When discussing the historical basis for the resurrection, one often
encounters a popular misconception that the ancient world was far more
gullible about claims of resurrection than people are today. This common
presumption amounts to what C.S. Lewis called “chronological snobbery.”
People imagine that, while our post-enlightenment modern world treats
claims of resurrection with doubt and skepticism, the ancient world —
being full of superstition and credulity abut the supernatural — would
have been poised to accept such a claim.
This discredited notion is addressed by N.T. Wright in his book
The Resurrection of the Son of God,
in which he surveys the (Jewish and non-Jewish) ideas concerning
resurrection and the afterlife in the first-century Mediterranean world.
He shows that the unanimous view in both the Jewish and non-Jewish
cultures was that bodily resurrection wasn’t possible. From the point of
view of Greco-Roman ideas, the physical world is seen as being defiling
and corrupt, while the spirit or soul was considered good. Within
Judaism, there were two major sects — the Sadducees and the Pharisees.
The former rejected all notions of an afterlife and resurrection, while
the latter believed that there would one day come a general resurrection
at the end of the world — but this precluded the possibility of someone
rising bodily from the dead to glory and immortality in the middle of
history, before this general resurrection at the end of time. As Timothy
Keller explains in his book
The Reason for God (p. 205),
“The idea of an individual being resurrected, in the
middle of history, while the rest of the world continued on burdened by
sickness, decay and death, was inconceivable. If someone had said to any
first-century Jew, ‘So-and-so has been resurrected from the dead!’ the
response would be, ‘Are you crazy? How could that be? Has disease and
death ended? Is true justice established in the world? Has the wolf lain
down with the lamb? Ridiculous!’ The very idea of an individual
resurrection would have been as impossible to imagine to a Jew as to a
Greek.”
We can also show historically from a number of sources that people in
the ancient world had a hard time buying the resurrection story.
Consider the late second century Christian writer Theophilus of Antioch.
In book 1 (chapter 13) of his apology to Autolycus, he addresses this
skepticism:
“Then, as to your denying that the dead are raised — for
you say, “Show me even one who has been raised from the dead, that
seeing I may believe,” […] But, suppose I should show you a dead man
raised and alive, even this you would disbelieve. God indeed exhibits to
you many proofs that you may believe Him. For consider, if you please,
the dying of seasons and days and nights, how these also die and rise
again. And what? Is there not a resurrection going on of seeds and
fruits, and this, too, for the use of men? A seed of wheat, for example,
or of the other grains, when it is cast into the earth, first dies and
rots away, then is raised and becomes a stalk of corn. And the nature of
trees and fruit-trees, — is it not that according to the appointment of
God they produce their fruits in their seasons out of what has been
unseen and invisible?”
There is a similar passage in Clement of Rome’s epistle to the church
of Corinth (1st Clement 24), written most likely in the mid-90’s A.D.:
“Think, my dear friends, how the Lord offers us proof
after proof that there is going to be a resurrection, of which He has
made Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead. My
friends, look how regularly there are processes of resurrection going on
at this very moment. The days and the night show us an example of it;
for night sinks to rest, and day arises; day passes away, and night
comes again. Or take the fruits of the earth; how, and in what way, does
a crop come into being? When the sower goes out and drops each seed
into the ground, it falls to the earth shriveled and bare, and decays;
but presently the power of the Lord’s providence raises it from decay,
and from that single grain a host of others spring up and yield their
fruit.”
Finally, the second century apologist Justin Martyr, in his first
apology (chapter 19), also addresses the believability of the
resurrection. He writes thus:
“And to any thoughtful person would anything appear more
incredible, than, if we were not in the body, and some one were to say
that it was possible that from a small drop of human seed bones and
sinews and flesh be formed into a shape such as we see? For let this now
be said hypothetically: if you yourselves were not such as you now are,
and born of such parents [and causes], and one were to show you human
seed and a picture of a man, and were to say with confidence that from
such a substance such a being could be produced, would you believe
before you saw the actual production? No one will dare to deny [that
such a statement would surpass belief]. In the same way, then, you are
now incredulous because you have never seen a dead man rise again. But
as at first you would not have believed it possible that such persons
could be produced, so also judge ye that it is not impossible that the
bodies of men, after they have been dissolved, and like seeds resolved
into earth, should in God’s appointed time rise again and put on
incorruption.”
Such statements should give us cause to re-consider whether the
ancient world was as gullible and credulous as we are often led to
think.
.jpg&container=blogger&gadget=a&rewriteMime=image%2F*)
Knowing people is a fascinating part of life, seeing the different aspects, personalities, preferences quirks etc of people is always very interesting. It goes without saying that some people we only get to know to a very limited extent and some we really build relationships and maybe build a life together with.
