I enjoyed the Easter service at Journey on Sunday – and I’ve been trying to write about it since then, but the kids had other plans for me. But the service was a good reminder that the point of the Resurrection is not that that it happened, but that we are called to respond to it. For most of my life Easter has been treated as simply an apologetics opportunity. Apparently if we know that it is possible to sweat blood, or the exact effect of crucifixion techniques on a body, or that the gospels were written too close to the event to be legends then we would have no choice but to believe it all happened. I think it’s obvious by now that simply knowing supposed facts or even believing something happened does little to change our lives. But nevertheless, the events of Easter continue to be reduced to poor historical forensics. Not that that stuff isn’t interesting or has a place, just that it really isn’t what Easter is about.
The argument that really gets me (which was brought up at church during the discussion) is the whole “the Easter story is just too fantastic and imperfectly told to be made up. The disciples couldn’t have made up this story if they had tried.” I used to buy that argument, but I’ve come to realize it’s utter absurdity. It’s premise rests on two assumptions. One that the gospel story is so unique it has to be true, and two, that imperfections in the writing techniques lend credibility to the story because no good author would allow such discrepancies. My response to proponents of the first premise is – have any of you guys ever read literature or studied history?! Of course authors come up with far more fantastical stories on a daily basis – even in ancient times. Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh of Greek mythology? How about the Odyssey? In fact many of those old mythological stories about dying gods coming to life are pretty dang similar to the Easter story. How about looking into why we call the day Easter to begin with. Even if the story is true, it is not unique.
And as for the second premise, it assumes that the point of the gospels is to convince people to believe. I guess if we have made Easter all about believing in certain facts, it is understandable that some would assume that the gospel writers had that same purpose in mind. But I have a hard time believing that these stories were written down as evidence to convince us to believe. Jesus didn’t instruct the disciples to spread his story so that everyone would know it was true, he instructed them to train others in the disciplines of the Kingdom. The books we have are tools for helping us understand how to follow Christ. Not just to know what he did and believe it happened, but to live it out. We are to respond to the Resurrection in the ways Jesus called us to live. We can argue all we want about it happening or not, but in the end that does nothing to serve Christ. Choosing to respond and actually live in the way of Christ is where the true significance lies.