"The general idea of resurrection for 2nd Temple Jewish culture was
centered around vindication--that God will stand behind the lives of
those who have been defeated by the world, yet have stood faithfully
for God. Specifically, belief concerning resurrection for the righteous
martyrs in Jewish history, for example, was that their persecutors were
not ultimately the victors, but that YHWH and his faithful would
win-out.
Jesus' resurrection is also vindication. In the
resurrection God backed-up the words and life of Jesus. He is the Son
of God, Messiah and Lord. It shows that Rome, power, injustice and death did not
win. That the values of the kingdom are ultimately true: that the meek,
the downtrodden, truly will inherit the land; that the first will be
last; that the kingdom is at hand. If I act contrary to these words
of Jesus, even if I think Jesus walked out of the tomb after his death,
I think I do deny the essence of the resurrection."
This will be the direction of my next post regarding the resurrection of Jesus in the NT.
Since we're about to celebrate Easter tomorrow, I thought I might do a multi-part overview of some aspects of the resurrection of Jesus in the New Testament.
Resurrection as Rising and Awakening
The first thing that might be of interest is that in the Greek the NT doesn't actually have a word that specifically means "resurrection," at least not in the specific way the term is used in English. In our language resurrection automatically implies a "raising from the dead" and usually with religious implications, but the Greek terms work in the reverse. The Greek terms initially had generic meanings like "stand up" and "wake up", and the religious/miraculous meaning was secondary and therefore these terms always have the possibility of carrying a dual meaning, sometimes with powerful and creative effect (think about the young girl whom Jesus says is "only sleeping" and then says to her "Little girl, get up!", in which the Aramaic koum is translated with the Greek egeire, "wake up"). The most common terms used for resurrection in the NT are anastasis/ἀνάστᾰσις, "a raising up, standing up, setting up" and egeiro/ἐγείρω, "to awaken, rouse, stir up." Anastasis in particular is used for the "raising up" of the dead at the last day, and so is generally translated in English as "resurrection". And as we have seen with the story of the young girl, egeiro ("wake up") is used in reference to raising someone from the dead. It might be helpful when you read "resurrection" in English translations to remember the basic non-religious or at least dual nature of these words.
God's raising of Jesus and His Son Revealed In Paul
The earliest written references that we have of the resurrection of Jesus actually are not found in the Gospels, since the earliest documents in the NT are the writings of Paul. Paul's letters are from the 40s-50s AD and the Gospels (according to the most widely accepted dating) were written near and after AD 70. This is important to remember: All of our existing Gospels are predated by Paul's letters. The order of the books of the NT and our own subconscious chronological organization (Jesus' story comes before Paul's) can confuse this fact for us, but Paul is the earliest written source for Jesus, the resurrection, the gospel, and the beliefs/practices of the early Jesus-groups.
The earliest letter we have from Paul is 1 Thessalonians. He would have written it in the late 40s or early 50s AD from Corinth. In it Paul writes:
For the people of those regions report about us what kind of welcome we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from the heavens, whom he raised/awakened/roused [ἤγειρεν] from the dead ones [νεκρῶν, "corpses" as well as "those who dwell in the nether world"]—Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath that is coming. (1 Thess 1:9-10)
On the right the reverse side of Augustus' coin, with Divine Julius (DIVVS IVLIVS) signified by a comet at his death.
There are several things about this reference. First, it is immediately clear that Paul sees Jesus as God's Son and that Paul understands the Son to be coming in the future from the heavens (not simply "from heaven" as is often translated), and by inference that the raising/awakening of God's Son from the "dead ones" resulted in his exaltation to the heavens. This could be interpreted as apotheosis, the exaltation of someone as a god to the divine realms of the heavens. This was a common image in Roman culture, as both Julius Caesar and Augustus had also been considered "sons of God" who had risen to the heavens upon their death to their proper place as divine beings. Often this image was that of a star or comet rising through the sky to take its proper place among the rest of the stars, which were viewed by the ancients as divine beings.
