In Matthew 27:51-54, we read of a very strange event following the crucifixion of Christ. The passage reads "Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”"
Even knowing all the miraculous occurrences recorded in Scripture, with the tearing of the temple veil being particularly well known, the bodies of the saints being raised is somewhat shocking to us when we come across it. It seems particularly strange given how little attention is paid to it. It's highlighted as a miraculous event, but the way it is mentioned is almost casual. Even stranger than this is the way in which it is worded. Rather than just being "they were raised", their bodies are specifically highlighted.
To our Western, 21st century minds, this is particularly difficult to interpret. Some even describe it as something akin to our culture's fascination with zombies. That is, mindless, hungry, re-animated corpses that shuffle around terrorising people, destroying the world as we know it. But it is vitally important to remember, the Bible was written in its time, for all time. This means that although it was written for us, it was not written only for us, nor even primarily for us. When we read the Bible, we are reading a book by, in this case, first century authors to a primarily first century audience.
The first and simplest thing this means is that even the original language is different than our own. This is not, as some claim, to the extent that an accurate translation is impossible, or that an English translation is inherently unreliable, or gives an impression other than what the original audience would have understood. What it does mean is that sometimes, it is hard for English speakers to understand it.
In this case, the word rendered "bodies" is "sōma" (σῶμα), which can mean corpse, but it actually has a very wide range of plausible meanings, just as our English word "body" does. This word is used many times in Scripture, both as a reference to the dead (e.g. Matthew 14:12) and the living (e.g. Matthew 6:22). It is not like the word "corpse", which, in our language, typically refers to the dead, and only symbolically refers to a living body.
But it still seems to be a strange way for Matthew to word this. Scripture does talk about the dead being raised, in those simple terms. But Matthew's specification that their bodies were raised and came out of their graves seems odd. That is, until you realise the first century conceptions of resurrections.
To get an understanding of this, consider Luke 24:36-43: "Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. And He said to them, “Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, “Have you any food here?” So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence."
From this, we see the large amount of confusion regarding Christ's bodily resurrection. It is an essential concept in the Christian faith. We see this in 1 Corinthians 15:12-32, wherein even many who called themselves Christians denied the bodily resurrection. Paul tells them that if this was the case, then he and his fellow Apostles were false preachers, the faith of Christians is in vain, we are still in our sins, and we, as Christians, are to be more pitied than other men.
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul addresses a group who claimed to be Christians, but we see that even the Jews who rejected Jesus had strange views on the resurrection. The Sadducees, in particular, explicitly denied it (Matthew 22:23). In response to them, "Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”" (Matthew 22:29-32).
With the bodily resurrection being such an essential, yet at that time confusing concept, it almost seems it would be a disservice for Matthew not to specify that the bodies of the saints who were asleep were raised.
Interestingly, this is not the only time Jesus raised the body of a saint. There is a particularly famous example in John 11, that of Lazarus. Just as the saints who were raised, Jesus said to the disciples "Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up." (v11). Similarly, He says to Martha "Your brother will rise again." (v23).
But just as when Jesus Himself rose, there was much confusion about what He was saying. When He told the disciples Lazarus was sleeping, they thought this was good, because if he slept, he would get better. So Jesus had to explain to them "...Lazarus is dead. And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, that you may believe. Nevertheless let us go to him." (v14-15). Similarly, Martha, in her confusion, replied "...I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." (v24). So Jesus replied "...I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (v25-26).
We see, from this, that the entire point of this event is to verify the glory of God and the power of Christ. From the very beginning, knowing Lazarus was going to die, Jesus said "This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it." (v4).
Though the two events occur in different Gospels, it is essential to remember that they cover the same miraculous ministry of the same Lord. We can therefore legitimately connect these resurrection events, and say, first of all, that these saints were exactly as alive as Lazarus. There is no meaningful connection between a resurrected saint and a zombified corpse in a modern horror movie.
But more importantly, these events are designed to bring us to the same conclusions as the disciples, as Martha, as the centurions: Truly, Jesus is the Son of God, the resurrection and the life. Through faith in Him, though we are dead in our trespasses, we will be raised to life. With one key difference. Without exception, every single one of the risen saints, eventually, died again. Lazarus is no longer with us. Jainus' daughter (Luke 8:40-56) eventually died again. The widow of Nain’s son (Luke 7:11–17) died again. This is because, while they were a shadow of things to come, none of the Biblical resurrections were the resurrection. Rather, as Paul says, Christ is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20). With this in mind, all of us need to look to Christ as our future resurrection.
Comments