sign in sign up
<<
Home , Argument from degree, Faith, Heaven

COMPASS SOME REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE

GERALD O’COLLINS SJ

E WOULD COME up with a ted- cise definitions that would pin it down. Rather iously long list if we were to reply it provides the broadest horizon within which Wcomprehensively to the question: we can recognize what human life ultimately what have they been saying about the resur- means, how we should live, and what we can rection of in the last ten years? In any expect from the who raised Jesus from case many authors go over the same ground the dead. and do not add very much either to the de- This latest plea for the utter centrality of bates about the resurrection or to the conclu- Easter follows earlier attempts to focus sions that can be reached. Hence I have de- Christian thinking and life on the resurrection cided to select nine books that have signifi- of the crucified Jesus. In the run up to the Sec- cant things to say, either positively or nega- ond Vatican Council, François-Xavier tively, about the resurrection and the possibil- Durrwell helped to ‘rehabilitate’ Easter as the ity of Easter faith and . This representa- central mystery of .2 In the tive sample will bring readers into the current postconciliar years some writers, like the Lu- state of resurrection studies. theran Wolfhart Pannenberg and myself,3 tried In presenting these nine works, I do not again to revitalize and its various intend to take readers through them in com- specializations by recalling where they should plete detail and provide full-length book re- constantly go to draw meaning, values and ports. Instead, I shall choose and highlight sig- guidelines: the light of the first Easter - nificant features that should students day. of the resurrection. But the strange neglect of the resurrection persists. Sadly, leading figures in liberation Some Positive Contributions theology have reflected only a little on Christ’s rising from the dead.4 Themes other than the Anthony Kelly, The Resurrection Effect: resurrection continue to engage the attention Transforming Christian Life and Thought of Catholic moral theologians, and, even more (2008) surprisingly, the resurrection can be seriously Anthony Kelly deserves to lead the team neglected by those who write in the area of of those who have contributed positively to sacramental theology.5 We will return later in the study of resurrection.1 He brings together this book to ways in which Easter faith should biblical, theological and philosophical think- enliven those two branches of theology, as well ing to show how the ‘satu- as liberation theology itself. Here I wish only rates’ the whole of Christian faith and should to endorse Kelly’s call to engage ourselves transform the life and thought of believers. As much more fully with the resurrection of Je- the key to God’s relationship with Jesus and sus from the dead. human , the resurrection eludes any pre- * * *

10 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION

N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son Gerald O’Collins, s.j., of God (2003) taught at the Gregorian A magisterial volume by N. T. Wright of- University (Rome) for 33 fers over eight hundred pages in response to years and is now an basic questions about the origins of Christian- adjunct of ity and the resurrection of Jesus.6 What did ACU. He has authored or the first Christians mean when they proclaimed co-authored sixty books; including Rethinking that Jesus of Nazareth had been raised from Fundamental Theology the dead? Where does the historical (O.U.P.), and Pause For lead us when we investigate what precisely Thought (Paulist Press). happened at the first Easter? What should be said about believing today in Jesus’ resurrec- limbs cut off by executioners (2 Macc 7)? tion? On two scores, as Wright shows, Christian The historical and biblical strength of this faith in resurrection had no strict precedent book emerges right from the first two hundred even in . First, it proclaimed that one pages that map ancient beliefs about life be- individual (Jesus) had been raised from the yond in both pagan and Jewish . dead in of the general resurrec- Wright takes us through a panorama of what tion at the end of all history. in Jesus’ Greeks and Romans held about where resurrection could not have been generated by went after death. The pagan assumed prior Jewish beliefs or study of the biblical that resurrection was impossible. Among the texts expressing those beliefs. Second, the , earlier hints (e.g., Isa 26:19; Ezek 37:1– other striking difference appears in a distinc- 14; and Hos 6:1–2; 13:14) developed, and, in tively Christian consensus about the of response to the of those martyred in resurrection. The newly embodied life of the God’s cause, became a full-blown belief in resurrected Jesus involved a glorious transfor- coming resurrection (Dan 12:2–3; 2 Macc 7). mation of his human existence, the ‘spiritual Of course, some like the rejected body’ of 1 Corinthians 15. That made Chris- any life beyond death worth speaking of, and agree in expecting that kind of risen ex- others expected only a disembodied immor- istence for themselves. Thus when compared tality. But by the time of Jesus ‘most Jews be- with Jewish for resurrection, the Easter lieved in resurrection.’ 7 They expected a gen- message of Paul and other early Christian wit- eral resurrection at the end of the present age: nesses contained two strikingly new elements. that is to say, a newly embodied life at the end Through the heart of his book Wright de- of history. But no one imagined that any indi- ploys the historical data that support accept- vidual had already been raised from the dead ing the appearances of the risen Christ and the or would be raised in anticipation of the last discovery of his empty tomb. Those two events day. Here one should note that Hosea 6:1–2 prompted the resurrection faith in Jesus as the (‘us’) and 13:14 (‘them’) speak in the plural messianic Son of God, a faith that Christi- and of a community resurrection, and not in anity going and provided its essential shape the singular or of an individual’s resurrection. Wright traces to the third century the trajec- Nor was there any agreement among those who tory of Easter faith and resurrection hope trig- believed that (general) resurrection would gered by Jesus’ own victory over death. eventually happen as to what it would be like. In such a monumental study different read- Would it involve woken from the sleep ers will have their favorite sections. I was par- of death to ‘shine’ forever like the and ticularly struck by what Wright wrote on the ‘the brightness of the ’ (Dan 12) or to en- Easter stories we read in the closing chapters a reassembled body and the restoration of of the four Gospels. They contain surprising,

