April 19, 2014


                                                                    The Resurrection: Fact, Myth, or Statement of Faith?


                                                                     (Please feel free to reply and engage in dialogue)




"The third day he rose from the dead and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty."
These are some words collected from a statement of faith known as the Apostle's Creed, which
was not written by the first century Church leaders, but which supposedly reflected the teachings
and the position of  Jesus's Apostles relative to the doctrines that the Church should be guided
by.  The composers of this statement of faith believed that this is what the Apostles would have said and taught.  It is very interesting that the leaders of the Church of the second, third, and fourth centuries (the Church Fathers, bishops, etc.) believed that they were preserving the traditions as handed down by the Apostles, or in other words, "the faith once delivered to the saints." There was very little, if any consideration given to the fact that the teachings of the Apostles were given in
a cultural and social context different from that of the fourth century. In addition, there was scant attention given to the fact that Church had undergone a theological evolution.  The Church of the first century was primarily Jewish in its composition and its theology was rooted, for the most part, in the Hebrew Scriptures, otherwise known as the Old Testament.  The Church of the second, third, and fourth centuries was mostly Gentile in its makeup, and was still carving out its theology and
defining its self-understanding in a culture of different belief systems.


Since the twentieth century, the Church has had to contend with a variety of theological perspectives to identify its beliefs, life and mission.  The three major perspectives have been known as conservative, liberal, and neo-orthodox.  The conservatives have wanted to preserve things as they believe always were from the beginning, focusing on such things as the infallibility of the Pope (Catholic), the infallibility of the Tradition (Orthodox), the infallibility of the Bible (Protestant), the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, the miracles, the doctrine of Creation and Redemption, the Trinity, and the Second Coming of Jesus (Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant).  The liberals have tended to emphasize the alliance between religion and science, the belief in human perfection through education, the historical-critical approach to the Bible, and a comparative approach to world religions. The neo-orthodox have wanted to combine the best of both views, upholding on the one hand, the seriousness of the biblical witness, and on the other hand, the scientific approach to reality.


A twentieth century theologian of the neo-orthodox school, Rudolf Bultmann, believed that in order for the Gospel to be relevant, that the main document of the Church (the Bible) had to be "demythologized," i.e. stripped of its legendary and mythical elements and worldviews, and readapted to the modern day scientific outlook, so that modern day people could understand and appreciate its message.  One of those "myths" that Bultmann believed had to be stripped and reinterpreted was the "myth" of the Resurrection of Jesus. Bultmann believed that we should drop the belief in a literal resurrection, and replace it with a belief in what he called an "existential" resurrection, i.e. one in which the individual defines herself/himself in new terms relative to their potential for authentic growth and development.


A question which I believe is relevant for those of us living in the post-Bultmann era (Bultmann died in 1976), in the age of medical advancement and the Internet, is the following: "Is the Resurrection of Jesus an historical fact, a myth, or a statement of faith?"  This writer would respond "All of the above."  The reader might ask "how can that be?'  My response would be the following:


1.  It is a historical fact because Jesus was a historical figure.  Jesus lived within the confines of human history, and functioned as any other human being.  As such, Jesus carried out his earthly ministry, engaging on all levels with people of different backgrounds and different walks of life. While someone may want to dispute the validity of the Church's claim of his resurrection, no one has been able to give a credible explanation for the empty tomb three days after he died.


2.  Depending on how the word "myth" is used, the doctrine of the Resurrection is a myth.  When Bultmann and others used the word "myth" they have used it to mean something which was not grounded in historical reality, and that in essence was the figment and concoction of the early Church's imagination and wishful thinking.  This writer has a different definition of "myth." Myth has also meant a sacred story about something which may or may not be literally true, but that in either case points beyond itself.  In my bias, the doctrine of the Resurrection is a sacred story which is literally true and points beyond itself, in that it serves as a witness to the power of God in history, not only to physically resurrect God's Son Jesus, but also those who believe in him.


3.  The doctrine of the Resurrection is a statement of faith.  Based on the historical fact and on the
biblical witness, the Church articulates and expresses its belief in this act of God and its implications for humanity of all ages.  With the Church of the past (the Church triumphant), the Church of the present (the Church militant) continues to proclaim "Christ is risen, he is risen indeed." In faith and hope we believe and trust that the Church of the future ( the Church perfected, being perfected) will continue to affirm "Christ is risen, he is risen indeed."  As we continue to live in the faith of our risen Lord, let us also remember the words stated in our Eucharistic celebrations "Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ is coming again."  And may we add to the prayer, the prayers of the early Church, i.e. "even so, come Lord Jesus." 


In the Name of the Creator, of the Liberator, and of the life-giving Spirit. Amen.


Pastor Juan A. Ayala-Carmona


Readers:  Though my articles are usually not intended to generate responses, please feel free to respond to the contents of this one and to engage us in conversation.