The following is a ****tion of A.B. Bruce's work entitled "Training Of The
Twelve." This section tells of Jesus' resurrection and what happen with
His
disciples.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
The Shepherd Restored
by A.B. Bruce
TOO GOOD NEWS TO BE TRUE
Matt. 28:17; Mark 16:11-15; Luke 24:11; 13-22; 36-42; John 20:20; 24-29.
The black day of the crucifixion is past; the succeeding day, the
Jewish Sabbath, when the Weary One slept in His rock-hewn tomb, is also
past; the first day of a new week and of a new era has dawned, and the
Lord
is risen from the dead. The Shepherd has returned to gather His scattered
sheep. Surely a happy day for hapless disciples! What rapturous joy must
have thrilled their hearts at the thought of a reunion with their beloved
Lord! with what ardent hope must they have looked forward to that
resurrection morn!
So one might think; but the real state of the case was not so. Such
ardent expectations had no place in the minds of the disciples. The actual
state of their minds at the resurrection of Christ rather resembled that
of
the Jewish exiles in Babylon, when they heard that they were to be
restored
to their native land. The first effect of the good news was that they were
as men that dreamed. The news seemed too good to be true. The captives who
had sat by the rivers of Babylon, and wept when they remembered Zion, had
ceased to hope for a return to their own country, and indeed to be capable
of hoping for any thing. "Grief was calm and hope was dead" within them.
Then, when the exiles had recovered from the stu**** of surprise, the next
effect of the good tidings was a fit of over-joy. They burst into hysteric
laughter and irrepressible song.
Very similar was the experience of the disciples in connection with
the
rising of Jesus from the dead. Their grief was not indeed calm, but their
hope was dead. The resurrection of their Master was utterly unexpected by
them, and they received the tidings with surprise and incredulity. This
appears from the statements of all the four evangelists. Matthew states
that
on the occasion of Christ's meeting with His followers in Galilee after He
was risen, some doubted, while others wor****pped. Mark relates that when
the
disciples heard from Mary Magdalene that Jesus was alive, and had been
seen
of her, "they believed not;." and that when the two disciples who
journeyed
toward Emmaus told their brethren of their meeting with Jesus on the way,
"neither believed they them." He further relates how, on a subsequent
occasion, when Jesus Himself met with the whole eleven at once, He
"upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they
believed not them which had seen Him after He was risen."
In full accordance with these statements of the two first evangelists
are those of Luke, whose representation of the mental attitude of the
disciples towards the resurrection of Jesus is very graphic and animated.
According to him, the re****ts of the women seemed to them "as idle tales,
and they believed them not." The two brethren vaguely alluded to by Mark
as
walking into the country when Jesus appeared to them, are represented by
Luke as sad in countenance, though aware of the rumors concerning the
resurrection; yea, as so depressed in spirits, that they did not recognize
Jesus when He joined their company and entered into conversation with
them.
The resurrection was not a fact for them: all they knew was that their
Master was dead, and that they had vainly trusted that it had been He who
should have redeemed Israel. The same evangelist also Informs us that on
the
first occasion when Jesus presented Himself in the midst of His disciples,
they did recognize the resemblance of the apparition to their deceased
Lord,
but thought it was only His ghost, and accordingly were terrified and
affrighted; insomuch that, in order to charm away their fear, Jesus showed
them His hands and feet, and besought them to handle His body, and so
satisfy themselves that He was no ghost, but a substantial human being,
with
flesh and bones like another man.
Instead of general statements, John gives an example of the
incredulity
of the disciples concerning the resurrection, as exhibited in its extreme
form by Thomas. This disciple he represents as so incredulous, that he
refused to believe until he should have put his finger into the prints of
the nails, and thrust his hand into the wound made by the spear in the
Saviour's side. That the other disciples shared the incredulity of Thomas,
though in a less degree, is implied in the statement made by John in a
previous part of his narrative, that when Jesus met His disciples on the
evening of the day on which He rose, "He showed unto them His hands and
His
side."
The women who had believed in Christ had no more expectation of His
resurrection than the eleven. They set forth towards the sepulchre on the
morning of the first day of the week, with the intention of embalming the
dead body of Him whom they loved. They sought the living among the dead.
When the Magdalene, who was at the tomb before the rest, found the grave
empty, her idea was that some one had carried away the dead body of her
Lord.
When the incredulity of the disciples did at length give place to
faith, they passed, like the Hebrew exiles, from extreme depression to
extravagant joy. When the doubt of Thomas was removed, he exclaimed in
rapture, "My Lord and my God!" Luke relates that when they recognized
their
risen Lord, the disciples "believed not for joy," as if toying with doubt
as
a stimulus to joy. The two disciples with whom Jesus conversed on the way
to
Emmaus, said to each other when He left them, "Did not our heart burn
within
us while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us the
Scriptures?"
In yet another most im****tant respect did the eleven resemble the
ancient Hebrew exiles at the time of their recall. While their faith and
hope were palsied during the interval between the death and the
resurrection
of Jesus, their love remained in unabated vitality. The expatriated Jew
did
not forget Jerusalem in the land of strangers. Absence only made his heart
grow fonder. As he sat by the rivers of Babylon, listless, motionless, in
abstracted dreamy mood, gazing with glassy eyes on the sluggish waters,
the
big round tears stole quietly down his cheeks, because he had been
thinking
of Zion. The exile of poetic soul did not forget what was due to
Jerusalem's
honor. He was incapable of singing the Lord's songs in the hearing of a
heathen audience, who cared nothing for their meaning, but only for the
style of execution. He disdained to prostitute his talents for the
entertainment of the voluptuous oppressors of Israel, even though thereby
he
might procure his restoration to the beloved country of his birth, as the
Athenian captives in Sicily are said to have done by reciting the strains
of
their favorite poet Euripides in the hearing of their Sicilian masters.
The disciples were not less true to the memory of their Lord. They
were like a "widow indeed," who remains faithful to her deceased husband,
and dotes on his virtues, though his reputation be at zero in the general
esteem of the world. Call Him a deceiver who might, they could not believe
that Jesus had been a deceiver. Mistaken He as well as they might have
been,
but an impostor - never! Therefore, though He is dead and their hope gone,
they still act as men who cherish the fondest attachment to their Master
whom they have lost. They keep together like a bereaved family, with
blinds
down, so to speak, shutting and barring their doors for fear of the Jews,
identifying themselves with the Crucified, and as His friends dreading the
ill-will of the unbelieving world. Admirable example to all Christians how
to behave themselves in a day of trouble, rebuke, and blasphemy, when the
cause of Christ seems lost, and the powers of darkness for the moment have
all things their own way. Though faith be eclipsed and hope extinguished,
let the heart ever be loyal to its true Lord!
