:

  

Rev. Dr. Monte Canfield

Rev. Dr. Monte Canfield
Location
Newcomerstown, Ohio, USA
Birthday
December 28
Title
Rev. Dr. Monte Canfield
Company
Retired
Bio
Retired Protestant Pastor and Theologian, jointly credentialed in the United Church of Christ and the Moravian Church. Education: BA, MA, M.Div, Thd. Public Service: NY State Office of Executive Development, Management Intern; Federal Exec. Branch: Executive Office of the President, Budget Examiner, Bureau of the Budget; Interior, Director of Energy and Minerals, Bureau of Land Management; Non Profit: Ford Foundation, Deputy Director, Energy Policy Project; Congressional: Director, Office of Special Projects; Director, Division of Energy and Materials, General Accounting Office; Private industry: Vice President, Grow Group, Inc.; Chief Executive Officer, US Paint; Owner, the Energy Center, St. Louis. Christian service: Pastor, First Congregational UCC, Ottawa, Illinois; Pastor, St. Paul's UCC, Port Washington, Ohio; Pastor, Moravian Church, Gnadenhutten, Ohio.

Rev. Dr. Monte Canfield's Links

Memoirs and Biographical (also see Motorcycling Memories)
Musical Tribute Essays, Playlists, Videos
Motorcycling Memories
The Christian Calendar Series
Essays on the Exodus and the Ten Commandments
Reflections on Faith
MAY 3, 2010 2:31PM

Appearances of the Risen Christ (4 of 5); Matthew; 2010

Rate: 2 Flag

resurrectionappearance3

Related posts in this series on Resurrection Faith may be found in the column to the left of this page under The Christian Calendar Series. This essay originally appeared here in May, 2009 and has been extensively edited for 2010.

A Review of Mark's Handling of the Resurrection Appearances

Mark says nothing about specific resurrection appearances.  Instead, he essentially repeats the kerygma, the proclamation, of the earliest Church, as first recorded by St. Paul in First Corinthians 15: 1-11.  

In Mark a proclamation of resurrection faith is stated within the empty tomb.  There, an angel says that Jesus is not in the tomb; that he has been raised, and is going ahead of Peter and the disciples to Galilee where they will see him.

This speech by the angel is a divine explanation of the meaning of the empty tomb.  But angels aren't humans and and human reaction is not necessarily one of casual acceptance.  Rather, Mark records that the women to whom the angel speaks are simply terrified and flee from the tomb in amazement, and tell no one!  

There, on that strange note, Mark ends his Gospel!

I believe that Mark intentionally ends his Gospel this way.  Mark wants each individual reader to make his or her own decision about who Jesus is. Mark would have us look at the evidence He provides in his Gospel and decide without the comfort of human testimony.  Mark demands that we have faith based on the word of Jesus, and that of an angel after he had risen.

But not many are blessed with such trusting faith.  And so, without realizing it, Mark lays the groundwork, via the statement of the angel in the empty tomb, for the later Gospel writers, who do include specific descriptions by eye-witnesses to the appearances of the Risen Lord. The three later Gospel writers tell us "what happened" after Mark's gospel ends.

Matthew's Account Differs Greatly from Mark's

Matthew, who wrote decades after Mark, is the Gospel writer who adheres closest to Mark's story, building his entire narrative on Mark's Gospel, but expanding it greatly and adding a lot of other material as well.

Mark wrote primarily for a gentile audience. Matthew, on the other hand, is the most "Jewish" of the Gospel writers and his small church was a Jewish sect within a Jewish world. As such, Matthew knew first hand the harsh accusations of the Jewish leadership and the condemnations of orthodox Jews against the upstart Christian sect within Judaism.  

The hardest accusation of all was that the resurrection was faked by the disciples.  Thus Matthew is interested in telling details of the story that Mark chose not to tell; or, perhaps, did not even know.

In any case, Matthew reports two separate appearances by the Risen Lord, the first immediately outside of the tomb in Jerusalem and the second later appearance on the mountain in Galilee, where the disciples worship him, yet some doubt.

It is there on that mountain in Galilee where the Risen Christ gives them what we know as "The Great Commission."  We'll come back to these two scenes in a moment, but first, let's look at something else that Matthew reports of which that Mark says nothing.

Matthew tells the story of what happened at the tomb quite differently than does Mark.  Matthew weaves into the story of the death of Jesus the undoubtedly true idea that the Jewish leaders were afraid that Jesus' followers would fake his resurrection.  

Thus in Matthew we learn that the Chief Priests and the Pharisees go to Pilot and tell of an alleged plot by the Christians to steal the body and to claim that Jesus was raised. Pilate, in turn, tells them to place guards at the tomb to keep that from happening and to "secure" the tomb.  

They do; and we are told that the guards "seal" the tomb.  This extra caution is to no avail, and Matthew describes a far more dramatic scene at the time of the resurrection than Mark reported.  Matthew tells us that the two Marys go to the tomb at dawn on Sunday - and everything goes crazy!