11 COMPASS even strange, features.8 For example, up to the the kind of person God could be expected to death and burial of Jesus, all four Gospels have raised from the dead. (c) In making his constantly quote and echo the Jewish scrip- case, Swinburne paints with broad sweeps of tures. A familiar theme in Matthew is his ‘all the brush, but also introduces some specific this took place to fulfill what had been spoken questions and arguments. (d) He draws to- by the through the prophet(s),’ to which gether his case by concluding with a calculus the evangelist then attaches one or more bibli- of logical . It expresses in a formal cal citations. Surprisingly such biblical ‘em- manner his previous steps, and aims at show- broidery’ does not show up in his final, Easter ing how it is very probable that the resurrec- chapter. The other evangelists also leave their tion happened. I know of no other book on the Easter narratives biblically ‘unadorned.’ A sec- resurrection that ends in such a mathematical ond unexpected feature is the absence of per- way with twelve pages of axioms, theorems sonal hope in the Easter stories. Elsewhere the and an apparatus of calculus. writers repeatedly express Let me comment on each of the four steps. their own hope for risen life when they refer As regards (a), the and sinning of to the resurrection of Jesus. A classic example human beings make it plausible that in his in- of this connection being made comes in 1 finite God would act by personally com- Corinthians 15, a letter written years before ing on the scene to set right a tragic situation. any of the Gospels took their final shape. These After all, John wrote: ‘God so loved the world and further strange silences and unexpected that he gave his only Son, so that everyone features of the Easter chapters in the Gospels who in him may not perish but may should encourage us to agree with Wright that have eternal life’ (:16). Nevertheless, the substance of these chapters represents a the did not have to happen. God very old telling of the discovery of the empty might have dealt in other ways with the trag- tomb and of Jesus’ encounters with the disci- edy of human sinning and suffering, or—to use ples—a time before biblical and theological Swinburne’s way of putting things—have ‘ful- reflection began working on connections and filled’ the divine ‘obligations’ 10 in ways other implications to be drawn from that discovery than the incarnation. In the light of the divine and those appearances. There is a haunting, freedom, may one allege that, given the hu- ancient simplicity in the Easter stories that man predicament, the incarnation was highly speaks for their credibility. probable? Here I must also express a quibble about , The Resurrection of the language of ‘intervention’ that Swinburne God Incarnate (2003) (and others) constantly use. To call the incar- Like Wright, Richard Swinburne is con- nation an ‘intervention’ can too easily suggest cerned to put a case for faith in Jesus’ resur- an ‘outsider’ God, who comes on the scene rection from the dead.9 Being a for the first time, even a kind of ‘meddlesome’ rather than a biblical scholar or historian, he God. This is inappropriate language when we takes a ‘broader’ approach and concludes that recall that God is always intimately present there is a high probability that Jesus rose from everywhere and in every situation, from - the dead. This ‘broad’ approach involves four ment to moment sustaining in being everything major steps: (a) God, being perfectly good and that is. It would be less misleading to charac- perfectly powerful, had serious for ‘in- terize the incarnation as a ‘special divine act,’ tervening’ in human history by becoming in- or, together with the resurrection, as ‘the spe- carnate. (b) Since the life and teaching of Je- cial divine act’ that differs qualitatively from sus show him to have been the incarnate Son other special divine acts, like .11 of God, we can conclude that he was uniquely Here too I must also protest against

12 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION

Swinburne ‘reducing’ the resurrection to the be expected to raise from the dead. I would category of ‘’ and describing ‘miracles’ prefer to say that Jesus, while being rejected as ‘violations of natural laws.’12 First, the res- and crucified as a blasphemer and threat to urrection of Jesus should not be called a mira- the public order, was in fact so truly identified cle or even a super-miracle. Miracles, like the with God and the divine cause that one would healing miracles of Jesus, are, to be sure, signs expect God to vindicate him in resurrection. of what he wishes to do for us in the final king- Luke cites in Acts 2:17 a psalm that suggests dom (in the perfect bodily ‘healing’ of the res- what one might, or even should, expect from urrection). Nevertheless, they happened and God after the execution of Jesus: ‘You will not happen within our historical world of space abandon my to Hades, or let your Holy and time, even if they point to what is to come. One experience corruption’ (Ps 16:9). The resurrection of Jesus goes beyond any (c) Swinburne introduces something valu- such miracles; it was and is the real beginning able in certain specific questions and argu- of the , the event that initiates a ments. He names, for instance, the new cel- sequence of final events that will fulfill and ebration of Sunday as a question to be an- complete his personal rising from the dead (1 swered. Why did the Jewish disciples of Je- Cor 15:20–28). Second, ‘violate’ has four sus, his first disciples, no longer give priority meanings, all of them negative and even ugly: to the Jewish Sabbath or Saturday and turn ‘the (i) disregard or fail to comply with; (ii) treat first day of the week’ or Sunday into the day with disrespect; (iii) disturb or break in upon: for meeting and celebrating the Eucharist (iv) assault sexually. Presumably Swinburne (which, after all, was instituted at the Last uses ‘violate’ in sense (i). But when working Supper seemingly on the day that we call miracles occasionally and for good reasons, )? What made them hold Sunday so God is surely better described as suspending special that they changed not only their man- or overriding the normal working of natural ner of (1 Cor 11:23-26) but also their laws. Since it is God who created the precise special day for worship? An obvious answer shape and functions of the laws of nature, it is close at hand for this momentous switch looks odd to speak of God ‘disregarding’ or away from the Sabbath, the day which God ‘failing to comply with’ them. ‘Suspending’ or was understood to have assigned for rest and ‘overriding’ seems more appropriate language. worship. Sunday was the day when the tomb As regards Swinburne’s second step (b), of Jesus was discovered to be open and empty what he calls ‘the marks of an incarnate God,’ and the day when the disciples first encoun- or ‘the life required of an incarnate God,’ are tered him risen from the dead. found exemplified in Jesus. He was the one Swinburne also spends a chapter examin- and only prophet to satisfy the requirements ing and refuting five rival theories of what for being and being recognized as God incar- happened to Jesus: for instance, that Jesus did nate. Obviously Swinburne cannot go into not die on the cross but was taken down alive much detail about the life, preaching, claims, and recovered, or that he did die and was bur- miraculous deeds of Jesus, and what that all ied, but his body was then removed by friends. implied about his personal identity. But, as I As regards the first theory, which sensational- argue in the next chapter, a good case can be ist but totally unscholarly writers revive every made for concluding that, when revealing the year or so, Swinburne points to several large divine mystery and working for the difficulties it faces: for example, if Jesus con- of human beings, Jesus gave the impression tinued to live on, ‘is it really plausible to sup- of claiming to be on a par with God. To put pose that he would have taken no further in- matters the way Swinburne does, Jesus was terest in the mushrooming movement which indeed the kind of person whom God could his and apparent resurrection had in-

13 COMPASS spired? Would he (in view of what we know acclaimed book on John’s Gospel precisely as about him from the Gospels) really have col- a work on the resurrection.16 But the subtitle luded with such massive deception?’13 could easily have been ‘encountering the risen What of the theory that friends (e.g., the Jesus in and through the Fourth Gospel’ (em- female disciples) removed the body of Jesus phasis mine). The book shares the aim of from the tomb where Joseph of Arimathea had John’s Gospel: to prompt its readers into en- given him burial, took the body for proper countering and believing in the risen Jesus. To burial elsewhere (e.g., in Nazareth), and con- be sure, the Fourth Gospel assigns only two cealed this act from most of the disciples. But chapters out of twenty-one to the Easter story. why would such disciples have wanted to con- But, as Schneiders points out, ‘the Johannine ceal from the other disciples what they had resurrection narrative is one of the literary jew- done out of devotion to Jesus? Even more im- els of the New Testament.’17 What is more, the portantly, could they have been able to keep Jesus of the entire Fourth Gospel is no mere secret their actions in removing the body from historical memory but a living presence. Right the tomb, transporting it somewhere else, and through the whole text and especially in the giving it honorable burial there? As Swinburne stories of various representative individuals remarks, ‘even if they had tried to keep the who meet Jesus, readers are invited not to re- theft secret from the other disciples, it is most turn to the past but to relate here and now in unlikely that they would have succeeded.’14 faith to the risen Jesus. The story of the man In an appendix Swinburne assigns numeri- born blind (John 9:1-41), in particular, syn- cal values to the various involved thesizes the challenge of seeing the risen Christ in his four-step argument. He maintains that, with the eyes of faith and committing oneself if these values do not ‘exaggerate the force of to him.18 In the text such episodes belong to the arguments by which they are supported,…it the history of the pre-Easter Jesus, but they is indeed very probable that Jesus was God move beyond the past to put the timeless ques- incarnate who rose from the dead.’15 In view tions: do you here and now experience in Je- of the Trinitarian faith which Swinburne ac- sus the One who is utterly true and good and cepts, it would be preferable to speak of Jesus brings us the face of God? If so, are you will- being the Son of God incarnate who rose from ing to become his disciple, and so ‘find life in the dead. But, more importantly, while appre- his name’ (John 20:31)? ciating Swinburne’s vigorous defense of the The presence of the risen Christ permeates resurrection, I how many people could the Fourth Gospel, not least the story of the come to believe in the resurrection simply on raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-53).19 It is faith the basis of numerical values, which they might in Jesus as the resurrection and the life (John assign to probabilities constituting various 11:25) that allows Martha, Mary, and other steps in the arguments that they develop from disciples to face and cope with death in their the historical of the New Testament. own families and the prospect of death them- Personal factors and experience, not to men- selves. tion, the influence of the Holy , feed into The risen and glorious Jesus remains inti- the making of Easter faith, as I will argue in a mately present in and among his community later chapter. of friends (John 15:15). In the struggles and of their lives and ministry, Sandra Schneiders, Written that You May experiences of the glorified Jesus will be ac- Believe: Encountering Jesus in the Fourth tualized over and over again when they hear Gospel (2003) the word proclaimed ‘It is ’ and sit Unlike the three authors we have just ex- down at table with him (John 21:1-14). amined, Sandra Schneiders did not write her Schneiders joins forces with the Fourth

14 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION

Gospel to remind us that the resurrection of for faith in the life of the world to come? Res- Jesus is something much more than a matter urrection: Theological and Scientific Assess- of historical debate; it involves an existential ments responded to this question by bringing issue, a spiritual challenge, and a personal re- together distinguished scientists and theolo- lationship. In the haunting words with which gians to explore, in the light of the laws of Albert Schweitzer ended his 1906 classic, nature, belief in bodily resurrection. Through a meeting in Heidelberg in 2001 He comes to us as One unknown, without a name, as of old, by the lakeside, He came to and a series of conferences elsewhere, the three those men who knew Him not. He speaks to us editors gathered a seminar team that repre- the same word: ‘Follow thou me!’and sets us to sented research and teaching faculty in phys- the tasks which He has to fulfil for our time. He ics, biology, neuroscience, , commands. And to those who obey Him, Egyptology, history, , and whether they be wise or simple, He will reveal . The eighteen contributors Himself in the toils, the conflicts, the (ten from Germany, six from the USA, and one which they shall pass through in His fellow- each from England and South Africa) pursued ship, and, as an ineffable mystery, they shall the question: how should we assess the resur- 20 learn in their experience Who He is. rection of Christ and our own future resurrec- In recent years the western world has wit- tion religiously and scientifically? nessed a growing interest in personal religious One of the editors, Ted Peters, not only experience and various forms of , skillfully introduces the book by summariz- including alternative not embod- ing the particular issues to be handled but also ied in nor often addressed by traditional reli- draws together in a conclusion some major gion. Reading Schneiders’s book on encoun- conceptual challenges. How, for instance, can tering Jesus and re-reading what Schweitzer faith in the resurrection present (a) the nature wrote a hundred years ago suggest that, un- of the risen body and (b) the preservation of less we take up again the experiential refer- personal identity in the resurrection? Peters ence of resurrection faith as proposed by quotes at the end the radiant lines of John’s Gospel, we will fail to provide what is Rabindranath Tagore: ‘Death is not extinguish- urgently needed: a revival of that Easter spir- ing the light; it is only putting out the lamp ituality, which can provide life and life in abun- because the dawn has come.’ dance. While the ‘Big Bang’ seems to favour the biblical doctrine of the first crea- T. Peters, et al., eds., Resurrection: Theo- tion, two major scientific scenarios for the fu- logical and Scientific Assessments 2002 ture threaten the Easter promise of the new The fifth and final book to be considered creation to come. In a masterly chapter, ‘Bod- among ‘the positive contributions’ is a theo- ily Resurrection, , and Scientific logical and scientific study of bodily resurrec- Cosmology,’ Robert Russell faces the two sce- tion produced by an international team.21 In narios for cosmic death: the universe will ei- 1987, after a study week at the papal summer ther freeze itself out of existence or collapse residence in Castel Gandolfo involving theo- back into a dense fireball. But we may not pre- logians, , and scientists, John Paul sume that the laws of nature, which have gov- II wrote to the director of the Vatican Observa- erned the past and continue to govern the tory encouraging such dialogue and raising a present, will also necessarily govern the fu- series of striking questions on how the find- ture. In the ongoing history of the , God ings of modern science might enrich our un- is free to act in new ways and transform the derstanding of some Christian beliefs. What, laws that he has created. Christian hope rests for instance, are the implications of science on something radically new, which we have