The state of mind in which the disciples were at the resurrection of
Jesus Christ from the dead, is of great moment in an apologetic point of
view. Their despair after their Lord's crucifixion gives great weight to
the
testimony borne by them to the fact of His resurrection. Men in such a
mood
were not likely to believe in the latter event except because it could not
reasonably be disbelieved. They would not be lightly satisfied of its
truth,
as men are apt to be in the case of events both desired and expected: they
would skeptically exact superabundant evidence, as men do in the case of
events desirable but not expected. They would be slow to believe on the
testimony of others, and might even hesitate to believe their own eyes.
They
would not be able, as M. Renan supposes, to get up a belief in the
resurrection of Jesus, from the simple fact that His grave was found empty
on the third day after His death, by the women who went to embalm His
body.
That cir***stance, on being re****ted, might make a Peter and a John run to
the sepulchre to see how matters stood; but, after they had found the
re****t
of the women confirmed, it would still remain a question how the fact was
to
be explained; and Mary Magdalene's theory, that some one had carried off
the
corpse, would not appear at all improbable.
These inferences of ours, from what we know concerning the mental
condition of the disciples, are fully borne out by the Gospel accounts of
the reception they gave to the risen Jesus at His first appearances to
them.
One and all of them regarded these appearances skeptically, and took pains
to satisfy themselves, or made it necessary that Jesus should take pains
to
satisfy them, that the visible object was no ghostly apparition, but a
living man, and that man none other than He who had died on the cross. The
disciples doubted now the substantiality, now the identity, of the person
who appeared to them. They were therefore not content with seeing Jesus,
but
at His own request handled Him. One of their number not only handled the
body to ascertain that it possessed the incompressibility of matter, but
insisted on examining with skeptical curiosity those parts which had been
injured by the nails and the spear. All perceived the resemblance between
the object in view and Jesus, but they could not be persuaded of the
identity, so utterly unprepared were they for seeing the Dead One alive
again; and their theory at first was just that of Strauss, that what they
saw was a ghost or spectra. And the very fact that they entertained that
theory makes it impossible for us to entertain it. We cannot, in the face
of
that fact, accept the Straussian dogma, that "the faith in Jesus as the
Messiah, which by His violent death had received an apparently fatal
shock,
was subjectively restored by the instrumentality of the mind, the power of
imagination and nervous excitement." The power of imagination and nervous
excitement we know can do much. It has often happened to men in an
abnormal,
excited state to see projected into outward space the creations of a
heated
brain. but persons in a crazy state like that - subject to hallucination -
are not usually cool and rational enough to doubt the reality of what they
see; nor is it necessary in their case to take pains to overcome such
doubts. What they need rather, is to be made aware that what they think
they
see is not a reality: the very reverse of what Christ had to do for the
disciples, and did, by solemn assertion that He was no spirit, by inviting
them to handle Him, and so satisfy themselves of His material
substantiality, and by partaking of food in their presence.
When we keep steadily before our eyes the mental condition of the
eleven at the time of Christ's resurrection, we see the transparent
falsehood and absurdity of the theft theory invented by the Jewish
priests.
The disciples, according to this theory, came by night, while the guards
were asleep, and stole the dead body of Jesus, that they might be able to
circulate the belief that He was risen again. Matthew tells that even
before
the resurrection the murderers of our Lord were afraid this might be done;
and then, to prevent any fraud of this kind, they applied to Pilate to
have
a guard put upon the grave, who accordingly contemptuously granted them
permission to take what steps they pleased to prevent all resurrectionary
proceedings on the part either of the dead or of the living, scornfully
replying, "Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can." This
accordingly they did, sealing the stone and setting a watch. Alas! their
precautions prevented neither the resurrection nor belief in it, but only
supplied an illustration of the folly of those who attempt to manage
providence, and to control the course of the world's history. They gave
themselves much to do, and it all came to nothing. Not that we are
disposed
to deny the astuteness of these ecclesiastical politicians. Their scheme
for
preventing the resurrection was very prudent, and their mode of explaining
it away after hand very plausible. The story they invented was really a
very
respectable fabrication, and was certain to satisfy all who wanted a
decent
theory to justify a foregone conclusion, as in fact it seems to have done;
for, according to Matthew, it was commonly re****ted in after years. It was
not improbable that soldiers should fall asleep by night on the watch,
especially when guarding a dead body, which was not likely to give them
any
trouble; and in the eyes of the unbelieving world, the followers of the
Nazarene were capable of using any means for promoting their ends.
But granting all this, and even granting that the Sanhedrists had
been
right in their opinion of the character of the disciples, their theft
theory
is ridiculous. The disciples, even if capable of such a theft, so far as
scruples of conscience were concerned, were not in a state of mind to
think
of it, or to attempt it. They had not spirit left for such a daring
action.
Sorrow lay like a weight of lead on their hearts, and made them almost as
inanimate as the corpse they are supposed to have stolen. Then the motive
for the theft is one which could not have influenced them then. Steal the
body to propagate a belief in the resurrection! What interest had they in
propagating a belief which they did not entertain themselves? "As yet they
knew not the Scriptures, that He must rise again from the dead;. nor did
they remember aught that their Master had said on this subject before His
decease. To some this latter statement has appeared hard to believe; and
to
get over the difficulty, it has been suggested that the predictions of our
Lord respecting His resurrection may not have been so definite as they
appear in the Gospels, but may have assumed this definite form after the
event, when their meaning was clearly understood. We see no occasion for
such a supposition. There can be no doubt that Jesus spoke plainly enough
about His death at least; and yet His death, when it happened, took the
disciples as much by surprise as did the resurrection. One explanation
suffices in both cases. The disciples were not clever, quick-witted,
sentimental men such as Renan makes them. They were stupid, slow-minded
persons; very honest, but very unapt to take in new ideas. They were like
horses with blinders on, and could see only in one direction, - that,
namely, of their prejudices. It required the surgery of events to insert a
new truth into their minds. Nothing would change the current of their
thoughts but a damwork of undeniable fact. They could be convinced that
Christ must die only by His dying, that He would rise only by His rising,
that His kingdom was not to be of this world, only by the outpouring of
the
Spirit at Pentecost and the vocation of the Gentiles. Let us be thankful
for
the honest stupidity of these men. It gives great value to their
testimony.
We know that nothing but facts could make such men believe that which
nowadays they get credit for inventing.
The apologetic use which we have made of the doubts of the disciples
concerning the resurrection of Christ is not only legitimate, but
manifestly
that which was intended by their being recorded. The evangelists have
carefully chronicled these doubts that we might have no doubt. These
things
were written that we might believe that Jesus really did rise from the
dead;
for the apostles attached supreme im****tance to that fact, which they had
doubted in the days of their disciple hood. It was the foundation of their
doctrinal edifice, an essential part of their gospel. The Apostle Paul
correctly summed up the gospel preached by the men who had been with
Jesus,
as well as by himself, in these three items: "that Christ died for our
sins
according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried; and that He rose
again
the third day, according to the Scriptures." All the eleven thoroughly
agreed with Paul's sentiment, that if Christ were not risen, their
preaching
was vain, and the faith of Christians was also vain. There was no gospel
at
all, unless He who died for men's sins rose again for their justification.
