And on the third day ...

On Good Friday, we have a solemn service in remembrance of Jesus' death. And we do achieve solemnity. But we probably do not come anywhere close to the devastation and grief that the apostles felt when they first laid Jesus in the tomb. 

Because for whatever solemnity we observe on Friday, we likely have already made some preparations for the feast on Sunday. 

Whenever in life I find myself at the tomb, caught up in the devastation and grief, may I remember Good Friday -- and how hard it is to be overwhelmed with defeat when we are looking forward to a victory feast. 

Christ is risen!

He is risen indeed. Alleluia!

Redemption through death and resurrection

Without forgiveness, eternal life is not a prize. Look at any family gathering where there is no tradition of forgiveness. There is either open enmity or secret hostility; those are about the sum of available options, without forgiveness. Forgiveness is the acceptance and love that values us even through our imperfection. Without it there is either a requirement to meet a standard, or the desperate pretense that there are no problems of any significance. Forgiveness brings with it the better likelihood of honesty, where admitting a problem isn't a deal-breaker and so problems can be addressed rather than masked or ignored. It may be counter-intuitive, but admitting to problems leads to fewer or smaller problems: there is a safe way back, so they can be addressed.

Without redemption -- and making all things new -- our lesser holiness doesn't survive first contact with a fallen world. We easily adopt the things we are cautioned against, whether doubt or enmity or strife or factions or discord or envy, bitterness or pride, or any number of pitfalls in this life. They can all start as strategies for making things better; the problem is that they don't. The Psalmist's cry, "Create in me a clean heart" is one of the most beautiful in Scripture. There comes a time when we are as interested in becoming pure and holy, as we are in being accepted or forgiven. 

To God be the glory for making all things new, and first for the death and resurrection of our Lord. 

God has given faith by raising Christ from the dead

God has given moral guidance throughout the ages. God has shown his glory in all of creation. But at times this seems unrelated to me and to my life. Does my life matter at all, or is it "Meaningless, meaningless!" as someone wiser than me has said? But one wiser than Solomon has said differently. There is forgiveness both for me and for those who have wronged me. There is healing and peace. There is reconciliation and, through it, fellowship. There is hope in the face of death because God does not abandon us in the grave. God has raised Jesus from the dead. 

Sometimes in my mind, I imagine my eventual memorial service. Did Jesus do the same? His was a special case: only a few short days had passed since his death and burial; the friends and disciples who had traveled with him to Jerusalem were still in town. After his resurrection, Jesus sought his friends and disciples, and renewed his fellowship with them. There were reconciliations to work through, absent friends to seek. But mostly a roll-back of the bad news of death, with the almost-unimaginable good news of resurrection. When it's all of us, it will probably be easier to imagine. Until then, my life now is changed by the hope that it brings. 

Or as Dr Mariottini put it so well on his blog this morning: 

The experience of the disciples of Jesus following his death upon the cross is similar to the experience of every man and woman today. On Calvary, the only message that the hearts of the disciples could read was: "Christ was defeated." But, on the first day of the week, the day when Jesus came out of the grave, the true happy message of the Gospel came through: "Christ defeated death."

Christ is risen!

"The Good Place" v The Good News

I've held off on posting this during the solemn season of Lent. Now that we have entered the festive season of the resurrection it's a more fitting time. This discusses the sitcom/drama The Good Place, and contrasts it with what Christians would consider to be the good news. For those not familiar with the show, the premise is that several people find themselves in the afterlife where their host informs them that they have died, this is the afterlife, and they are now in "the good place".

The Good Place reflects the socially acceptable agnostic spirituality of our times. Without spoiling the various plot twists of the series, we'll just say that "the good place" is not necessarily as good as anyone might hope. After some time the focus of the series pivots to the question: If we were to create our own afterlife, what would we want it to be? In one man's vision of what the afterlife should be, we would choose to perfect ourselves -- perfect our skills, complete our bucket lists, attain self-fulfillment or enlightenment -- then let go of our existence and return our energy to the cosmos. Every story must end; this one ended with an embrace of a return to non-existence.

The show had some good moments, some fun plot twists, and some endearing characters. What it didn't have was a belief that life is intrinsically good and that a love of life would endure. In some scenes, the afterlife was an endless party that had overstayed its welcome. The show's last reconstruction of the afterlife was one in which people pursued pet projects and self-actualization. In that vision of the afterlife love was not forever. The residents, either self-absorbed or isolated, eventually saw that there was nothing more for them, and left. In some cases, they left others grieving; it was not a place where there was no more mourning or death. There was little to distinguish the afterlife from this life except greater power (or accommodation from the existing powers) and more time.

The good news paints a different picture, and I will note some of the differences that struck me most clearly. The good news pictures our own creator who loves us dearly welcoming us to a place he has prepared for us. The good news pictures love and beauty that do not fade or wear thin in our renewed hearts and minds. In the good news, we are no longer world-weary. Our relationships are no longer strained, our souls are no longer stained. Fear of death and of loss are gone. Instead of "the good place" with its escalating series of entertainments or achievements that at some point can no longer be topped, the good news gives us a river that restores our soul, and the warmth and connection that make life desirable. 

People willingly step out of "the good place" because it's not the kingdom of God; it's just an epilogue where people can fix their lives and characters if they choose. But the kingdom of heaven is like a wedding feast. Or like baking bread. Or like going fishing. Or like a family that is finally re-united with a long-lost son.

Christ Is Risen!

... and (Jesus) was buried. The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures - Nicene Creed

That ancient creed contains traces of far earlier Christian proclamations:

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received:

that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the Scriptures: and that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve. After that, he was seen of above five hundred of the brothers at once; of whom the most remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that, he was seen by James; then by all the apostles. 

(Paul, first letter to the Corinthians 15:3-7)

Paul's words were what he received from the earlier believers -- some of them who had seen the risen Lord themselves. Paul knew these people; he had met those who had run to the tomb in confusion and amazement that morning when the proclamation was very first head: he is not here. He has risen.

They have passed it down to us, an echo of the words first spoken at the empty tomb nearly 2000 years ago, and a record of the some of the times he came among the apostles after he had risen from the dead. It has been proclaimed in amazement by his people ever since:

He is not here. He is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. (Matthew 28:6)

He is not here. He is risen. Come see the place where they laid him. (Mark 16:6)

He is not here, but has risen. Remember how he told to you ... (Luke 24:6)

This was now the third time Jesus had showed himself to the disciples after he was risen from the dead. (John 21:14)

Christ is risen indeed. Alleluia.


