The Resurrection of Christ. Its a big deal, right? Of course it is. Despite this, I feel like Easter is an occasion that gets lost in the noise of Christian Culture. There is Christmas, and lent, and Palm Sunday, Easter, and many other major and minor feast days. Amongst these, Easter is just only day that comes and goes when more people then usual come to Church and get to have a big dinner. This is so wrong.

Easter is the event that defines Christianity and is so far set apart from everything we celebrate in the Church that it sometimes defies explanation, or even proper appreciation.

One Question to Rule Them All

Having known this for many years, and believing it, it wasn’t until recently that I came upon an explanation that changed my entire perspective about the resurrection and faith. It was put forth very simply by Timothy Keller in his Reasons for God.

Sometimes people approach me and say, ‘I really struggle with this aspect of Christian teaching. I like this part of Christian belief, but I don’t think I can accept that part.’ I usually respond: ‘If Jesus rose from the dead, then you have accept all he said; if he didn’t rise from the dead, then why worry about any of what he said? The issue on which everything hangs is not whether or not you like his teachings, but whether or not he rose from the dead.’

Of course! If you believe in the Resurrection, as a factual event in history then every other aspect of what we believe becomes an afterthought, and doubts about prophets and miracles and angels and heaven be damned. They maybe hard to accept, but they came from the mouth of a man that was resurrected, why shouldn’t we believe him? All thats left is to understand and act, and thats pretty much Church has been up to for 2000 years.

On the other hand, if we don’t view the resurrection as fact, Christ’s position is clear. He becomes relegated to a long list of visionaries that have impacted and improved Mankind.

The Bottom Line

If you’re somebody who believes in the Resurrection, then when that opportunity in your life arises, as it will on many occasions, to turn a critical eye to God, Christ, the Church, and the meaning of life, do yourself a favor and relax. Things are looking up. You know that the only guy that was ever resurrected in history said that you are loved, and that you are made with a purpose. Start from there, and you’ll be fine. No need to read on, have an ice-cream sunday or something.

This was the awesome thing that I realized, and the real topic I wanted to write about.

If when you ask yourself whether or not the Resurrection really happened, and you come back with a “Perhaps, but I’m not sure”, “probably not”, or “don’t be ridiculous” then things get more complicated.

If you answered akin to the latter, then God be with you. I believe that the path to God is found on all routes and in all things, and you might be on it right now whether or not you know it.

If you are in the “maybe” category, I think there is some compelling evidence that I’ll share with you.

So Why Believe in the Resurrection

When trying to verify the truth of the resurrection, can we turn to the Bible? Does it seem like cheating? We’re conditioned to feel as though the Bible needs some sort of second party corroboration in order to achieve factuality. Sometimes, this is the case, and sometimes its possible. But Keller presents a great argument regarding the Resurrection that I’ll try and do justice.

Ancient People Weren’t Dumb

Its widely accepted that the Gospels were written over 4 decades after the Resurrection occurred. But it’s also widely excepted that the Epistles, the letters written by St. Paul and others, were written much earlier (as early as ~10 years after the Resurrection), and that some of those pre-existed as sermons and public addresses even earlier then that. In some of St. Paul’s letters he refers to the witnesses of the resurrection.

… that Christ Died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living today, though some have died. — 1 Corinthians 15:3-6

Sometimes when we think about antiquity we assume that people let a lot things slide without looking at them with the same scrutiny that a modern audience would have. The truth is that this simply isn’t the case. N. T. Wright argues that an idea such as coming back to life after death would have been regarded by an Apostolic Age audience as completely ludicrous and salacious. Just as if I were to tell you that someone that’s just died has come back to life. You’d think I was crazy and you’d do your best to prove me wrong.

The fact that St. Paul is referring to witnesses in certain communities by name is him saying “Hey, if you don’t believe this story, go ask these people. They saw the resurrected Christ with their own eyes.”

For those seeking to destroy Christianity this would have been the first line of attack. Though we don’t have accounts of the challenges that were made against these witnesses, it seems likely to have happened. The fact that the Early Church under these circumstances even got off the ground, let alone spread like wild fire, is testimony to the conviction of these witnesses of the Resurrection. As Keller puts it,

Paul’s letters show that Christians proclaimed Jesus’s bodily resurrection from the very beginning. That meant that the tomb must have been empty. No one in Jerusalem would have believed the preaching for a minute if the tomb was not empty. Skeptics could have easily produced Jesus’s rotted corpse. Also, Paul could not be telling people in a public document that there were scores of eyewitnesses alive if there were not. We can’t permit ourselves the luxury of thinking that the resurrection accounts were only fabricated years later. Whatever else happened, the tomb of Jesus must have really been empty and hundreds of witnesses must have claimed that they saw him bodily raised.
— Reason for God, pg. 205

Tradition, tradition

The Fiddler on the Roof had it rough. Without tradition things were pretty shaky, or so they say. But does tradition have more of a role to play than simply providing a proven pattern of living?

In the Orthodox faith there is something very important called Holy Tradition, which is believed to be as authoritative for us as the Bible. Vladamir Losky, a famous 20^th Century Orthodox Theologian, simply described it as “the life of the Holy Spirit within the Church.” It is the belief that the Church, like the Bible, is a means for the transmission of Divine Truth. In fact it was Holy Tradition that imparted the earliest teachings of Christ to the first Christians by means of personal communication. From one person teaching another, each bound to the Teachings of Christ.

Unlike the normal view of tradition as something that evolves and grows over time to accommodate its circumstances, Holy Tradition means that from generation to generation, although the expression may grow, the essence of what is transmitted always remains intact. Therefore it becomes a means for us to connect with the earliest Church Fathers and the roots of our faith.

Perhaps it seems self-serving to turn to Holy Tradition to guide us in our realization of the Resurrection, because if Christ was not resurrected than there is no Holy Spirit, and without the Holy Spirit Holy Tradition is simply a human idea.

I think otherwise though. The beauty of Holy Tradition is the way in which one can reach out, break free of the confines of our contemporary lot, and become part of something universal that reaches back to the event of the Resurrection.

For example, when I read the following from the Teaching of St. Gregory the Illuminator, the Patriarch of the Armenian Church (scribed by St. Mesrob Mashtots according to tradition), I am wonderfully encouraged. As an Armenian, it is powerful to hear this message which is believed to come from St. Gregory himself, and is just one link in the chain that has led to the teaching that I receive today in Church.

For the Life-giver came for the life of the living; and they were given over to death in despair instead of to life. He died then for the dead, and rose that by his resurrection He might be an example. Therefore he made his illuminating resurrection by night, that He might make known the truth of his completed task to those on guard and those on watch. They were exceedingly terrified by the earthquake and splitting of the rocks, and the opening on the graves and resurrection of the dead [Mt. 27:51-53].

Consider it for yourself

This is a big question with important ramifications. If you’re still in the “maybe” category, I suggest that you take the initiative to read up on it yourself. Of course, the New Testament is a good place to start. I would also recommend the book which I’ve quoted from in this post, Reasons for God.

There are numerous resources, be they website or book. I couldn’t sort through them all. If you find something engaging let me know so that I can add it to my library.

Above all, I would recommend that you raise the question with your pastor, assuming you have one. They will be happy to work it out with you, and when it comes to issues of faith, they are always better resolved through dialogue.