With this conviction in their minds, they constantly bore witness to the
resurrection of Jesus wherever they went. So im****tant a part of their
work
did this witness-bearing seem to them, that when Peter proposed the
election
of one to fill the place of Judas he singled it out as the characteristic
function of the apostolic office. "Of these men," he said, "which have
companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among
us,
.. . . must one become a witness with us of His resurrection."
With this supreme value attached to the fact of Christ's rising again in
apostolic preaching, it is our duty most heartily to sympathize. Modern
unbelievers, like some in the Corinthian church, would persuade us that it
does not matter whether Jesus rose or not, all that is valuable in
Christianity being quite independent of mere historical truth. With these
practically agree many believers addicted to an airy spiritualism, who
treat
mere supernatural facts with contemptuous neglect, deeming the high
doctrines of the faith as alone worthy of their regard. To persons of this
temper such studies as those which have occupied us in this chapter seem a
mere waste of time; and if they spoke as they feel, they would say, "Let
these trifles alone, and give us the pure and simple gospel." Intelligent,
sober, and earnest Christians differ toto caelo from both these cl***** of
people. In their view Christianity is in the first place a religion of
supernatural facts. These facts occupy the principal place in their creed.
They know that if these facts are honestly believed, all the great
doctrines
of the faith must sooner or later be accepted; and, on the other hand,
they
clearly understand that a religion which despises, not to say disbelieves,
these facts, is but a cloudland which must soon be dissipated, or a house
built on sand which the storm will sweep away. Therefore, while
acknowledging the im****tance of all revealed truth, they lay very special
stress on revealed facts. Believing with the heart the precious truth that
Christ died for our sins, they are careful with the apostles to include in
their gospel these items of fact, that He was buried, and that He rose
again
the third day.
THE EYES OF THE DISCIPLES OPENED
Mark xvi. 14; Luke xxiv. 25-32; 44-46; John xx. 20-23.
Jesus showed Himself alive after His passion to His disciples in a
body, for the first time, on the evening of His resurrection day. It was
the
fourth time He had made Himself visible since He rose from the dead. He
had
appeared in the morning first of all to Mary of Magdala. She had earned
the
honor thus conferred on her by her pre-eminent devotion. Of kindred spirit
with Mary of Bethany, she had been foremost among the women who came to
Joseph's tomb to embalm the dead body of the Savior. Finding the grave
empty, she wept bitter tears, because they had taken away her Lord, and
she
knew not where they had laid Him. Those tears, sure sign of deep true
love,
had not been unobserved of the Risen One. The sorrows of this faithful
soul
touched His tender heart, and brought Him to her side to comfort her.
Turning round in distress from the sepulchre, she saw Him standing by, but
knew Him not. "Jesus saith to her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest
thou? She, supposing Him to be the gardener, replies, Sir, if thou hast
borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him, and I will take Him
away.
Jesus saith unto her, Mary." Startled with the familiar voice, she looks
more attentively, and forthwith returns the benignant salutation with an
expressive word of recognition, "Rabboni." Thus "to holy tears, in lonely
hours, Christ risen appears."
The second appearance was vouchsafed to Peter. Concerning this
private
meeting between Jesus and His erring disciple we have no details: it is
simply mentioned by Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians, and by Luke in
his Gospel; but we can have no doubt at all as to its object. The Risen
Master remembered Peter's sin; He knew how troubled he was in mind on
account of it; He desired without delay to let him know he was forgiven;
and
out of delicate consideration for the offender's feelings He contrived to
meet him for the first time after his fall, alone.
In the course of the day Jesus appeared, for the third time, to the
two
brethren who journeyed to Emmaus. Luke has given greater prominence to
this
third appearance than to any other in his narrative, probably because it
was
one of the most interesting of the anecdotes concerning the resurrection
which he found in the collections out of which he compiled his Gospel.
And,
in truth, any thing more interesting than this beautiful story cannot well
be imagined. How vividly is the whole situation of the disciples brought
before us by the picture of the two friends walking along the way, and
talking together of the things which had happened, the sufferings of Jesus
three days ago, and the rumors just come to their ears concerning His
resurrection; and as they talked, vibrating between despair and hope, now
brooding disconsolately on the crucifixion of Him whom till then they had
regarded as the Redeemer of Israel, anon wondering if it were possible
that
He could have risen again! Then how unspeakably pathetic the behavior of
Jesus throughout this scene! By an artifice of love He assumes the
incognito, and, joining the company of the two sorrowful men, asks them in
a
careless way what is the subject about which they are talking so sadly and
seriously; and on receiving for reply a question expressive of surprise
that
even a stranger in Jerusalem should not know the things which have come to
pass, again asks dryly and indifferently, "What things?" Having thereby
drawn out of them their story, He proceeds in turn to show them that an
intelligent reader of the Old Testament ought not to be surprised at such
things happening to one whom they believed to be Christ, taking occasion
to
expound unto them "in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself,"
without saying that it is of Himself He speaks. On the arrival of the
travellers at the village whither the two brethren were bound, the unknown
One assumes the air of a man who is going farther on, as it would not
become
a stranger to thrust himself into company uninvited; but receiving a
pressing invitation, He accepts it, and at last the two brethren discover
to
their joy whom they have been entertaining unawares.
This appearing of Jesus to the two brethren by the way was a sort of
prelude to that which He made on the evening of the same day in Jerusalem
to
the eleven, or rather the ten. As soon as they had discovered whom they
had
had for a guest, Cleopas and his companion set out from Emmaus to the Holy
City, eager to tell the friends there the stirring news. And, behold,
while
they are in the very act of telling what things were done in the way, and
how Jesus became known to them in the breaking of bread, Jesus Himself
appeared in the midst of them, uttering the kindly salutation, "Peace be
unto you!" He is come to do for the future apostles what He has already
done
for the two friends: to show Himself alive to them after His passion, and
to
open their understandings that they might understand the Scriptures, and
see
that, according to what had been written before of the Christ, it behooved
Him to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day.
While the general design of the two appearances is the same, we
observe
a difference in the order of procedure followed by Jesus. In the one case
He
opened the eyes of the understanding first, and the eyes of the body
second;
in the other, He reversed this order. In His colloquy with the two
brethren
He first showed them that the crucifixion and the rumored resurrection
were
in perfect accordance with Old Testament Scriptures, and then at the close
made Himself visible to their bodily eyes as Jesus risen. In other words,
He
first taught them the true scriptural theory of Messiah's earthly
experience, and then He satisfied them as to the matter of fact. In the
meeting at night with the ten, on the other hand, he disposed of the
matter
of fact first, and then took up the theory afterwards. He convinced His
disciples, by showing them His hands and His feet, and by eating food,
that
He really was risen; and then He proceeded to show that the fact was only
what they ought to have expected as the fulfilment of Old Testament
prophecy.
