Pay in installments of $10.75 with
,
and
Shipping Estimate
USA
- USA
- CAN
- USA
- CAN
Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 26 - Jul 31
Promo Codes Available:
For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15
Description
txt hueningkai ad pj 2026TXT HUENINGKAI Senil Vision #HAPPYHUENINGKAIDAY_MOAJP_2026 MOAJP TXT Senil Vision YouTube MOAJP TXT YouTube X Instagram MOAJP TXT Senil TOMORROW MOAJP YouTube JAPANMOA JP MOATOMORROW X TOGETHER Saengil VisionMOA MOA TXT JAPANHUENINGKAI Unica Vision 30 30 * [] Unica Vision Image [] * 2026611 2026724 2026 8 14 * X @moajpad 220,000 XTwitter MOAJP TXT MOAJP MOAJP TXT Senil Advertising Planning X 1,100 MOAJPYouTube * * MOAJP X MOAJPX * JCB * 7 Kurafan X
项目标签
请通过 TXT HUENINGKAI Senil Vision 广告广播项目帮助宣传该项目。🙌🏻
项目特定主题标签
#HAPPYHUENINGKAIDAY_MOAJP_2026
支持该项目的好处
●MOAJP 过去 TXT 成员的 Senil Vision YouTube视频您还可以参与庆祝图片！
关于本项目的策划者
很高兴认识你！另外，一如既往地感谢您！这是MOAJP TXT Senil 广告项目。
我们已经庆祝了TOMORROW全体成员的庆祝活动
我们之所以能坚持这么久，多亏了大家一直以来的参与。
太感谢了！如果这是您第一次，您可以在 MOAJP 的 YouTube 页面上观看过去的项目。请看一下♪
爱豆代理JAPANMOA JP 的专题文章
关于策划的过程和想法
通过会员庆典，让MOA会员们一起欢乐，并通过播放街景广告，让更多新人认识TOMORROW X TOGETHER！
我们正在继续我们的项目，希望我们能够成为这些机会之一。
到目前为止，已经有一些人在看到我们所计划的Saengil Vision后告诉我们，他们已经成为了MOA。就在那一刻，我意识到继续我的活动是多么高兴。
我希望更多的 MOA 加入我们，以便未来继续与 TXT 合作。
项目概况
这个项目是爱豆代理JAPAN通过这个项目，我们将以众筹的形式向所有支持这个项目的人收集捐款，我们会发布广告来庆祝HUENINGKAI的生日。
主要应援广告
东京新宿 Unica Vision 30 秒视频
大阪道堀站 30秒视频
我们先从上述两个目标开始。
如果你能尽早实现第一个目标
目前，我们计划按照名古屋、福冈、北海道的顺序增加街景广播数量！
*每个愿景的转播时段可以在粉丝实现后确定。因此，请注意，如果目标日期延迟或未实现，广播愿景以及是否实施可能会发生变化。
我们需要您的帮助来完成我们的计划！
我们也期待您这次的合作！
[新宿] Unica Vision Image
[大阪] 道堀站
*由于媒体公司与其他广告的安排，每个愿景的播出时间表可能要到前一天早上才能确定。感谢您的理解。
时间表
| 日期 | 内容 |
|---|---|
| 2026年6月11日 - 2026年7月24日 | 支持资金申请期限 |
| 2026 年 8 月 14 日 | ★预定广告实施日期★ |
*请注意，该时间可能会根据项目的进展情况而有所不同。
检查项目进度
关注策划者X账号，查看项目进度👇
@moajpad
关于支援金
目标金额
220,000日元（不含税）
如果支持金额超过目标金额，则追加应援广告我们将执行！
我们将告知您本项目页面、X（Twitter）等将添加的广告内容。
扶持资金如何使用
所筹集的资金将用于以下目的：
●应援广告转播费用
●克拉凡付款费用
剩余资金如何使用
主办方不会收到哪怕一日元的捐款，但全部将用于播放《休宁凯君》的费用。如果在添加广播地点等后仍有剩余部分无法使用，则将结转到延俊君的下一次广播中。
MOAJP 并不是为一名成员计划一个项目，而是为所有 TXT 成员计划一个广播，因此我们感谢您对结转的理解。
活动结束后，MOAJP将通过电子邮件通知您收支报告，因此请您在投资时务必正确输入您的电子邮件地址。
如果扶持资金未达到目标金额
如果该项目没有达到目标数量，播出地点的数量将会减少。
在此情况下，我们将在本项目页面和 MOAJP TXT Senil Advertising Planning 的 X 上提前通知您。
请注意，广告内容可能会发生变化。
关于退货
每口1,100日元起，每人想吃多少就吃多少！
从一开始就有你们的支持，
稍后会上传至MOAJP的YouTube视频您可以申请发布祝贺评论图片！
★有关如何申请的信息将在俱乐部球迷活动结束后发送到您的电子邮件地址。
*您的姓名不会单独出现在广告中，因此无需在特别说明字段中输入您的姓名。请将字段留空。
（请注意，由于网站设置的原因，您将被要求在特殊注释字段中输入您的姓名。）
*我们也计划在 MOAJP 的 X 帐户上发布图像。也请关注MOAJP的X账号。
*主办方将向您发送有关如何申请的说明。
关于收支报告数据
●收入和支出报告将由规划者通过电子邮件发送。
●其他详情请联系策划师。
注意事项
●与主办方签订保密协议后，我们将提供支持者信息，以便提供退回物品和收支报告数据。 （不包括电话号码和地址）感谢您的理解。
●广告中列出的姓名不予退货。请注意，即使您没有在广告中写下您的姓名，系统也会在购买时显示一个字段供您输入。
