Resurrection and Hope

Resurrection and Hope March 26, 2016

I had an e-mail from a reader of the blog a while back, and it has taken me much longer than I had hoped to begin answering the questions that I was asked. Here is one of them, which seems timely:

[W]hile I understand that you are sceptical of the prospect of an afterlife, I wonder what your opinion would be on the possibility of a physical resurrection, and could that be something that a Christian could responsibly hope for, if not expect. Tying into this, I know, as you’ve asserted multiple times on your blog that we cannot expect to prove the Resurrection happened historically, but would you say there is still room to hope for the possibility that it happened?

I think this is a great question, for a number of reasons. It is a topic I address in my book The Burial of Jesus (which I tend to mention on the Saturday between Good Friday and Easter most years, because of the title, even though the book is as much about the rise of belief in Jesus’ resurrection as about the actual burial of Jesus).

The short answer is that it is not at all inappropriate to hope. On the one hand, I would say that, if the afterlife were indeed supposed to be the focus of human existence, then we ought to expect more and clearer revelations and explanations on that topic than we have received. Instead, the idea appears late in the Jewish Scriptures. And so I think we ought to be focused on these matters less than we are.

But on the other hand, to the extent that the future – whether for us personally, for our species, or for anything at all – is a context that has the potential to give meaning to our present existence, or deprive us of it, I would emphasize the need to not put the cart before the horse. Belief that there is an afterlife arose in the Biblical context not as a response to proof, but as an expression of the conviction that the supreme God is so concerned with justice, and so powerful, that not even death will prevent God from doing what is right. There is no reason that those who view God in this way cannot maintain the same conviction about an afterlife. And, conversely, no one should resent the fact that they need to do so merely on the same basis that people first developed and subsequently held to the viewpoint.

For those who may be interested, I explore some of these matters related to the theology of an afterlife in my forthcoming book Theology and Science Fiction, about which you’ll be hearing more here in the coming months.

As for the question of what may have led the earliest Christians to the convictions they had specifically about the resurrection of Jesus, let me provide a long excerpt from my book, which you can buy for a mere $2.99 if you’d like to read more of my thoughts on the matter.

One can only speculate about what the first post-Easter experience of “seeing Jesus” may have been like. It is alluded to, but ultimately left undescribed, in 1 Corinthians 15:5, where Paul writes simply that he “appeared to Peter.” The challenge to the historian is to reconstruct a plausible scenario that could have given rise to the evidence available in later sources. Perhaps, as we have suggested above, Peter returned to Galilee and to fishing. He wrestled with the failure of his expectations, with his own failure in denying Jesus, and perhaps with questions about whether things might have turned out differently had no one drawn a sword and cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant that fateful night (Mk. 14:47). On one particular day he goes fishing, taking some of Jesus’ other closest followers with him. They catch nothing, and much of the time is spent in silence. Then, they see a figure on the shore. The figure asks if they have caught anything, and they say no. He tells them to try again, and suggests a spot. They lower their net –and catch a huge number of fish. Peter makes a connection. Isn’t this the spot where he first met Jesus, who did something similar on that occasion? He looks up. Perhaps the figure on the shore has already vanished. Perhaps he is still standing there, and they have breakfast without exchanging many words, as suggested in John 21. In either case, at some point after the figure has departed, Peter suddenly has a flash of insight: it was Jesus. He tells the others, but at least initially, they are skeptical, and for a time they remain unpersuaded.

Peter spends much of the days that follow in prayer, seeking information and advice from rabbis and experts in the Law. What do the Scriptures in fact say about what the Messiah would be like? Could the Messiah suffer? Could the Messiah return from the dead? Could the Messiah enter the messianic age of the resurrection ahead of everyone else? Were there passages that left open such possibilities, texts that had been neglected but which might allow for such an unthinkable, paradoxical, surprising Messiah? After much reflection, exploration, and soulsearching, Peter contacts the rest of the Twelve, and they gather to hear what Peter has to say.They listen, and when he is done explaining to them what he has come to believe, he leads them in the prayer Jesus had taught them. “Father…” they begin. When they reach the words “Your will be done,” they mean it as they had never truly meant it before. “Not our will, but yours.” A sense of peace washes over them. A sense of certainty that Peter is right, that Jesus has in fact been raised. And in their dreams, and in glimpses in crowds, in mysterious encounters with unknown individuals, and even in mystical visions, they too experience this phenomenon of“Jesus appearing.”