In thus varying the order of revelation, Jesus was but adapting His
procedure to the different cir***stances of the persons with whom He had
to
deal. The two friends who journeyed to Emmaus did not notice any
resemblance
between the stranger who joined their company and their beloved Lord, of
whom they had been thinking and speaking. "Their eyes were holden, that
they
should not know Him." The main cause of this, we believe, was sheer
heaviness of heart. Sorrow made them unobserving. They were so engrossed
with their own sad thoughts that they had no eyes for outward things. They
did not take the trouble to look who it was that had come up with them; it
would have made no difference though the stranger had been their own
father.
It is obvious how men in such a mood must be dealt with. They can get
outward vision only by getting the inward eye first opened. The diseased
mind must be healed, that they may be able to look at what is before them,
and see it as it is. On this principle Jesus proceeded with the two
brethren. He accommodated Himself to their humor, and led them on from
despair to hope, and then the outward senses recovered their perceptive
power, and told who the stranger was. "You have heard," He said in effect,
"a rumor that He who was crucified three days ago is risen. You regarded
this rumor as an incredible story. But why should you? You believe Jesus
to
be the Christ. If He was the Christ, His rising again was to be expected
as
much as the passion, for both alike are foretold in the Scriptures which
ye
believe to be the Word of God." These thoughts having taken hold of their
minds, the hearts of the two brethren begin to burn with the kindling
power
of a new truth; the day-dawn of hope breaks on their spirit; they waken up
as from an oppressive dream; they look outward, and, lo, the man who has
been discoursing to them is Jesus Himself!
With the ten the case was different. When Jesus appeared in the midst
of them, they were struck at once with the resemblance to their deceased
Master. They had been listening to the story of Cleopas and his companion,
and were in a more observing mood. But they could not believe that what
they
saw really was Jesus. They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed
that
they had seen a spirit - the ghost or spectre of the Crucified. The first
thing to be done in this case, therefore, manifestly was to allay the fear
awakened, and to convince the terrified disciples that the being who had
suddenly appeared was no ghost, but a man: the very man He seemed to be,
even Jesus Himself. Not till that has been done can any discourse be
profitably held concerning the teaching of the Old Testament on the
subject
of Messiah's earthly history. To that task accordingly Jesus forthwith
addressed Himself, and only when it was successfully accomplished did He
proceed to expound the true Messianic theory.
Something analogous to the difference we have pointed out in the
experience of the two and the ten disciples in connection with belief in
the
resurrection may be found in the ways by which different Christians now
are
brought to faith. The evidences of Christianity are commonly divided into
two great categories - the external and the internal; the one drawn from
outward historical facts, the other from the adaptation of the gospel to
man's
nature and needs. Both sorts of evidence are necessary to a perfect faith,
just as both sorts of vision, the outward and the inward, were necessary
to
make the disciples thorough believers in the fact of the resurrection. But
some begin with the one, some with the other. Some are convinced first
that
the gospel story is true, and then perhaps long after waken up to a sense
of
the im****tance and preciousness of the things which it relates. Others,
again, are like Cleopas and his companion; so engrossed with their own
thoughts as to be incapable of appreciating or seeing facts, requiring
first
to have the eyes of their understanding enlightened to see the beauty and
the worthiness of the truth as it is in Jesus. They may at one time have
had
a kind of traditional faith in the facts as sufficiently well attested.
But
they have lost that faith, it may be not without regret. They are
skeptics,
and yet they are sad because they are so, and feel that it was better with
them when, like others, they believed. Yet, though they attempt it, they
cannot restore their faith by a study of mere external evidences. They
read
books dealing in such evidences, but they are not much impressed by them.
Their eyes are holden, and they know not Christ coming to them in that
outward way. But He reveals Himself to them in another manner. By hidden
discourse with their spirits He conveys into their minds a powerful sense
of
the moral grandeur of the Christian faith, making them feel that, true or
not, it is at least worthy to be true. Then their hearts begin to burn:
they
hope that what is so beautiful may turn out to be objectively true; the
question of the external evidences assumes a new interest to their minds;
they inquire, they read, they look; and, lo, they see Jesus revived, a
true
historical person for them: risen out of the grave of doubt to live for
evermore the sun of their souls, more precious for the tem****ary loss;
coming
"Apparelled in more precious habit,
More moving, delicate, and full of life,
Into the eye and prospect of their soul,"
than ever He did before they doubted.
From these remarks on the order of the two revelations made by Jesus
to
His disciples, - of Himself to the eye of their body, and of the
scriptural
doctrine of the Messiah to the eye of their mind, - we pass to consider
the
question, What did the latter revelation amount to? What was the precise
effect of those expositions of Scripture with which the risen Christ
favored
His hearers? Did the disciples derive therefrom such an amount of light as
to supersede the necessity of any further illumination? Had Jesus Himself
done the work of the Spirit of Truth, whose advent He had promised before
He
suffered, and led them into all truth? Certainly not. The opening of the
understanding which took place at this time did not by any means amount to
a
full spiritual enlightenment in Christian doctrine. The disciples did not
yet comprehend the moral grounds of Christ's sufferings and resurrection.
Why He underwent these experiences they knew not; the words "ought" and
"behooved" meant for them as yet nothing more than that, according to Old
Testament prophecies rightly understood, the things which had happened
might
and should have been anticipated. They were in the same state of mind as
that in which we can conceive the Jewish Christians to whom the Epistle to
the Hebrews was addressed to have been after perusing the contents of that
profound writing. These Christians were ill grounded in gospel truth: they
saw not the glory of the gospel dispensation, nor its harmony with that
which went before, and under which they had been themselves educated. In
particular, the divine dignity of the Author of the Christian faith seemed
to them incompatible with His earthly humiliation. Accordingly, the writer
of the epistle set himself to prove that the divinity, the tem****ary
humiliation, and the subsequent glorification of the Christ were all
taught
in the Old Testament Scriptures, quoting these liberally for that purpose
in
the early chapters of his epistle. He did, in fact, by his written
expositions for his readers, what Jesus did by His oral expositions for
His
hearers. And what shall we say was the immediate effect of the writer's
argument on the minds of those who attentively perused it? This, we
imagine,
that the crude believer on laying down the book would be constrained to
admit: "Well, he is right: these things are all written in the Scriptures
of
the Messiah; and therefore no one of them, not even the humiliation and
suffering at which I stumble, can be a reason for rejecting Jesus as the
Christ." A very im****tant result, yet a very elementary one. From the bare
concession that the real life of Jesus corresponded to the ideal life of
the
Messiah as ****trayed in the Old Testament, to the admiring, enthusiastic,
and thoroughly intelligent appreciation of gospel truth exhibited by the
writer himself in every page of his epistle, what a vast distance!
Not less was the distance between the state of mind of the disciples
after Jesus had expounded to them the things in the law, and the prophets,
and the psalms concerning Himself, and the state of enlightenment to which
they attained as apostles after the advent of the Comforter. Now they knew
the alphabet merely of the doctrine of Christ; then they had arrived at
perfection, and were thoroughly initiated into the mystery of the gospel.
Now a single ray of light was let into their dark minds; then the daylight
of truth poured its full flood into their souls. Or we may express the
difference in terms suggested by the narrative given by John of the events
connected with this first appearance of the risen Jesus to His disciples.
