The crux of the whole problem with History and Theology boils down to the question of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Was it a fact that Jesus rose from the dead after his crucifixion and burial or was it only a myth created by the believing community of Christians? If it was a fact, it could be counted as part of history and could be verified like any other historical fact. If it is claimed that it is anything beyond history and the present world we are in, it is presumed to be suspect as a part of mythology created by the people involved. When we search the history of religions, especially the ancient ones, we see that whenever God or angels are referred to, they are inevitably couched in mythological language. No one will claim that all of them are historical facts, and yet we seem to demand historicity to similar descriptions of God and angels in the Bible. What is the distinguishing characteristic that separates the historical from the mythological narratives? The proximity of the witnesses concerned to the events narrated or reported and the possibility of their verification should be taken as the distinguishing characteristic of the historical as against the mythological. Using this criterion, we may say that the resurrection of Jesus is historical, although it is also trans-historical, while the creation narratives in the book of Genesis and the visit of the Magi to the baby Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew are mythological. We must immediately add here a note of caution that mythological does not mean fictional or imaginary as they are only ways of expression of certain truths otherwise inaccessible to people in general. A mythology does not lay claim to a particular mode of a happening , unlike history, as it itself is only a mode of expression of something vital to the identity of a community.
The resurrection of Jesus reported in all the four Gospels was something which was verified by the Apostles and disciples personally when Jesus appeared to them after his resurrection. The resurrection itself happened when no one, except perhaps the angels, was present at the tomb if we discount the guards who were sleeping as per their own testimony. The guards could not be witnesses to the resurrection even if they were wide awake as we realize that only believers could take in the reality of resurrection. They could not be true believers as we see that the guards did not have the disposition required for true belief since they easily succumbed to the power of greed for money for acquiring which they were willing to bear false testimony. This incident clearly manifests the nature of the reality of resurrection, which is not a mere crass material event exclusively to be presented as historical and belonging to the confines of this world. It is a reality that transforms the believer for which certain basic human dispositions are presupposed making it also trans-historical and eternal.
The guards at the tomb admitted that the body of Jesus was missing from the tomb and they blindly interpreted it to mean that the disciples came while they were sleeping and removed the same from the tomb. If Pilate was in a mood to closely cross-examine them, the guards would have been at a loss to explain how they could be certain that the disciples of Jesus removed the body though they were sleeping at the time! Mary Magdalene at the tomb was also thinking of the removal of the body by someone as it was not in the tomb when she visited, although she was not motivated by the power of money unlike the guards. However, it is clear that she had the right dispositions for belief in the resurrection from the fact that she recognized the transformed Jesus when he addressed her "Mary!" (John, 20:16). Peter and John ran to the tomb on hearing the news to find only the clothes lying in the tomb where the body of Jesus was placed. They too did not come to the conclusion that Jesus rose from the dead on seeing whatever evidence was available for his missing body. All of them were sure of only one indisputable fact that the body of Jesus placed in the tomb on Friday evening was missing on the morning of the ensuing Sunday! The experiences of these people tell us that no one was in a mood to believe in the resurrection without further evidence and proof lacking which Peter and John along with some other disciples returned to their old profession of fishing as per the Gospel of John. There they had the incontrovertible proof supplied by Jesus himself that he was alive by means of the miraculous catch of fish. For fishermen who toiled all night without catching any fish, just one casting of the net at the command of Jesus with the result that the net came up with full of fish was proof enough that Jesus was alive again. Not only that, the loving care with which Jesus served them breakfast was reminiscent of their experiences with him before his death. John adds that this was the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after his resurrection from the dead (John, 21:14).
Add to this all the other appearances of Jesus to his disciples after his resurrection providing them proofs by eating with them, allowing them to feel his body to dispel their possible doubt that they might be seeing a ghost and conferring his power upon the Apostles for continuation of his mission. If all these experiences of the witnesses who proclaimed later the fact of resurrection were not good enough for history, can there be any historical fact at all that may be reliably reported? The initial resistance to belief in the resurrection of Jesus even from the Apostles and closest disciples of Jesus effectively takes care of the objection of some critics that the experiences of the appearances of the risen Jesus were mere hallucinations based on their deepest aspirations. In fact their aspirations were thoroughly dashed by the crucifixion of Jesus and that too pertained only to his being the expected Messiah. They did not even understand what is meant by resurrection, although foretold by Jesus, and some even doubted the authenticity of all this even at his ascension (Matthew, 28:17). They found it very difficult to give up their notions of the kingdom as late as just before the ascension of Jesus in spite of being taught about the Kingdom of God for forty days after his resurrection (Acts, 1: 3 and 6). Given the above scenario who could ever think that the Apostles and disciples were under the tyranny of their own hallucinations except those pseudo-scholars who want to remain in their own obstinate stupidity? If they are tacitly thinking that the element of faith that has entered into the Gospel narratives polluted them making them unworthy of history, we have already answered them in the previous Posts. Yet again the next Post 'Faith in the Resurrection' shall attempt to address their concern once more.
