Conclusion to “The Resurrection, A Critical Inquiry” a Jewish Critique of the Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus

The pertinent question that must be asked relates to the evidence for Jesus’s death and claimed physical, bodily resurrection:  is the evidence overwhelmingly conclusive to any honestly objective seeker of the truth?  This book reveals certainly that this is not the case.

In the preface to this investigation, the late evangelical fundamentalist William Bright (1999, xii), was quoted:

During my fifty-five years of sharing the good news of the Savior with the academic world, I have met very few individuals who have honestly considered the evidence and yet deny that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of men.  To me, the evidence confirming the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is overwhelmingly conclusive to any honest, objective seeker after truth.  However, not all—not even the majority—of those to whom I have spoken have accepted Him as their Savior and Lord.  This is not because they were unable to believe—they were simply unwilling to believe.

In response to Mr. Bright’s significant words, the reason that this text rejects Jesus’ physical, bodily resurrection is because there is no unequivocal evidence that this historical event occurred.

A second volume to this text will be published.  This second volume will directly respond to many of the foremost arguments raised by Christian apologists in support of Jesus’ physical , bodily resurrection.  In particular, the second volume will review, analyze, and refute the arguments presented by such leading writers as William Lane Craig, Norman L. Geisler, Gary Habermas, Michael Licona, Gerald O’Collins, and N. T. Wright.

Finally, I would like to thank those who took the time to read this text.  …Your time is valuable, respected, and appreciated.

Again, I thank you.

Michael J. Alter, Jewish educator and author

 

Gary:  Yes, the ol’ “You don’t believe because you don’t want to believe” argument, a favorite of conservative Christian apologists.  No, dear conservative Christians, Jews and other skeptics don’t believe in the resurrection of Jesus because the evidence for this alleged event is AWFUL!   The evidence is woefully insufficient.  Anyone interested in reading a comprehensive Jewish review of the alleged resurrection of Jesus should buy and read Mr. Alter’s book!  It is well-written and fascinating.

Believe in the Resurrection if you wish, my Christian friends, but be honest and admit that you believe this supernatural tale—not because of good historical evidence—but because of the comfort and security it gives you!

 

 

End of post.

3 thoughts on “Conclusion to “The Resurrection, A Critical Inquiry” a Jewish Critique of the Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus

  1. Gary,

    As I’ve mentioned before during this series, I greatly appreciate the effort you’ve put in to share Alter’s outstanding work! I have very much enjoyed your entire series on this particularly because it was from the critically important Jewish perspective—the entire background, education, and ultimately execution of Yeshua bar Yosef’s parts and contributions during very tumultuous times inside the oppressive Roman Empire. Most importantly within the authentic full context of Second Temple Sectarian (Homeland) Judaism/Messianism.

    Please excuse me repeating what I’ve often commented during this series. But Second Temple Sectarian Judaism/Messianism—properly & authentically understood by/from ancient Jewish Rabbinical sources reaching back well before the Common Era—is a broad topic grossly misunderstood and often distorted or ignored for current Greek Apotheosis, or rather modern Christology, a religion/cult completely incompatible with pure proper Judaism/Messianism. And yet modern Greek Christologist apologists want to demarcate themselves from pure Judaism/Messianism while at the same time claim it as their own heritage of a “New Covenant.” 😆 This OF COURSE is completely bogus and merely a Roman hijacking of Second Temple Judaism/Messianism for their own sociopolitical agenda in 1st thru 4th century CE Palestine and Rome.

    But honestly, how many modern Christians go to the trouble to even question their own blind faith’s earliest roots, or seeds, or even the contextual soil their Cult was invented within? Lol

    Like

      1. Couldn’t agree more Gary, especially if they are going to continue to (immorally) ignorantly claim Judaism as their heritage to a bogus “New Covenant” without knowing exhaustive details about its original soil, seeds, and roots. And contrary to what DeadAtheist/Ftbond (or whatever alias he keeps changing into) babbles on and on about here the bottom-line is that he and 98% or more modern Xian apologists do NOT know Syriac-Aramaic or Mishnaic Hebrew, two CRITICAL languages that Yeshua spoke fluently to Israelites in Galilee and Judea while advocating his reforms—something MANY Hebrews/Sectarians were doing everywhere around 1st-century CE Jerusalem and throughout Judea.

        But then again, how many modern Xians care anything about this authentic contextual history of their own religious cult? 🙄😄

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s