Other celebrations spotted:

He is risen!
He is risen indeed!
He arose!

Why I believe in Jesus' Resurrection

I was not born a Christian: my parents were not church-goers in my early years. They did not set out to teach me anything about religion. Still, especially from my very liberal mother, I did pick up a mocking attitude. I still remember the first time when I was little when a neighbor child mentioned "God" seriously to me and to my brother: we traded a shocked look then laughed in her face. That was how I was raised. But still that attitude was more reflex than well-thought, so when another friend invited me to go to Sunday school and then church with her, I came to see. I began reading the Bible without too many preconceptions either from the mockers or the church, though I had been exposed to both at that point. Later on, my parents came to church with me for a few years, before they stopped again; I continued, my religious beliefs still tentative and forming. (It's likely that my religious beliefs will always be forming.) My religious beliefs did not come from my parents, so I consider myself a convert to Christianity.

When I began reading the Bible to figure out how it fit into the world and what I should make of it, I didn't come with any fundamentalist preconceptions about "inerrancy"; and my friend's church was not a fundamentalist church, so the idea of "inerrancy" was still unknown to me when I first read the Bible. When it came to the gospels, that didn't look like the way the authors of the gospels thought about their own writings, from what I could see. I also didn't come with the preconception that miracles must be myth or legend.

So why do I believe in Jesus' resurrection? It comes to this: the people writing the accounts of the gospels came across, like most people, as basically sane and basically honest people. People who are basically sane and basically honest are not wrong about something of that nature for that length of time. The disciples' reactions even to the resurrection come across as both honest and sane: they react with shock and disbelief at first, outright skepticism about a thing like that. Even seeing is not quite believing, at first, for something that out-of-the-ordinary. It takes awhile for them to believe their own eyes. From reading the early writings, it was more that when someone stays -- not a mere vision or phantom or hallucination -- stays and has conversations with you and eats meals with you, after awhile the reality sinks in: he's alive.

Haven't I heard the counter-challenges? Well, yes. As an adult, I've considered it a basic matter of something that we would call "due diligence" in the business world to make sure I give an honest hearing to the major different religions besides Christianity, and the major arguments for and against Christianity. And due diligence is done with my loyalty squarely on the side of reality wherever that should lead.

When it comes to the resurrection, the only substantive argument I've heard against it is, "Miracles don't happen." Many other arguments take the general form "The real explanation for the events must have been _____"; I have yet to see an argument in that format that had much merit of its own as an explanation; generally they don't have much more merit than their premise, "Miracles don't happen." The arguments that the gospels are myth or legend again generally don't have a lot of merit beyond their premise, "Miracles don't happen." But when I read the accounts in the gospels, based on what I read, I think those miracles did happen.

Why do I think those miracles did happen? A lot of it is the basic credibility of the narrators. Saying this usually results in a flurry of nit-picking about the gospels. But I've never read an account of anything, anywhere that couldn't be nit-picked. I've looked over the usual criticisms of the gospels, and haven't found anything that looks like it's relevant to whether the narrators were basically sane and honest. Remember, I don't have the preconceptions of an inerrantist. So if the narrator doesn't have a total recall grasp of every detail, or was giving the words as best they could remember instead of a word-for-word transcript like from a tape recorder -- so that someone else might have a slightly different wording of the same conversation -- that's normal for any account we have from the days before electronic recording. It doesn't mean the people writing the records were insane or rampant liars, which they would have to be if they were wrong about the kinds of things I'm looking at. If a mistake is an honest mistake -- no signs of being intentionally misleading -- and is about a peripheral detail that didn't matter at the time and doesn't matter now --  it doesn't bother me. So the endless criticisms about minute points of the gospels has seemed to be about trivial matters. It often seems nearly petty.

Again, why do I think those miracles did happen? A lot of it is the uniqueness of Jesus. If there is one thing that was very plain to me from reading the gospels, it was this: in Jesus' words, here are teachings that are extraordinary in their picture of holiness as a thing of beauty, desirable in a way that we might actually hunger and thirst for it. His teachings resonate with depth, power, purity, and humility, and are in words so simple that a farmer or a fisherman can not only understand but teach and live. I understood that Jesus had thoroughly earned and deserved that his teachings should be considered among the great religious teachings in the history of the planet; I still think those who have never read or heard Jesus' teachings have been deprived of a great and profound human experience. The list of people who teach religion on a world-class level is a short list. If I were to find real miracles anywhere in the world, I should expect to find them coming from somebody on that short list, and if I did not find them there, I would not expect to find them anywhere at all. That is to say, if there is such a being as "God" and if miracles are his actions in this world, then I should expect to find out more about miracles somewhere among the best of the religious teachers. If the best evidence for miracles were from someone whose life and moral thoughts were unremarkable, it would be easy to dismiss as a fraud. But from Jesus in particular? Here is a case where, if miracles would happen at all, here is a place where you could expect them. Yes, I think those miracles did happen.

For Jesus' resurrection, why do I think that particular miracle did happen? The early writings have records of Jesus' meals with his disciples and conversations with his disciples after he rose from the dead. I have mentioned briefly already that I do not see any reason to dismiss those writings as lies or the product of delusion. In the surviving records, they mention enough detail that I am convinced this is no hallucination or mistake or legend. We have the entire first generation of Christians -- however many thousands of them -- who knew these people, the eyewitnesses to the miracles and especially to Jesus' resurrection, from the disciples' years of travels to spread the news of the resurrection. Some of the people who knew Jesus in person, who saw him and spoke with him and ate meals with him after he rose from the dead, were public figures for decades afterwards and spoke of it often. It created a burst of writings on the topic in which we have many documents dating to the lifetime of people who knew Jesus that speak of his resurrection. The circle continued later with those who knew that first generation, who had themselves known Jesus' disciples, and so on. For centuries of the ever-expanding following of Jesus as a religious figure, there was not an ever-expanding list of documents that were considered trustworthy. It had to trace back to people from that first generation, to the apostles and those who had known them in person.