There is an earthquake; an angel descends from heaven and rolls away the stone and sits on it!  The guards shake in fear and then go catatonic.  And, in typical angelic fashion the angel tells the women not to be afraid!  

Then the angel proceeds to tell them exactly what the angel in Mark told them. And, the women do not run away in terror, although this scene is far more terrifying than that depicted by Mark, but leave in both fear and "great joy", running to tell the disciples!

To say the least, that is different than Mark's report.  But then it gets even more different, for Jesus suddenly appears before them, saying simply, "Greetings!"  Matthew tells us that they are not afraid of him, or of him having appeared to them; but rather, that they come to him; fall at his feet, worshiping him.  

He, like the angel, tells them not to be afraid, but to go tell the brothers to meet him in Galilee.  Thus, in Matthew, we see not only that Jesus will meet the disciples in Galilee, as he promised, but that he first meets the women in Jerusalem, reassuring them of the truth of what the angel had spoken.

Why does Matthew Expand on Mark and add new material?

In the first place Matthew's community has entirely different stories that have been handed down within it than the stories told in Mark's community. In addition, Matthew is determined to undermine any idea that the followers of Jesus had stolen the body. Matthew highlights God's heavenly power: the earthquake, the angel, the angelic rolling away of the sealed stone from the tomb, and the trance placed on the guards. All of these actions are to indicate that Jesus being gone from the tomb has nothing whatsoever to do with human mischief, and everything to do with God's divine intervention.

And, to top it off, in case there are any who still think that the dead Jesus has been carried off; we see a very alive Jesus who is actually called "Jesus" not "Lord."  In other words Matthew makes it clear that this is the same Jesus who was dead that we now see speaking calmly to the women.  

Whatever lapses Matthew found in Mark's account which he thought would allow the claim of the Jewish leadership that the body was stolen, are completely covered here by Matthew's detailed defense of what happened.

What Matthew is doing here is trying to turn the tables on the accusers: arguing, in effect, that the hoax is not the resurrection, but rather the real hoax is the attempt by the Jewish leadership to cover up the resurrection!
 
So Matthew reports that the guards awakened from their catatonic state and went to the chief priests and told them what happened. Not content to let the truth prevail, the priests then bribed the guards with a large sum of money and told them to lie about what really happened!  Listen: "You must say, 'His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep.'"  

Matthew says that the guards agreed, and took the money;  and that "to this day" -- meaning when Matthew was writing his Gospel some 30 years later -- this lie still was circulating among the Jewish leadership.  

Thus we see Matthew taking head-on the argument against the truth of the resurrection.  Matthew becomes then the first great Gospel apologist (defender) for the Good News of Christ.

Why Matthew Admits that "Some Doubted"

Matthew ends his Gospel on a much more positive note.  The eleven remaining disciples, less Judas, go to the mountain in Galilee to which Jesus directed them. Matthew is unclear here as he never says when or how Jesus told them to go to a mountain, rather than just to go to Galilee. In any case they go there and see him and they worship him.  

Interestingly, Matthew admits that "some doubted." This is undoubtedly reported correctly because Matthew would be very reluctant to put that in had it not been a key part of the testimony that was passed forward to him. Our text implies that some of Jesus' own disciples doubted, even after seeing him, since there is no indication that anyone other than the disciples was on the mountain top, although "disciples" can include many followers other than the original twelve, and we know that Jesus had a large group of followers when he entered Jerusalem.  

This idea was so repugnant to later redactors that some translations say that "others" doubted, implying that there were others on the mountain who saw Jesus, and those who doubted were not followers. Which may be true, but the text does not support it. The harder translation to swallow, that even after seeing him some of his own disciples doubted, is more likely correct.  

Both Mark's and Matthew's Gospels are full of times when the disciples did not understand, and often doubted, both what Jesus was doing and what he said, including that he must die and be raised.


While we might wish that all of us were of one convinced mind on all important matters of the faith, the truth is that we are not. We are all individuals and are at different places in our own faith journeys. And each of us go through personal periods of doubt.  I am comfortable with that as you know. I believe that doubt is a normal experience of faith development.  

But many people are not comfortable with any doubt, including their own.   You will have to make up your own minds, however, because there is no way to confirm the text.

What is clear is that when you read differing accounts of things that happened long ago, the logical thing to do is to accept the account that would be the hardest for the writer to accept, but could not leave out since it was part of the story as handed down.

Matthew's Account of the Giving of the "Great Commission"

What is far more important, however, than the question of who doubted that the Risen Lord was indeed risen was the instruction he gave them.  We now call that instruction "The Great Commission."
 
The Great Commission is the basis for the mission of the Church, and is literally Christ's own instruction about what his disciples are to be doing with our lives.  The fact that lay Christians most often do not do what he instructs us can be disheartening to those of us who like to think that we all should be trying to live as Christ would have us live.  Regardless of how we respond to it, his message is clear and unequivocal.  

