He is Risen Indeed
Dr. George Sweeting tells of an
incident in the early 1920s when Communist leader Nikolai Bukharin
was sent from Moscow to Kiev to address an anti-God rally. For an
hour he abused and ridiculed the Christian faith until it seemed as
if the whole structure of belief was in ruins. Then questions were
invited. An Orthodox church priest rose and asked to speak. He
turned, faced the people, and gave the Easter greeting, "He is
risen!" Instantly the assembly rose to its feet and the reply came
back loud and clear, "He is risen indeed!"
Is there Life after Death?
Madonna the great singer, attempted
to answer the question of, "Why am I here?" by becoming a diva,
confessing, "There were many years when I thought fame, fortune, and
public approval would bring me happiness. But one day you wake up
and realize they don't... I still felt something was missing... I
wanted to know the meaning of true and lasting happiness and how I
could go about finding it."(The Oprah Magazine, "Oprah talks to
Madonna," January, 2004, 120.)
Others have given up on finding meaning. Kurt Cobain, lead singer of
the Seattle grunge band Nirvana, despaired of life at age 27 and
committed suicide. Jazz-age cartoonist Ralph Barton also found life
to be meaningless, leaving the following suicide note. "I have had
few difficulties, many friends, great successes; I have gone from
wife to wife, and from house to house, visited countries of the
world, but I am fed up with inventing devices to fill up 24 hours of
the day." Josh McDowell, The Resurrection Factor (San Bernardino,
CA. Here's Life Publ., 1981).
Pascal, the great French philosopher believed this inner void we all
experience can only be filled by God. He states, "There is a
God-shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which only Jesus Christ
can fill." William R. Bright, Jesus and the Intellectual (San
Bernardino, CA. Here's Life Publ., 1968),If Pascal is right, then we
would expect Jesus to not only answer the question of our identity
and meaning in this life, but also to give us hope for life after we
die.
Can there be meaning, without God? Not according to atheist Bertrand
Russell, who wrote, "Unless you assume a god, the question of life's
purpose is meaningless." Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life (Grand
Rapids, MI. Zondervan, 2002). Russell resigned himself to ultimately
"rot" in the grave. In his book, Why I am not a Christian, Russell
dismissed everything Jesus said about life's meaning, including his
promise of eternal life.
Jesus Triumphs
Jesus actually defeated death as eyewitnesses claim. He alone is
able to tell us what life is all about, and answer, "Where am I
going?" In order to understand how Jesus' words, life, and death can
establish our identities, give us meaning in life, and provide hope
for the future, we need to understand what he said about God, about
us, and about himself.
Summing up, I use the words of Arthur Ashe, the legendary Wimbledon
player as he was dying of AIDS, which he got due to infected blood
he received during a heart surgery in 1983. From world over, he
received letters from his fans, one of which conveyed. "Why does GOD
have to select you for such a bad disease"?
To this Arthur Ashe replied. The world over 5 crore children start
playing tennis, 50 lakh learn to play tennis, 5 lakh learn
professional tennis, 50,000 come to the circuit, 5000 reach the
grand slam, 50 reach Wimbledon, 4 to semi-final, 2 to the finals,
When I was holding a cup I never asked GOD "Why me?".
And today in pain I should not be asking GOD "Why me?"
Life after death promise keeps us Sweet, Trials keep us Strong,
Sorrow keeps us Human, Failure keeps us Humble, Success keeps us
Glowing, But only GOD KEEPS US GOING..... EVER STRONG...
The Resurrection
The main sources which directly attest the fact of Christ's
Resurrection are the Four Gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul.
Easter morning is so rich in incident, and so crowded with
interested persons, that its complete history presents a rather
complicated tableau. It is not surprising, therefore, that the
partial accounts contained in each of the Four Gospels appear at
first sight hard to harmonize. But whatever exegetic view as to the
visit to the sepulcher by the pious women and the appearance of the
angels we may defend, we cannot deny the Evangelists' agreement as
to the fact that the risen Christ appeared to one or more persons.
According to St. Matthew, He appeared to the holy women, and again
on a mountain in Galilee; according to St. Mark, He was seen by Mary
Magdalene, by the two disciples at Emmaus, and the Eleven before his
Ascension into heaven; according to St. Luke, He walked with the
disciples to Emmaus, appeared to Peter and to the assembled
disciples in Jerusalem; according to St. John, Jesus appeared to
Mary Magdalene, to the ten Apostles on Easter Sunday, to the Eleven
a week later, and to the seven disciples at the Sea of Tiberius. St.