The opposition to Jesus (or orthodoxy, or Christianity) in modern times has been something I have looked at, in the course of my due diligence. Again, my allegiance is to reality, wherever that leads. I have looked at questions of authorship, questions of dates, alternative gospels, synoptic similarities, a few ancient manuscripts, and anything that seemed relevant to the question, "What's really going on here?" I can only hope that in my lifetime I get the chance to write down what I found when I checked the facts and evaluated the arguments, though some of that can already be found on this blog. I know I haven't heard all the details of all the arguments back and forth; but I've heard so many of them that I'd think that if there was some other major line of argument, I'd at least be aware that the argument existed. This I will say: to this point, nothing I have found changes my evaluation that the gospel writings are honest, trustworthy early accounts of Jesus' life and teachings, and miracles, and his resurrection from the dead.

I believe in Jesus because of the accounts I have read of his life, and after considering various arguments I think that these accounts are trying to faithfully record Jesus as his disciples knew him. When I believed the records of Jesus' life, it was not because I already believed in miracles and God and the Bible. Instead, whatever I believe about miracles and God and the Bible is because I believe in Jesus.

He Is Risen!

And he said to them, "Don't be frightened! You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified.

He is risen. He is not here. See the place where they laid him.

But go and tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you into Galilee: there shall you see him, as he said to you." (Mark 16:6-7)

And the announcement at the empty tomb has echoed down the years to today: He is not here. He is risen.

Christ is risen!

You will not abandon me to the grave, nor let your holy one see decay. (Psalm 16:10)

There is ultimately only one hope for us: that God raises the dead. There is one key event in the history of the world that shows us we are not abandoned, not forsaken.

Today, of all days, we see the reason for the hope that we have.

Christ is risen.

Alternative Explanations for the Resurrection?

This is the final installment of a response to Michael Martin's article, "Why the Resurrection is Initially Improbable," Philo, 1, no. 1 (Spring-Summer 1998): 63-73.

Mr. Martin argues that it is not necessary for him to provide an alternative explanation for the historical evidence of the resurrection. But during his writing about other explanations, he placed a precise mathematical figure on the probability of alternative explanations. How is it possible to calculate an exact mathematical probability value for another theory without having any specific alternative theory in mind? How can anyone else assess whether that probability figure is valid? As someone I know has jokingly said, "86.7234% of all statistics are made up on the spot." Without any basis for the figures that Martin quotes, his numbers will inevitably seem to be of this sort. The precise mathematical values seem hollow, if not downright misleading, when there are no supporting details given to show their basis.

It is also necessary that those who reject the resurrection at least look at alternative theories for this simple reason: if someone claims that some alternative explanation for the facts is more likely, that claim depends entirely on there being an alternative explanation for the facts in the first place. For some types of miracles such as a mysterious healing, the facts can be explained in various ways: the fact that first someone was sick, and then someone was well, could be explained by natural causes. Even in cases where no cure is known for a disease, it may yet be possible (in theory) that a naturalistic explanation exists but has not yet been discovered.

In the case of Jesus’ resurrection, the facts include that first he was dead – having been executed in public – and buried, then three days later he was alive again. Naturalistic explanations may be imagined for healing miracles, but at the point of death, nature no longer works to restore health. There is no natural process that restores the dead to life; that’s why naturalists’ insistence on opposing the resurrection is so strong.

There is only one explanation of the facts that he was dead before, then alive after: he was raised from the dead. All the alternative explanations of the facts are not actually alternative explanations of the facts, but selective denial of the facts. Some alternative explanations deny that Jesus died in the first place, such as the swoon theory. Some alternative explanations deny that he was alive afterwards, such as the stolen body theory, or the theory of mass hallucinations by the disciples.

The evidence that Jesus was seen alive again is strong enough to prompt opponents of Christianity to create theories in which Jesus never died; the skeptical community attests to the strength of the evidence for Jesus being alive whenever they argue for the swoon theory. The evidence that the tomb was empty is strong enough to prompt opponents to create a theory of a stolen body to explain it; the skeptical community attests to the strength of the evidence for the empty tomb whenever they argue for the stolen body theory. The evidence that many people did in fact see Jesus alive is strong enough to prompt opponents to create a theory of extended, shared hallucinations to explain it.

All of these alternative theories have something in common: they resort to altering the facts which they are supposed to explain. As such, they do not fully count as alternative explanations of the facts, besides being unlikely themselves. The swoon theory denies Jesus’ death; the stolen body theory denies the post-resurrection appearances; the mass-hallucination theory may explain Jesus' post-resurrection appearances but denies the reality of the empty tomb, something any of Jesus' highly-motivated opponents could have easily checked.

These are examples of the risk discussed earlier: when someone assumes it is always irrational to believe in a miracle, even granted that miracles are possible, then this anti-miracle view will necessarily lead to denial of facts or distortion of reality in the face of an actual miracle. Martin himself stops short of Hume's "always irrational" view of miracles, and stops short of the far-fetched theories which try to provide alternate explanations for the facts. But he does this at a cost: he has no viable alternative explanation, which is required for his assertion that there is a hypothetical alternative explanation that is far more probable than Jesus' resurrection. In how many arguments could someone claim that they have won because their explanation is more probable, but not have to provide that explanation? It would be like playing a poker game, and a person claims to have the winning hand; would anyone believe it if he refuses to show?

Rather than putting any hypothetical alternative explanation to the test so that someone else could evaluate his claim that it is far more probable, he wants that evaluation to be made simply on the fact that the resurrection is a miracle so something else must be considered more probable even if it happened. He wants his readers to follow his argument to deny the resurrection even if it is true, simply because it is a miracle. Granted it is a miracle; but if it is true, would you really want to deny it?

Is it really possible that everyone who claimed Jesus to be dead was mistaken about it, from those who watched him breathe his last, to the executioner who pierced his side to make sure of his death, to those who pried him off the cross, wrapped him in a cloth and laid him in the tomb? No, it is not; we can be certain of his death when he was buried. Is it really possible that everyone who claimed Jesus to be alive on the third day and after was mistaken about it, from the women outside the tomb to the close friends who gave him dinner the first night, the same who saw him come back again to show his wounds as proof to Thomas, those same close friends who cooked broiled fish with him by the lake, to Jesus’ brother who had been skeptical before but afterwards became a leader in the church? No, it is not; we can be certain of his life. There is only one explanation that explains the facts rather than denies them: Jesus rose from the dead.

Conclusion

I appreciate the job that Mr. Martin has done in setting out a number of different lines of thought that bear on peoples’ perceptions of the reality of Jesus’ resurrection. I believe his most valuable contribution to the discussion is actually choosing a relevant topic: he gets to the heart of the matter when he asks whether it is likely, whether we can really believe it, rather than arguing about endless side issues as is sometimes done. He added much to the conversation by acknowledging the importance of God’s purpose, and by his recognition that miracles can have value as a sign.