●虽然以多种语言显示，但我们使用自动翻译，因此外语的表达可能会有所不同。请注意“日语”是正确的句子。
●补助金额将征收消费税。付款时将添加税费。请注意，规划者可用于其项目的金额是收取的不含税金额。
● 一旦您支持了我们，我们就无法取消或退款您的支持。
付款方式
扶持资金可通过以下方式支付：
●信用卡（维萨卡、万事达卡、JCB、美国运通卡）
●贝宝
●银行转账
*如果您选择银行转账，请在付款注册后 7 天内、支持结束日期之前进行转账。如果无法确认接送，预订将自动取消。
关于联系方式
●有关 Kurafan 的更多信息或有关退货的查询，请联系组织者的 X 帐户@moajpad。
●有关付款方式的查询，请联系爱豆代理JAPAN请。 [email protected]
常见问题
可以取消/退款吗？
对于给您带来的不便，我们深表歉意，但一旦收到您的支持，就无法取消。请您仔细考虑并支持我们。如果由于主办方或代理机构方面的问题导致该项目无法正确实施，则不适用。
如果我对项目有疑问，我应该联系谁？
请联系以上联系方式。
我可以支持多个帐户吗？另外，这样的话，退回的商品可以合并吗？
可以支持多个单位，但退货不能合并（例如，10,000 日元退货需 5,000 日元 x 2 个单位）。每笔金额都将被退回。
Shipping Notes
- Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
- Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
- Delivery to the USA:
- Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
- If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
- We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
- Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
- To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
- Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
4.1 ★★★★★
Based on 12 reviews
Sort
Product Reviews
★★★★★ 5
Outstanding, compelling, and thorough work on the historicity or non-historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus
Format: Paperback
I had been looking forward to reading this book since the first time I heard about it. I was sitting in Dr. Gary Habermas' class on miracles and he told us about Mike Licona, who was currently working on his dissertation on the Resurrection. Although it was published in 2010, I finally had the opportunity to read it over the past few months.
At over 700 pages, including an extensive bibliography and over 2,000 footnotes, this book is not a light read by any stretch of the imagination. As the subtitle states, this is a book dealing with historiography. Readers looking for a deep theological treatment on the Resurrection of Christ may want to look elsewhere since Licona's focus here is not theology, but history (although there is still a good deal of theology). Using methodological principles agreed upon by a vast number of historians from a variety of religious and philosophical backgrounds, he sets out to determine whether or not the historian "is warranted in regarding Jesus' resurrection as an event that occurred in the past" (p. 610).
Surprisingly, the book consists of only five chapters and one appendix, so each chapter averages more than 100 pages in length. Also, the second half of the book contains a significant amount of Greek, giving me a good opportunity to brush up on that. If you can't read Greek, don't worry, Dr. Licona provides an English translation throughout.