15 COMPASS already glimpsed in the resurrection of Christ turning now to two works that fail to advance himself. the cause of resurrection studies, let me first John Polkinghorne, familiar to many recall two learned but ambivalent books that through working on science and and provoke a ‘yes, but’ reaction. winning the Templeton Prize in 2002, shows how the final hope of Christians cannot be truly Betwixt and Between maintained by those who play down the empty tomb and bodily resurrection. That hope in- After co-authoring a major commentary on volves, along with a personal and spiritual Matthew’s Gospel and publishing other sig- continuity, some element of material continu- nificant works on the New Testament, Dale ity between the pre-resurrection and the post- Allison has long ago established himself as not resurrection Jesus. Those who disagree end up only a notable, learned biblical scholar but also arguing for a ‘full’ tomb, which means an at times a provocatively independent inter- ‘empty’ Christian faith. They also have to preter. Not surprisingly he was chosen to write reckon with the clear evidence that all four the entry on Jesus for the 2006 edition of the Gospels found it very important that the tomb Encyclopedia of Religion.22 His Resurrecting of Jesus was empty. In some real sense, a genu- Jesus,23 despite its title, also contains essays ine resurrection must be bodily. The message on other topics. But it belongs in this chapter, of the empty tomb also reinforces the sense of since it contains nearly two hundred pages on a that enjoys a cosmic scope; in the Easter appearances, the empty tomb, and other words, the resurrection brings the well the whole question of historical research and founded expectation of a ‘new ’ and a belief in the resurrection. ‘new earth.’ After the death of Jesus, something hap- Among the many fine chapters in this book pened to set the Christian movement going. let me also mention those by Brian Daley (on What was it? After stating the orthodox early Christian ways of articulating faith in the belief that defends the of the empty resurrection), Nancey Murphy (on the resur- tomb and the objectivity of Jesus’ post-resur- rection and personal identity), and Noreen rection appearances, Allison takes us through Herzfeld. She demolishes as science fiction the six rival theories (e.g., hallucination, deliber- thesis of cybernetic that reduces ate deception, and so forth), indicating their the human self to mere patterns. exponents and noting various difficulties that All in all, this valuable dialogue between tell against these theories (199–213). He scientists and theologians illuminates the skillfully groups together these hypotheses and Christian hope that the end of the world will alerts readers to their origins, import, and bring the healing and transformation of our weaknesses. personal history and the renewal of all things. Over specific questions connected with the It translates into modern terms the link St Paul resurrection, Allison engages with N. T. had drawn in Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15 Wright and Richard Swinburne, as well as with between (a) the resurrection of Jesus, (b) the me (mainly on the issue of bereavement expe- bodily resurrection of human beings, and (c) riences, of which we will speak below). He the new creation of the whole universe. probes Wright’s claim that the resurrection of The five books chosen for this sample of Jesus is the best historical explanation of the positive contributions to resurrection studies biblical evidence (345–50). Like many others represent distinct fields: theology (Kelly), bib- (including myself in Easter Faith),24 Allison lical studies (Wright), philosophy insists that we all evaluate questions about the (Swinburne), spirituality (Schneiders), and resurrection from within our own world-views. science (Peters, Russell, and Welker). Before Background theories (about such matters as

16 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION accepting or denying the possibility of special he made no mention of the article I published divine actions and, indeed, about the existence with Kendall. and nature of God) can be decisive (346–50; In general, Allison’s documentation is see 340–44). Hence Allison ‘understands’ why breathtaking: 692 footnotes for his 178 pages Swinburne, ‘in his recent defense of the resur- on the resurrection, and many of these foot- rection, commences by first seeking to estab- notes contain multiple references. Unlike some lish the existence of a certain sort of God and scholarly books, his index of names includes the likelihood of such a God communicating the authors of books and articles that appear with and redeeming the human race’ (341). only in the footnotes. Again unlike some mod- Allison also joins with Swinburne in putting ern scholars, Allison does not limit himself to the question: was Jesus someone who ‘should recent years when citing writers who meet with have been raised from the dead’ (349). In other his approval or disapproval. His exceptionally words, when reflecting on the resurrection, we wide reading enables him to quote nineteenth- also need to assess the teaching and actions of century or even earlier works that express with Jesus. Allison draws together the two require- clarity, and at times elegance, notions that ments: ‘if judgment about the resurrection can- Allison endorses or deplores. not be isolated from one’s , it But, regrettably, when comparing the post- equally cannot be isolated from one’s estima- resurrection appearances with reports of peo- tion of the pre-Easter Jesus’ (350). ple experiencing their beloved dead and, in In some sections Allison shows himself at particular, alleged experiences of his incisive best: for instance, in an excursus that kind, he introduces in an undifferentiated eliminating the arguments of John Dominic way references to a mass of literature, some Crossan (and others) and defending the histo- of it unreliable popular publications, some of ricity of the burial story and Joseph of it coming from parapsychologists of the nine- Arimathea’s central role in it (352–63). He teenth and twentieth century, and some of it rightly observes that the historicity of the burial not dealing, at least directly, with the matter story always plays some role in evaluating the in question, the experiences of bereaved per- historicity of the empty tomb story. It is not sons (269–75, 278–84). It almost seems as if that the former ‘proves’ the latter. But, as Dan the sheer quantity of the references replaces Kendall and I wrote, ‘for a critical assessment the quality of the argument. Apropos of ‘re- of the New Testament traditions about the ports of collective apparitions,’ Allison notes empty tomb much depends on one’s evalua- that they are ‘prominent in the literature of tion of the burial story.’25 Our article took aim but not in normal psychology’ at the questionable case Crossan made against (279, n. 292). That should have warned him the historicity of the burial story that we find against introducing, as he does, references to in Mark 15:42–47. As Allison was to do, we a number of long-discredited parapsycholo- concluded that Crossan ‘has done nothing to gists. Very many scholars, including profes- undermine its historical credibility, which re- sional psychologists, find only pseudo-science mains accepted by very many biblical schol- in the works of parapsychologists. ars from Bultmann to Fitzmyer and But let me come to the heart of my ‘quar- beyond.’26 As far as I know, my article with rel’ with Allison. He scrutinizes carefully the Kendall and then Allison’s excursus are the New Testament data about the appearances of only detailed examinations and rejections of the risen Jesus (or, as he and others call them, the way Crossan dismissed the story of Jesus’ ‘christophanies’ ) (232–69) and the discovery historical burial by Joseph of Arimathea. Given of the empty tomb (299–337). As regards the Allison’s penchant for adequate and even ex- former, he states what ‘appears to be the facts’ tensive documentation, it is a little strange that ‘several people reported christophanies,’ and

17 COMPASS

‘Jesus ostensibly appeared on more than one his tragic end, idealized and internalized their occasion to more than one person’ (269). Re- teacher, and remembered his words and deeds’ viewing the arguments against and for the his- (375). This summary reduces all that happened toricity of the empty tomb (300–11 and 311– after the death and burial of Jesus to what hap- 31, respectively), he tentatively concludes that pened on the side of the bereaved disciples, to the story of the empty tomb is ‘more likely to their subjective experience, and to their activ- be history than legend’ (344). As a biblical ity. They ‘saw him again’ and ‘sensed his in- scholar, Allison feels himself at an impasse: visible presence,’ rather than the risen Jesus historical reasoning cannot by itself decide the himself taking the initiative to ‘appear’ to them issue and produce certain conclusions about (1 Cor 15:5–8). They ‘overcame their by the alleged resurrection of Jesus. The evidence finding sense in his tragic end,’ rather than the seems inconclusive. In Allison’s words, ‘his- risen Jesus and the conveying to torical criticism cannot judge the extraordinary them (e.g. John 21:15–19) and in- experiences of the disciples to be true or false, sight (e.g. John 16:13). They ‘idealized and or attribute them either to the Spirit of God or internalized their teacher,’ rather than their to psychology’ (342, n. 564; emphasis mine). risen Lord encountering them and enabling Yet it is to psychology and reports of bereave- them to ‘live in him’ and ‘abide’ in his love ment experiences that Allison himself turns. (e.g. John 15:1–10). They ‘remembered his Encouraged by his own experience of a words and deeds,’ rather than the Holy Spirit deceased friend and by experiences of his de- coming to ‘teach’ them everything and ‘re- ceased father that happened to several mem- mind’ them of all that Jesus had said and done bers of his immediate family (275–77), Allison (e.g. John 14:25). moves to interpret the post-resurrection ap- This one-sided privileging of the disciples’ pearances of Jesus as instances of such be- experience and activity runs dead contrary to reavement experiences. He presses ‘the simi- the primacy of the divine initiative that perva- larities between reports of postmortem en- sively shapes the Easter narratives and theol- counters with Jesus and visions of the recently ogy of Paul and the evangelists. It also leaves departed’ (364), and never pauses to review behind Allison’s own theological tradition.28 the dissimilarities.27 He ignores, for instance, The leaders of the Protestant Reformation the way the bereaved who have enjoyed such rightly highlighted God’s prior activity in visions do not claim that their dear departed Christ and the Holy Spirit over anything that are risen from the dead and that their graves human beings, including the first disciples, have been found empty. Where the Easter nar- might by themselves see, sense, overcome, ratives do not supply some alleged feature of find, idealize, internalize, and remember. In the bereaved disciples’ mourning experience Allison’s version of things, the coming to (for instance, the that they ‘must’ have Easter faith and the foundation of the Chris- felt), Allison supplies it himself: they ‘would Church looks very much like a human not have been human if they had not felt an- ‘work.’ Allison properly recognizes that the ger and toward those they held re- findings of historical research, even that sponsible for crucifying the man to whom they practiced by someone as expert as himself, are were devoted’ (372). insufficient in themselves to bring him or any- Allison concludes his book with twelve one else to faith in the risen Jesus. Once or pages on ‘the disciples and bereavement’ twice he recalls the setting in which such faith (364–75). Some final words sum up his the- flourishes and grows, the Christian commu- sis: ‘shortly after his death, the followers of nity at worship on Easter Sunday (xi, 352). Jesus saw him again, sensed his invisible pres- The Easter faith of generations of worshipping ence, overcame their guilt by finding sense in and practicing believers provides what Allison

18 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION looks for: the experiential and religious ‘war- est form of the disappearance tradition as he rant’ for accepting that God has raised Jesus finds it in Mark 16:1–8 with, for instance, the from the dead (342). A that he did not disappearance of in 2 Kings 2. One turn in that direction rather than use (or mis- might raise a here: Elijah, unlike Jesus, use?) psychology and engage in what amounts had not died and been buried before being as- to a serious ‘reduction’ of the New Testament’s sumed. message of the resurrection. If one might adapt Smith has studied assiduously many an- some words of St Paul (1 Cor 15:54–55), ‘res- cient texts that seem relevant to his argument, urrection has been swallowed up in psychol- along with modern authors who comment on ogy. Where, O resurrection, is your victory? them. He notes significant differences between Where, O resurrection is your sting?’ Jewish accounts of assumption (through which Allison begins with a moving ‘confession,’ Elijah and others escape from death by being in which he shows his longing to endorse a ‘taken up’ with a view to their eschatological faith that holds that Jesus was truly resurrected functions to come) and Greco-Roman stories. from the dead (213–19). But, bewitched by The latter usually involved an apotheosis in possible analogies with bereavement experi- which some hero was taken alive into the pres- ences, he ends with his own version of psy- ence of the or else his spirit ascended chological reductionism. In an appendix I ex- while his dead body was buried. plore the bereavement analogy, which is both Smith recognizes that we have something like and unlike the Easter experiences of the unique in the case of Jesus: Christian belief in first disciples. him involved both resurrection and assump- tion/ascension (e.g., Phil 2:9; 1 Tim 3:16). But Daniel Smith, Revisiting the Empty Tomb: he never acknowledges a key difficulty thrown The Early History of Easter (2010) up by the cases he cites of Herakles, Romulus, In a recent book Daniel Smith takes on a and other such heroes and heroines. Unlike more limited project than Allison but practices Jesus (who lived and died shortly before the a similar (yet not identical) form of New Testament came into existence), they reductionism: it draws not on modern psy- were understood to have lived in a very dis- chological research into the experiences of tant past, and—one can reasonably maintain— bereaved persons, but on a mass of ‘assump- most probably never existed at all. A similar tion’ stories from Greco-Roman and Jewish difficulty also affects the way in which Elijah sources that are supposed to unlock the ‘real’ and other ancient biblical figures might be meaning of the empty tomb story in Mark 16:1- pressed into service as parallels for the tradi- 8.29 Let us see some of the details. tions that arose about what happened to Jesus. Smith limits himself to (a) exploring the Whatever one’s verdict on the historical real- tradition of Jesus’ empty tomb (as he recon- ity of these ancient figures, they certainly did structs its religious background) and the tra- not exist, as Jesus did, within living memory. dition of the post-resurrection appearances, Smith does not refer to Richard and to (b) accounting for the differences of Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses,30 a perspective between these two traditions. He work that might have qualified his willingness explains the differences by arguing that the to credit the New Testament authors and their empty tomb tradition did not originate as a way sources with a high degree of creativity.’ of stating that Jesus had been raised from the Bauckham recognizes how the period between dead but as a ‘disappearance’ tradition or a Jesus and the final composition of Mark and way of expressing that Jesus had been assumed the other Gospels was spanned by the contin- from the tomb into heaven and would be seen ued presence and testimony of some who had again at the parousia. He associates the earli- participated in the history of Jesus: namely,

