Abstract
Chilton observes that the “empty tomb” has become a standard metonym for Jesus’ resurrection. That is a relatively recent development, accomplished by the influence on scholars of the fundamentalist and evangelical claim that Jesus was raised “in the same body” in which he died. The earliest known testimony regarding the resurrection, St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, is adamant Jesus’ body was different in resurrection from what it was before, spiritual rather than composed of flesh. Further, the usual methods of exegesis show that the tomb of Jesus, judged by the statements of the texts involved and their developing tendencies, is better described as “emptying” as time went on than as “empty” from the outset. More importantly, reference to the tomb conveyed differing emphases among tradents, and distinctive outlooks on the resurrection. Awareness of the exegetical trajectory of the relevant texts and their varying perspectives leads to the conclusion the “empty tomb” needs to be replaced as the point of departure in discussion. Otherwise, alleged textual analysis is really only an example of apologetics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