John relates, that, at a certain stage in the proceedings, Jesus breathed
on
the disciples, and said unto them, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." We are not
to understand that they then and there received the Spirit in the promised
fulness. The breath was rather but a sign and earnest of what was to come.
It was but an emblematic renewal of the promise, and a first installment
of
its fulfilment. It was but the little cloud like a man's hand that
****tended
a plenteous rain, or the first gentle puff of wind which precedes the
mighty
gale. Now they have the little breath of the Spirit's influence, but not
till Pentecost shall they feel the ru****ng wind. So great is the
difference
between now and then: between the spiritual enlightenment of the disciples
on the first Christian Sabbath evening, and that of the apostles in after
days.
It was but the day of small things with these disciples yet. The
small
things, however, were not to be despised; nor were they. What value the
ten
set on the light they had received we are not indeed told, but we may
safely
assume that their feelings were much of kin to those of the two brethren
who
journeyed towards Emmaus. Conversing together on the discourse of Jesus
after His departure, they said one unto another, "Did not our heart burn
within us while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us
the
Scriptures?" The light they had got might be small, but it was new light,
and it had all the heart-kindling, thought-stirring power of new truth.
That
conversation on the road formed a crisis in their spiritual history. It
was
the dawn of the gospel day; it was the little spark which kindles a great
fire; it deposited in their minds a thought which was to form the germ or
centre of a new system of belief; it took away the veil which had been
upon
their faces in the reading of the Old Testament, and was thus the first
step
in a process which was to issue in their beholding with open face, as in a
glass, the glory of the Lord, and in their being changed into the same
image, from glory to glory, by the Lord the Spirit. Happy the man who has
got even so far as these two disciples at this time!
Some disconsolate soul may say, Would that happiness were mine! For
the
comfort of such a forlorn brother, let us note the cir***stances in which
this new light arose for the disciples. Their hearts were set a-burning
when
they had become very dry and withered: hopeless, sick, and life-weary,
through sorrow and disappointment. It is always so: the fuel must be dry
that the spark may take hold. It was when the people of Israel complained,
"Our bones are dried and our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts,"
that the word went forth: "Behold, O my people, I will open your graves,
and
cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of
Israel." So with these disciples of Jesus. It was when every particle of
the
sap of hope had been bleached out of them, and their faith had been
reduced
to this, "We trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed
Israel,"
that their hearts were set burning by the kindling power of a new truth.
So
it has been in many an instance since then. The fire of hope has been
kindled in the heart, never to be extinguished, just at the moment when
men
were settling down into despair; faith has been revived when a man seemed
to
himself to be an infidel; the light of truth has arisen to minds which had
ceased to look for the dawn; the comfort of salvation has returned to
souls
which had begun to think that God's mercy was clean gone for ever. "When
the
Son of man cometh shall He find faith on the earth?"
There is nothing strange in this. The truth is, the heart needs to be
dried
by trial before it can be made to burn. Till sorrow comes, human hearts do
not catch the divine fire; there is too much of this world's life-sap in
them. That was what made the disciples so slow of heart to believe all
that
the prophets had spoken. Their worldly ambition prevented them from
learning
the spirituality of Christ's kingdom, and pride made them blind to the
glory
of the cross. Hence Jesus justly upbraided them for their unbelief and
their
mindless stupidity. Had their hearts been pure, they might have known
beforehand what was to happen. As it was, they comprehended nothing till
their Lord's death had blighted their hope and blasted their ambition, and
bitter sorrow had prepared them for receiving spiritual instruction.
THE EYES OF THE DISCIPLES OPENED
Mark xvi. 14; Luke xxiv. 25-32; 44-46; John xx. 20-23.
Jesus showed Himself alive after His passion to His disciples in a
body, for the first time, on the evening of His resurrection day. It was
the
fourth time He had made Himself visible since He rose from the dead. He
had
appeared in the morning first of all to Mary of Magdala. She had earned
the
honor thus conferred on her by her pre-eminent devotion. Of kindred spirit
with Mary of Bethany, she had been foremost among the women who came to
Joseph's tomb to embalm the dead body of the Savior. Finding the grave
empty, she wept bitter tears, because they had taken away her Lord, and
she
knew not where they had laid Him. Those tears, sure sign of deep true
love,
had not been unobserved of the Risen One. The sorrows of this faithful
soul
touched His tender heart, and brought Him to her side to comfort her.
Turning round in distress from the sepulchre, she saw Him standing by, but
knew Him not. "Jesus saith to her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest
thou? She, supposing Him to be the gardener, replies, Sir, if thou hast
borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him, and I will take Him
away.
Jesus saith unto her, Mary." Startled with the familiar voice, she looks
more attentively, and forthwith returns the benignant salutation with an
expressive word of recognition, "Rabboni." Thus "to holy tears, in lonely
hours, Christ risen appears."
The second appearance was vouchsafed to Peter. Concerning this
private
meeting between Jesus and His erring disciple we have no details: it is
simply mentioned by Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians, and by Luke in
his Gospel; but we can have no doubt at all as to its object. The Risen
Master remembered Peter's sin; He knew how troubled he was in mind on
account of it; He desired without delay to let him know he was forgiven;
and
out of delicate consideration for the offender's feelings He contrived to
meet him for the first time after his fall, alone.
In the course of the day Jesus appeared, for the third time, to the
two
brethren who journeyed to Emmaus. Luke has given greater prominence to
this
third appearance than to any other in his narrative, probably because it
was
one of the most interesting of the anecdotes concerning the resurrection
which he found in the collections out of which he compiled his Gospel.
And,
in truth, any thing more interesting than this beautiful story cannot well
be imagined. How vividly is the whole situation of the disciples brought
before us by the picture of the two friends walking along the way, and
talking together of the things which had happened, the sufferings of Jesus
three days ago, and the rumors just come to their ears concerning His
resurrection; and as they talked, vibrating between despair and hope, now
brooding disconsolately on the crucifixion of Him whom till then they had
regarded as the Redeemer of Israel, anon wondering if it were possible
that
He could have risen again! Then how unspeakably pathetic the behavior of
Jesus throughout this scene! By an artifice of love He assumes the
incognito, and, joining the company of the two sorrowful men, asks them in
a
careless way what is the subject about which they are talking so sadly and
seriously; and on receiving for reply a question expressive of surprise
that
even a stranger in Jerusalem should not know the things which have come to
pass, again asks dryly and indifferently, "What things?" Having thereby
drawn out of them their story, He proceeds in turn to show them that an
intelligent reader of the Old Testament ought not to be surprised at such
things happening to one whom they believed to be Christ, taking occasion
to
expound unto them "in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself,"
without saying that it is of Himself He speaks. On the arrival of the
travellers at the village whither the two brethren were bound, the unknown
One assumes the air of a man who is going farther on, as it would not
become
a stranger to thrust himself into company uninvited; but receiving a
pressing invitation, He accepts it, and at last the two brethren discover
to
their joy whom they have been entertaining unawares.
