The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach

This monograph represents a significant methodological intervention in historical Jesus studies, specifically addressing the resurrection as a historical question through rigorous historiographical analysis. Licona develops what he terms a "historical bedrock" approach, identifying facts about Jesus' fate that enjoy virtually unanimous scholarly support across ideological divides, then examining which explanatory hypothesis best accounts for this data.

The work's distinctive contribution lies in its extensive preliminary groundwork on historical method. Licona devotes substantial attention to horizons and bias in historical investigation, drawing on hermeneutical theory and philosophy of history to establish criteria for adjudicating between competing historical explanations. He examines how worldview commitments influence historical conclusions while maintaining that responsible historical inquiry remains possible despite these limitations.

Central to Licona's argument is his identification of three minimal facts that form the "historical bedrock": Jesus' death by crucifixion, the sincere belief of the disciples that Jesus appeared to them after his death, and the conversion of Paul based on what he believed was a resurrection appearance. After surveying contemporary scholarship, he adds two additional well-attested facts: the empty tomb and the conversion of James. Licona then evaluates six competing hypotheses for explaining this data, including hallucination theories, conspiracy theories, and apparent death theories.

The work engages extensively with skeptical scholars, particularly addressing arguments from Crossan, Lüdemann, and Goulder. Licona applies standard historiographical criteria including explanatory scope, explanatory power, plausibility, ad hoc content, and illumination. He argues that the resurrection hypothesis, while requiring a supernatural worldview, provides superior explanatory power compared to naturalistic alternatives when judged by these criteria.

The monograph's significance extends beyond resurrection studies to broader questions about divine action in history. By treating the resurrection as a historical rather than purely theological question, Licona challenges both fideistic approaches that remove religious claims from historical scrutiny and naturalistic methodologies that exclude supernatural explanations a priori. His careful attention to method offers a model for how historians might approach religious phenomena while maintaining scholarly rigor.

The work has generated substantial discussion about the relationship between worldview commitments and historical investigation, the criteria for assessing miracle claims, and the proper boundaries of historical inquiry when examining religious events.