Ancient and modern scholars have written many thousands of pages on resurrection in the New Testament. Fewer have examined the theme in both pagan and Jewish texts, however, and the topic remains inherently fascinating. John Granger Cook argues for two primary hypotheses: First, there is no fundamental difference between Paul's conception of the resurrection body and that of the Gospels; and second, the resurrection and translation stories of Greco-Roman antiquity probably help explain the willingness of Mediterranean people to gradually accept the Gospel of a crucified and risen savior. The use of ?????? (egeir?, wake/rise) and ???????? (anist?mi, rise) and the bodily nature of resurrection in ancient Judaism and paganism warrant the first hypothesis. The second hypothesis is more speculative, but the Christian apologists' comparisons of pagan narratives with those of the New Testament renders it feasible.
Born 1955; 1976 BA, Davidson College; 1979 M.Div., Union Theological Seminary (VA); 1985 PhD, Emory University; currently Professor of Religion at LaGrange College.
Ancient and modern scholars have written many thousands of pages on resurrection in the New Testament. Fewer have examined the theme in both pagan and Jewish texts, however, and the topic remains inherently fascinating. John Granger Cook argues for two primary hypotheses: First, there is no fundamental difference between Paul's conception of the resurrection body and that of the Gospels; and second, the resurrection and translation stories of Greco-Roman antiquity probably help explain the willingness of Mediterranean people to gradually accept the Gospel of a crucified and risen savior. The use of ?????? (egeir?, wake/rise) and ???????? (anist?mi, rise) and the bodily nature of resurrection in ancient Judaism and paganism warrant the first hypothesis. The second hypothesis is more speculative, but the Christian apologists' comparisons of pagan narratives with those of the New Testament renders it feasible.