This appearing of Jesus to the two brethren by the way was a sort of
prelude to that which He made on the evening of the same day in Jerusalem
to
the eleven, or rather the ten. As soon as they had discovered whom they
had
had for a guest, Cleopas and his companion set out from Emmaus to the Holy
City, eager to tell the friends there the stirring news. And, behold,
while
they are in the very act of telling what things were done in the way, and
how Jesus became known to them in the breaking of bread, Jesus Himself
appeared in the midst of them, uttering the kindly salutation, "Peace be
unto you!" He is come to do for the future apostles what He has already
done
for the two friends: to show Himself alive to them after His passion, and
to
open their understandings that they might understand the Scriptures, and
see
that, according to what had been written before of the Christ, it behooved
Him to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day.
While the general design of the two appearances is the same, we
observe
a difference in the order of procedure followed by Jesus. In the one case
He
opened the eyes of the understanding first, and the eyes of the body
second;
in the other, He reversed this order. In His colloquy with the two
brethren
He first showed them that the crucifixion and the rumored resurrection
were
in perfect accordance with Old Testament Scriptures, and then at the close
made Himself visible to their bodily eyes as Jesus risen. In other words,
He
first taught them the true scriptural theory of Messiah's earthly
experience, and then He satisfied them as to the matter of fact. In the
meeting at night with the ten, on the other hand, he disposed of the
matter
of fact first, and then took up the theory afterwards. He convinced His
disciples, by showing them His hands and His feet, and by eating food,
that
He really was risen; and then He proceeded to show that the fact was only
what they ought to have expected as the fulfilment of Old Testament
prophecy.
In thus varying the order of revelation, Jesus was but adapting His
procedure to the different cir***stances of the persons with whom He had
to
deal. The two friends who journeyed to Emmaus did not notice any
resemblance
between the stranger who joined their company and their beloved Lord, of
whom they had been thinking and speaking. "Their eyes were holden, that
they
should not know Him." The main cause of this, we believe, was sheer
heaviness of heart. Sorrow made them unobserving. They were so engrossed
with their own sad thoughts that they had no eyes for outward things. They
did not take the trouble to look who it was that had come up with them; it
would have made no difference though the stranger had been their own
father.
It is obvious how men in such a mood must be dealt with. They can get
outward vision only by getting the inward eye first opened. The diseased
mind must be healed, that they may be able to look at what is before them,
and see it as it is. On this principle Jesus proceeded with the two
brethren. He accommodated Himself to their humor, and led them on from
despair to hope, and then the outward senses recovered their perceptive
power, and told who the stranger was. "You have heard," He said in effect,
"a rumor that He who was crucified three days ago is risen. You regarded
this rumor as an incredible story. But why should you? You believe Jesus
to
be the Christ. If He was the Christ, His rising again was to be expected
as
much as the passion, for both alike are foretold in the Scriptures which
ye
believe to be the Word of God." These thoughts having taken hold of their
minds, the hearts of the two brethren begin to burn with the kindling
power
of a new truth; the day-dawn of hope breaks on their spirit; they waken up
as from an oppressive dream; they look outward, and, lo, the man who has
been discoursing to them is Jesus Himself!
With the ten the case was different. When Jesus appeared in the midst
of them, they were struck at once with the resemblance to their deceased
Master. They had been listening to the story of Cleopas and his companion,
and were in a more observing mood. But they could not believe that what
they
saw really was Jesus. They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed
that
they had seen a spirit - the ghost or spectre of the Crucified. The first
thing to be done in this case, therefore, manifestly was to allay the fear
awakened, and to convince the terrified disciples that the being who had
suddenly appeared was no ghost, but a man: the very man He seemed to be,
even Jesus Himself. Not till that has been done can any discourse be
profitably held concerning the teaching of the Old Testament on the
subject
of Messiah's earthly history. To that task accordingly Jesus forthwith
addressed Himself, and only when it was successfully accomplished did He
proceed to expound the true Messianic theory.
Something analogous to the difference we have pointed out in the
experience of the two and the ten disciples in connection with belief in
the
resurrection may be found in the ways by which different Christians now
are
brought to faith. The evidences of Christianity are commonly divided into
two great categories - the external and the internal; the one drawn from
outward historical facts, the other from the adaptation of the gospel to
man's
nature and needs. Both sorts of evidence are necessary to a perfect faith,
just as both sorts of vision, the outward and the inward, were necessary
to
make the disciples thorough believers in the fact of the resurrection. But
some begin with the one, some with the other. Some are convinced first
that
the gospel story is true, and then perhaps long after waken up to a sense
of
the im****tance and preciousness of the things which it relates. Others,
again, are like Cleopas and his companion; so engrossed with their own
thoughts as to be incapable of appreciating or seeing facts, requiring
first
to have the eyes of their understanding enlightened to see the beauty and
the worthiness of the truth as it is in Jesus. They may at one time have
had
a kind of traditional faith in the facts as sufficiently well attested.
But
they have lost that faith, it may be not without regret. They are
skeptics,
and yet they are sad because they are so, and feel that it was better with
them when, like others, they believed. Yet, though they attempt it, they
cannot restore their faith by a study of mere external evidences. They
read
books dealing in such evidences, but they are not much impressed by them.
Their eyes are holden, and they know not Christ coming to them in that
outward way. But He reveals Himself to them in another manner. By hidden
discourse with their spirits He conveys into their minds a powerful sense
of
the moral grandeur of the Christian faith, making them feel that, true or
not, it is at least worthy to be true. Then their hearts begin to burn:
they
hope that what is so beautiful may turn out to be objectively true; the
question of the external evidences assumes a new interest to their minds;
they inquire, they read, they look; and, lo, they see Jesus revived, a
true
historical person for them: risen out of the grave of doubt to live for
evermore the sun of their souls, more precious for the tem****ary loss;
coming
"Apparelled in more precious habit,
More moving, delicate, and full of life,
Into the eye and prospect of their soul,"
than ever He did before they doubted.
From these remarks on the order of the two revelations made by Jesus
to
His disciples, - of Himself to the eye of their body, and of the
scriptural
doctrine of the Messiah to the eye of their mind, - we pass to consider
the
question, What did the latter revelation amount to? What was the precise
effect of those expositions of Scripture with which the risen Christ
favored
His hearers? Did the disciples derive therefrom such an amount of light as
to supersede the necessity of any further illumination? Had Jesus Himself
done the work of the Spirit of Truth, whose advent He had promised before
He
suffered, and led them into all truth? Certainly not. The opening of the
understanding which took place at this time did not by any means amount to
a
full spiritual enlightenment in Christian doctrine. The disciples did not
yet comprehend the moral grounds of Christ's sufferings and resurrection.
