Posted on 03/31/2018 4:48:08 PM PDT by pcottraux
By Philip Cottraux
Since I upload blogs every Saturday, I usually write my yearly Easter messages between Good Friday and Easter. This often gives me the unique opportunity to focus on both the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. The two are inseparable from one another as the central point of Christianity. This year, I want to focus on why the resurrection itself is more than just absolutely important to our faith; it is our faith.
Unfortunately, Christians today are far too divided over secondary issues. The starkest example is the raging debate over the age of the earth. While evolutionists sit back and laugh at us, we tear ourselves apart over whether the Bible literally tells us that the planet is 6,000 years old, or that the creation account of Genesis can fit into science’s claims of a 14 billion year-old Earth.
But this isn’t anything new. That Christianity was ever this single unified entity that agreed on every doctrine is what I call the myth of “unificationism.” The church was a widely diversified group with opinions on a variety of issues from its birth. This is why we have a New Testament in the first place; Paul had to write extensively to straighten out what the gospel really meant. The classic issue dividing Christianity in the early first century was that many Jewish converts had trouble accepting Gentiles into the faith. Some believed that Jesus had only died to redeem the sins of Israel; still others insisted that Gentiles had to convert to Judaism and abide by the Old Testament laws to be true Christians (the epistles of Romans and Galatians were both Paul’s attempts to combat this).
For that reason, if they could see the state of the church today, the apostles probably wouldn’t be as shocked as we think. Back then they were arguing about the role of the Mosaic Law post-Jesus. Today, we’re arguing about the age of the earth, evolution, the role of tongues and spiritual gifts, orthodoxy versus evangelism, and predestination (Calvinism) versus free will (Arminianism). The sad part is that many of these fractured subgroups of Christianity are convinced that only people who agree with them are going to heaven.
I’ve come across several interesting theories, many of which I don’t necessarily agree with but have at least challenged me on some level. For example, the local flood theory claims that the great deluge only covered early Mesopotamia instead of the entire planet. Or that “thousand” from Numbers (Hebrew aleph) is a mistranslation of “tribal leaders,” meaning we’ve greatly overestimated the number of Israelites leaving Egypt to 2 or 3 million, and it should be recalculated to about 35,000. And don’t even get me started on the “where did the Red Sea crossing take place?” controversy.
To add to this, some of the miraculous events of the Old Testament could be explained as natural phenomena. For example, Sodom was located in a geologically unstable region (the Jordan Valley), prone to sudden bursts of lava. It’s also been theorized that a local volcanic eruption could have caused the ten plagues that struck Egypt. A chain reaction would have caused the water to turn red due to a massive increase of iron oxide, driving the frogs out of the water, followed by darkness from ash and pyroclastic clouds, etc.
If this is the case, it doesn’t affect my faith in God at all, because it doesn’t explain the coincidental timing. If Sodom was destroyed by a nearby eruption, how did two men arrive beforehand to warn Lot to leave the city? If a volcano caused the ten plagues of Egypt, how did it happen right as Moses demanded Pharaoh to release the slaves, or suffer divine consequences?
In theological terms, we have to differentiate between miraculous and divine providence. Miracles are when God violates the laws of physics to makes His will happen. Divine providence is when He uses the forces of nature. Providence is a perfectly legitimate means for the Lord to accomplish His work; so that some Biblical events can be explained by it is fine with me.
But the resurrection is different. It cannot be explained by divine providence. Death is permanent. If it happened, it has to be a supernatural event.
Think of the Bible as a galaxy. Our solar system is a collection of planets attracted to the sun’s gravity. Likewise, the core of the Bible is the resurrection of Christ. It was the singular event that proved Him to be the Messiah and Son of God, the “sun” of the Bible around which all Biblical stories revolve. Every Old Testament occurrence points toward the resurrection and all events afterward point back to it. It is the climax of the great long story of humanity, the entryway back to Eden, paradise lost by Adam then found again through Jesus.
It also serves as the central core of Christianity itself. No matter our different interpretations of the Bible, all doctrine should revolve around and point to Christ emerging from the empty tomb.
