| Home |
There are some who believe, Bultmann or Bishop Spong for example, that Jesus did not physically rise from the dead. I will approach this matter through the work of William James. William James was a scientist, America's foremost philosopher, and preeminent among those who scientifically study religious experience. In his Varieties, he analyzed the living religious experience of thousands of people, and in the Postscript, offered his conclusions. He classified himself as a "crass supernaturalist," one who believed that God intervened supernaturally to change physical and mental matters of fact. He contrasted his position with the non-miraculous view which "takes the facts of physical science at their face-value, and leaves the laws of life just as naturalism finds them, with no hope of remedy, in case their fruits are bad." Further, for logical reasons, James found it incredible to believe that God could exist, and yet, "no concrete particular of experience should alter its complexion in consequence of a God being there...." Were James alive today, he would find the thought of such theologians as Tillich, Macquarrie, and Bultmann fundamentally irrational. These thinkers believe that science requires the "modern" view that God does not miraculously intervene. For James, a God who doesn't intervene is equivalent to no God at all. Further, James would argue that matter is no less susceptible to God's action than mind. If we deny physical miracles, we should deny mental ones. And if God does not affect the human mind, then the ideas of Scripture were not revealed through God's action, but rather, were simply the opinions of ancient writers, and therefore, they have no claim upon us. James' study of religious experience confirms the overwhelming evidence of Scripture, church history, and present experience -- that God has affected millions of people, mentally, emotionally, physically. From this point of view, the physical resurrection of Jesus was remarkable, but not unprecedented. The disciples had already witnessed such miracles, the raising of Lazarus, the calming of the storm. What was truly astonishing was that the resurrected Jesus appeared in the glory of God. Their astonishment resulted from their deeply held belief, a conviction going back to the origins of biblical faith (Genesis 3), that all humanity had sinned, and being sinful, none could enter God's presence. Apart from the living God, all died. But in the resurrection, Jesus appeared as God in tangible form. Therefore, Jesus must have been sinless, and even more, by holding to him in faith, one could be forgiven and given eternal life with God. That was the greatest possible miracle, the way to God was now open to sinful humanity. The spiritual miracle requires the physical miracle. Jesus arose physically, with a transformed resurrected body, different from our corrupt fleshly bodies, but a body nonetheless. That was a central affirmation of the early church fathers, held against the scientific view of classical naturalism. As Tertullian put it, "the flesh is the hinge of salvation." The Apostle's Creed and Article IV of the Articles of Religion affirm the same. Without a body, there is no individuation, no distinction of selves. Without a body, we will never seen God, or our loved ones, or anyone else again. We will simply disappear. This conclusion is confirmed in Eastern thought. For example, Yogi Ramacharaka, in his Mystic Christianity, claims that Jesus left his physical body in the tomb, but assumed an astral body for the resurrection appearances. In the ascension, the astral body was discarded so that Jesus became a Christ Principle devoid of personality. At the end of the ages, even the Principle will evaporate as all reality disappears into the Absolute. The resurrection is the absolute center, the core, of the Christian faith. It is massively attested throughout the New Testament. It is confirmed by the faith of millions of Christians who, though they know they justly die, will live and never die again. (Plenteous Harvest, April 1996) The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D. April, 1996. |