Why He underwent these experiences they knew not; the words "ought" and
"behooved" meant for them as yet nothing more than that, according to Old
Testament prophecies rightly understood, the things which had happened
might
and should have been anticipated. They were in the same state of mind as
that in which we can conceive the Jewish Christians to whom the Epistle to
the Hebrews was addressed to have been after perusing the contents of that
profound writing. These Christians were ill grounded in gospel truth: they
saw not the glory of the gospel dispensation, nor its harmony with that
which went before, and under which they had been themselves educated. In
particular, the divine dignity of the Author of the Christian faith seemed
to them incompatible with His earthly humiliation. Accordingly, the writer
of the epistle set himself to prove that the divinity, the tem****ary
humiliation, and the subsequent glorification of the Christ were all
taught
in the Old Testament Scriptures, quoting these liberally for that purpose
in
the early chapters of his epistle. He did, in fact, by his written
expositions for his readers, what Jesus did by His oral expositions for
His
hearers. And what shall we say was the immediate effect of the writer's
argument on the minds of those who attentively perused it? This, we
imagine,
that the crude believer on laying down the book would be constrained to
admit: "Well, he is right: these things are all written in the Scriptures
of
the Messiah; and therefore no one of them, not even the humiliation and
suffering at which I stumble, can be a reason for rejecting Jesus as the
Christ." A very im****tant result, yet a very elementary one. From the bare
concession that the real life of Jesus corresponded to the ideal life of
the
Messiah as ****trayed in the Old Testament, to the admiring, enthusiastic,
and thoroughly intelligent appreciation of gospel truth exhibited by the
writer himself in every page of his epistle, what a vast distance!
Not less was the distance between the state of mind of the disciples
after Jesus had expounded to them the things in the law, and the prophets,
and the psalms concerning Himself, and the state of enlightenment to which
they attained as apostles after the advent of the Comforter. Now they knew
the alphabet merely of the doctrine of Christ; then they had arrived at
perfection, and were thoroughly initiated into the mystery of the gospel.
Now a single ray of light was let into their dark minds; then the daylight
of truth poured its full flood into their souls. Or we may express the
difference in terms suggested by the narrative given by John of the events
connected with this first appearance of the risen Jesus to His disciples.
John relates, that, at a certain stage in the proceedings, Jesus breathed
on
the disciples, and said unto them, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." We are not
to understand that they then and there received the Spirit in the promised
fulness. The breath was rather but a sign and earnest of what was to come.
It was but an emblematic renewal of the promise, and a first installment
of
its fulfilment. It was but the little cloud like a man's hand that
****tended
a plenteous rain, or the first gentle puff of wind which precedes the
mighty
gale. Now they have the little breath of the Spirit's influence, but not
till Pentecost shall they feel the ru****ng wind. So great is the
difference
between now and then: between the spiritual enlightenment of the disciples
on the first Christian Sabbath evening, and that of the apostles in after
days.
It was but the day of small things with these disciples yet. The
small
things, however, were not to be despised; nor were they. What value the
ten
set on the light they had received we are not indeed told, but we may
safely
assume that their feelings were much of kin to those of the two brethren
who
journeyed towards Emmaus. Conversing together on the discourse of Jesus
after His departure, they said one unto another, "Did not our heart burn
within us while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us
the
Scriptures?" The light they had got might be small, but it was new light,
and it had all the heart-kindling, thought-stirring power of new truth.
That
conversation on the road formed a crisis in their spiritual history. It
was
the dawn of the gospel day; it was the little spark which kindles a great
fire; it deposited in their minds a thought which was to form the germ or
centre of a new system of belief; it took away the veil which had been
upon
their faces in the reading of the Old Testament, and was thus the first
step
in a process which was to issue in their beholding with open face, as in a
glass, the glory of the Lord, and in their being changed into the same
image, from glory to glory, by the Lord the Spirit. Happy the man who has
got even so far as these two disciples at this time!
Some disconsolate soul may say, Would that happiness were mine! For
the
comfort of such a forlorn brother, let us note the cir***stances in which
this new light arose for the disciples. Their hearts were set a-burning
when
they had become very dry and withered: hopeless, sick, and life-weary,
through sorrow and disappointment. It is always so: the fuel must be dry
that the spark may take hold. It was when the people of Israel complained,
"Our bones are dried and our hope is lost, we are cut off for our parts,"
that the word went forth: "Behold, O my people, I will open your graves,
and
cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of
Israel." So with these disciples of Jesus. It was when every particle of
the
sap of hope had been bleached out of them, and their faith had been
reduced
to this, "We trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed
Israel,"
that their hearts were set burning by the kindling power of a new truth.
So
it has been in many an instance since then. The fire of hope has been
kindled in the heart, never to be extinguished, just at the moment when
men
were settling down into despair; faith has been revived when a man seemed
to
himself to be an infidel; the light of truth has arisen to minds which had
ceased to look for the dawn; the comfort of salvation has returned to
souls
which had begun to think that God's mercy was clean gone for ever. "When
the
Son of man cometh shall He find faith on the earth?"
There is nothing strange in this. The truth is, the heart needs to be
dried by trial before it can be made to burn. Till sorrow comes, human
hearts do not catch the divine fire; there is too much of this world's
life-sap in them. That was what made the disciples so slow of heart to
believe all that the prophets had spoken. Their worldly ambition prevented
them from learning the spirituality of Christ's kingdom, and pride made
them
blind to the glory of the cross. Hence Jesus justly upbraided them for
their
unbelief and their mindless stupidity. Had their hearts been pure, they
might have known beforehand what was to happen. As it was, they
comprehended
nothing till their Lord's death had blighted their hope and blasted their
ambition, and bitter sorrow had prepared them for receiving spiritual
instruction.
THE DOUBT OF THOMAS
John xx. 24-29.
"Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when
Jesus came" on that first Christian Sabbath evening, and showed Himself to
His disciples. One hopes he had a good reason for his absence; but it is
at
least possible that he had not. In his melancholy humor he may simply have
been indulging himself in the luxury of solitary sadness, just as some
whose
Christ is dead do now spend their Sabbaths at home or in rural solitudes,
shunning the offensive cheerfulness or the drowsy dullness of social
wor****p. Be that as it may, in any case he missed a good sermon; the only
one, so far as we know, in the whole course of our Lord's ministry, in
which
He addressed Himself formally to the task of expounding the Messianic
doctrine of the Old Testament. Had he but known that such a discourse was
to
be delivered that night! But one never knows when the good things will
come,
and the only way to make sure of getting them is to be always at our post.
The same melancholy humor which probably caused Thomas to be an
absentee on the occasion of Christ's first meeting with His disciples
after
He rose from the dead, made him also skeptical above all the rest
concerning
the tidings of the resurrection. When the other disciples told him on his
return that they had just seen the Lord, he replied with vehemence:
"Except
I shall see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my fingers into
the
print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe." He
was not to be satisfied with the testimony of his brethren: he must have
palpable evidence for himself. Not that he doubted their veracity; but he
could not get rid of the suspicion that what they said they had seen was
but
a mere ghostly appearance by which their eyes had been deceived.