The omissions of Mr. Martin’s article are not unique to him, and I would not wish to fault specifically him for them. It is typical that non-Christians, assessing the probability of the resurrection, do not take into account the solidness of evidence for earlier miracle claims associated with Jesus and do not consider that when thinking about the resurrection. It is also typical that non-Christians do not take into account how few people have been founders of major religions when considering the probability of Jesus’ resurrection; it is typically assessed no differently than the probability of my next-door-neighbor’s resurrection. Again, it is typical that non-Christians' grasp of atonement is incomplete, and this mainly because it is a large subject with many aspects, where any one given explanation is almost sure to be incomplete by itself.

However, the historical evidence is solid, and God has clear reasons to raise Jesus from the dead as outlined previously. This puts the resurrection of Jesus on solidly trustworthy ground. While disputes against Jesus' resurrection will no doubt continue, it is largely a dispute waged against the evidence, fueled on the one hand by those who oppose the idea of Jesus’ uniqueness in God’s purposes, and on the other hand by those who have not yet ventured to hope that God would truly do what so many have asked all along: give a clear sign that this world is not all there is, that he has not abandoned us to the grave, and that he will raise us up at the last day. I'm concerned whether an amateur like myself has given a good enough account, but I hope I have shown why Christians hold to the certainty of Jesus' resurrection.

No Trustworthy Accounts of Jesus After the Resurrection?

This is the next-to-last installment of a response to Michael Martin's article, "Why the Resurrection is Initially Improbable," Philo, 1, no. 1 (Spring-Summer 1998): 63-73.

Martin makes a series of interrelated claims about the New Testament records of Jesus’ resurrection. He claims that there were no contemporary eyewitness reports of seeing Jesus after the resurrection other than Paul and that the other "alleged" eyewitnesses who saw Jesus after the resurrection may not have been reliable and trustworthy. From there he continues to multiply layers, that those who heard the eyewitnesses and passed on their reports may not have been reliable and trustworthy, and that those who recorded the accounts (supposedly third-hand) may not have been reliable and trustworthy. How do Mr. Martin's claims hold up against what we know? We will quickly review the history of the four gospels.

John: Its own value and the added value of the appendix

To begin with, there are not so many layers between the resurrection and our most direct account of it as Mr. Martin suggests. No matter your view of which person is "the disciple whom Jesus loved", the main author of the Gospel According to John, this person still claims to have seen the risen Jesus in person on more than one occasion, each time with a number of Jesus’ other disciples also present. The author claims that he himself had eaten with Jesus and spoken with Jesus on a number of occasions after Jesus was raised from the dead.

There is an interesting claim that certain people make about the Gospel of John, which is that John cannot have written it -- or that it had been "tampered with" -- because there is a separate part at the end, apparently an appendix of sorts, and it includes the comment "we know that his (the author’s) testimony is true." From this, the speculation begins about revisions and late dates. But there is an equally interesting history about the Gospel of John and how it was written. According to an ancient list of authoritative Christian writings, the Muratorian canon or Muratorian fragment, the Gospel of John involved a number of Jesus’ surviving disciples:

The same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John in his own name should write down everything and that they should all revise it.

While the date of the Muratorian Canon (like everything else involving Jesus) is disputed, the document makes references to events from the mid-100's C.E. as happening "quite recently, in our own time" -- so the most likely date for the Muratorian Canon will remain in the second half of the 100's C.E. The "mystery appendix" to the Gospel of John is actually part of the known history of the document and not an unknown addition. We have separate confirmation of what the document itself tells us, that it was reviewed by other people. In this light, the book’s comment "we know that his testimony is true" (John 21:24) has support for what it claims to be: the confirmation of other eyewitnesses that it happened just as recorded. Contrary to the common skeptical view that the Gospel of John is to be taken less seriously than the other gospels because of its later date and "appendix", instead we have here, even in the latest of the accounts, a strong and direct claim to first-hand material, with support from more than one source that this material had been reviewed and confirmed by other witnesses.

Mark: Traveling companion to Peter, known to other disciples of Jesus

The Gospel of Mark is often lightly dismissed because Mark himself was not a disciple of Jesus. But Mark was a disciple of Simon Peter, the leader among Jesus’ followers and privileged to be with Jesus on certain special occasions when only a few of the disciples were present. Mark was known to have traveled with Simon Peter – see 1 Peter 5:13, where Simon Peter writes a greeting to his readers from Mark. He also here refers to Mark as "son". It was common to call someone "son" if there was a close relationship such as a spiritual mentorship, and this is the usual understanding of the relationship between Peter and Mark. It is against this background, that Peter and Mark were close, and that Mark traveled with Peter, that we can see the implications of our histories of how the Gospel of Mark came to be written.

But was Mark's gospel ever read by those who had known Jesus? Here the early writer Papias quotes what he learned from one of Jesus' disciples, here called the "elder" or "presbyter":

The presbyter used to say, 'Mark, who had been Peter’s interpreter, wrote down carefully, but not in order, all that he remembered of the Lord’s sayings and doings. For he [Mark] had not heard the Lord or been one of His followers, but later, as I said, one of Peter’s. Peter used to adapt his teachings to the occasion without making a systematic arrangement of the Lord’s sayings, so that Mark was quite justified in writing down some things just as he remembered them. For he had one purpose only – to leave out nothing that he had heard and to make no misstatement about it.' -- Papias, quote preserved in Eusebius' History 3:39

Note that this early quote, preserved in Eusebius' History, records one of Jesus' disciples approving Mark's diligence and the contents (if not the sequence) of Mark's writings. So here the person who has written the accounts is not far-removed from true knowledge, but someone who wants to leave an accurate record of what he heard from his mentor, who in this case was Peter, among the best sources of information available regarding Jesus.

Luke: Diligent researcher who met with eyewitnesses

Of other early Christian records, much is made of the possibility of Luke borrowing from Mark. We have good reason to believe that they met and knew each other; consider verse 24 of Philemon, in which Paul mentions both Luke and Mark among his fellow-workers, probably part of the Christian community in early Rome. But we also have good reason to believe that Luke traveled with Paul. There are sections of the Book of Acts in which the author lists himself as part of the action, saying that "we" did this or that, suggesting that the writer was, at that time, traveling with Paul. Luke had been to Jerusalem with Paul and met some of the key figures of ancient Christianity, including some of the eyewitnesses of the resurrection such as Jesus’ brother Jacob ("James").