19 COMPASS such original eyewitnesses as Peter, Mary in the rest of his Gospel. Paul Danove, in a Magdalene, and the sons of Zebedee. They literary and rhetorical study of this Gospel, played a central and authoritative role in guid- finds little or no evidence of Greco-Roman ing the transmission of the traditions about influence.31 Years ago, in a paper that antici- Jesus and would not have tolerated ‘creative’ pated the thesis of Smith’s book, Adela Yarbro innovations. Bauckham’s historical recon- Collins ‘explained’ Mark’s empty tomb story struction of the role of the original eyewit- largely on the basis of Greco-Roman ideas of nesses does not allow for the kind of imagina- a notable figure being translated into heaven. tive developments Smith alleges. Smith imag- But she had to admit that ‘it is hard to find’ in ines Mark and/or his sources fashioning, on Mark much influence from Greco-Roman the basis of a saying from ‘Q’: ‘You will not sources.32 see me’ (Matt 23:39; Luke 13:35), an empty Second, as we move from Mark to John, tomb tradition that involved not resurrection we do find a progressive linking of two tradi- from the dead but Jesus being taken up into tions. But it is one that links the tradition of heaven. the discovery of the empty tomb (entailing Dealing with this and other texts from the Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, not his as- sayings-source used by Matthew and Luke, sumption into heaven) with the tradition of his Smith (like many others) writes of those (in appearances to individuals and groups. the plural) who compiled Q and, to support Third, the central statement in the Easter his theory of an ‘assumption,’ speculates about chapter of Mark is ‘he has been raised’ from their theology and community life. But surely the dead (along with ‘he is going before you it was entirely possible that it was only one into Galilee and there you will see him’), not individual who put Q together? After all, it was ‘he has been taken up into heaven’ (and ‘you only one individual, Luke, who put together will see him again at the parousia’). Smith tries the third Gospel—not to mention the case of hard to explain (or explain away?) Mark’s text other Gospels. in favor of his disappearance/assumption the- Smith offers various helpful insights when sis, but the arguments seem contrived. The lan- treating details in the Easter chapters of Luke guage of ‘assumption’ or ‘ascension’ turns up and Matthew. But the arguments in favor of elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., Phil 2:9; his central theme (that, as we move from Tim 3:16), but not in Mark 16. to John, we see a progressive accommodation of a disappearance/assumption tradition, first Two Books on the Fringe found in Mark, to an appearance/resurrection tradition) do not . Geza Vermes. The Resurrection (2008) To begin with, the Greco-Roman material Geza Vermes secured his place in the mod- used to support Smith’s interpretation of Mark ern history of biblical studies through (a) Je- 16:1–8 as a disappearance/assumption story sus the Jew, which prompted many Christian seems largely irrelevant to a Gospel that most scholars into taking seriously the Jewishness scholars interpret against a Jewish background. of Jesus and the Gospels, and (b) The Com- This evangelist sets the story of Jesus within plete Dead Sea Scrolls in English,33 which the framework of Jewish salvation history; his helped curb bizarre theories that misuse the text is permeated with quotation and echoes Scrolls. But The Resurrection fails on two ac- of the Jewish scriptures, as he goes about il- counts.34 First, Vermes is a less reliable guide lustrating how Jesus fulfilled various Jewish to Jewish views on the than Jon motifs. Greco-Roman motifs do not provide a Levenson and Alan Segal.35 Second, Vermes’s key, let alone a master-key, for interpreting thesis, that Jesus ‘rose’ only in the sense of what Mark wrote either in his final chapter or being loved by his followers who ‘felt’ that he

20 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION was still with them, is no more convincing now First, while rightly observing that the theme than what his friend Paul Winter (whom of resurrection does not enjoy a central place Vermes cites on this point) wrote years in the preaching of Jesus, he ignores some texts ago.36 According to this thesis, what happened which imply resurrection: ‘many will come after the death and burial of Jesus was merely from the east and the west and sit down with a change in the disciples, not a new, trans- , Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of formed life for Jesus himself. In these terms, heaven’ (Matt 8: 11). How will the patriarchs ‘resurrection’ is not a fact about Jesus him- and those many others who join them at the self, but simply a fact about his disciples, past final feast of the kingdom do so unless they and present. have been raised from the dead? The longest The basic problem with any such change passage explicitly concerned with resurrection of heart thesis is that it must deny the obvious comes in Jesus’ debate with some Sadducees meaning of what the New Testament authors (: 18–27). Vermes asserts that ‘most repeatedly say and say in a variety of ways. critical commentators rightly assume’ that this Let me take just one example, the formula of story is ‘inauthentic’ and ‘probably reflects by proclamation cited by Paul: ‘I handed on to anticipation’ later conflicts between Sadducees you what I also received that Christ died for and Christians.37 Sampling some critical com- our according to the Scriptures, and that mentators on Mark, I found that, while Adela he was buried, and that he has been raised, Yarbro Collins agrees with Vermes, John and that he appeared to Cephas [= Peter], then Donahue, Joel Marcus, John Meier and Francis to the Twelve’ (1 Cor 15: 3–5). In this for- Moloney hold that the dispute on resurrection mula, Christ is the subject of all four verbs, goes back in its substance to the historical the last two (‘has been raised’ and ‘ appeared’) ministry of Jesus. In any case all five scholars being just as informative as the first two (‘died’ argue for their position and do not simply ‘as- and ‘was buried’). In the case of both pairs of sume’ that the passage is authentic or verbs, the second verb explains and supports inauthentic.38 what the first claims. We know that Christ died Vermes spends a chapter on the predictions because he was buried; burial is a certain made by Jesus about his coming death and pointer to death. We know that Christ has been resurrection and concludes that they are ‘au- raised because he appeared bodily alive to a thentic’ (he meant to write ‘inauthentic’).39 In number of individuals and groups; dead per- so joining and dismissing the sons do not appear like that. historicity of the three predictions in Mark (8: For all the moving sincerity with which 31; 9: 31; 10: 33–34) as after the Vermes and his dead friend Winter have put event, Vermes fails to notice that one early and forward their thesis, they must suppose that pervasive Christian interpretation of Jesus’ Paul and other New Testament writers, al- death is missing. It is not stated that ‘the Son though seeming to claim some new fact about of Man must suffer and be killed for us and Jesus (his personal resurrection from death to for our sins and then rise again.’ Nor do these new life), were using a deceptive form of dis- three predictions include one enormously im- course and ‘merely’ talking about a fresh love portant detail, the killing by crucifixion. These that now possessed their hearts. They spoke omissions support the (now widely held) view only of themselves, not of a new event - that the passion predictions are by no means ing Jesus himself. free inventions and contain an historical ker- En route to his epilogue (‘Resurrection nel: Jesus anticipated his violent death and [Merely] in the Hearts of Men’ ), Vermes not hoped for a divine vindication through resur- only illustrates his rich historical rection. but also makes judgments that invite challenge. When discussing a resurrection text from