The resurrection of Jesus reported in all the four Gospels was something which was verified by the Apostles and disciples personally when Jesus appeared to them after his resurrection. The resurrection itself happened when no one, except perhaps the angels, was present at the tomb if we discount the guards who were sleeping as per their own testimony. The guards could not be witnesses to the resurrection even if they were wide awake as we realize that only believers could take in the reality of resurrection. They could not be true believers as we see that the guards did not have the disposition required for true belief since they easily succumbed to the power of greed for money for acquiring which they were willing to bear false testimony. This incident clearly manifests the nature of the reality of resurrection, which is not a mere crass material event exclusively to be presented as historical and belonging to the confines of this world. It is a reality that transforms the believer for which certain basic human dispositions are presupposed making it also trans-historical and eternal.
The guards at the tomb admitted that the body of Jesus was missing from the tomb and they blindly interpreted it to mean that the disciples came while they were sleeping and removed the same from the tomb. If Pilate was in a mood to closely cross-examine them, the guards would have been at a loss to explain how they could be certain that the disciples of Jesus removed the body though they were sleeping at the time! Mary Magdalene at the tomb was also thinking of the removal of the body by someone as it was not in the tomb when she visited, although she was not motivated by the power of money unlike the guards. However, it is clear that she had the right dispositions for belief in the resurrection from the fact that she recognized the transformed Jesus when he addressed her "Mary!" (John, 20:16). Peter and John ran to the tomb on hearing the news to find only the clothes lying in the tomb where the body of Jesus was placed. They too did not come to the conclusion that Jesus rose from the dead on seeing whatever evidence was available for his missing body. All of them were sure of only one indisputable fact that the body of Jesus placed in the tomb on Friday evening was missing on the morning of the ensuing Sunday! The experiences of these people tell us that no one was in a mood to believe in the resurrection without further evidence and proof lacking which Peter and John along with some other disciples returned to their old profession of fishing as per the Gospel of John. There they had the incontrovertible proof supplied by Jesus himself that he was alive by means of the miraculous catch of fish. For fishermen who toiled all night without catching any fish, just one casting of the net at the command of Jesus with the result that the net came up with full of fish was proof enough that Jesus was alive again. Not only that, the loving care with which Jesus served them breakfast was reminiscent of their experiences with him before his death. John adds that this was the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after his resurrection from the dead (John, 21:14).
Add to this all the other appearances of Jesus to his disciples after his resurrection providing them proofs by eating with them, allowing them to feel his body to dispel their possible doubt that they might be seeing a ghost and conferring his power upon the Apostles for continuation of his mission. If all these experiences of the witnesses who proclaimed later the fact of resurrection were not good enough for history, can there be any historical fact at all that may be reliably reported? The initial resistance to belief in the resurrection of Jesus even from the Apostles and closest disciples of Jesus effectively takes care of the objection of some critics that the experiences of the appearances of the risen Jesus were mere hallucinations based on their deepest aspirations. In fact their aspirations were thoroughly dashed by the crucifixion of Jesus and that too pertained only to his being the expected Messiah. They did not even understand what is meant by resurrection, although foretold by Jesus, and some even doubted the authenticity of all this even at his ascension (Matthew, 28:17). They found it very difficult to give up their notions of the kingdom as late as just before the ascension of Jesus in spite of being taught about the Kingdom of God for forty days after his resurrection (Acts, 1: 3 and 6). Given the above scenario who could ever think that the Apostles and disciples were under the tyranny of their own hallucinations except those pseudo-scholars who want to remain in their own obstinate stupidity? If they are tacitly thinking that the element of faith that has entered into the Gospel narratives polluted them making them unworthy of history, we have already answered them in the previous Posts. Yet again the next Post 'Faith in the Resurrection' shall attempt to address their concern once more.
No comments:
Post a Comment