We spent the last eight weeks or so learning about second-Temple
Jewish views of resurrection and how, because of Jesus’ resurrection, these
views were profoundly modified, and what the modifications were.
·
Last week, we
summarized a large number of foundational modifications and suggested that the best
and only explanation for them was that Jesus was bodily raised from the dead.
·
In other words, the
changes were grounded in the historical event of Jesus’ bodily
resurrection, not the hysterical ideas of disillusioned
disciples.
·
Today we finally get
back into John’s text.
In John’s Gospel (and the others as well) Jesus’ resurrection is
revealed through two basic events.
·
(1) The first
event is the discovery that Jesus’ tomb was empty.
·
(2) The second
event is the bodily appearances of Jesus to his followers.
1) THE EMPTY TOMB
John 20:1–10 (ESV) — 1
Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while
it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. 2 So she ran and went to Simon Peter and
the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have
taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.” 3 So Peter went out with the other
disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. 4
Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and
reached the tomb first. 5 And
stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in.
6 Then Simon Peter came, following
him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, 7 and the face cloth, which had been on
Jesus’ head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by
itself. 8 Then the other disciple,
who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; 9 for as yet they did not understand the
Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. 10
Then the disciples went back to their homes.
Last Sunday’s sermon dealt with this text, so we will simply point
out one interesting fact.
·
A tantalizing
inscription was discovered near Nazareth (probably from Emperor Claudius 41-54
a.d.).
·
“Ordinance of
Caesar. It is my pleasure that graves and tombs remain undisturbed in
perpetuity ... If any man lay information that another has either demolished
them, or has in any other way extracted the buried, or has maliciously
transferred them to other places in order to wrong them, or has displaced the
sealing or other stones, against such a one I order that a trial be instituted
... Let it be absolutely forbidden for any one to disturb them. In case of
contravention I desire that the offender be sentenced to capital punishment on
charge of violation of sepulture” – N.T. Wright.
Whatever else this inscription may teach us, it establishes for us
that the reaction of Mary Magdalene and the disciples was spot on.
·
An empty tomb did
not mean Jesus was raised from the dead.
·
An empty tomb did
not mean Jesus was vindicated.
·
An empty tomb did
not mean Jesus was God or Messiah.
·
An empty tomb is
of no more value as heaven is to Paul without resurrection (1 Cor. 15).
·
An empty tomb simply
meant Jesus’ tomb had probably been robbed.
But John does show us that something may not be quite right – the
grave clothes were still there.
·
“The expression ‘folded
up’ may actually mean ‘rolled up’, which either points to neatness or indicates
that the cloth was still in the exact same position as when Jesus’ body had
been wrapped in it, or both” – Kostenberger.
·
In other words,
they were not “folded up” as in somebody “folded up” a towel.
·
They were “folded
up” as in they still retained the shape of how they were rolled around Jesus’
shoulders, neck and head when originally applied – Boice.
This would tell John and Peter two things.
·
(1) The body was
not stolen.
·
(2) Something
very unusual happened.
o Jesus’ body passed right through them – N.T. Wright, Boice,
Kostenberger, et al.
So what, then, does John mean when he says he “saw
and believed” (vs. 8).
·
“The evangelist
does not specify precisely what ‘the other disciple’ believed” –
Kostenberger.
·
But we can say
for certain that, “For the ‘disciple Jesus loved,’ the linen
strips were sufficient evidence that the body had not simply been moved” –
Kostenberger.
Most suggest that “saw and believed” refers explicitly
to a belief that Jesus was raised from the dead.
·
If that is what
it refers to, I am all in.
But none of those who advocate this contend with the following:
·
1) The cause of the action in the text is Mary
Magdalene’s proclamation that someone stole Jesus body (vs. 2).
o
So, this is what
is “hanging in the air” and waiting to be addressed.
o
So given this
context, did John see and believe that Jesus was in fact gone – not stolen, but
certainly gone, as Mary had said?