21 COMPASS late in the first century, John 6: 54 (‘he who lic, and is due to be rehashed any year now. eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal Let me, however, speak of a book that was life and I will raise him up on the last day’), the talk of the town at Easter 2010 and elimi- Vermes speaks of ‘eating of blood’ (surely it nated the resurrection of Jesus as a case of should be ‘drinking of blood’?), dismisses this deliberate deception: Philip Pullman’s The as a ‘cannibalistic allegory’ (introduced by a Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Gentile Christian), and appeals to a council Christ.43 Pullman invests Jesus with a twin held in Jerusalem around AD 50 and its in- called ‘Christ,’ who becomes more and more junction about ‘abstaining from blood’ (Acts alienated from his brother and led astray by a 15: 20).40 But Vermes says nothing about a mysterious, demonic ‘stranger.’ Eventually letter from the 50s where Paul, a Jewish Chris- Christ plays the part of Judas in being paid to tian par excellence, provides the earliest ac- lead a guard to Jesus and identify him with a count of the Eucharist and writes of ‘drinking’ kiss. In Pullman’s version, Christ does not then the Lord’s ‘blood’ (1 Cor 11: 25–26). give way to but agrees to do some- In short, for an historical account of the thing worse by masquerading as his dead resurrection in the New Testament, read N. T. brother and deceiving people into thinking that Wright’s The Resurrection of the Son of God Jesus has risen from the dead. After Jesus has (dismissed by Vermes as ‘faith wrapped in been buried by Joseph of Arimathea and scholarship’41), and query the claim made on Nicodemus, ‘the stranger’ organizes several the dust jacket that Vermes has been ‘the great- men to remove the body of Jesus during the est Jesus scholar of his generation.’ Such praise night of Saturday/Sunday. He persuades Christ belongs rather to Raymond Brown, John to return the next morning and play the part of Meier, or others. the ‘risen’ Jesus. Mary Magdalene, who has discovered the Philip Pullman, The Good Man Jesus and tomb to be open and empty, then meets and the Scoundrel Christ (2010) talks with the twin brother of the dead Jesus. Every year or so sensationalist books de- She thinks she has seen the risen Jesus and bunking the resurrection of Jesus are published runs to announce the wonderful news to the They often make a great splash but normally other disciples. Later the same day, the disci- leave hardly a ripple. Some of them rehash an ples set off as a group for a village called old theory about Jesus being taken down alive Emmaus. Christ joins them on the road. They from the cross. They differ by dispatching him reach the village at night and invite him to join to continue his life in various parts of the them for a meal. A disciple called Cleopas world, like France, Rome, the Dead Sea Com- brings a lamp close to the face of Christ and munity, or India. Apropos of the Indian con- takes him to be the risen Jesus. Christ plays nection, with his 1894 book, The Unknown out the deception and encourages the disci- Life of Jesus Christ, Nicolas Notovitch fash- ples to identify him as his twin brother raised ioned the first part of the legend: Jesus, he al- from the dead.44 leged, spent some pre-ministry years in India.42 Many of those who reviewed Pullman’s The second half of the legend was created by book found little plausibility in the way he ; in an 1899 work (in ‘explains’ the empty tomb and the Easter ap- Urdu) he asserted that Jesus was saved from pearances. Right from New Testament times, the cross, went to Kashmir, and eventually died skeptics have repeatedly accounted for the there at the age of 120 in Srinagar, where tour- of Jesus’ tomb by alleging that his ists are still shown his ‘grave.’ Without a shred body had been removed by friend or foe (e.g., of evidence in its support, this whole story was Matt 28:11–15). The only new twist added simply made up, spread among a gullible pub- by Pullman comes when he attributes the re-

22 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION moval of the corpse to a sinister ‘stranger’ one individual and one group misidentifying who is intent on creating organized Christi- his twin as if he were Jesus risen from the dead, anity. is historically speaking quite implausible. To As regards the post-resurrection situation be sure, Pullman has written a work of histori- presented by Paul and the Gospels, Pullman cal fiction. But, by its nature, historical fic- ignores the appearance(s) of the risen Jesus in tion should be plausible, even and especially Galilee (Matt 28:16–20; John 21; and implied from an historical point of view. by Mark 16:7), the appearance to Peter (1 Cor History shows us an effect, the propaga- 15:5; :34), the appearance to ‘more tion of the Christian message and community than five hundred’ disciples (1 Cor 15:6), the throughout the world, a propagation that took appearance to James and then to ‘all the apos- place despite ruthless persecutions and other tles’ (1 Cor 15:7), and the appearance to Paul terrible setbacks. If Christ did not personally (1 Cor 9:1; 15:8; Gal 1:12, 15–16; Acts 9; 22; rise from the dead, what else might have 26). Pullman selects the appearance to Mary caused this visible and public effect in world Magdalene (John 20:11–19) and the Emmaus history, the development and massive presence Story (Luke 24:13–35), and rewrites them. He of the Christian religion? Pullman asks us to not only remains silent about so much testi- believe that this effect was brought about by mony to post-resurrection appearances but also (a) fraud (namely, the theft of Jesus’ body), leaves us with a strange puzzle. Could the early and (b) a mistaken identification, deliberately Christian witnesses have lived such heroic provoked by a twin of Jesus masquerading as lives and spread the message of Jesus with so his dead brother brought back to life. That such much effective devotion, if all that lay behind an odd turn of events was sufficient to cause their outreach were two episodes the rise and spread of Christianity will con- in which first a credulous woman (Mary vince only the credulous, and those who can- Magdalene) and then a group (the disciples at not imagine that there is a God who raised Emmaus) mistook the identity of someone they Jesus from the dead and gave him a new and met? glorious life. Pullman’s version of what happened after Such then are nine works that have been the death and burial of Jesus is so contrived published in the first decade of the twenty-first and plays so fast and loose with the evidence century and that represent current writing on that it loses even its superficial plausibility. the resurrection. In my forthcoming book, to At the end does he turn the greatest story ever be published early in 2012 by Paulist Press told into the greatest puzzle ever imagined? (Mahwah, NJ), Believing in the Resurrection, The ‘reconstruction’ proposed by Pullman, the I turn to what I want to say about Easter faith, body of Jesus being spirited away and then both biblically and theologically.

NOTES

This article is the opening chapter of Gerald’s Ward, 1960). Years later Durrwell took up again next book that Paulist Press (Mahwah, NJ) are the main themes of The Resurrection in Christ Our to publish early in 2012, entitled Believing In Passover: The Indispensable Role of the Resur- the Resurrection. 1 A. J. Kelly, The Resurrec- rection in Our Salvation, trans. John F. Craghan tion Effect: Transforming Christian Life and (Liguori, MI: Liguori Publications, 2004). Thought (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008); see 3 See, e.g., W. Pannenberg, Systematic Theology, my review, Theological Studies 70 (2009): 478- trans. G. W. Bromiley, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids, 80. Mich.: Eerdmans, 1991-98); G. O’Collins, Jesus 2 F.-X. Durrwell, The Resurrection, trans. Rose- Risen: An Historical, Fundamental and System- mary Sheed (London and New York: Sheed and atic Examination of Christ’s Resurrection (New