When we arrived at Jerusalem, the brothers received us warmly. The next day Paul and the rest of us went to see James, and all the elders were present" (Luke, in Acts 21:17-18).

So Luke is known to have personally met some of those who knew Jesus directly. His writings explain how he has made every effort to write an orderly and well-researched account of Jesus’ life. Again, we do not have some supposedly untrustworthy and far-removed source, but a conscientious person who knows the value of being accurate and talking to the original sources, as he says, "Since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." (Luke 1:3-4)

Matthew: A complex history but a useful source

Probably the most controversial authorship for the records of Jesus’ life is the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. The early church records are unanimous that it was written by Matthew (also known as Levi), one of Jesus’ twelve closest disciples, and that it was written in "the Hebrew tongue" for the benefit of Jewish Christians. At some point early in church history, the book underwent at least a translation; the traditional text we follow now is in Greek. The authorship question arises because of textual comparisons: certain sections of Mark’s account and certain sections of Matthew’s are nearly identical.

The different sides of the dispute have made claims ranging from that Matthew had never seen any of the material in Mark (which seems unlikely) to that Matthew "slavishly followed" Mark, which is at least a serious overstatement based on the documents we have before us. Whatever relationship there may be between specific accounts, the majority of material in Matthew is not found in Mark, some of the material in Mark is not found in Matthew either, and a number of the accounts found in both documents are in different order or vary in certain details. There are some instances where the accounts preserved in Matthew appear to be older than the corresponding accounts in Mark, and some vice versa where the accounts in Mark appear to be older than those in Matthew. There is plenty of textual material to occupy the scholars for some time.

While the debate is far from over about the exact relationship between the material in Matthew and Mark, the amount of independent material in Matthew is enough to make it a worthwhile source in its own right regardless of the outcome of that discussion. It seems an overreaction to rule out Matthew’s involvement solely on the basis of shared sections between Matthew and Mark, though of course any particular piece of information would not count as coming from two separate sources in cases where those accounts are shown to share a common source.

Closing words on the accounts in the gospels

What is left of Martin’s general claims about the accounts of Jesus’ resurrection? Not much. We have first-hand accounts from people who themselves saw Jesus after his resurrection. For most documents we have a reasonably clear picture of who wrote them and how the authors got their information. The authors showed themselves to be careful and earnest in what they recorded. We have records showing that the documents were written early enough that a number of eyewitnesses were still on the scene commenting, giving information, or even (in the case of the Gospel of John) adding notes vouching for the reliability of the reports.

Beyond that, there are even more basic reasons why many people, reading the gospels, believe them: writers who are basically honest do not make up things like that. Writers who are basically sane are not wrong on that level for that length of time about what they see. The gospels come across as having been written by people who are, like most people, basically sane and honest. It is difficult to believe that all of these authors were entirely wrong about everything important in their writings. Leaving aside questions of "infallibility", if the authors were merely sane, honest, and reasonably careful, then what they have recorded is of monumental importance.

"No Eyewitnesses to the Resurrection"?

This is a continuation of a response to Michael Martin's article, "Why the Resurrection is Initially Improbable," Philo, 1, no. 1 (Spring-Summer 1998): 63-73.

In recent years, I have heard people make the claim that there were "no eyewitnesses to the resurrection". Mr. Martin also makes that claim. This claim is common enough among skeptics, but it is misleading.

The "no eyewitnesses" claim is, if you think about it, spectacularly wrong. One of the earliest written accounts of the events, recorded by Paul in his first letter to the people of Corinth, mentions that there were over 500 eyewitnesses. Later, more detailed accounts mention appearances where Jesus spoke with people -- some of the conversations are recorded for us -- and even ate with people after rising from the dead. Even the latest written account that appears in the New Testament is written by someone who personally claims to have been an eyewitness of Jesus' resurrection himself, to have talked with Jesus on a number of occasions after he rose from the dead.

So how do skeptics make so bold as to claim that there were no eyewitnesses to the resurrection? It seems to be a bit of a sleight-of-hand: Are we discussing the event of the resurrection - the precise moment when Jesus became alive again inside the tomb - or the enduring fact of the resurrection: that Jesus was alive again? No one else was in the tomb with Jesus when he rose from the dead, but many people saw him alive afterwards. The fact that they were not in the tomb at the moment when Jesus rose to life again does not invalidate their testimony that Jesus had risen from the dead. They remain eyewitnesses to the fact of the resurrection, if not the event of the exact first moment of the resurrection.

To take the example from the other side, if nobody had seen Lincoln assassinated, but many had seen him later dead, it would be nonsense to claim that there were no eyewitnesses to Lincoln’s death and imply that therefore he might be alive. Lincoln’s death was an event, but also an enduring fact; anyone who saw Lincoln dead was a valid eyewitness of the fact of his death, if not the event of his death. They may not be able to say, "I saw him die," but they can say, "I saw him dead." They are witnesses of the fact of his death.

So with Jesus, the many who saw him alive again are eyewitnesses of the fact of his resurrection, if not the event of his return to life inside the tomb. They may not be able to say, "I saw him begin to breathe again, saw him draw the first breath of his new life and take off the funeral shroud," but they can say, "I saw him alive." They may not be able to say, "I saw him rise," but then can say, "I saw him risen." They are witnesses of the fact of his resurrection, and there were many of them.

I would give Mr. Martin the benefit of the doubt as to whether he was misleading deliberately; it could have been accidental ambiguity. Still, the claim that "there were no eyewitnesses of the resurrection" is misleading, bordering on deceptive; in fact many people saw Jesus alive again and were eyewitnesses of the resurrection in a very real and factual sense.

Why raise Jesus from the dead?

This continues the repost of a response to Michael Martin on Jesus' resurrection.

Mr. Martin's original article gives prominent place to one particular complaint: there is (he states) no plausible reason why the resurrection should have occurred. In the course of this response, I will discuss a number of the reasons for Jesus’ resurrection.

God's Purposes and Jesus' Resurrection

When discussing the resurrection and God’s purpose, Mr. Martin limits the discussion to theories of atonement. While I will also respond to Mr. Martin on the atonement, the discussion of God’s purpose will not be limited to atonement alone. We will also consider the resurrection in light of the view that a miracle may also be a sign which communicates a message.

