Easter: Facts and Fiction 2
The Science of Resurrection
1 Corinthians 15:50-57
If you were to ask Christians across the theological spectrum what they believe happened after the crucifixion of Jesus, you would get a wide range of answers. Some take the resurrection stories found in the gospels literally and understand that on the third day (which is different than three days later) Jesus’ body was resuscitated and walked around among them, eating fish by the sea, pointing out the wound marks on his hands, teaching disciples along the roadway and scaring the be-Jesus out of Mary Magdalene in the garden. To confess and believe in the literal resuscitation of the body of Jesus is held as a benchmark of authentic Christian faith. Without a resuscitated body, this position holds, the truth of Jesus’ promises and stories cannot be believed and the Christian story loses its powerful authority.
Other Christians read the resurrection stories more metaphorically – looking for intent by the authors or literary constructions. They would say that the reality of resurrection is about the power of life to overcome the fear of death. They would hold that the concept of resurrection is powerful and transformative without requiring a restored corpse. Scientifically speaking, a resuscitated corpse is impossible. Biologically speaking, once your heart stops beating, the body begins to breakdown naturally. Bacteria begin to devour the flesh. Mold, fungi and viruses do their part as well consuming the material that formally fought them off as a living being.
Paul’s writings about the resurrection are the earliest account we have of the early church’s understanding of what happened after the crucifixion and for Paul it seems that resurrection was more of a spiritual event than a physical one. He never says that Jesus’ mortal body walked around or spoke to anyone. He notes in 1 Corinthians that the perishable cannot take on immortality. (1 Cor. 15:50) There is good reason to believe that Paul never heard of any of the gospel resurrection stories we associate with Jesus today. The reason for this is that the gospels would not be written until decades later so Paul might never have read them. For Paul resurrection had more to do with the exaltation of Jesus into the presence of God.
Also we note that the first gospel writer, Mark, (around 70 CE) has no resurrection appearances in the gospel account. Mark ends the gospel with the women fleeing an empty tomb in terror and telling nobody. Later editors add a section to the end of Mark but biblical scholars point out that language and construction are very different than the rest of the gospel so it was not part of the original gospel. It appears that the resurrection stories don’t become widely used until Matthew and Luke write their gospels 15-30 years later.
Now, I’m not telling you what to believe about resurrection because that’s not how we do church here. We all have to decide for ourselves what it means. I am saying that it is spiritually healthy to be skeptical of accepting carte blanche everything we think we might have been told resurrection means. If our faith requires fiction for us to believe, then what kind of faith is that?
Just for the record, I believe that resurrection is real and powerful and transformative for my own life. I also understand that the gospel writers wrote in a time when the church was under great strain to make sense of their world around them. On a personal level, I have already experienced resurrections that have made me a different person today. I also believe that as the church it is important that we live with a faith that is as vibrant and alive and hopeful as possible. That is resurrection faith.
Sources:
www.homileticsonline.com Dead Like Me commentary, March 2005.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/symes01.htm