So in my opinion, you can believe that Sodom was destroyed by a volcano, the earth is 14 billion years old, or that there were only 35,000 Israelites, and still be a Christian. But the resurrection is not up for negotiation. You must believe Jesus died and rose again to be saved. That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved (Romans 10:9).
Because the resurrection isn’t just what separates Christianity apart. It’s also what makes Christ Himself a unique historical figure and stands as the ultimate witness to His divinity.
Jesus wasn’t the only self-proclaimed Messiah. There has actually been a plethora of historical characters making similar claims and gathering similar followings. Here are just a few examples:
Simon bar Kokhba (?-135 AD): Led a short-lived rebellion against Rome from 132-135 AD, but was killed in siege of Betar.
Moses of Crete (real name Fiskis): Claimed to be the Messiah from 440-470 AD. He attempted to re-enact the Red Sea crossing to liberate his people from Roman rule. The waters didn’t part and most of his followers drowned. Whether he died with them or fled is unclear, but he was never seen again.
Abu Isa: From 744-750 AD, led a revolt against Persian caliph. He was killed in battle at Rai.
Yudghan: A disciple of Abu Isa’s took over his movement after the battle of Rai. He was hailed as the “new Messiah” by his followers. His teachings were similar to Jesus’. After his death, his followers were certain he would return. He never did.
David Alrui: began declaring himself the Messiah in Persia in 1160 AD. He stirred up a Jewish uprising in Northern Persia. His movement failed, and he was assassinated in his sleep by his own father-in-law.
Abraham ben Samuel Abulafia (1240-1291 AD): Claimed to be Messiah in 1279 AD in Sicily. He gathered a large following until two of his disciples turned on him. He fled to island of Comino and was never heard from again.
Sabbatai Zevi (1626-1676 AD): Ottoman Jew who gathered a huge following claiming to be the Messiah. Sadly, he disappointed his followers after converting to Islam.
The life of Christ alone isn’t anything historically spectacular, except for maybe His miracles. But those alone weren’t necessarily enough to make Him history’s most enduring figure. His life and teachings weren’t radically different from these men. Some of them had larger followings. He could have been just an obscure cult leader. Even the crucifixion, horrible as it was, doesn’t set Jesus apart. Many of the other self-proclaimed Messiahs died martyrs’ deaths as well.
But instead of fading into irrelevance, Christianity suddenly exploded into the world’s largest religion. Two thousand years later, two and a half billion people around the world still absolutely believe that Jesus is the Son of God. What makes Him stand out?
The resurrection made the difference.
My reasoning stands as follows: it’s impossible to come back from death (especially considering the extremely brutal execution Jesus endured). Therefore, if Jesus came back from the dead, it proves He was who He said He was. This also means all things He said are truth. Which means heaven is an actual place. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you (John 14:2).
But this also means that hell is very real. In fact, no one spoke about it more than Jesus, and He taught on it more than He did heaven. Matthew 13:41-42: The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
I’ve seen a glimpse of hell myself in a vision (which you can read about in a previous blog, The Vision of the Rope). Yet it was never more real to me than when I reached this realization: the logical conclusion of the empty tomb Messiahship is that heaven and hell are both the only possible eternal destination of our souls. Those who believe on Jesus will reach one, and the other is reserved for everyone else. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (Matthew 25:46). Which will you choose?
Let me know if you'd like on or off the Depths of Pentecost ping list. Thanks for reading!
Ping.
Thanks. Thought provoking message. Happy Easter!
Well written, I very much appreciated reading it.
Best to you and yours this Easter, pcottraux.
He is risen.....Indeed!
Thanks for this.
Happy Easter!
Thank you for reminding us Christians what unites us. Divisions within the church are temporary. The Lord’s divisions are eternal.
Put me on all the lists you have.
You’re welcome! Same to you (belated)!
Well today’s Monday, so I’m a bit late responding...but He was still risen the day after, so praise the Lord!
Profoundly put!
You’re all very welcome! Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for reading!
The pleasure was mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.