The first section deals with a significant number of preliminary considerations. There is an excellent critique of the skeptical postmodern view of history and a complete dismantling of the beliefs of Jesus "mythers" (those who claim Jesus never existed). There's also a good discussion on horizons (the presuppositions and biases we all have). While total neutrality may not be possible, Licona gives several principles historians should implement to help them transcend their horizon. Finally, he provides an honest discussion of his own biases so that readers are well aware of where he is coming from.
The second chapter focuses on whether or not miracles fall within the purview of the historian. Licona addresses the popular objections of David Hume and Bart Ehrman, as well as McCullagh, Meier, Wedderburn, and Dunn. Many skeptics simply have an a priori objection to miracles, so they aren't willing to even consider the possibility that historical evidence for a miracle may exist. There's an interesting discussion on the burden of proof as it relates to the historicity of miracle claims. I thought the following quote summarized the nature of evidence when it comes to miracle claims:
"It is the responsibility of the historian to consider what the evidence would look like if she were not wearing her metaphysical bias like a pair of sunglasses that shade the world. It is not the responsibility of the evidence to shine so brightly that they render such glasses ineffectual." (p. 196)
With all the preliminary matters out of the way, Dr. Licona gets down to the business of doing history. Chapter three examines the historical sources pertaining to Christ's Resurrection. Many Christians may object to the methodology employed in this chapter since he does not automatically accept every biblical passage on the subject as evidence, but bear in mind that Licona is doing his best to transcend his own Christian horizon to be as neutral as possible. He discusses over two dozen early sources and rates them as "unlikely, possible-minus, possible, possible-plus, highly probable, indeterminate [or] not useful" (p. 201).
The fourth chapter uncovers the historical bedrock pertaining to the fate of Jesus. This approach follows on the heels of the exhaustive work of Dr. Habermas who, since 1975, has kept track of over 3,400 academic works from scholars of various stripes on the Resurrection in English, German, and French. From this research, Dr. Habermas has shown that there are 12 facts accepted by the vast majority of scholars. He has reduced this to six best attested details in what he calls the "minimal facts" approach. Each of these facts are discussed, but Dr. Licona narrows this down to three facts that nearly all scholars agree upon: 1) Jesus died by crucifixion, 2) the disciples had experiences that led them to believe and proclaim that Jesus had risen from the dead, and 3) Paul converted to Christianity after experiencing what he believed to be a post-Resurrection appearance of Jesus. There's also a lengthy discussion on what "resurrection" meant to Jewish and Christian audiences in the first century.
The information contained in this chapter is often completely ignored by agnostics, atheists, Muslims, and others who do not want to even consider the Resurrection as a possibility. I have had many discussions with skeptics who display naivete when they claim that there is no evidence to support the claim that Jesus rose from the dead. It's one thing to disbelieve in the event, but it's an entirely different thing to completely ignore or to willingly remain ignorant of the historical bedrock pertaining to the fate of Jesus.
The fifth and final chapter of the book examines six different hypotheses that attempt to explain what happened to Jesus after being crucified. Along with the traditional Christian understanding of the Resurrection, the views promoted by Vermes, Goulder, Ludemann, Crossen, and Craffert are weighed in terms of their explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility, the amount of ad hoc elements, and illumination for solving problems associated with the subject. An appendix also examines Dale Allison's work on the Resurrection according to the same criteria. The traditional Resurrection hypothesis is the only view that fulfills all five criteria, and it outdistances the other views by a wide margin. Critics can claim that Licona merely concluded what he hoped to prove, but they must be able to point out flaws in his methodology, since his conclusion most certainly follows from the data when historiographical principles are applied.
My biggest concern with the book is found in the fifth chapter. While discussing the strange events described in Matthew 27:51-53, Licona suggested that the passage was not describing historical events but employing apocalyptic language to show that a significant person had died. Such descriptions were not uncommon in the ancient world when describing the death of important people. This comment has set off a wave of criticism from conservative Christian scholars like Norman Geisler and Al Mohler. I disagree with Licona's statement and share some of the same concerns as Geisler and Mohler. But when I consider the context and methodology being used in the book, I don't find it to be quite as grievous an error as some have claimed.
Skeptics will undoubtedly continue to dismiss the Resurrection of Christ, but they must deal with the research in this book or they simply are not interacting with the latest scholarship.
Dr. Licona's work raises the bar when it comes to the most important subject we could ever study: the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. I highly recommend it for anyone interested in this subject who is up to the task of reading an academic work. I have studied the subject for years, but I still learned a lot and will treasure this book as an extremely valuable resource.
Even though I disagree with his take on Matt. 27:51-53, I still need to give the book five stars since I don't need to agree with the author on every point for me to give a positive review and recognize the book's worth.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on December 30, 2012
★★★★★ 5
Brilliant, rigorous, balanced, and approachable
Format: Paperback
"The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach," by Michael R. Licona is an outstanding, thorough yet highly approachable assessment of the evidence, sources, and explanatory hypotheses for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the subtitle suggests, it borrows significant methodological rigor and best practices from the field of historical analysis and applies them to biblical scholarship.
Licona begins his assessment with a meticulous discussion of his historical analysis methodology. Included in this section is his definition of five criteria he uses to assess a set of explanatory hypotheses. He then uses those assessments to weigh the hypotheses based on nine levels of certainty ranging from “certainly not historical” to “certainly historical.” The hypothesis representing the best explanation for the resurrection of Christ is the one rated highest in historical certainty based on the five criteria.
At the outset of the book, Licona also includes a robust discussion of historical analysis influences and issues because evaluating them openly is essential to his methodical approach and because they aren’t often discussed in biblical studies. It is in this section that he does something quite unique and insightful; Licona includes a full discussion of knowledge, experiences, worldviews, preferences and other influences, which he calls “horizons,” that tend to bias the assessment of history. Furthermore, he defines a set of six methods that he uses throughout the book to avoid his own biases as he strives to present outcomes based on methodical neutrality. It’s quite brilliant. Licona even includes a confession of his own “horizons” - his potential influences.
With all this foundation in place, Licona proceeds to identify all sources of evidence for the resurrection of Christ and rates each according to its likelihood of providing reliable independent testimony. Included in this assessment are sources from the Bible, early Christian writers, non-biblical Christian literature and early non-Christian writers. He then uses the most reliable sources as the basis for attesting to the reliability for all the available evidence for the resurrection. This produces three pieces of evidence that he calls “historical bedrock” because they are well attested within multiple reliable sources and are validated by a broad range of scholars.
In the final section of the book, Licona evaluates major assertions against the resurrection from skeptics and compares the results against a parallel evaluation of the resurrection hypothesis. Specifically, he uses his criteria and rating system to assess how well hypotheses from a range of skeptical scholars, like Gerd Ludemann and John Dominic Crossan, are able to explain the historical bedrock evidence. At the end of this extensive analysis, the biblical resurrection hypothesis is by far the most credible explanation for historical bedrock evidence associated with the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
As noted above, Michael Licona’s book is an excellent assessment of the evidence, sources and competing hypotheses associated with the resurrection of Christ. The author uniquely applies the meticulousness of best practice historical analysis methodology to arguably the most important of all biblical questions. Using rigorous criteria and rating scales, Licona delivers a fair and balanced evaluation that achieves the methodical neutrality he was striving for while minimizing, as best as possible, influences from his “horizons.” It’s also worth noting that Licona assesses a broad range of possible sources, including those classified as gnostic and pseudepigraphal, and includes viewpoints from a broad range of scholars, supportive and skeptical alike. Furthermore, the author includes a very robust set of footnotes on the various topics discussed within the book. These footnotes are helpful for both scholars and non-scholars looking for a deeper understanding or pointers for additional exploration plus they include additional explanatory comments that complement Licona’s focus on delivering a fair and balanced assessment.
The one issue I found while reading the book was its treatment of the empty tomb evidence. I was disappointed the author’s discussion was brief since I was looking forward to a robust evaluation. However, in his defense, Licona was looking for historical bedrock evidence that could be used to assess the various resurrection hypotheses. A large number of scholars are skeptical of the empty tomb so it doesn’t belong in his historical bedrock category. Beside this one brief moment of disappointment, I was greatly pleased with the totality of Licona’s analysis and outcomes.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on April 25, 2021
★★★★★ 5
Detailed examination
Format: Paperback
The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach is thus far my favorite textbook to refer to when exploring the Jesus’ resurrection. If you are looking for a timeless, structured, methodical, and systematic approach to the resurrection of Jesus, then this is the book for you. Although the massiveness of the volume can be intimidating, Licona’s scholarly work is well-written and easily followed, making it suitable for both scholars and layman. Rather than jump straight into the historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection, as others do, Licona begins by discussing the nature of history, truth, bias, burden of proof, and method. In so doing Licona makes clear what his methodology is, and that is, to carefully establish a core of facts (called the historical bedrock) and evaluate which hypothesis best meets those facts according to the standard historical criteria (e.g., explanatory scope and power), which can also be referred to as a minimal facts approach. After these more metaphysical topics, Licona provides details all (or nearly all) relevant ancient texts surrounding the resurrection. And after a lengthy discussion on the historical bedrock, Licona weighs six hypotheses (five of which being naturalistic hypotheses), concluding that the resurrection hypothesis is the only one that meets all of the historical criteria.
