seemingly have no knowledge of the passion and resurrection, and such traditions may be earlier than the intra-canonical traditions. Was the resurrection a later invention?� Are intra-canonical texts developments of extra-canonical tradition, or vice versa?� This article demonstrates that extra-canonical texts do not materially alter the landscape of enquiry. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1609-9982 2074-7705 |