In Part 1 of this work, we are told that Wright’s intention “is to write about the historical beginnings of Christianity and about the question of god” (p.5). His focus for most of the book is on what the early Christians believed, primarily about Jesus. The question of life after death in general is fleshed out with a particular focus on what happened to Jesus after he was crucified. Wright begins his investigation by diving into all the possible beliefs that people in the ancient world held about what happens to a person after death. In Part 2 Wright takes the reader through all of Paul’s writings in the New Testament in order to highlight the beliefs of Jesus’ earliest followers. Ultimately, “…the Christian life belonged within a historical narrative which began with Jesus’ resurrection and ended with the resurrection of all believers, and that the divine Spirit who accomplished the first would accomplish the second, and was even now at work to anticipate and guarantee the final event” (p.373). Part 3 addresses the idea of resurrection in early Christianity. While the Gospels say little about the resurrection directly, there is still much to be understood about the 2nd Temple Jewish beliefs and those of early Christianity. Wright makes clear that the Messiahship of Jesus is woven in many places throughout the New Testament and non-canonical texts alike. Part 4 is where each Gospel is assessed individually.mThe story of Easter is brought to the forefront as he investigates the claim that Jesus of Nazareth was raised from the dead. The empty tomb and the appearances of Jesus to so many witnesses thereafter are necessary conditions that lead to a clear conclusion that the resurrection did indeed take place as the early Christians believed. This book was assigned as one of two texts for a graduate level class on exploring a historical case for the resurrection. Michael Licona’s book The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach was the other. While Licona argues with a minimal facts approach to minimize scholarly push-back, skeptics would have a much easier time poking holes in Wright's conclusions simply because he doesn't establish a universal consensus before making his case. Nevertheless, knowing what different people groups believed about the resurrection certainly lends to historical credibility of how people in the first century would have understood the resurrection of Jesus. It seems that Licona’s book would fair better with scholars and critics, while Wright’s theological bent lends itself to a Christian audience. That said, it is not written for one looking for some light reading. It takes perseverance to get through 738 pages, and unless you have a research project you are working on or you have an intense interest in studying this subject, I would suggest finding other, more popular sources that address the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection. While Wright seems to have turned over every possible stone to uncover what is beneath each at every angle, he definitely takes his reader into the weeds at times; and those weeds take some time to get through. However, the journey is worth the time if you are looking for a scholarly work that takes a deep dive into not only the resurrection of Christ in the first century, but what people before and after the first century believed about resurrection in general and how Christ’s resurrection affected those beliefs. I gave this book five stars assuming that anyone looking to purchase such a work understands what he/she is in for. If you are reading this and are interested in a popular, easy, quick read, ignore the five stars and look elsewhere. (The bibliography alone is 41 pages long!)