In what could be traditional Christian imagery we find a depiction of the apotheosis of Emperor Antoninus Pius and his wife Faustina.
At other times the image is apotheosis through winged beings or chariots. What is important in this imagery and language of "raising" and coming "from the heavens" is that Paul is clearly recognizing Christ as divine and as someone who has overcome death through the power of God's raising or awakening Jesus from among the dead. However, we should not read too much into Paul's statements in his first letter. He does not yet address the nature of the resurrection itself, only the means of it through God and the resultant exaltation of Jesus. Both of these are themes in Paul's other letters, and he repeatedly refers to God as the one who raised/awakened Jesus from the "dead ones".
For Paul, the central point was God's work and declaration in raising Jesus, not merely the miraculous nature of Jesus rising. While this may seem very basic and too obvious to need mentioning, it should be emphasized that, for Paul, through the raising of Jesus God had said and wassayingsomething. This something was centered in divine apocalypse, "revelation", for Paul. In Galatians Paul associates his own calling and authority with God's raising Jesus: “Paul an apostle—sent neither by human commission nor from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead . . . ” (Galatians 1:1 NRSV). He then goes on to describe his experience of the risen Jesus:
“But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal [ἀποκαλύψαι, apokalypsai] his Son in me [many English translations have "to me", but the Greek is εν μοι, "in me"], so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any flesh and blood [sarki kai haimati, σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι], nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus.” (Galatians 1:15-17 NRSV)
This description of God's revealing his Son in Paul, particularly Paul's insistence that he did not consult anyone regarding this, is interesting. Especially since it is different from the accounts of Paul's experiences with the risen Jesus in Acts, where he confers with Christian believers as soon as he reaches Antioch as well as Jerusalem (Acts 9:3-28). Another interesting issue is Paul's use of εν μοι, "in me". The frequent translation of this phrase as "to me" is unfortunate and probably has more to do with theology and harmonization with Acts than simply translating the Greek. It is unfortunate because it is easy to forget that Paul became a follower of Jesus long after the event of Jesus' ascension to the heavens as recorded in Matthew, Luke, and Acts. This insight might help us to recognize that Paul's experience of Jesus might have more in common with our own contemporary experiences of Jesus than the experiences of the empty tomb and body of Jesus witnessed by the first disciples as recorded in Matthew, Luke-Acts, and John. Paul, like us, did not know Jesus personally. He also did not see the empty tomb nor touch Jesus' body. For Paul, in the same letter in which he says "it is no longer I who live, but in me Christ [ἐν ἐμοὶ Χριστός]," the risen Christ was primarily alive and revealed in him rather than to him.
It might be surprising to know that the visual depiction of Jesus being crucified are very rare prior to the 4th century. The earliest existing graphic depiction dates from the 3rd century, and it is actually a graffito drawn to mock the worship of a crucified God:
This image was carved in plaster and discovered on the Palatine Hill in Rome in 1857. It's inscription reads in Greek: Αλεξαμενος ϲεβετε θεον, "Alexamenos worship god!" or possibly "Alexamenos worships [a] god." It seems apparent that this inscription was made to mock Alexamenos' worship of Jesus. Though it has been dated by some as early as the 1st century C.E., the most common dating is to the 3rd century C.E. The 3rd century corresponds to Tertullian's against the accusations that Christians of worshipping the head of an ass: "Somniatis caput asininum esse Deum nostrum". (Apology, xvi ; Ad Nationes, I, xi)
Another 3rd century image of crucifixion was discovered in Iruña-Veleia , Spain on an ostracon in 2005 and published during 2006. The image was scratched into the pottery and contains a scene of Jesus cross with two worshippers (possibly kneeling) at is based and two crosses on either side. The bodies of two other crucified victims are faintly scratched on the other two crosses.
Interestingly, the inscription above the center crucifix reads "RIP" (Requiescat In Pace, "Rest In Peace") rather than INRI (Jesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum, "Jesus Nazarene King of Jews").