·
2) Verse 9 states
that they didn’t grasp that Jesus must raise from the dead as taught in
Scripture.
o
If John didn’t
grasp that from Scripture, why would he grasp this from the grave clothes?
o
Nothing in his
worldview would have given him the category – strange presence of grave clothes
equals bodily resurrection of a dead person.
o
And without knowing
the meaning of Scripture (and Jesus’ words) would John even have known what to
believe?
·
3) Mary Magdalene
saw the grave clothes (she went into the grave) and she saw angels, but she still thought Jesus’ body had
been stolen (vs. 13).
o
Certainly if it
is argued that strange presence of grave clothes equals resurrection, it would
be hard to suggest that strange presence of grave clothes plus strange presence
of angels would not also equal bodily resurrection.
·
4) The only other
time in John where seeing and believing are intimately linked together is in
John 2:23-25.
o
There it involves
a spurious faith not a legitimate one.
o
And
interestingly, it follows the text (vs. 22) that connects the disciples’ ability
to understand both Jesus’ words about His resurrection and Scriptures teaching
on it to a belief that Jesus rose
from the dead.
o
In other words,
once they believed Jesus rose from the dead, they understood Jesus’ words and
Scripture.
o
However, we are
told in John 20:9, that John still didn’t understand the Scripture about Jesus’
resurrection.
o This would imply, then, that John did not yet understand that Jesus
rose from the dead.
N.T. Wright says, “The grave-clothes seem to be understood as a
sign…”
·
Maybe we should leave
it at that.
·
And as with the
other signs of Jesus, this one needed some explaining.
·
And in just a few
verses we will get our explanation.
Final comment on the empty tomb:
·
“It would have
proved nothing; it would have suggested nothing, except the fairly common practice
of grave-robbery. It certainly would not have generated the phenomena we have
studied in this book so far. Tombs were often robbed in the ancient world,
adding to grief both insult and injury. Nobody in the pagan world would have
interpreted an empty tomb as implying resurrection; everyone knew such a thing
was out of the question. Nobody in the ancient Jewish world would have
interpreted it like that either; ‘resurrection’ was not something anyone
expected to happen to a single individual while the world went on as normal” –
N.T. Wright.
But we must keep going!
2) THE
APPEARANCES
John 20:11–23 (ESV) — 11
But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look
into the tomb. 12 And she saw two
angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and
one at the feet. 13 They said to
her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my
Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” 14 Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus
standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. 15 Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are
you seeking?” Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, “Sir, if you
have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him
away.” 16 Jesus said to her,
“Mary.” She turned and said to him in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means
Teacher). 17 Jesus said to her,
“Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my
brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my
God and your God.’ ” 18 Mary
Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”—and that
he had said these things to her. 19
On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked
where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them
and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20
When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples
were glad when they saw the Lord. 21
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even
so I am sending you.” 22 And when
he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy
Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins
of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is
withheld.”
In this text, Peter and John have left and the focus is back on Mary.
·
She has come back
to the tomb, sees two angels, and is weeping because somebody has, “taken
away my Lord” (vs. 13).
o Mary still hasn’t grasped that Jesus has risen.
And then we witness the first resurrection appearance of Jesus
Christ – “she turned around and saw Jesus standing” (vs. 14).
·
But, oddly, she
doesn’t recognize Him.
·
He then asks the
same question as the angels, “woman why are you weeping” (vs. 15).
·
John tells us
that Mary suspects this man of being a thieving gardener (vs. 15).
·
But Jesus speaks
her name and at once she recognizes Jesus.
o “My sheep know my voice” – John 10:3.
And, given Jesus’ words “do not cling to me” (vs. 17), it
appears that Mary ran to Him and grabbed hold of Him.
·
This prompts Jesus
to speak of yet another new concept for the second-Temple Jew.
·
The ascension of
the risen Messiah to the Father (vs. 17).