Could this be the way events unfolded, and Christian faith in the resurrection of Jesus arose? What we have written in this section is admittedly speculative. There seems to be little hope of gaining access by means of the extant written sources to the actual experiences that early Christians had, the ones that convinced them Jesus was alive. Even Paul only alludes to his own direction-changing experience, and never describes it. Perhaps this is appropriate: religious experiences are regularly characterized by those who have them as ineffable, as “beyond words.”The Gospel of Mark suggested that Jesus would be seen, but doesn’t describe the experience, at least not in our earliest manuscripts. Our two earliest sources thus leave little for us to work with at this point.

But this much can be said: the act of completely surrendering has transformed many lives. Such unconditional surrender to God seems to have been central to Jesus’ own spirituality. There would be something fundamentally appropriate if it turned out to be central to the rise of the conviction in the earliest disciples that Jesus had been raised, as it has been for Christians all through the ages since then. But even if we choose to speculate about the nature of these early Easter experiences, the truth is that, in the end, we do not have access to them. Those who have religious experiences often find words fail them. If we choose to fill the silence of our earliest sources with speculation, it should be speculation that respects the fact that those who have had religious experiences regularly acknowledge that, in the end, they defy description.

And one more brief snippet that addresses a concern some may have in relation to the longer excerpt above (although the comment is made primarily in connection with other possibilities):

Some readers who know the New Testament well will probably be reluctant to accept the claims made in this section. Speaking of the disciples’ experiences of “seeing Jesus” as dreams and visions does not fit with some of the stories in the Gospels, in which Jesus even eats with people and was perhaps touched by them. However, it is important to observe that all such details which emphasize the physicality of Jesus’ resurrection body are in the latest of the New Testament Gospels: Luke and John. The earlier Gospels do not specify that Jesus’ resurrection body had this physical, material character, and our earliest Gospel, in its earliest form that we have access to,does not describe Jesus appearing at all.

I hope you found these excerpts from The Burial of Jesus: What Does History Have to Do With Faith? interesting enough that it makes you want to read more!


"This seems a very strange comment, one offered as though completely unaware of things I’ve ..."

Elephantine, Leontopolis, and Gnosticism
"This article includes one remark warrants emphasis. "...there’s much more to be done if this ..."

Elephantine, Leontopolis, and Gnosticism
"This is genuinely fascinating, but as an inveterate nerd, I must ask -- where's the ..."

Guest Lecture and Academic Minute on ..."
"Yes, I agree. Technical arguments which supposedly prove (or disprove) the Resurrection are a waste ..."

Copycat Anti-Religion

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • The Eh’theist

    It would appear that the Easter Bunny has been mischievous and stolen a number of spaces between words in your citations. Just a psa to let you know, feel free to delete this afterwards.

    • Thanks for taking the time to let me know. It had already come to my attention, and so hopefully now is fixed. Can you take another look, if it isn’t too much trouble, to see whether it is now displaying properly?

      I should have known that copying an excerpt from the book would be more hassle than simply copying and then pasting…

      • The Eh’theist

        Only possible remaining one I found is in the 2nd paragraph of the 1st citation: soulsearching. Not sure if you intend it to be one word or not.

        Likely the source you copied from omits adding spaces when it flows text and wraps lines so you don’t have blank space starting lines and throwing off the alignment. Similar to what can happen when you copy paste from notepad with word wrap enabled.

        • “Soulsearching” is in the text as I wrote it, although when I copied it, I wondered (as I hope I also did when I wrote the book) whether it should be “soul-searching” or something else.

          Thanks so much again!

  • Thanks for giving this short commentary from your book. I plan to order it.

    What confuses me though based on your points (and previous articles on your blog related to this) is how visions and experiences if they aren’t based in reality can in any sense give one hope?

    After 55 years as a committed Christian, when I came to realize that Christianity can’t be objectively true, I ceased being a Christian.

    But it appears that you still identify as a Christian, even teach Sunday School at a Baptist church though you don’t think that most of Christian doctrines are true and that there probably isn’t an afterlife.

    Do you deal with any of your personal reasons why you still think of yourself as a Christian in your book, or in another book?

    Thanks for your blog. I also like your commentaries on science fiction as I am an aficionado of that.

    • Sorry for taking so long to respond to your comment. A short answer is that I have come to conclude that all religious language, if it is meaningful at all, is symbolic, a pointer towards and exploration of mystery rather than an explanation. And so the reason I consider myself a Christian is that I find that the symbols of the Christian tradition resonate with me and point in ways that are meaningful to me towards the ultimate mysteries of existence. The idea of a crucified messiah, one who overcomes through love and faithfulness rather than violence and hate, is a powerful and challenging one.

      It is only if one accepts as foundational the premises of Christian fundamentalism, that religion is about knowing facts and living forever, that the recognition of problems with those two premises will necessarily lose to a complete loss of faith, rather than a change in one’s beliefs.

