Tuesday, March 05, 2019

Going Up - Article 4/39

4. OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST
CHRIST did truly rise again from death, and took again his body, with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of Man's nature; wherewith he ascended into Heaven, and there sitteth, until he return to judge all Men at the last day.

There are, as Percy says, no obvious answers to life's questions at Christmas. We have to put time into the relationship with the baby and let him grow, if we are to hear him speak. If we are to believe the hymn that suggests the little Lord Jesus makes no crying even, then it will be a while before we get to hear parables.

The set question in the Gospels, perhaps most clearly put in Mark is 'Who is this man?' Hiding behind the theological complexity of Articles 2-4 the question still has legs and still brings life to those who would pursue the relationship.

Back in the day when I was churning out Bible study books for teenage groups at the rate of two a year we always had interesting discussions about titles. We had no debate about the title of our book on Jesus' resurrection. It came to me and it was the only one ever considered. Didn't he used to be dead? I'm still proud of it.

The Article wishes us to affirm a bodily resurrection – I love the idea of flesh, bones and all things... He even took his unmentionable bits with him. Bless.

O'Donovan says '...a human body is something more than its material constituents, and what became of those constituents in the resurrection of Jesus's body is a question on which some reticence might be appropriate.'

And on that ascension he adds, 'The verb 'ascended', like the verb 'came down' in the Creed, can refer to no form of spatial movement known to man.'

For Paul the resurrection was key. It was the resurrection which affirmed that the death of Christ dealt with the human relationship with God once and for all. Not everyone who is a useless preacher is a useless preacher because of lack of faith in the resurrection. But for Paul if there is no resurrection our preaching is useless. Literally without use. A waste of time.

So, has our understanding of what actually happened that first Easter morning moved on since the resurrection. Yes, I think it has. But it has moved in the direction of mystery not certainty. I used to think that it was evidence that demanded a verdict, influenced by books such as Frank Morrison's 'Who Moved the Stone?'

I now read a paragraph such as the one which follows from Martin Percy and feel much more comfortable:

'In the oldest account of the resurrection (by Mark), and in the earliest Greek manuscripts, the Gospel ends mid-sentence, with the innocuous Greek word gar (meaning 'for': “they were afraid for...”).

'Thus, a proper conclusion to the story is withheld, and it is up to the reader to say what happens next. The followers of Jesus are invited to write a resurrection conclusion with their own lives.'

It is also true that it makes Mark's Gospel a better piece of literature. Throughout Jesus' life he warns people not to tell about him, but they do. Post-resurrection, witnesses are invited to share the news. But they don't. Will you?

No comments: