To the editors:
The reviewer of ‘Shua [March 20] said that the gospels are historically inaccurate so that scholars must search for the historical Jesus, and that recent studies of Jesus are placing him within Judaism, and appreciating that he was born, lived, and died a Jew. These two statements are at variance with one another. It was the older criticism that supposed that many sayings attributed to Jesus originated in the church later, while studies of first century Judaism compare all the sayings of Jesus, more or less, to those of contemporary rabbis.
Are the sayings, then, accurate, and the miracles fabrication? Or is it unhistorical that he rose from the dead? This too, is the opinion of the older search for the historical Jesus!
But if he rose from the dead, Jewish exegesis (explanation of the Bible) of the raising would make him the Son of God. For precisely such a claim by a rabbi, see that part of the book of Acts which shows a rabbi explaining the double promise of God through the prophet Nathan to David that after the death of that warrior, God would raise his seed, of which He would be the Father and he the Son. Or do it without capitalizing it, it makes no difference! See Acts 13:31 and following. The rabbi is the apostle Paul!
Before you print this letter, you can, if you like, submit it to any theological faculty in the world!
Vincent Shaw Flack