Paul (1 Cor 15.3-8) enumerates another series of apparitions of
Jesus after His Resurrection; he was seen by Cephas, by the Eleven,
by more than 500 brethren, many of whom were still alive at the time
of the Apostle's writing, by James, by all the Apostles, and lastly
by Paul himself.
An Outline
Here is an outline of a possible harmony of the Evangelists' account
concerning the principal events of Easter Sunday.
The holy women carrying the spices previously prepared start out for
the sepulcher before dawn, and reach it after sunrise; they are
anxious about the heavy stone, but know nothing of the official
guard of the sepulcher (Mt 28.1-3; Mr 16.1-3; Lk 24.1; Jn 20.1).
The angel frightened the guards by his brightness, put them to
flight, rolled away the stone, and seated himself not upon (ep autou),
but above (epano autou) the stone (Mt 28.2-4).
Mary Magdalene, Mary the Mother of James, and Salome approach the
sepulcher, and see the stone rolled back, whereupon Mary Magdalene
immediately returns to inform the Apostles (Mk 16.4; Lk 24.2; Jn
20.1-2).
The other two holy women enter the sepulcher, find an angel seated
in the vestibule, who shows them the empty sepulcher, announces the
Resurrection, and commissions them to tell the disciples and Peter
that they shall see Jesus in Galilee (Mt 28.5-7; Mk 16.5-7).
A second group of holy women, consisting of Joanna and her
companions, arrive at the sepulcher, where they have probably agreed
to meet the first group, enter the empty interior, and are
admonished by two angels that Jesus has risen according to His
prediction (Lk 24.10).
Not long after, Peter and John, who were notified by Mary Magdalen,
arrive at the sepulchre and find the linen cloth in such a position
as to exclude the supposition that the body was stolen; for they lay
simply flat on the ground, showing that the sacred body had vanished
out of them without touching them. When John notices this he
believes (Jh 20.3-10).
Mary Magdalen returns to the sepulchre, sees first two angels
within, and then Jesus Himself (Jn 20.11-l6; Mk 16.9).
The two groups of pious women, who probably met on their return to
the city, are favored with the sight of Christ arisen, who
commissions them to tell His brethren that they will see him in
Galilee (Mt 28.8-10; Mk 16.8).
The holy women relate their experiences to the Apostles, but find no
belief (Mk 16.10-11; Lk 24.9-11).
Jesus appears to the disciples, at Emmaus, and they return to
Jerusalem; the Apostles appear to waver between doubt and belief (Mk
16.12-13; Lk 24.13-35).
Christ appears to Peter, and therefore Peter and John firmly believe
in the Resurrection (Luke 24.34; Jn 20.8).
After the return of the disciples from Emmaus, Jesus appears to all
the Apostles excepting Thomas (Mk 16.14; Lk 24.36-43; Jn 20.19-25).
The Apparitions
The harmony of the other apparitions of Christ after His
Resurrection presents no special difficulties. Briefly, therefore,
the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by more than 500
eyewitnesses, whose experience, simplicity, and uprightness of life
rendered them incapable of inventing such a fable, who lived at a
time when any attempt to deceive could have been easily discovered,
who had nothing in this life to gain, but everything to lose by
their testimony, whose moral courage exhibited in their apostolic
life can be explained only by their intimate conviction of the
objective truth of their message. Again the fact of Christ's
Resurrection is attested by the eloquent silence of the Synagogue
which had done everything to prevent deception, which could have
easily discovered deception, if there had been any, which opposed
only sleeping witnesses to the testimony of the Apostles, which did
not punish the alleged carelessness of the official guard, and which
could not answer the testimony of the Apostles except by threatening
them "that they speak no more in this name to any man" (Acts 4.17).
Finally the thousands and millions, both Jews and Gentiles, who
believed the testimony of the Apostles in spite of all the
disadvantages following from such a belief, in short the origin of
the Church, requires for its explanation the reality of Christ's
Resurrection, for the rise of the Church without the Resurrection
would have been a greater miracle than the Resurrection itself.
