Skip to main content
EnglandReligious StudiesSyllabus dot point

Are the birth and resurrection of Jesus historical events, theological symbols, or both, and how far do the differing scholarly readings affect Christian faith?

Component 1 Jesus, his birth and resurrection: the Gospel and 1 Corinthians 15 accounts, historical versus theological readings, and the views of Vermes, Sanders, Wright and Bultmann.

An Eduqas Component 1 (Christianity) guide to the birth and resurrection of Jesus. Covers the Matthew and Luke birth narratives, the resurrection accounts in the Gospels and 1 Corinthians 15, the contrast between historical and theological readings, and the views of Vermes, Sanders, Wright and Bultmann that the exam asks you to evaluate.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.817 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

Eduqas Component 1 (Christianity) opens with Jesus as a religious figure, studied through his birth and his resurrection. You learn the Gospel accounts (the birth narratives in Matthew and Luke, the resurrection accounts in the four Gospels and 1 Corinthians 15), and you contrast a historical reading (these are events that happened) with a theological reading (the texts proclaim who Jesus is). The exam rewards explaining each account and reading precisely (AO1) and then evaluating how far the resurrection in particular is a historical event (AO2), using the named scholars Vermes, Sanders, Wright and Bultmann.

The answer

The birth narratives: Matthew and Luke

Historical versus theological readings of the birth

A historical (literalist) reading treats the events as reported fact: a genuine virgin conception, a real journey, a real star. A theological reading treats the narratives as proclamation: the Christological titles (Son of God, Immanuel, Messiah) and the citations of prophecy announce Jesus's identity and mission, so historical precision is not the point. Most academic scholars sit nearer the theological end, noting that the two accounts are hard to reconcile as straight history (for example the dating of the census against Herod's reign) yet agree strikingly on their doctrinal message.

The resurrection accounts: the Gospels and 1 Corinthians 15

Four scholarly views

Why the readings matter for faith

A purely literalist account secures the objective truth of the creed but is exposed to historical objection. A purely demythologised account answers those objections but, critics say, hollows out what Paul insists on. Many Christians and scholars take a middle position: the resurrection is a real act of God that the historical method can support but not fully capture. The same spectrum runs through the birth narratives, which is why Eduqas asks you to weigh history against theology rather than simply assert one.

Examples in context

Try this

Q1. Examine the views of scholars on the resurrection of Jesus. [part (a), AO1, 20 marks]

  • What the marker wants. Accurate exposition of at least Wright (bodily resurrection, empty tomb plus appearances) and Bultmann (demythologised Easter faith), ideally with Vermes and Sanders, organised and using specialist language. No evaluation needed; this is the AO1 band.

Q2. "The birth narratives tell us more about theology than about history." Evaluate this view. [part (b), AO2, 30 marks]

  • Cue. Weigh the difficulty of reconciling Matthew and Luke as history against their shared Christological message, using Vermes and Sanders, and judge whether the narratives are primarily theological proclamation. AO2 band, the larger 30-mark tariff.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of WJEC Eduqas exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Eduqas A120 2019 (style)20 marksExamine the different ways in which the birth narratives of Jesus may be interpreted. [part (a), AO1, 20 marks]
Show worked answer →

A part (a) AO1 question marked on the five-band scheme (band 5 is 17 to 20 for extensive, accurate, organised knowledge with reference to scholars). Explain, do not evaluate.

Set out the literalist or historical reading (the virgin birth and Bethlehem events happened as Matthew and Luke report). Set out the theological reading (the narratives use Old Testament prophecy and Christological titles such as Son of God and Immanuel to proclaim who Jesus is, not to file a report). Note the differences between Matthew (magi, Herod, flight to Egypt) and Luke (shepherds, the census). Use scholars: Vermes reads the stories as midrash on scripture; Sanders treats the birth material as the least secure historically. A top band answer is precise about each reading and cites the named scholars accurately.

Eduqas A120 2021 (style)20 marks"The resurrection of Jesus is best understood as a historical event." Evaluate this view. [part (b), AO2, the full Eduqas tariff is 30 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.]
Show worked answer →

A part (b) AO2 question; the top band rewards sustained, balanced argument with a justified conclusion.

For the historical view: Wright argues the empty tomb plus the appearances best explain the rise of the early Church and the disciples' transformation, and that rival explanations (theft, hallucination, wrong tomb) fail. For the theological or symbolic view: Bultmann demythologises, holding that the resurrection is the rise of faith in the disciples and the meaning of the cross, not a resuscitated corpse; the Easter event is what the proclamation does in the believer. Weigh these: does treating it as history overreach the evidence, or does demythologising empty the claim Paul stakes everything on in 1 Corinthians 15? A high answer judges whether "historical event" is the right category and defends the verdict.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this