Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Historical and Theological Reflections by Matthew Levering

Abstract

Reviewed by: Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Historical and Theological Reflections by Matthew Levering Glenn B. Siniscalchi matthew levering, Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Historical and Theological Reflections (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019). Pp. ix + 255. $99. Today scholarly publications on the credibility of the resurrection of Jesus are not difficult to find. Many NT historians appeal to three reported facts as evidence for the resurrection: (1) the series of postmortem appearances of Jesus to friend and foe alike, (2) the discovery of the open and empty tomb by a group of his women followers, and (3) the origin of the disciples' faith in the resurrection despite having predispositions to the contrary. Some critics add to or nuance the evidence, but in recent years a consensus has emerged in support of the facts. The hesitancy in affirming Jesus's resurrection as an event of history has more to do with philosophical issues related to defending the historicity of miracles rather than establishing what should count as evidence. One of the best features of Matthew Levering's new book is that he makes several genuine contributions to a field that seems to have been nearly exhausted. For example, after surveying the most recent arguments and positions among prominent NT scholars who write on the subject, he draws from Thomas Aquinas's interpretation of selected OT passages that, "when viewed as an assemblage, instruct us profoundly about the context in which Jesus' resurrection is credible" (p. 13). The OT witnesses go beyond the presupposition of God's existence for ensuring the possibility of miracles (or even the probability of miracles). Thus, L. summarizes other presuppositions for taking the resurrection seriously: "The needed foundations for believing in Christ's Resurrection are here. We must believe that God is creator; that God loves humans in to existence; that God wishes to draw near to his fallen human creatures; that God wills to establish a 'ladder' between his dwelling and ours; that God will restore his fallen creatures through the sacrifice of his beloved son" (p. 105). Another major contribution focuses on the strangeness of the resurrection as evidence. Undoubtedly, there is a sense in which this argument has been utilized in resurrection studies (it is most notably found in N. T. Wright's monumental The Resurrection of the Son of God [Christian Origins and the Question of God 3; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003]), but L. [End Page 323] does not so much focus on the unicity of the resurrection against the Jewish matrix from which Easter faith emerged as appeal to the peculiarity of the NT writers' depiction of the risen body. A spiritual view of the afterlife would have been much easier to promote in dialogue with potential converts in the Greco-Roman world, but the early Christians never compromised about the risen body in their preaching. Though some contemporary exegetes may highlight the spiritual view in order to make the afterlife credible in the modern world, L. reminds us that the ancient world had the same trouble with accepting the bodily resurrection. Yet the early Christians proclaimed that Jesus was raised from the dead, not assumed or immortalized. Third, L.'s chapter on faith, reason, and history outlines the Catholic perspectives of Joseph Fenton, Bernard Lonergan, and Pierre Rousselot. Although L. recognizes the indispensable role of reason in matters of defending the faith, he does not overstate the case for reason in the next chapter, which shows the need for contemplative engagement and love to pinpoint an answer to the truth concerning the risen Jesus. As a case in point, L. shows how Hans Urs von Balthasar's apologetics of love (see his Love Alone Is Credible [trans. D. C. Schindler; San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004]) is congruent with historical approaches: "While I think von Balthasar's position is too quick to dismiss the contemplative work of reason unaided by faith, the strengths of his position should be evident. Lacking appreciation for divine self-surrendering love, we are unlikely to perceive the truth of Christ" (p. 182). Finally, given the assumption that Jesus made himself seen to the disciples, skeptics, individuals, and even large groups of people under radically different circumstances...