In preparation, we will first recall some known facts -- our background knowledge for assessing the evidence for Jesus’ resurrection. The first thing to recall is that Jesus is among a very rare group of people in the history of the world: people who founded a major religion. While this is undisputed and very likely to be relevant, Mr. Martin does not consider it in his assessment. From a simple standpoint of logic, it can easily have a bearing on whether God has any purpose in resurrecting Jesus from the dead. Another thing to recall is that, in the Judaism of Jesus’ day, previous teaching on resurrection was not especially strong, with no explicit support for it in the Torah and no other officially-recognized scriptures besides the Torah. In that day, it was an acceptable Jewish belief that there was no resurrection from the dead, with the party of Sadducees holding that belief. If the teaching of a future resurrection of all people from the dead is true, it is among the most relevant and important teachings in the history of religion. To be sure, some people had taught as if a resurrection would come. But these had not gained full acceptance as of the time of Jesus.

Jesus’ resurrection is a sign that clarifies the answers to many questions:

1. It serves as a final answer as to whether there is life after death. As a sign, it clearly indicates that God raises the dead.
   
2. It serves as a sign validating Jesus' teachings on the resurrection. It indicates that among the various teachings of what happens after death, Jesus’ teaching on resurrection is true. This is a sign of the certainty of Jesus' teaching that there will be a general resurrection in the future.
   
3. It shows God’s faithfulness to his creation. From confirming Jesus' teaching of the future resurrection of all people, it follows that it is also a sign that God has not abandoned humanity to pain, meaninglessness, and death. It confirms Jesus' pledge to us that our own tombs will one day be empty, and we will rise to life again just as he rose. From this we can see the reason for the hope we have in us.
   
4. It foretells the promised renewal of creation to a state of goodness that is no longer subject to death and corruption. Restoring nature to what God intended is one connecting link between Jesus’ healing miracles and his resurrection. Jesus’ work restoring nature is affirmed as God’s own purpose by Jesus’ restoration to life. Together with the background of Jesus’ other miracles restoring the sick, the blind, and the crippled, it shows that any evil, disease, death, or destruction that may confront us still cannot defeat God’s purpose of restoring us and renewing all things.
   
5. The resurrection is a sign indicating the final practical resolution of the problem of evil. It is a sign showing the weak and temporary nature of suffering and death, and the truth of Jesus' promises regarding the world to come.
   
6. It is a vindication of the goodness of God. If suffering, death, and meaningless had in fact been the final result of our lives, it would be problematic to maintain the reality of God's love of mankind. Instead, the resurrection demonstrates death's inability to destroy us and to undo God's purposes for us. As the generation that saw Christ raised from the dead put it, "Death, where is your victory? Grave, where is your sting?" The resurrection, as a sign of the general resurrection to come, provides a clear indication that God does value mankind.
   
7. It confirms the uniqueness of Jesus of Nazareth in God's purposes in the world. Among that very, very small group of people in the history of the world who have founded major religions, Jesus is unique even within that group in rising from the dead. Jesus’ resurrection plainly shows which leader to follow. It renders foolish the argument that God has not made clear which religious leader to follow.

These are clear signs given by Jesus' resurrection that would provide a clear reason for God to have raised Jesus from the dead.

The Resurrection Texts: Harmonization

I first put this together a number of years ago (in the late 1990's, I think). A skeptic had put forward what was supposed to be an unanswerable challenge: to take all the passages in the Bible beginning with the day of Jesus’ resurrection and continuing to the day of his ascension, and without omitting anything write a simple narrative that is chronological and leaves out nothing. For years this article had been hosted on some ftp space provided by my ISP ... but the ISP has since removed the ftp space from their service, leaving the articles formerly hosted there homeless unless you count a flash drive. So I thought I'd repost here in honor of Jesus' resurrection.

Here are the texts requested, every requested verse included and every account with the verses still in their original order, with the verses from each account placed with the corresponding verses from other accounts. What follows is the texts you specified with the verses grouped so as to reconstruct the events from the resurrection to the ascension from the existing accounts. On a few occasions when one account has an event recorded in a single verse while another account has the same event recorded in more detail over several verses, the more condensed version is shown half a verse at a time, followed by the detailed verses from the other account. I've added headings such as are common in modern narratives, and one or two comments in brackets. I've also made four introductory remarks separately, so that it doesn't interfere with the text below.

Introductory remarks:

1. The women's visits to the tomb. Because of the way the names are listed and the comings and goings are presented, I suspect that the women came in more than one group. They may have agreed to meet at the tomb around dawn. If memory serves, Mary Magdalene lived in Bethany, while some of the other women lived in Jerusalem. It's reasonable to think the women may have come in two or more groups.
   
2. The timing of the earliest visits. The text of John begins with Mary Magdalene setting out for the tomb "while it was still dark". Since walking to the tomb, perhaps a couple of miles, would take some time, it's reasonable to think that the sun rose while the women were on their way to the tomb. The events recorded for that morning would probably take at least half an hour, perhaps over an hour, to complete.
   
3. The location of the ascension. The original "challenge" presented the location of the ascensions as "variously given" being either in Bethany, near Jerusalem, or on the Mount of Olives. A detailed map of the area shows that Bethany, which is near Jerusalem, is on the slope of the Mount of Olives. If after reading this you're still interested in the other "challenges", go ahead and ask.
   
4. Various things concerning the angels. Since the events at the tomb that morning may have taken half an hour to an hour, I am not going to concern myself with where the angels were when Salome came versus where the angels were when Joanna came, or anything of that sort. Even supposing all the women came together as a single group, if one woman reported to the disciples “we saw two angels, and they said such a thing” while another of the women reported “someone in gleaming clothes said such a thing”, those two statements are generally compatible.

Introduction

I Cor 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
I Cor 15:4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

Acts 1:3 After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God.


Preparations
Mark 16:1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body.


The beginning of the day

John 20:1 [first half] Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb

Matt 28:1 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.

Luke 24:1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb.

Mark 16:2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb
Mark 16:3 and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"


Meanwhile, at the tomb

Matt 28:2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.
Matt 28:3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.
Matt 28:4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.


The women arrive at the tomb; Mary Magdalen runs to get the disciples

Mark 16:4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away.

Luke 24:2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb,

John 20:1 [second half] and [Mary M.] saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.
John 20:2 So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!"


