Christopher Columbus, Corn and Potatoes: How the New World Fed the Old

Since these are evaluations of critiques, stay focused on the analysis rather than emphasizing your opinion or interpretation. Ask questions. Comment on a quote that stood out. Refer to key Bible verses when applicable. Review the logic of the arguments used by other students.The general grading criteria for the Group Discussion Board Forums include the following:1. Timeliness: Were the evaluations (replies) posted in a timely fashion?2. evaluations sufficiently detailed? Is the 150-minimum word count followed3. Quality of Content: Are the remarks/evaluations accurate, insightful, and logically valid? Were appropriate “netiquette” manners observed? Do the evaluations bring clarity and raise innovative yet relevant points? Are issues related to Scripture/biblical principles and experience?1011The article “The Resurrection of Christ: Theological Implications is an extremely well written article and I believe that it is the better of the two that we have been asked to critique in this course. We will examine what kind of understanding Wallace has on the subject, his theological background, how well he constructed his arguments, how he addresses opposing views, how balanced he is in expressing his own views, the scope of the article, and how convincing Wallace is in conveying his message.Wallace has a deep understanding of all things theological but especially so considering New Testament theological principles. He has spent his career having taught Greek and New Testament courses since 1979. His doctorate is from Dallas Theological Seminary and he is currently a professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. He holds many positions of note such as the Executive Director Office for the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts among others. It is obvious that Wallace is extremely well versed in New Testament theological principles. This solid grasp is readily observed in how Wallace constructed his arguments. The article is broken down how we with military or law enforcement backgrounds would say, Barney style. Each argument is separated from the other in numerical, outline style to allow for clarity of thought and ease of understanding the chronology of his thought pattern. I think the most striking thing about this article is how many admissions Wallace makes as to the point of view of non-believers regarding the resurrection. In fact, he begins the article by aging a normal woman well into her 200’s to allow us to see just how ridiculous the resurrection story would be to a non-believer and if applied to a normal human being. While that may be the most striking aspect of the article, I think the foundation of the article lies in his liberal use of Scripture to support each aspect of the principle. Many of his headlining thoughts include at least 3 Scripture references with many more headlining thoughts containing 5 or more Scripture references. The amount of evidences he includes to support his thinking also implies that the article is not as well balanced as the casual reader might prefer. This does not mean that Wallace did not address opposing views because he most certainly did. In almost every bullet point he examines the ramifications of altering any part of the resurrection and even has an entire section devoted to those ramifications entitled, “What’s at Stake?” However, what I would perceive as soundly evidencing one’s thought may be considered by the casual reader or non-believer may be construed as bias. That is a matter of personal opinion and perception and everyone that reads the article cannot be sated as we all have our own presuppositions and in effect are all arm-chair quarterbacks. No one can fault the scope of the article though. Wallace made clear what he would discuss through the title of the article and not once did he stray from the subject at hand. He discussed every important factor regarding the resurrection and provided numerous Scriptural references and logical thought patterns to make his article as convincing and persuasive as possible. I really enjoyed the fact that he included an invitation in the article which is something I have not often seen during my studies. He appealed to the emotions of the reader speaking about the forgiveness of sins and more often than not, that is the most persuasive angle to take when speaking to a non-believer or even a back sliding Christian for that matter.1012Daniel Wallace begins in his journal article using, as is a benefit of most of the skilled theologianand writers, a hook to draw in the reader that describes a parallel of something they know aboutthat can (and in this case is) tied into a theological lesson. In this hook, he describes how absurdthe belief of the Resurrection can be to some. Because, in frank honesty, if done in a certain waythe absurdities between the Resurrection and reincarnation are more compatible in surfaceappearance than most would feel comfortable. However, building upon this statement, he goesinto much further detail describing how, unlike on the surface potentially, the Resurrection andreincarnation do, indeed, have little in common.Beginning first in the Old Testament, he sets a firm cornerstone of Scriptural truth as the firstbrick to lay the foundation of articles points. He uses Scripture, also, from the New Testamentand very much draws a very real picture of how the truth of the Resurrection is, in actuality,truth. Continuing further into the article, the author skillfully then adds in not only how theResurrection is truth and that it happened, but also why it happened and why it’s important.To many, the fact that Jesus died and rose from the dead is something that is not necessarily new.For some, especially those who have grown up in the church or otherwise been exposed toChristian teachings often during their lives, the very human tendency to become numb tosomething so spectacularly supernatural is not abnormal. To circumvent this, the author goes intodetail about just how much is essentially laid on the line in not only Christianity, but life ingeneral, if the Resurrection was not true and did not happen.At the end of the article, the author himself summed up his writing saying this:“To sum up: life, relationship, forgiveness, sanctification, the future, sanctity of the body. A whole philosophy, an entire world view, is wrapped up in the resurrection of Christ. Act as if your life depends on the resurrection of Christ–because it does!”In doing this, he finishes a superb article with a superb statement about the oneness that ChristHimself-and only Himself-can provide through His Creation, His love and His desire to see all ofus drawn to Him.