Mark 3-35 Analysis

This paper is a review of the book The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach by Michael Licona. This book is comprised of pages that “investigate the question of the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection while providing unprecedented interaction with the literature of professional historians outside of the community of biblical scholars on both hermeneutical and methodological considerations.” The book is separated into five long chapters: “Chapter 1: Important Consideration pertaining to Historical Truth” , “Chapter 2: The Historians and Miracles”, “Chapter 3: Historical Sources Pertaining to the Resurrection of Christ”, “Chapter 4: The Historical Bedrock Pertaining to the Fate of Jesus”, and “Chapter 5: Weighing Hypothesis”.

Christianity in general holds onto the belief in a physical resurrection. Followers of this tradition tend to believe that the resurrected body is identical to the body one has before

But, one of the other things that the Gospel authors are also clearly intent on showing us, is that it’s really Jesus who rose from the dead. It’s not a ghost. Not a spirit. Not a vision. Not a hallucination.

H.S. Horton-Parker states that “scholars, Christians, and non-Christians have different opinions concerning the meaning of the gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus”. (1) After reading “The Transforming Reality of the Bodily Resurrection” by N.T. Wright I am able to appreciate the significance of the meaning behind the word “resurrection”. Jesus’ resurrection plays a pivotal part in our Christian faith. The Bible states in John 3:17, “For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him” (New International Version). Jesus’ death and resurrection create a larger picture of “salvation history” for us. Through this action we can now be saved from our sins and receive eternal life. N.T.

The resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted upon people, or it is the most important fact of history. It may be said that the one casts light upon the other. If He was what the Gospels represent Him, He must have been born of a pure Virgin, without sin, and He must have risen from the dead. If the story of His birth be true, we can believe that of His Resurrection; if that of His Resurrection be true, we can believe that of His birth. In the nature of things, the latter was incapable of strict historical proof; and, in the nature of things, His Resurrection demanded and was capable of the fullest historical evidence.

3) The first witnesses were women - if the resurrection of Jesus was a lie, women were literally the worst first witnesses you could possibly have chosen - their testimony was considered inadmissible under both Roman and Jewish law. Jewish historian Josephus - "let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex, nor let servants be

The name “James” appears frequently in gospel narratives. There are three separate James’ mentioned amidst the early church in Jerusalem: James, the Son of Zebedee; James the Less; and James the righteous. Correct interpretation of which James is being mentioned when discerning Scripture is imperative.

The book of James has created disputations amongst its readers for years. Like almost all of the New Testament writings, contemporary readers have questions about it origin, composition, and content. Also like most New Testament writings, there are multiple hypotheses that have been presented to answer each of these enquiries. For example, many scholars have suggested that it is the least Christian amongst all of the New Testament writings due to the fact that it only references the name of Jesus twice. This a particular point that I feel needs to be addressed when trying to understand James, and it is a point I will answer further while also trying to present information regarding other possible questions an individual may have while reading

Paul and James are divided by the Faith /Grace/ a gift, verses Faith involves Works. This caused confusion and division amongst believers. Many choose Good Deeds; However, many choose Faith in Jesus Christ.

Many readers of the New Testament are thought to have misinterpret both Paul and James, this would be the assumption that they contradict each other. They have different emphasis but they simply don’t have a contradiction with their teaching. In a Christian life, both believe that faith and works are essential but play different parts. Another belief they have in common is that faith comes from God and Jesus and it does not come from us. The reason why they have different ideas may be because they had different audiences going through different problems and situations. Paul stresses that Jesus’ death is where our salvation begins, not the laws of Moses. James stresses that Christians put their faith into actions. The misinterpretations come

One of the general epistles of the Bible is the epistle of James. Though some may think of "James the disciple of Jesus" it is not him who had written it, but instead another James that was called by God to record the words form God. James was written in 49 A.D. and was intended for mostly Jewish people though it can apply to everyone in today's culture. The one thing James tried to do in his teachings was re-mold the mindset of the Jews which at the time was about status, wealth and glory. James also wanted to show how we can express our faith outwardly. Most people today associate the book of James with work and this comes from a verse in James (that is translated in english) about how faith comes by works. Though the English translation

The Christian faith is founded on the idea of the resurrection and Jesus dying for everyone’s sins. The Resurrection is a central story of the Christian faith, and it must be true for the Christianity to hold up. The Bible is the ultimate source for information on the Resurrection from the disciples themselves through the Gospels. Many theorists have come up with theories that contradict and counter the Resurrection because of the lack of belief and proof. Although there are arguments against the resurrection, there are more arguments for it. Christianity arose due to the Resurrection, and consists of the sacrifice Jesus made for the greater good of all the people.

The epistle of James is famous among the LDS community for containing the verse that compelled the Prophet Joseph Smith onto his knees into a prayer that would lead to the Restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ. While this may be one of the more popular verses, there are many one-liners from the Epistle of James that most would be familiar with. “Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only” (James 1:22), “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:17), and “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.” (James 4:6) to name a few. As much as James’ writing is referenced and applicable to followers of Christ today, little is known about the author and his work. This paper will explore the different theories behind the mysterious James and also emphasize key doctrine that he taught.

In our second article critique we have to critique an article about “The Resurrection of Christ: Theological Implications” written by Daniel B. Wallace. Before getting to the content in this article we must first talk some about the author.

The explanation and narrative of the chronological basis of the Resurrection of Jesus has been the focus of historical investigation and debate, as well as a theme of discussion among theologians. The description of the Gospels, together with the empty tomb and the manifestation of the risen Christ to His followers, have been observed as historic reports of a factual event, as exact versions of prophetic encounters, as dishonest eschatological allegories, and as a lie invented by early Christian authors, with numerous interpretations. It has been proposed, for instance, that Jesus was never crucified, that there was an empty tomb because the body of Christ was stolen, or that Jesus Christ was never in the grave.