Opposing Theories
By what means can the evidence for Christ's Resurrection by
overthrown? Three theories of explanation have been advanced, though
the first two have hardly any adherents in our day.
The Swoon Theory
There is the theory of those who assert that Christ did not really
die upon the cross, that His supposed death was only a temporary
swoon, and that His Resurrection was simply a return to
consciousness. This was advocated by Paulus ("Exegetisches Handbuch",
1842, II, p. 929) and in a modified form by Hase ("Gesch. Jesu", n.
112), but it does not agree with the data furnished by the Gospels.
The scourging and the crown of thorns, the carrying of the cross and
the crucifixion, the three hours on the cross and the piercing of
the Sufferer's side cannot have brought on a mere swoon. His real
death is attested by the centurion and the soldiers, by the friends
of Jesus and by his most bitter enemies. His stay in a sealed
sepulchre for thirty-six hours, in an atmosphere poisoned by the
exhalations of a hundred pounds of spices, which would have of
itself sufficed to cause death. Moreover, if Jesus had merely
returned from a swoon, the feelings of Easter morning would have
been those of sympathy rather than those of joy and triumph, the
Apostles would have been roused to the duties of a sick chamber
rather than to apostolic work, the life of the powerful wonderworker
would have ended in ignoble solitude and inglorious obscurity, and
His vaunted sinlessness would have changed into His silent approval
of a lie as the foundation stone of His Church. No wonder that later
critics of the Resurrection, like Strauss, have heaped contempt on
the old theory of a swoon.
The Imposition Theory
The disciples, it is said, stole the body of Jesus from the grave,
and then proclaimed to men that their Lord had risen. This theory
was anticipated by the Jews who "gave a great sum of money to the
soldiers, saying. Say you, His disciples came by night, and stole
him away when we were asleep" (Mt 28.12). The same was urged by
Celsus (Orig., "Contra Cels.", II, 56) with some difference of
detail. But to assume that the Apostles with a burden of this kind
upon their consciences could have preached a kingdom of truth and
righteousness as the one great effort of their lives, and that for
the sake of that kingdom they could have suffered even unto death,
is to assume one of those moral impossibilities which may pass for a
moment in the heat of controversy, but must be dismissed without
delay in the hour of good reflection.
The Vision Theory
This theory as generally understood by its advocates does not allow
visions caused by a Divine intervention, but only such as are the
product of human agencies. For if a Divine intervention be admitted,
we may as well believe, as far as principles are concerned, that God
raised Jesus from the dead. But where in the present instance are
the human agencies which might cause these visions? The idea of a
resurrection from the grave was familiar to the disciples from their
Jewish faith; they had also vague intimations in the prophecies of
the Old Testament; finally, Jesus Himself had always associated His
Resurrection with the predictions of his death. On the other hand,
the disciples' state of mind was one of great excitement; they
treasured the memory of Christ with a fondness which made it almost
impossible for them to believe that He was gone. In short, their
whole mental condition was such as needed only the application of a
spark to kindle the flame. The spark was applied by Mary Magdalen,
and the flame at once spread with the rapidity and force of a
conflagration. What she believed that she had seen, others
immediately believed that they must see. Their expectations were
fulfilled, and the conviction seized the members of the early Church
that the Lord had really risen from the dead.
Such is the vision theory commonly defended by recent critics of the
Resurrection. But however ingeniously it may be devised, it is quite
impossible from an historical point of view.
Criticism
It is incompatible with the state of mind of the Apostles; the
theory presupposes faith and expectancy on the part of the Apostles,
while in point of fact the disciples' faith and expectancy followed
their vision of the risen Christ.
It is inconsistent with the nature of Christ's manifestations; they
ought to have been connected with heavenly glory, or they should
have continued the former intimate relations of Jesus with His
disciples, while actually and consistently they presented quite a
new phase that could not have been expected.
It does not agree with the conditions of the early Christian
community; after the first excitement of Easter Sunday, the
disciples as a body are noted for their cool deliberation rather
than the exalted enthusiasm of a community of visionaries.
It is incompatible with the length of time during which the
apparitions lasted; visions such as the critics suppose have never
been known to last long, while some of Christ's manifestations
lasted a considerable period.
It is not consistent with the fact that the manifestations were made
to numbers at the same instant.
It does not agree with the place where most of the manifestations
were made. visionary appearances would have been expected in
Galilee, while most apparitions of Jesus occurred in Judea.