·
Jesus, echoing
His teaching in John 17, cannot stay – He must leave.
·
So we can add
this “mutation” to last week’s list.
Jesus asks Mary to go and tell the disciples.
·
Another reason
Mary can’t cling – she has to go and proclaim.
·
And with this we
have the first Gospel proclamation – “Mary Magdalene went and announced to the
disciples, ‘I have seen the Lord’ – and that he had said these things to her”
(vs. 18).
And that evening, John tells us of a second appearance of Jesus
Christ.
·
“Jesus
came and stood among them” (vs. 19).
·
He spoke to them
and showed them the remnants of His crucifixion, “his hands and his side”
(vs. 20).
Jesus then did something very interesting.
·
“He
breathed on them and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit” (vs. 22).
·
And He then tells
them, John 20:23 (ESV) — 23
If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold
forgiveness from any, it is withheld.
This actions and words of Jesus within John’s appearance narrative
bring us to three things I want to explore.
·
(1) The significance
of the appearances in tandem with the empty tomb.
·
(2) The meaning
of Jesus breathing on the disciples.
·
(3) This
forgiveness business.
(1) Appearances
and the Empty Tomb.
·
We uncovered a
moment ago yet another mutation of second-Temple Judaism that must be accounted
for.
·
And as with all
the others from last week, N.T. Wright argues that…
An empty tomb with no bodily appearances of Jesus will not serve
as an explanation.
·
“Had the tomb
been empty, with no other unusual occurrences, no one would have said that
Jesus was the Messiah or the lord of the world. No one would have imagined that
the kingdom had been inaugurated. No one, in particular, would have developed
so quickly and consistently a radical and reshaped version of the Jewish hope
for the resurrection of the body. The empty tomb is by itself insufficient to
account for the subsequent evidence” – Wright.
Likewise, a vision of Jesus while His dead body is still in the
tomb will not do either.
·
In the ANE,
visions of the dead were not uncommon – Wright.
·
“The ancient
world as well as the modern knew the difference between visions and things that
happen in the ‘real’ world” – N.T. Wright.
·
And encounters of
Jesus as visions, “could not possibly, by themselves, have given rise that
Jesus had been raised from the dead…Indeed, such visions meant precisely…that
the person was dead, not that they were alive” – Wright.
But, both an empty tomb and the bodily appearances were necessary.
·
“The point of the
empty tomb stories always was that Jesus was alive again; the point of the
appearance stories always was that the Jesus who was appearing was in bodily
continuity with the corpse that had occupied the tomb” – Wright.
·
The claims of
Jesus’ disciples make no sense without both.
·
Jesus’ bodily
resurrection was an historical event, not a provocative idea.
One further comment on this point:
·
“The early
Christians did not invent the empty tomb and the ‘meetings’ or ‘sightings’ of
the risen Jesus in order to explain a faith they already had. They developed
that faith because of the occurrence, and convergence, of these two phenomena.
Nobody was expecting this kind of thing; no kind of conversion-experience would
have generated such ideas; nobody would have invented it, no matter how guilty
(or how forgiven) they felt, no matter how many hours they pored over the
scriptures. To suggest otherwise is to stop doing history and to enter into a
fantasy world… In terms of the kind of proof which historians normally accept,
the case we have presented, that the tomb-plus-appearances combination is what
generated early Christian belief, is as watertight as one is likely to find” –
N.T. Wright.
(2) Appearances
and Breathing.
·
John 20:22 (ESV) — 22 And when he had said this, he breathed
on [not breathed into] them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
We know from both John 17 and from Acts 2 that this act of Jesus
cannot mean that they were indwelled with the Holy Spirit.
·
He had not yet
gone to be with the Father (John 17).
·
And this was not
Pentecost.
So what does this
text mean?
There are at least two things going on here.
·
1) “The present reference represents a
symbolic promise of the soon-to-be-given gift of the Spirit, not the actual
giving of it fifty days later at Pentecost” – Kostenberger.