One of the many strengths of his book is that it attempts to look at the historical research for the resurrection of Jesus from an unbiased perspective. His attempt is to limit what he refers to as his “horizon”—his lens of prior beliefs and experiences that make him biased to the evidence. Licona cites and deals with a vast number of nonbiblical sources and skeptical scholars. I would gladly say that Licona does so with modesty and integrity. For skeptics, they should be easily able to interact with this text with gratitude and enthusiasm. For some Christians, though, Licona can seem a bit too unbiased. If you are looking for an examination of the resurrection of Jesus that does not address challenges and tough questions honestly, then this probably isn’t the book for you.
There are occasional instances where some may find Licona’s conclusions to seem too critical. For instance in his assigned historical value to the canonical Gospels and in his historical bedrock. (Spoiler) Licona only includes three facts in his historical bedrock, omitting the historical fact of the empty tomb (although he does consider it a second-order fact). The reason for both are based on the historical method and standard criteria. While some may disagree with his conclusions, there is no doubt in Licona’s consistency.
The only other downside to the textbook is that it does not have the wherewithal to go into deep discussion on certain topics, like the historical reliability for the empty tomb. Doing a deep dive into individual topics like such would result in a much larger volume. So, if you are looking for an exhaustive exploration into a specific topic, this may not be the right text for you. That is not to discredit the comprehensiveness that Licona does provide! Despite its inexhaustiveness, Licona does give a number of sources one could use for a deeper search into a specific topic.
Overall, if you are a Christian who wants to research the skeptical challenges facing the resurrection and you want to know how to construct a minimal facts approach to the resurrection of Jesus, or if you are a skeptic who desires to know more about the subject and interact with the top Christian historians, then this is the book for you.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 29, 2023
★★★★★ 5
Worth reading. Worth keeping. Conservative and narrow choice of 3 irrefutable facts of resurrection
Format: Paperback
Michael Licona was motivated to write this exhaustive book on the resurrection to fill a gap he perceived in Biblical scholarship—that Biblical scholars typically come from a theological background not a historical one, and historians often aren’t interested in religious topics but rather the history of an era. He wondered what would happen if someone studied the resurrection of Jesus using the same approach historical scholars do to discern the plausibility of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, which is the falsifiable core of Christianity.
The book contains only five chapters but they are exhaustive in their coverage of each topic. His first chapter deals with the burden of proof laid on historians and the sleuthing they do to determine accuracy. A bedrock of historical research is that all researchers are tainted by their horizons, ie, presuppositions and/or biases. No one is devoid of them, maybe especially in the arena of studying the likelihood of the resurrection of Jesus. Licona is sensitively aware of his own bias—that of a Christian whose faith hangs on the resurrection—and so he took a very conservative, narrow approach to his study in order to minimize his own bias. Chapter 2 is titled “The Historian and Miracles.” It puts his discussion of horizon to the test with a topic most secular historians don’t believe—that miracles can and do exist. The rubber meets the road in Chapter 3 where he examines every first- and second-century document as to its content and believability regarding evidence and eyewitness accounts of the resurrection of Jesus. Chapter 4 is also exhaustive in using all these strong sources to put together a bedrock of historical facts. What can no one deny about the resurrection of Jesus? With his extremely conservative focus, he only has three foundational bedrock facts that virtually all Biblical scholars—even the skeptical ones—attest to. These are: 1. That Jesus died by crucifixion, 2. That the disciples believed they had experiences with the resurrected Jesus after his death, proclaimed it, and many were martyred for it, 3. That the apostle Paul converted from persecutor to proclaimer after Jesus appeared to him. Licona does not include other commonly used evidences like the conversion of Jesus’s brother James or the empty tomb because these are not attested to by >90% of Biblical scholars. In chapter 5 he puts his accumulative scholarship to the test by comparing the likelihood that the resurrection actually happened versus theories disputing it. He gives the best arguments for each in turn and then summarizes the strength of each theory in a table.