Jesus' last words before his ascension are:

"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,  and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Christ is clear. And it is equally clear that his resurrection was for the purpose of reestablishing relationship with us, and, through Christian ministry, with all humankind.

After he was risen Jesus said very little to us that is recorded in the Bible. This is by far the clearest message that the Risen Christ sends to those who call themselves Christians.

Sadly, very few lay people in the Church pay much attention to me when I tell them that the Great Commission is what we should be doing with our lives. It is, they tell me, what we hire pastors and missionaries to do.  But that is only partly true.

When I was a pastor I hated to be the one to tell them, they were wrong to think that the commandment of Great Commission could be foisted off on paid staff. The truth is that there is nothing a Christian can do in his or her day to day life that is more important than trying to fulfill the Great Commission.

 The Abuse of the Great Commission
and What Christians Should be Doing Instead

I am painfully aware of the fact that the Great Commission has been abused countless times when Christians have tried to cram their faith down people's throats.  But the mission is to create disciples, then to teach those disciples to obey the teachings of Christ. It is not to force, coerce, intimidate or insist upon making disciples of people who have no interest in the Christian message.

Christians are to offer the message of Jesus by teaching; offering what Jesus said and did during his ministry on earth as an example for all humanity. That is a far cry from the fervent proselytizing  and "in your face" demanding of faith that has gone on over the centuries, and continues to this day.

Yet, ironically, that Christ wants lay people to do anything at all about sharing the faith is not a comfortable idea to most modern Christians.  But at the very least Christians can show the way to Christ by the examples of how they live their lives. The best evangelism is living a godly life.

They can invite people to "come and see" what Christians do, how they worship, what they get out of being followers of the Way, which is what Jesus did at the beginning of his ministry. They can be warm, open, friendly and loving to those who do come and see.  Perhaps those seekers will decide that they want some of that love, compassion, caring and learning that they see when they visit our churches.


Next, in the final post in this series, we'll look at Luke's story of the resurrection appearances.  

God bless you.

Monte

 

Original post: 1312 page views as of 2010 05 02

This post: 139 page views 2010 05 05

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
I guess there's an art to sharing our faith without repelling people. I do try to be an example, rather than tell others what they should be doing with their lives.

My goal is they'll see something in me they'll want for themselves.

Thanks for the thought-provoking post.
I think the challenge for me is that it is a constant learning and unfolding of the Mystery, and I pray if I do draw people to Christ it is with depth and compassion. Some Christians do damage I think by evangelizing without deeply understanding. Or I have seen ministers get the energy up and use key phrases to get people to come down to the altar, when the people really don't know what they are doing. And the ministers only seem to be concerned about numbers. That's one way they cram it down the throat. We must trust at that point that the Holy Spirit is filling in the "gaps", and that the new disciple will reach an understanding of Christ in tandem with the person who presented Him.
Your comment that some people think " the resurrection was faked by the disciples" was interesting. In fact, the gospels weren't wriiten for many years after Jesus died. His cult followers had lots of time to reform and spin the narrative they wanted for their new religion. There was no resurrection, there is no video of it, and no unbiased fact-checkers were monitoring it. But writing that story in a book helped persuade people that it actually happened and it helped to convince them to join the religion.
Hi, Terry, you and I are on the same wave length on this matter. I wish more people would realize that any kind of forcing of one's views on another will ultimately be harmful. People simply have to make their own minds up whether or not to believe.

Thanks, Bonnie, wonderful anagram.

Anne, I do hope that the Holy Spirit can intervene when people have been duped into religious involvement, to the benefit of both parties, but I am not sanguine that happens very often. Too often a ,
cult of charisma develops around one leader who does what is simply a form of mind control seeking a group think mentality. I have seen it too often in the TV evangelists and the mega church leaders. I do not see it so much in the small local churches where a community of disciples working for common goals with strong lay leadership exists. That is why I always chose to serve churches with an average membership of no more than 400. Anything larger and it is hard to have anything but strong central leadership. And even in the church, power corrupts.

Gary, I hope you have read the prior posts in this series and some of my other posts on faith. It should be clear to anyone doing that I believe that one cannot "prove" the resurrection. Either, as I do, you believe it as a matter of faith, from the heart, or you demand evidence that cannot be provided and decide not to have faith. It is a choice. Faith, by definition, is trust in things unseen.

As a student of ancient writings I can assure you that none of the so called secular writings, biographies, histories, etc. can be "proven" either, and the evidence for the validity of the Bible, for instance, is at least as strong as the evidence for most ancient "histories" or "biographies." Actually, that is true for a lot of "factual" writing up to and including the 18th century.

In the end there is no "objective" history. But, in any case, you are correct. There is no video, no audio tape, not even snap shots. There is only kerygma, proclamation, to be believed or not as each individual sees fit.

Thanks for your comments, everybody.

Monte