Meanwhile, the women are back at the tomb

Luke 24:3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
Luke 24:4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.
Luke 24:5 [first half] In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground,

Mark 16:5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.
Mark 16:6 "Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him.

Matt 28:5 The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified.
Matt 28:6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.

Luke 24:5 [second half] but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead?
Luke 24:6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee:
Luke 24:7 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.'"
Luke 24:8 Then they remembered his words.

Matt 28:7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

Mark 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'"
Mark 16:8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid. [Hold your horses, Mark gets to the part where they tell the disciples in just a few verses. See Mark 16:10-11]

Matt 28:8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

Luke 24:9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others.
Luke 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles.
Luke 24:11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense.

Peter goes to the tomb
Note: The time overlaps in part with the time some women were still at the tomb or coming from the tomb

John 20:3 So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb.

Luke 24:12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.

John 20:4 Both [Peter and John] were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first.
John 20:5 He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in.
John 20:6 Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there,
John 20:7 as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen.
John 20:8 Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed.
John 20:9 (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)
John 20:10 Then the disciples went back to their homes,

Mary's second visit to the tomb; she meets Jesus

John 20:11 but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb
John 20:12 and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.
John 20:13 They asked her, "Woman, why are you crying?" "They have taken my Lord away," she said, "and I don't know where they have put him."

Mark 16:9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons.

John 20:14 At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.
John 20:15 "Woman," he said, "why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?" Thinking he was the gardener, she said, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him."
John 20:16 Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher).
John 20:17 Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"
John 20:18 Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: "I have seen the Lord!" And she told them that he had said these things to her.

Mark 16:10 She [Mary M.] went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping.
Mark 16:11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.

Jesus shows himself to the women near the tomb

Matt 28:9 Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him.
Matt 28:10 Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me."

The guards

Matt 28:11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened.
Matt 28:12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money,
Matt 28:13 telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.'
Matt 28:14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble."
Matt 28:15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

Jesus meets two on the road to Emmaus

Mark 16:12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country.

Luke 24:13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem.
Luke 24:14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened.
Luke 24:15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them;
Luke 24:16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
Luke 24:17 He asked them, "What are you discussing together as you walk along?" They stood still, their faces downcast.
Luke 24:18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?"
Luke 24:19 "What things?" he asked. "About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.
Luke 24:20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him;
Luke 24:21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place.
Luke 24:22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning
Luke 24:23 but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive.
Luke 24:24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."
Luke 24:25 He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!
Luke 24:26 Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?"
Luke 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Luke 24:28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther.
Luke 24:29 But they urged him strongly, "Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over." So he went in to stay with them.
Luke 24:30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them.
Luke 24:31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight.
Luke 24:32 They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"

Jesus meets his disciples that evening

Mark 16:13 These [the two walking in the country] returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.

Luke 24:33 They [the two in the country who had been on the road to Emmaus] got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together
Luke 24:34 and saying, "It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon."

I Cor 15:5 [first half] and that he [Jesus] appeared to Peter,

Luke 24:35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.

I Cor 15:5 [second half] and then [Jesus appeared] to the Twelve.

Luke 24:36 While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."

John 20:19 On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”

Luke 24:37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost.

Mark 16:14 Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

Luke 24:38 He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
Luke 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”
Luke 24:40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet.

John 20:20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.
John 20:21 Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you."
John 20:22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
John 20:23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

Mark 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation.
Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Mark 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
Mark 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Luke 24:41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?”
Luke 24:42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish,
Luke 24:43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.
Luke 24:44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.
Luke 24:46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day,
Luke 24:47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Luke 24:48 You are witnesses of these things.”

Jesus’ other appearances after that dinner. An exact timeframe for these is not given.

I Cor 15:6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.
I Cor 15:7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,

The first time Thomas sees the risen Jesus

John 20:24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came.
John 20:25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
John 20:26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!”
John 20:27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
John 20:28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
John 20:29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
John 20:30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.
John 20:31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Jesus meets the disciples again in Galilee

Matt 28:16 [first half] Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee,

John 21:1 Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias. It happened this way:
John 21:2 Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together.
John 21:3 “I'm going out to fish,” Simon Peter told them, and they said, “We'll go with you.” So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
John 21:4 Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.
John 21:5 He called out to them, "Friends, haven't you any fish?" "No," they answered.
John 21:6 He said, "Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some." When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish.
John 21:7 Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, "It is the Lord," he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water.
John 21:8 The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards.
John 21:9 When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread.
John 21:10 Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish you have just caught.”
John 21:11 Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn.
John 21:12 Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” None of the disciples dared ask him, “Who are you?” They knew it was the Lord.
John 21:13 Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish.
John 21:14 This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
John 21:15 When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?" "Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
John 21:16 Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?" He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
John 21:17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?" Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my sheep.
John 21:18 I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go."
John 21:19 Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"
John 21:20 Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, "Lord, who is going to betray you?")
John 21:21 When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"
John 21:22 Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me."
John 21:23 Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
John 21:24 This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.

Matt 28:16 [second half] to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.
Matt 28:17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.
Matt 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Matt 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Matt 28:20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.""

Jesus’ ascension

Luke 24:49 "I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high."

Acts 1:4 On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about.
Acts 1:5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
Acts 1:6 So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"
Acts 1:7 He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.
Acts 1:8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

Luke 24:50 When he had led them out to the vicinity of Bethany, he lifted up his hands and blessed them.
Luke 24:51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven.

Mark 16:19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.

Acts 1:9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
Acts 1:10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them.
Acts 1:11 "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."
Acts 1:12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day's walk from the city.

Luke 24:52 Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy.
Luke 24:53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God. [until Pentecost anyway, but that is outside the scope of the request]

Conclusion

Mark 16:20 Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

I Cor 15:8 and last of all he appeared to me [Paul] also, as to one abnormally born.

John 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

The gospel: how central is Jesus' death and resurrection?

The gospel of Matthew has 28 chapters; the last 8 of them are spent on the week stretching from Palm Sunday to the Resurrection. The other gospels have a similar emphasis: not only the largest section, but the pride of place as culmination and climax is given to Jesus' death and resurrection.

I remember, years ago watching Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ, the scene -- was it a flashback? -- where a woman caught in sin was forgiven by Jesus. The look in her eyes when Jesus was led off to execution seemed to ask a question: if Christ is executed, is forgiveness still the last word for me? Or am I next?

Death takes all of Jesus' miracles and gives them over to the powers of darkness, where we hear a mocking, "So what?" to them all. If Jesus stays in the tomb, eventually the miraculous bread is gone, the storms are back, sickness is back, forgiveness is gone, death is back, and that is the last word. If Christ is not raised, that forgiveness he announced to us is not the last word. If Christ is not raised, the powers of darkness win and the kingdom of God is not among us.

I have heard some Christians say that some groups over-emphasize the cross of Christ: that it is not so central to Christianity, that Jesus should not be portrayed on it, that Christian thought and devotion and artwork overemphasizes what happened there. But Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul all put the focus on Jesus' death and resurrection. We can shy away from it because it is difficult to wrap our minds around. We don't necessarily appear at our most sophisticated when we struggle to grasp and articulate everything that has happened there. Paul said it very succinctly, that given the choice of talking about miraculous signs, or wisdom, or Christ crucified, he knew what he would choose: "While I was with you, I resolved to know nothing but Christ, and him crucified."

He is risen!

He spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. (Acts 2:31-32)

He is risen indeed. Praise GOD.

---

Additional celebrations spotted in the blogroll:

He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen
He is risen indeed. Alleluia.

The Ancient Jewish Lectionary: Passover, Resurrection, and the Ultimate Liberation

It was many years ago now in long message-board talks with a zealous and adamantly anti-Christian Jew that I first became aware of some interesting things about the Jewish lectionary. From references I have since found in the Talmud, I expect that the lectionary cycle with its selected readings was already taking shape before Jesus' birth.

I suspect the Spirit of God had a hand in the choice of readings. The prescribed readings included:

for haftarah on Passover the passage of the ‘dry bones’ (Megilah 31a)

If the disciples, any of of them, had gone to worship when Jesus was in the tomb, they would have heard from the appointed reading:

The hand of the LORD came upon me. He took me out by the spirit of the LORD and set me down in the valley. It was full of bones. He led me all around them; there were very many of them spread over the valley, and they were very dry. He said to me, "O mortal, can these bones live again?" I replied, O Lord GOD, only You know. And He said to me, "Prophesy over these bones and say to them: O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD! Thus said the Lord GOD to these bones: I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live again." (Ezekiel 37:1-5, JPS)

The JPS study notes on this section helpfully add the reasons why this section was selected for the Passover reading in the ancient Jewish lectionaries:

mostly likely because the restoration envisaged here is interpreted as a second, liberating Passover-like experience or because the rabbinic tradition that the second, ultimate liberation would transpire on Passover.

If the disciples or Jesus' family had gone to worship when he was in the tomb, that is likely what they would have heard, and why they would have heard it.

Spiritual resources for the terminally ill and caregivers: Where, O grave, is your sting?

What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all-- how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died-- more than that, who was raised to life-- is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written: "For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered." No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.

For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Rom 8:31-39)

---

So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed -- in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory." "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O grave, is your sting?" The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain. (1 Cor 15 (portions))

Not even death can separate us from God's love, and death has no victory over us.

In the end, what matters is this:

• Christ gives us real forgiveness for real sins.
• Christ gives us real resurrection after real death.

The Resurrection with Moltmann

Jesus’ resurrection from the dead by God was never regarded as a private and isolated miracle for his authentication, but as the beginning of the general resurrection of the dead, i.e. as the beginning of the end of history in the midst of history. His resurrection was not regarded as a fortuitous miracle in an unchangeable world, but as the beginning of the eschatological transformation of the world by its creator. ...

For the Easter hope shines not only forwards into the unknown newness of the history which it opens up, but also backwards over the graveyards of history, and in their midst first on the grave of a crucified man who appeared in that prelude. (Jurgen Moltmann in The Crucified God. Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1993, pp. 162-163)

---

This is the end of the Moltmann series, for those keeping track of such things.

Christ is risen!

Proclaiming Christ's Resurrection: Reclaiming the Good News

Have you ever heard someone say that July 4 is the day on which Americans believe that John Hancock and other revolutionaries signed the Declaration of Independence from Britain? How about saying that Julius Caesar was a man that historians believe may have once ruled Rome? I haven't either.

But that is the game that many play with Jesus' resurrection from the dead; that it is merely the day on which Christians believe that Jesus rose bodily from the dead, three days after a public execution. Over 20 sources within a century of the event mention Jesus' resurrection; a number of them have it as the main reason for bothering to write the documents that mention it. The opponents are conspicuous by their silence. If it were any other event, it would be considered beyond rational dispute. But it's not any other event. It is an event whose reality plainly disproves atheism and materialism and secularism. The resurrection is also an event which renders silly the traditional hand-wringing about choosing a religion; the resurrection is a clarifying moment in the history of the world. This is offensive to many. And because it is offensive to so many, the proclamation of Jesus' resurrection is often muted -- when it is not drowned out by shouts of protest.

This proclamation -- that Christ is risen from the dead -- cannot be muted, or apologized for, or proclaimed in a whisper lest it might offend, because it is good news. When it is proclaimed rightly it is good news even for those who might be offended. Because even those who might be offended know the score. The weight of death and hopelessness is heavy on the world. Life is too often marked by anger, fear, and hatred. Love is poisoned by greed and pride. And finally hope is dimmed by exhaustion and apathy.

Christ's resurrection changes that. It allows us to trust his promise to raise us up at the last day, to believe his promise to make our own graves empty, because his is empty already. It gives birth to a living hope that our lives are not so fleeting and meaningless as we had feared; that we are not, after all, unloved and unnoticed in the world, but beyond wildest dreams we have the love of God, creator of heaven and earth. Christ's resurrection also highlights the promise made at his death, the promise he made as he raised the cup the night he was betrayed: a covenant for the forgiveness of sins. Christ's death and resurrection open the way for the washing of our souls, the forgiveness of our own wrongs, a release from guilt and shame. It opens the door for us to forgive others, to love again, to keep no record of wrongs. In his death our hungry spirits are fed, our thirsty souls can drink their fill. Christ's love for us can create love in our hearts where there was none before, can create humility where there was none before, can create a desire to return to God. It brings reconciliation between us and God; it restores meaning to our lives. Christ creates hope where there was none before.

The angry sounds of protest we hear over the message of Christ -- those are the sounds of those who have not yet heard: hatred can be put away now. God's blessing is back in the land.

Christ is risen indeed! It's cause for joy.