It is inconsistent with the fact that the visions came to a sudden
end on the day of Ascension.
Keim admits that enthusiasm, nervousness, and mental excitement on
the part of the disciples do not supply a rational explanation of
the facts as related in the Gospels. According to him, the visions
were directly granted by God and the glorified Christ; they may even
include a "corporeal appearance" for those who fear that without
this they would lose all. But Keim's theory satisfies neither the
Church, since it abandons all the proofs of a bodily Resurrection of
Jesus, nor the enemies of the Church, since it admits many of the
Church's dogmas; nor again is it consistent with itself, since it
grants God's special intervention in proof of the Church's faith,
though it starts with the denial of the bodily Resurrection of
Jesus, which is one of the principal objects of that faith.
Modernist View
The Holy Office describes and condemns in the thirty-sixth and
thirty-seventh propositions of the Decree "Lamentabili", the views
advocated by a fourth class of opponents of the Resurrection. The
former of these propositions reads. "The Resurrection of our Saviour
is not properly a fact of the historical order, but a fact of the
purely supernatural order neither proved nor provable, which
Christian consciousness has little by little inferred from other
facts." This statement agrees with, and is further explained by the
words of Loisy ("Autour d'un petit livre", p. viii, 120-121, 169; "L'Evangile
et l'Eglise", pp. 74-78; 120-121; 171). According to Loisy, firstly,
the entrance into life immortal of one risen from the dead is not
subject to observation; it is a supernatural, hyper-historical fact,
not capable of historical proof. The proofs alleged for the
Resurrection of Jesus Christ are inadequate; the empty sepulchre is
only an indirect argument, while the apparitions of the risen Christ
are open to suspicion on a priori grounds, being sensible
impressions of a supernatural reality; and they are doubtful
evidence from a critical point of view, on account of the
discrepancies in the various Scriptural narratives and the mixed
character of the detail connected with the apparitions. Secondly, if
one prescinds from the faith of the Apostles, the testimony of the
New Testament does not furnish a certain argument for the fact of
the Resurrection. This faith of the Apostles is concerned not so
much with the Resurrection of Jesus Christ as with His immortal
life; being based on the apparitions, which are unsatisfactory
evidence from an historical point of view, its force is appreciated
only by faith itself; being a development of the idea of an immortal
Messiah, it is an evolution of Christian consciousness, though it is
at the same time a corrective of the scandal of the Cross. The Holy
Office rejects this view of the Resurrection when it condemns the
thirty-seventh proposition in the Decree "Lamentabili". "The faith
in the Resurrection of Christ pointed at the beginning no so much to
the fact of the Resurrection, as to the immortal life of Christ with
God."
Practical Conclusion
Besides the authoritative rejection of the foregoing view, we may
submit the following three considerations which render it untenable.
First, the contention that the Resurrection of Christ cannot be
proved historically is not in accord with science. Science does not
know enough about the limitations and the properties of a body
raised from the dead to immortal life to warrant the assertion that
such a body cannot be perceived by the senses; again in the case of
Christ, the empty sepulcher with all its concrete circumstances
cannot be explained except by a miraculous Divine intervention as
supernatural in its character as the Resurrection of Jesus.
Secondly, history does not allow us to regard the belief in the
Resurrection as the result of a gradual evolution in Christian
consciousness. The apparitions were not a mere projection of the
disciples' Messianic hope and expectation; their Messianic hope and
expectations had to be revived by the apparitions. Again, the
Apostles did not begin with preaching the immortal life of Christ
with God, but they preached Christ's Resurrection from the very
beginning, they insisted on it as a fundamental fact and they
described even some of the details connected with this fact. Acts
2.24,31; 3.15,26; 4.10; 5.30; 10. 39-40; 13.30,37; 17.31-2; Rm 1.4;
4.25; 6.4,9; 8.11,34; 10. etc. Thirdly, the denial of the historical
certainty of Christ's Resurrection involves several historical
blunders. it questions the objective reality of the apparitions
without any historical grounds for such a doubt; it denies the fact
of the empty sepulchre in spite of solid historical evidence to the
contrary; it questions even the fact of Christ's burial in Joseph's
sepulchre, though this fact is based on the clear and simply
unimpeachable testimony of history.
Fr. Rudolf V. D'Souza OCD
.jpg)