  • John MacDonald

    Belief in an afterlife carries along with it a shadow of egoism. No Christian believes that, after death, bacteria, fungi, plants, mollusks, spiders (etc.) live on after death. And yet, these organic beings are just as “alive” as we are. It is little more than special pleading to set aside your favorite form of life for an afterlife, while all other forms of life are, in your mind, destined for nothing but oblivion.

  • Matthew Green

    James, I have my own hypothesis as to how the Christian faith began. I suspect that the body of Jesus was temporarily placed in the tomb by Joseph and then reburied somewhere else. I read in a social-scientific commentary on the gospels that an empty tomb would be understood by Jesus’ followers as God’s way of vindicating him; that God disapproved of the crucifixion and the shameful burial of Jesus. I suspect that finding the tomb to be empty, they came to believe that God had reversed the judgment of the enemies of Jesus and therefore began to pray to Jesus, asking for forgiveness, asking for a sign if Jesus was alive, etc. I am convinced that the disciples had a series of visions. Both individual and collective group visions that convinced them that Jesus had risen, something akin to what we would call a “mass hallucination”.

  • John MacDonald

    I’ve always felt Jesus protesting his place in God’s plan in the prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane seemed historical: “Take this cup away from Me” (Mark 14:36).” If Mark was just inventing Jesus as a divine character (as mythicists say), you would think Mark would portray Jesus as a paradigmatic follower of God, shrugging off the temporary threat of suffering of the cross with the knowledge there would be a speedy resurrection. But Jesus is in agony in the Garden of Gethsemane – hardly a divine, mythical being.

    • Matthew Green

      John, that’s very intriguing. This has never occurred to me before. That Jesus would ask God if it was possible that he could bail out at the last moment is exactly the sort of thing you would expect from a fallible and nervous human being, not the divine Son who knows all that is going to take place. Most mythicsts that I know of tend to believe in some kind of dying-and-rising savior myth as the basis of the death and resurrection of Jesus. However, it was not only the death of Jesus that was shameful but it was also the burial of Jesus that was shameful, too. If the story of Jesus is purely mythical, having been in any way borrowed, based upon, or syncretized from earlier myths, wouldn’t Jesus have died a honorable death and wouldn’t he have been given an honorable burial?

      • John MacDonald

        “Take this cup away from Me” (Mark 14:36)” contradicts the thesis that Mark’s gospel is presenting a symbolic unfolding of a mythical hero undergoing God’s plan. It is, rather, a story of a fallible human being struggling to exist in a plan that scares him. The prayer in the Garden is a vivid portrayal of the emotions Jesus was going through: “33And He took with Him Peter and James and John, and began to be very distressed and troubled. 34And He said to them, “My soul is deeply grieved to the point of death; remain here and keep watch.” 35And He went a little beyond them, and fell to the ground and began to pray that if it were possible, the hour might pass Him by (Mark 14:34-35).” The mythicist’s thesis is simply wrong.

        • Matthew Green

          Excellent point! I believe that the baptism, prediction of his second coming, the crucifixion, and shameful burial of Jesus were events that the earliest Christians would not make up. If Jesus was a mythic hero or another dying-and-rising god, why wouldn’t he have an honorable death and an honorable burial? I think we see serious cognitive dissonance in the gospel stories that are probably authentic. If Jesus was a fallible human being who felt that he was in need of God’s forgiveness, then it makes sense that he would get baptized. Later on, as Jesus became more sinless and divinized in the eyes of the early church, Christians would invent a rationalization for his baptism; Jesus was setting an example for all Christians to follow. The same for the failed prediction that the Son of Man would come in the lifetime of his disciples. This didn’t happen so cognitive dissonance turned a failed prophecy into the theology of preterism. Crucifixion was a shameful death so cognitive dissonance might have led to atonement theology.

      • John MacDonald

        Mythicist Neil Godfrey says: “I don’t find the portrayal of Jesus as “real” or in “convincing detail” at all. He is two-dimensional, without personality or character, a mere cardboard figure who speaks and acts according to theological requirements of the author.”

        The prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane contradicts this. Jesus is vividly portrayed here as a man in agony.

        • Matthew Green

          I agree. The same with the crucifixion; it shows a man in agony.

  • John MacDonald

    I think regarding the afterlife in the New Testament, before the general resurrection at the end of days, the Christian dead are “asleep” in Christ (1 Cor 15:18), as Paul says. Then, Jesus’ view seems to be: “In the resurrection, people will neither marry nor be given in marriage. Instead, they will be like the angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30).”