23 COMPASS

York/Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1987). lieve: Encountering Jesus in the Fourth Gospel 4 Even if Jon Sobrino has reflected on the resur- (New York: Crossroad, revised & expanded edn., rection (see O’Collins, Jesus Risen, 94-97), the way 2003). liberation theologians have generally neglected that 17 Ibid., 57. theme is reflected by the fact that resurrection is 18 Ibid., 149-70. not mentioned in the index to Christopher 19 Ibid., 171-83. Rowland, ed., Cambridge Companion to Libera- 20 A. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical tion Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Jesus: A Critical Study of its from Press, 1999). Reimarus to Wrede, trans. W. Montgomery (Lon- 5 On the way moral theologians and sacramental don: A. & C. Black, 3rd edn., 1954; orig. German theologians neglect the resurrection, see Kelly, 1906), 401. Resurrection Effect, 159-68 and 5, respectively. 21 T. Peters, R. J. Russell and M. Welker eds., 6 N. T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Ques- Resurrection: Theological and Scientific Assess- tion of God, vol. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of ments (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002). God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003); see my 22 ‘Jesus,’ in Encyclopedia of Religion, ed. review, The Tablet, April 19, 2003, 28-29. Lindsay Jones, vol. 7 (Detroit: Macmillan, 2006), 7 Wright, The Resurrection, 205; ‘most’ may be 4843–52. too strong, but certainly many Jews at the time of 23 D. C. Allison, Resurrecting Jesus: The Earli- Jesus (like the ) believed in resurrection. est Christian Tradition and Its Interpreters (New 8 Ibid., 585-615. Kelly was also struck by York/London: T. & T. Clark, 2005); hereafter ref- Wright’s theme of the surprising items in the Easter erences to this book will be given intratextually. narratives of the Gospels, but he Wright’s 24 G. O’Collins, Easter Faith: Believing in the failure to reflect on the resurrection as a phenom- Risen Jesus (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2003), 1- enon that saturates the whole life of faith 24. (Resurrrection Effect, 4, 61-52). 25 G. O’Collins and D. Kendall, ‘Did Joseph of 9 R. Swinburne, The Resurrection of God Incar- Arimathea Exist?,’ Biblica 75 (1994), 235-41. nate (New York: , 2003). 26 Ibid., 241. 10 Ibid., 33-34. 27 For a detailed discussion of the similarities 11 On divine activity and special divine acts, see and dissimilarities in the analogy proposed by G. O’Collins, : A Biblical, Historical, Allison and others, see the appendix below, ‘Easter and Systematic Study of Jesus (New York: Oxford Appearances and Bereavement Experiences,’ and University Press, 2nd edn, 2009), 112-18; and id., O’Collins, Christology, 97-100. Rethinking Fundamental Theology Toward a New 28 Towards the end Allison talks about handing Fundamental Theology (Oxford: Oxford Univer- the discussion over to ‘the philosophers and theo- sity Press, 2011), 22-29. logians, among whose lofty company’ he is ‘not 12 Swinburne, The Resurrection, 186, 190. On privileged to dwell’ (351). Some dialogue with p. 31 Swinburne speaks of ‘ suspending’ the laws them might have stopped Allison from dismissing of nature, but at once returns to the language of ‘ resurrection as ‘the recovery’ of one’s ‘current flesh the violation of the natural laws.’ Kelly is also trou- and bones’ (344; see 219-28). bled by the way Swinburne presents the resurrec- 29 D. A. Smith, Revisiting the Empty Tomb: The tion as a ‘super-miracle’ in a world of natural laws: Early History of Easter (Minneapolis: Fortress ‘the idea of a new creation is not evident’ (Kelly, Press, 2010). Resurrection Effect, 8). 30 R. Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: 13 Ibid., 174-75. See also G. O’Collins and D. The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rap- Kendall, ‘On Reissuing Venturini,’ Gregorianum ids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2006). 75 (1994): 241-54; reprinted in G. O’Collins and 31 P. L. Danove, The End of Mark’s Story: A D. Kendall, Focus on Jesus (Leominster, UK : Methodological Study (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1993). Gracewing, 1996), 153-75. 32 A. Yarbro Collins, ‘The Empty Tomb in the 14 Swinburne, The Resurrection, 184. Gospel According to Mark,’ in Hermes and 15 Ibid., 215. Athena, ed. E. Stump and T. P. Flint (Notre Dame, 16 S. M. Schneiders, Written that You May Be- Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993), 107-

24 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS ON THE RESURRECTION

40, at 130-31. In her Mark: A Commentary the Afterlife in the of the West (New York: (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007), she wrote Doubleday, 2004). of ‘the possibility of the influence on Mark 16:1– 36 P. Winter, On the Trial of Jesus (Berlin: De 8 of ancient notions of the translation or trans- Gruyter, 2nd edn, 1974), 208. ference of a body of a favored person to the ends 37 Vermes, Resurrection , 65. of the earth or to heaven, where he or she is made 38 Yarbro Collins, Mark, 558-59; J. R. Donahue, immortal. Ancient notions of deification or ‘A Neglected Factor in the Theology of Mark,’ apotheosis may also have influenced the story of Journal of Biblical Literature, 101 (1982): 563- the empty tomb.’ She concluded: ‘The author of 94, at 575-76; J. Marcus, Mark 8-16 (New Ha- Mark was probably aware of the idea that some ven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2009), 826-36, Roman emperors had ascended into heaven and at 830; J. P. Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. 3 (New become gods. He may also have known that their York: Doubleday, 2001), 431-44; F. J. Moloney, deifications were modeled on that of Romulus’ The : A Commentary (Peabody, (791-92, 793; emphasis mine). No evidence is Mass.: Hendrickson, 2002), 237, fn. 117. cited to show any such ‘awareness’ on the part of 39 Vermes, Resurrection, 82. the evangelist; what was stated as ‘possible’ be- 40 Ibid., 68. comes ‘probable’—once again without any evi- 41 Ibid., 153. dence being produced. 42 N. Notovitch, The Unknown Life of Jesus 33 G. Vermes, Jesus the Jew: A Historian’s Read- Christ, trans. J. H. Connelly and L. Landsberg ing (London: Collins, 1973); id., The Complete (New York: G. W. Dillingham, 1894). Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York/London: 43 P. Pullman, The Good Man Jesus and the Allen Lane/Penguin, 1997; orig. edn.,1962). Scoundrel Christ (Edinburgh: Canongate, 2010). 34 G. Vermes, The Resurrection (New York: On this book see G. O’Collins, Philip Pullman’s Doubleday, 2008). Jesus (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2010). 35 K. J. Madigan and J. D. Levenson Resurrec- 44 Pullman did not first create the ‘ theory’ that tion: The Power of God for Christians and Jews credited Jesus with a twin brother who faked his (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2008); resurrection; it had been proposed some years ear- see also Alan Segal, Life After Death: A History of lier; see Allison, Resurrecting Jesus, 213, n. 60.

‘If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain... and you are still in your sins’ (1 Cor 15: 14-17). With these strong words from the First Letter to the Corinthians, St Paul makes clear the deci- sive importance he attributes to the Resurrection of Jesus. In this event, in fact, lies the solution to the problem posed by the drama of the Cross. The Cross alone could not explain the Christian faith, indeed it would remain a tragedy, an indication of the absurdity of being. The Paschal Mystery con- sists in the fact that the Crucified man ‘was raised on the third day, in ac- cordance with the Scriptures’ (1 Cor 15: 4), as proto-Christian tradition attests. This is the keystone of Pauline Christology: everything rotates around this gravitational centre. The whole teaching of starts from, and arrives at, the mystery of him whom the Father raised from the dead. The Resurrection is a fundamental fact, almost a prior axiom (cf. 1 Cor 15: 12), on the basis of which Paul can formulate his synthetic proclamation (kerygma). He who was crucified and who thus manifested God's immense love for man, is risen again, and is alive among us. —Benedict XVI, General Audience, Wednesday 5th November, 2008.

25