Volles Grab, leerer Glaube? Zum Streit um die Auferweckung des Gekreuzigten
Instead of causally explaining the empty tomb, the interpretative function of the resurrection message lies in the attempt to bridge the gap between the fact that Jesus died on the cross and the appearances of the risen Christ by referring to God's activity. The empty tomb is not essential to t...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Alemán |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Gargar...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publicado: |
Mohr Siebeck
1998
|
| En: |
Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche
Año: 1998, Volumen: 95, Número: 3, Páginas: 379-409 |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Sumario: | Instead of causally explaining the empty tomb, the interpretative function of the resurrection message lies in the attempt to bridge the gap between the fact that Jesus died on the cross and the appearances of the risen Christ by referring to God's activity. The empty tomb is not essential to the kernel of Christian faith. In strict logic, empty tomb and resurrection do not necessarily entail each other: Jesus could have risen and the corpse be in the tomb; Jesus could not have risen and the tomb be empty. The fact that the tomb was not empty could affect the faith only under the condition that therewith the appearances of Jesus were rendered impossible. This, of course, is not so. Hence, arguments about the empty tomb are theologically pointless. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1868-7377 |
| Obras secundarias: | Enthalten in: Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche
|