Summary of Project:
‘Investigates Paul’s assertion that “Christ was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” – seeks to answer the question: which Scripture(s)’
Method:
‘An exhaustive survey of relevant OT data – itself a contribution to the subject. Careful exegesis – a sound approach.’
Breadth of
Reading/Research:
‘Excellent – covers, as far as I know, all the major work – commentaries, studies of the number, OT + NT, etc. Bauer, Metzger, Wright, Barnett, etc.’
Quality of Argument:
‘The project draws some compelling conclusions. It is industrious and workmanlike rather than being forceful or rivetting. Sometimes it is plodding. He deals with many objections. Very occasionally, there is a touch of special pleading (e.g. ref. to Dan. 12 [pp. 49-50] and p. 8 and 9 on the main). He should have looked at 1 Macc. 7:16, an objection to his work [Metzger]’
Independent Thought:
‘Much evidence of patient, inductive research – exhaustive and many times perceptive.’
Judicious
Conclusions:
‘The basic notion of 3rd day signalling “climactic reversal from death to life” is a genuine contribution to the puzzle of 1 Cor 15:4b.
Academic Apparatus:
‘Footnote style inconsistent – e.g. full stop after title – fn 4, p. 6; Block quotation problem, p. 6; fn 28 – comma; fn 32 – no punctuation.’
Written style:
‘A few typos e.g. p. 42. Thorough and clear – only rarely elegant. Concludes the project with an aside – Esther – not exactly climactic.’
Strengths:
‘The project is a thorough examination of a real issue and offers a distinctive and largely convincing solution’
Weaknesses:
‘Few – mainly in terms of style. Does not comment on “Scriptures” being plural (I think) – rare in Paul, usually in the singular – this may caution against too much focus on Hosea.’
Further work:
‘More thought to the concept of a literary motif needed (e.g. p. 53 is unconvincing in terms of the “suggestion which the OT makes”’
Grade:
78/100