·
“Jesus’
‘exhalation’ and command Receive the Holy
Spirit are best understood as a kind of acted parable pointing forward to the
full enduement still to come” – D.A. Carson.
·
2) A symbolic link to Genesis 2 and
Ezekiel 37.
I want to quickly deal with the second.
A Link to Genesis and Ezekiel:
·
Genesis 2:7 (ESV) — 7 then the Lord
God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
·
Ezekiel 37:9–10 (ESV) — 9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the
breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O breath,
and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came
into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.
In our John text, he breathed “on” His
disciples as a group.
·
In the Genesis
text, God breathed “into” the nostrils of an individual, Adam.
o
We know in Adam’s
case, the breath was the breath of life.
·
In Ezekiel, the
breath is also “into” but it was “into them”.
o
“The prophet
calls to the wind to ‘breathe into these slain that they may live,’ after which
‘breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly
great army’” – Beasley-Murray.
·
But what is meant by the breath in our John text?
The breath of Jesus, with its allusion to original creation and
with what came to represent bodily resurrection in second-Temple Judaism, is a resurrection breath.
·
It is a nod both to
the original creation and the promise to restore Israel.
·
But it primarily
serves as a symbol of the new creation grounded in resurrection.
·
And the Holy
Spirit is relevant because He is power to this new creation and resurrection.
·
Jesus’ breath, “represents
the impartation of life that the Holy Spirit gives in the new age, brought
about through Christ’s exaltation in death and resurrection” – Beasley-Murray.
N.T. Wright takes it even further.
·
He believes that
John, “intends his readers to follow a sequence of seven signs, with the
water-into-wine story at Cana as the first and the crucifixion as the seventh”
– Wright.
·
And then we come
to resurrection.
·
He says John “is
careful to tell us twice” that resurrection comes on the first day of the week.
·
This fact, He
says, is to make clear that Jesus’ resurrection was the “start of God’s new
creation” – N.T. Wright.
·
This means, for
Wright, that the cross (“it is finished”), was the completion
of the first creation.
·
There was then a
Sabbath day of rest, as in Genesis, and then resurrection – new creation.
·
In this context,
it is even easier to see Jesus’ breath as symbolic expression of a Spirit-powered
new creation.
3) Appearances
and Forgiveness.
John 20:23 (ESV) — 23
If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold
forgiveness from any, it is withheld.”
·
After Jesus
breathed on the disciples and spoke of receiving the Holy Spirit, He makes this
interesting comment.
Its meaning, obviously, has to be linked to the previous
verse specifically, and to resurrection generally, given the context.
·
The first thing we need to notice is that the
“you” is a corporate “you” – the disciples.
·
This links up with Ezekiel 37’s corporate
context which dealt with the restoration of Israel.
·
We know of course that the twelve represented
the twelve tribes of Israel.
·
And we know that the “now and not yet” of
resurrection and new creation is now corporately lived out in the context of
the Church.
·
The disciples, then, are the transition from
Israel to the Church.
·
And so it is within this context that the
meaning becomes clear.
Jesus’ words are apparently a formal declaration that the religious
“gatekeepers” have been replaced.
·
“Jesus is declaring that his new messianic
community, versus the Jewish leadership represented by the Sanhedrin and the
Pharisees, is authorized to affirm or deny acceptance into the believing (new)
covenant community” – Kostenberger.
·
By their preaching the Gospel, the disciples are
now the ones that “affirm” believers or “deny” unbelievers.
·
But NOT
based on their whims, will, inclinations or power!!
·
They (we) proclaim the Gospel and those given to
Christ believe and are forgiven, and those that aren’t given do not believe and
aren’t forgiven.
·
So it is now the Christian who “...can declare
that those who genuinely repent and believe the gospel will have their sins
forgiven by God. On the other hand, they can warn that those who reject Jesus
Christ will die in their sins” – John MacArthur.
No comments:
Post a Comment