[play mini-movie called 'Spiritual Cafeteria' produced by Floodgate Productions].
One time at University I spent all night finishing an assignment despite having a major exam the next day. So I hadn’t done an ounce of study. All my friends had a good night sleep and were in the library studying through the morning. I was sitting down with my head in my arms hoping the world would end. My friends woke me up and insisted I sit the exam. All the events leading up to the exam suggested I’d fail. No sleep, no study. I had no mind capable of thinking through problems in structural engineering. Almost certainly my friends thought I’d fail but they were too nice to say otherwise.
When I got the exam result it had PASS written on it. The exact opposite of what should have happened. The result was contrary to all the known facts. It should not have happened. It was unexpected and undeserved and I was filled with a remarkable sense of relief.
The events leading up to the resurrection of Jesus didn’t look too good. The ‘King of the Jews’ died the death of a criminal between two other criminals. The mourning and wailing were profound, the three hours of darkness over the whole land at the place called ‘the Skull’. Turn with me to Luke 23:35. Luke says that ‘the people stood there watching and the rulers even sneered at him’ (Lk 23:35). All the hopes and expectations for Jesus the Messiah seemed to vanish as he took his last breathe. The possibility of a resurrection seemed absolutely contrary to all the observable facts.
So when the women discovered the empty tomb they were frightened and they needed reminding that Jesus said he will rise again. The situation is overwhelming and they ran back to tell the disciples. Luke tells us about an age-old problem—the men did not believe the women because their words seemed to them like nonsense (Lk 24:11). But I might add—the women were right!
A few years later, the Apostle Paul is giving a speech about Christianity in Athens. All is going well until he comes to the topic of the resurrection. Let me read the minute extract from the meeting, ‘For God has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead. When they heard about the resurrection from the dead, some of them sneered’. (Acts 17:31–32).
The resurrection of Jesus hasn’t got fantastic media coverage. In the second century, Marcion rejected the resurrection of the body because he thought the flesh was evil and it was beyond redemption. Rather ironically in modern times, the loudest criticism of the resurrection comes from a churchman. In his book Escaping from Fundamentalism, John Selby Spong argues that the resurrection is no more than a parable of future hope. He says there is no such thing as a physical resurrection. He argues that the resurrection is picture language which is meant to invoke within us a Christ-power which is otherwise unattainable.
So what are we to make of the resurrection on this Easter Sunday? Is belief in the resurrection for those with weak minds? Is the resurrection for, perhaps as Richard Dawkins might say, for those simpletons who believe in creationism?
It’s all a bit much for Alan Jones who said one year, ‘The Easter message is a simple one. It’s just reminding us that goodness can and will triumph. And that’s the hope we carry with us this weekend. Without being too religious, we need to rediscover our faith. We need to rediscover the humanity and decency which lie at the core of Christianity. And that’s the challenge I guess for all of us’.
The Bible doesn’t defend the resurrection. Rather it anticipates the resurrection of Jesus and it relies upon the testimony of eye witnesses to establish the facts. And it interprets the historical fact of the resurrection through the lens of the Scriptures and from the words of Jesus himself. The Bible does not engage in scientific speculation or meaningless philosophical probing. Although Thomas anticipates the modern person when he asks for empirical evidence, ‘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 20:25).
There can be no Christianity apart from the death of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins. There can be no Christianity apart and his raising from the dead on the third day. So its vitally important to establish the credentials of such a position. Like the Apostle in Athens, we can appeal to the testimony of Scripture itself and to the inclination of our own poets and philosophers.
This is where our postmodern scholars are particularly helpful. For the claim of objectivity which science makes is exposed as a fraudulent position. The scientific method is based upon a set of assumptions about the world and the human condition. And while science does, and will continue, to make an important contribution to society it does not do so from a position of neutrality. The postmodernism person—and if you are not a Christian and not an academic you are probably one of these people—the postmodern person is suspicious of anyone who makes a claim to universal truth. It argues that all truth is someone’s truth which inevitably represents a grab for power.
We know that politicians often say, ‘this is the reality of the situation’ or ‘here is the truth’. And we are suspicious of these words because we know that often behind this so called ‘truth’ is a grab for political power. The postmodern person extends this suspicion of politicians to anyone who claims authority—including the church. There are weaknesses in this position but it is true that no-one observes life from a position of neutrality.
The postmodern suspicion of authority is based on atheistic assumptions which powerfully unravel the scientist’s claim to be objective in the name of truth. Nevertheless, scientists such as Dawkins and Spong rely upon the power of the mind to progress humanity. They want us to enter into a new stage in cultural evolution that leaves the childishness of faith in ancient Scriptures behind. So these Scriptures either have to be discarded or grossly reinterpreted to remain relevant in our sophisticated world. Either way, the truth of the resurrection is the first casualty.
Contrary to the evidence, scientists like Dawkins believe that humankind has the skills to master ourselves and the world. Incredibly, all this in the face of a profound loss of hope stimulated by disasters such as the Holocaust and the Twin Towers. Are we really moving forwards? Is humanity really on the road to perfection? Can the world really save itself?
The inclination of our poets and philosophers is to describe and lament the human situation, but offer no meaningful solution. For Camus, the only serious question left for the philosopher is the question of suicide. The French philosopher, Jean-Paul Satre, wrote a little volume called, ‘Nausea’ in which he concludes that humankind is a ‘useless passion’.
Our scientists, our philosophers and our poets are very good at asking questions but are very bad at providing answers that satisfy the soul.
When we return to the Bible we see that the reality of the resurrection is attested to by eye-witnesses. Luke tells us that the women discovered the empty tomb, then Jesus appeared to his disciples, ‘they were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost’ (Lk 24:37). After that, Paul says, he appeared to more than five hundred people, then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and lastly he appeared to Paul himself (1 Cor. 15:10–11). The historical credibility of the resurrection relies on the testimony of independent eye-witnesses who saw their risen Lord. The Bible recognises the obvious problems if this testimony is wrong. So the apostle says, ‘And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith’ (1 Cor. 15:14).
It’s an old but great story. Sherlock Holmes and his friend Dr. John Watson went on a camping trip. They set up their tent and fell asleep. Some hours later, Holmes woke his faithful friend. ‘Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see’. Watson replied, ‘I see millions of stars’. ‘What does that tell you’? asked Holmes.
Watson pondered for a minute. ‘Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Horologically, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, it’s evident the Lord is all powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. “
Then—after a pause, Watson said, ‘Well, Holmes, What does it tell you’? Holmes was silent for a moment and then he said. ‘Watson, you imbecile, someone has stolen our tent’. In the same way as Dr Watson missed the blindingly obvious, ‘so the birth and rapid rise of the Christian Church [...] remains an unsolved puzzle for any historian who refuses to take seriously the only explanation offered by the church itself—the resurrection’ (Charles Moule).
At a funeral service, the preacher got carried away and his sermon far exceeded the time limit. Finally his assistant whispered, ‘It’s getting late sir’! ‘I know’, the preacher said, ‘But this doctrine of the resurrection is so important’ ‘Yes, sir’, the assistant said, ‘But we’ve got to get the body over to the cemetery in time for it’.
In his recollection of the life of Jesus, Dr Luke gives us an extended explanation of the death and resurrection of Jesus. It begins with the perspective of the those on that first Easter Sunday—the women and the disciples whose reactions we mentioned at short time ago. The women return and report the empty tomb to the disciples, and then, according to verse 12, ‘Peter, 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’.
Peter leaves the scene pondering the meaning of the empty tomb. Luke, who is recording these events for us, anticipates that the informed reader will also ponder the meaning of the empty tomb. So after Luke’s record of the story of the resurrection in 24:1–12, he immediately moves on to explain the significance of what has happened—not only for Peter’s sake but for our sake as well.
The scene changes but the pondering continues into verses 13 and 14. ‘Now on the same day (as the resurrection) two of them (Cleopas and probably his wife) were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. They were talking with each other about everything that had happened’. Their conversation was heavy with sorrow (Luke 24:17); they were filled disappointment (Luke 24:21) and confusion (24:22–24).
The conversation that takes place on the road to Emmaus is a brilliant explanation of the resurrection which happened earlier that day. Cleopas and his wife are heading home, and while they are talking (verse 15), ‘Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; but they were kept from recognising him’ (Luke 24:15–16). The conversation with Jesus picks up and we learn that Cleopas and his wife get the meaning of Christmas wrong; they get the meaning of Good Friday wrong—so it was bound to happen: they get the meaning of Easter Sunday wrong.
They know the stories but it just doesn’t make any sense to them. Unlike us, they were close enough to original events not to doubt the testimony of the eye-witnesses. They don’t doubt the facts—they just don’t understand the facts about Jesus. So how did they get Christmas so wrong? In verse 19, they start with the popular view that Jesus is no more than a prophet who is powerful in word and deed. When the birth of Jesus is foretold, it is said that he ‘will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever’ (Luke 1:32–33).
They forget the Christmas message. They must have been out fishing or too busy cutting the Christmas turkey. They do not recognise that Jesus is the Christ—the Son of God. They forget the miracles. They forget the healings. They forget the transfiguration. So the first reason for not believing in the resurrection is a failure to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.
The next problem for Cleopas and his wife relates to Good Friday. They can’t handle a king who suffers and dies. They say in verse 20, ‘The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; but we had hoped that he was the one that was going to redeem Israel’ (Luke 24:20–21). It seems nonsense to them that anything could be achieved through death of a King. As they read their Old Testament, they saw the glory not the suffering, the crown but not the cross.
So when it comes to understanding the resurrection they had no where to go. The resurrection only makes sense if there is belief that Jesus is the King who died on the cross for the forgiveness of sins. He did not deserve to die. Yet in love he bore our sins on the tree so that anyone who asks for forgiveness can receive a free and complete pardon. Then God raised Jesus up three days later in victory to take his place as the rightful ruler of the universe.
Wolfhart Pannenberg is a German theologian. In a magazine interview he was discussing the resurrection and he said this, ‘The evidence for Jesus’ resurrection is so strong that nobody would question it except for two things: First, it is a very unusual event. And second, if you believe it happened, you have to change the way you live’.
The resurrection is true and it must change the way we live. It’s much easier these days to accept a view about Jesus that doesn’t make huge claims. It’s easier to believe in a Jesus that has no authority over us. There is a choice for us to make: either the full serving of Jesus or the ‘Jesus-light’ version. Remember? The same Jesus without the hard to digest “son of God’ status. Then throw in the 51/49 bar—if 51% of your life is good and 49% of your life is bad, then you make it into heaven. It pairs really well with the ‘Jesus-light’.
The full version of Jesus, which includes a physical resurrection, is far more satisfying—and it is true. On one occasion Jesus said, ‘I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never go thirsty’ (John 6:35). In the spiritual cafeteria, only Jesus fully satisfies our deepest needs. The cross—the forgiveness of sin; the empty tomb—the promise of new life.
Luke tells us that as they were speaking to Jesus, Cleopas and his wife’s ‘eyes were opened and they recognised him’. The recognised Jesus as the Son of God who died in order to pardon sin and who rose from the tomb to be the Lord and our Lord. Ask Jesus to open your mind so you recognise him. For he is King and he calls all men and women to submit to him. The promise of sin forgiven, the rock solid promise of the resurrection and life in his kingdom.
It’s the truth and its an offer too good to refuse.