Another early depiction of Christ's crucifixion can be found on the door of the Basilica of Saint Sabina in Rome. This door was most likely carved around the mid 5th century and contains many panels of biblical scenes. The crucifixion image is very unique as it seems to depict a crucifixion on a type of gallows before city walls:
This last depiction brings up the question of the type of cross that was used to crucify Jesus. The Romans were known to use multiple forms of crucifixion, with different materials and positions of the crucified. Simple stakes or gibbets (crux simplex), trees, gallows, and walls may have been used in addition to stakes/trees with cross-beams. Often the crucified may have been tied to the cross rather than nailed. The most common type of cross with a cross-beam was probably the Tau cross which was in the shape of that Greek letter (Τ), and this may have been the type of cross used to crucify Jesus rather than crux immissa which is the most well known Christian image of the cross today. The late 1st century Christian document the Epistle of Barnabas make the following symbolic interpretation concerning Abraham in regards to the shape of Jesus' cross:
For it says: “And Abraham circumcised ten and eight and three hundred men of his household.” What, then, is the knowledge that was given to him? Observe that it mentions the “ten and eight” first, and then after an interval the “three hundred.” As for the “ten and eight,” the I [the first letter of Jesus' name in Greek, IHSOUS] is ten and the H [the second letter of Jesus' name] is eight;* thus you have “Jesus.” And because the cross, which is shaped like the T [tau in Greek always looks like this, without the extension above the cross-bar], was destined to convey grace, it mentions also the “three hundred.” So he reveals Jesus in the two letters, and the cross in the other one. (Barn. 9:8, *The abbreviation IH was sometimes used as short-hand for Jesus in early Christian literature)
However, Barnabas is a late document and may be more interested in the rhetoric of the cross's shape than the actual form used to crucify Jesus. It is possible that any of the three types of crosses could have been used, along with crosses in the shapes of X and Y. Interestingly, it is known that the Romans crucified victims on trees turned into gibbets and the book of Acts along with Paul refers to Jesus as hanging on a "tree" (Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29; Gal 3:13). However, the Greek word for "tree", ξύλου, can also simply mean wood, and the author of Acts could be simply speaking of the stake or pole. There is some thinking among historians that perhaps the Romans found old olive trees readily useful and available for the task:
Personally, I've always thought the Last Temptation of Christ was, oddly, one of the better historical representation in film of at least the form of crucifixion. In it, Jesus is stripped naked and crucified on a cross-beam tied to rough hewn post and the thieves are crucified on trees.
Okay...so my 4 year old and I are going through the channels this morning to find a kid's show, and we come across a TBN thing for children. It's a "Bible Quiz". I've looked for a graphic, but I couldn't find one so you will have to use your imagination. The spot has an announcer's voice introducing a question and track of children merrily and excitedly cheering "Yea!" after his comments (the children sound like ages 8 and younger...think Sesame Street voices).
So, here's the quiz question: "Who murdered John the Baptist?" And then the announcer goes through a list of 4 characters from the Bible.
Seriously, 7:30 AM on a show for children: Who murdered John the Baptist? But the weirdest part was that once the announcer declared the correct answer (Herod!), the track of the children merrily and excitedly cheering "Yea!" again. So here's the scenario: Kids are you ready to play? [Yea!] Who murdered Herod? Goliath, Saul, Judas, or Herod? That's right kids, it was Herod! [Yea!]
And then they followed up with a sketch that included a cheery song about Noah (and for those of you who know my issues with teaching Noah's story to children, no, I'm not kidding).
Often the crucified may have been tied to the cross rather than nailed. The most common type of cross with a cross-beam was probably the Tau cross which was in the shape of that Greek letter (Τ), and this may have been the type of cross used to crucify Jesus rather than crux immissa which is the most well known Christian image of the cross today. The late 1st century Christian document the Epistle of Barnabas make the following symbolic interpretation concerning Abraham in regards to the shape of Jesus' cross:
