57 Chilton, “Exorcism,” p. 263; Borg, Jesus, pp. 66–67, 70–71.
58 Crossan and Borg are not the only members of the Jesus Seminar who have published important works on the resurrection of Jesus. For two such older examples that may be interpreted as providing even more groundsfor the conclusions we have reached here, see James M. Robinson, “Jesus from Easter to Valentinus (or to the Apostles’ Creed),” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 101; No. 1 (1982), pp. 5–37; John Kloppenborg, “An Analysis of the Pre-Pauline Formula 1 Cor 15:3b–5 in Light of Some Recent Literature,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, vol. 40 (1978), pp. 351–367.
Although the Jesus Seminar has received much attention from its treatment of the historical Jesus, their conclusions must be apportioned to the data. As a result, their basic rejection of the supernatural events in Jesus’ life is unwarranted.^59
59 Several detailed critiques of the Jesus Seminar and related views have appeared in recent years. The interested reader might consult the following: Gregory A. Boyd, Cynic Sage or Son of God? Recovering the Real Jesus in an Age of Revisionist Replies(Wheaton: Victor, 1995); Wilkins and Moreland, eds., Jesus Under Fire; Ben Witherington III, The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1995); N.T. Wright, Who was Jesus?(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992).^4 Habermas, Gary R. ; Habermas, Gary R.: The Historical Jesus : Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Joplin, Mo. : College Press Pub. Co., 1996, S. 120
Page 1234567891011121314151617181920