The book is worth owning since it is exhaustively researched and for each assertion Licona makes, he provides copious evidences for and against his hypotheses—historiography, miracles the resurrection, the 3 bedrock facts, and his conclusions. I’ve read every word of this book for a Master-level class on the resurrection and it can get tedious because of the detail, however, at the end of every reading session I was invariably glad I’d read it. I always learned something new and was impressed with Licona’s scholarship and attempt to be as unbiased as he could. I think he was too sensitive toward his own horizons in some cases.
Anyone who wants to decide for her- or himself whether the resurrection really happened, or anyone who wants to make a strong case for the resurrection with a skeptic, I would highly recommend getting this book and keeping it to refer to over and over again. The first chapter on horizon is applicable to many other areas of life; it alone is worth the price of the book (but definitely don’t ignore the rest!) For a companion tome to flesh out evidences for the resurrection being real, an equally scholarly but different thrust, check out N. T. Wright’s equally exhaustive book but viewed from a different angle: "The Resurrection of the Son of God".
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 19, 2019
★★★★★ 4
A Rational Approach To Examine Competing Explanations
Format: Paperback
This is the first book I have read on an investigation into the resurrection event of Jesus. I found Licona’s approach clear and easy to follow. His writing style is very structured which I found to be valuable since he this book is thorough and covers a lot of material. Each chapter Licona begins with a brief outline of what he will cover and then he summarizes his main points at the end as well. Structuring the book this way was very helpful in following Licona’s reasoning and method from beginning to end.
Licona begins by laying out his approach to historical inquiry. As someone who is not a historian and unfamiliar with the specifics of how historians approach their work, I found this section very useful in setting the stage for Licona’s investigation. For example, Licona has a section on “horizons,” which he defines as our “preunderstanding.” Essentially, horizons are our own perspectives based on our personal experiences and various influences such as culture, race, political, and religious experiences, that shape how we form our judgments and what we might choose to be an acceptable claim about reality. For example, whether miracles are possible. The goal is to mitigate horizons as much as possible and look at what the evidence has to say on its own.
Since the goal of the book is to arrive at a conclusion pertaining to whether Jesus rose from the dead it is important to define what is meant by “best explanation” when we weigh competing hypotheses. Licona devotes a section to set criteria for a best explanation candidate. He establishes five criteria; explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility, less ad hoc, and illumination. Licona utilizes this criterion in the final chapter to weigh competing hypotheses.
Furthermore, the critical insight that Licona focuses on is what he refers to as the “historical bedrock.” According to Licona, the historical bedrock includes three facts that are virtually undisputed by historians. Licona states his two criteria for the facts as strongly evidenced and those which contemporary scholars unanimously regard as historical facts. He navigates through various historical details surrounding the resurrection of Jesus and narrows down to three bedrock facts; Jesus died by crucifixion, shortly after Jesus’ death his disciples had experiences that led them to believe and proclaim Jesus was resurrected and appeared to them, and Paul’s conversion after experiencing a postresurrection appearance of Jesus within a few years after the crucifixion. Licona claims that the vast majority of scholars grant these facts as historical.
With the bedrock laid, now one can weigh competing hypotheses against the bedrock itself to determine which explanation the best accounts for all three facts. As one weighs any available hypotheses against the bedrock facts, the idea is that one can minimize biases and infer the best explanation as to what happened to Jesus in the first century. Ultimately, Licona concludes that the best explanation is the resurrection of Jesus as claimed by Christianity. His conclusion comes after a thorough examination of six common explanations (including the resurrection hypothesis) and showing how each fails to explain at least one of the three facts except for the resurrection hypothesis. He spends a good deal of time interacting with scholarly work on different explanations. Licona concludes that the resurrection hypothesis best accounts for the three bedrock facts as well as fulfills all five criteria for a best explanation.
Overall, I thought Licona’s method is thorough and rigorous, ultimately showing that the resurrection hypothesis cannot simply be dismissed. I also found Licona to be very candid. At the end of the book he admits that he was surprised at the “very certain” level which he awards the resurrection hypothesis after applying his method. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in learning what can be determined about the fate of Jesus from a historical approach.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 17, 2019