The skepticism of Thomas was, we think, mainly a matter of
temperament,
and had little in common with the doubt of men of rationalistic
proclivities, who are inveterately incredulous respecting the
supernatural,
and stumble at every thing savoring of the miraculous. It has been
customary
to call Thomas the Rationalist among the twelve, and it has even been
supposed that he had belonged to the sect of the Sadducees before he
joined
the society of Jesus. On mature consideration, we are constrained to say
that we see very little foundation for such a view of this disciple's
character, while we certainly do not grudge modern doubters any comfort
they
may derive from it. We are quite well aware that among the sincere, and
even
the spiritually-minded, there are men whose minds are so constituted that
they find it very difficult to believe in the supernatural and the
miraculous: so difficult, that it is a question whether, if they had been
in
Thomas's place, the freest handling and the minutest inspection of the
wounds in the risen Saviour's body would have availed to draw forth from
them an expression of unhesitating faith in the reality of His
resurrection.
Nor do we see any reason à priori for asserting that no disciple of Jesus
could have been a person of such a cast of mind. All we say is, there is
no
evidence that Thomas, as a matter of fact, was a man of this stamp.
Nowhere
in the Gospel history do we discover any unreadiness on his part to
believe
in the supernatural or the miraculous as such. We do not find, e.g. that
he
was skeptical about the raising of Lazarus: we are only told that, when
Jesus proposed to visit the afflicted family in Bethany, he regarded the
journey as fraught with danger to his beloved Master and to them all, and
said, "Let us also go, that we may die with Him." Then, as now, he showed
Himself not so much the Rationalist as the man of gloomy temperament,
prone
to look upon the dark side of things, living in the pensive moonlight
rather
than in the cheerful sunlight. His doubt did not spring out of his system
of
thought, but out of the state of his feelings.
Another thing we must say here concerning the doubt of this disciple.
It did not proceed from unwillingness to believe. It was the doubt of a
sad
man, whose sadness was due to this, that the event whereof he doubted was
one of which he would most gladly be assured. Nothing could give Thomas
greater delight than to be certified that his Master was indeed risen.
This
is evident from the joy he manifested when he was at length satisfied. "My
Lord and my God!" that is not the exclamation of one who is forced
reluctantly to admit a fact he would rather deny. It is common for men who
never had any doubts themselves to trace all doubt to bad motives, and
denounce it indiscriminately as a crime. Now, unquestionably, too many
doubt
from bad motives, because they do not wish and cannot afford to believe.
Many deny the resurrection of the dead, because it would be to them a
resurrection to shame and everlasting contempt. But this is by no means
true
of all. Some doubt who desire to believe; nay, their doubt is due to their
excessive anxiety to believe. They are so eager to know the very truth,
and
feel so keenly the immense im****tance of the interests at stake, that they
cannot take things for granted, and for a time their hand so trembles that
they cannot seize firm hold of the great objects of faith - a living God;
an
incarnate, crucified, risen Saviour; a glorious eternal future. Theirs is
the doubt peculiar to earnest, thoughtful, pure-hearted men, wide as the
poles asunder from the doubt of the frivolous, the worldly, the vicious: a
holy, noble doubt, not a base and unholy; if not to be praised as
positively
meritorious, still less to be harshly condemned and excluded from the pale
of Christian sympathy - a doubt which at worst is but an infirmity, and
which ever ends in strong, unwavering faith.
That Jesus regarding the doubt of the heavy-hearted disciple as of
this
sort, we infer from His way of dealing with it. Thomas having been absent
on
the occasion of His first appearing to the disciples, the risen Lord makes
a
second appearance for the absent one's special benefit, and offers him the
proof desiderated. The introductory salutation being over, He turns
Himself
at once to the doubter, and addresses him in terms fitted to remind him of
his own statement to his brethren, saying: "Reach hither thy finger, and
behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side:
and
be not faithless, but believing." There may be somewhat of reproach here,
but there is far more of most considerate sympathy. Jesus speaks as to a
sincere disciple, whose faith is weak, not as to one who hath an evil
heart
of unbelief. When demands for evidence were made by men who merely wanted
an
excuse for unbelief, He met them in a very different manner. "A wicked and
adulterous generation," He was wont to say in such a case, "seeketh after
a
sign, and there shall no sign be given unto it but the sign of the Prophet
Jonas."
Having ascertained the character of Thomas's doubt, let us now look
at
his faith.
The melancholy disciple's doubts were soon removed. But how? Did
Thomas
avail himself of the offered facilities for ascertaining the reality of
his
Lord's resurrection? Did he actually put his fingers and hand into the
nail
and spear wounds? Opinions differ on this point, but we think the
probability is on the side of those who maintain the negative. Several
things incline us to this view. First, the narrative seems to leave no
room
for the process of investigation. Thomas answers the proposal of Jesus by
what appears to be an immediate profession of faith. Then the form in
which
that profession is made is not such as we should expect the result of a
deliberate inquiry to assume. "My Lord and my God!" is the warm,
passionate
language of a man who has undergone some sudden change of feeling, rather
than of one who has just concluded a scientific experiment. Further, we
observe there is no allusion to such a process in the remark made by Jesus
concerning the faith of Thomas. The disciple is represented as believing
because he has seen the wounds shown, not because he has handled them.
Finally, the idea of the process proposed being actually gone through is
inconsistent with the character of the man to whom the proposal was made.
Thomas was not one of your calm, cold-blooded men, who conduct inquiries
into truth with the passionless inpartiality of a judge, and who would
have
examined the wounds in the risen Saviour's body with all the coolness with
which anatomists dissect dead carc*****. He was a man of passionate,
poetic
temperament, vehement alike in his belief and in his unbelief, and moved
to
faith or doubt by the feelings of his heart rather than by the reasonings
of
his intellect.
The truth, we imagine, about Thomas was something like this. When,
eight days before, he made that threat to his brother disciples, he did
not
deliberately mean all he said. It was the whimsical utterance of a
melancholy man, who was in the humor to be as disconsolate and miserable
as
possible. "Jesus risen! the thing is impossible, and there's an end of it.
I
won't believe except I do so and so. I don't know if I shall believe when
all's done." But eight days have gone by, and, lo, there is Jesus in the
midst of them, visible to the disciple who was absent on the former
occasion
as well as to the rest. Will Thomas still insist on applying his rigorous
test? No, no! His doubts vanish at the very sight of Jesus, like morning
mists at sunrise. Even before the Risen One has laid bare His wounds, and
uttered those half-reproachful, yet kind, sympathetic words, which evince
intimate knowledge of all that has been passing through His doubting
disciple's mind, Thomas is virtually a believer; and after he has seen the
ugly wounds and heard the generous words, he is ashamed of his rash,
reckless speech to his brethren, and, overcome with joy and with tears,
exclaims, "My Lord and my God!"
It was a noble confession of faith, - the most advanced, in fact,
ever
made by any of the twelve during the time they were with Jesus. The last
is
first; the greatest doubter attains to the fullest and firmest belief. So
has it often happened in the history of the Church. Baxter records it as
his
experience, that nothing is so firmly believed as that which hath once
been
doubted. Many Thomases have said, or could say, the same thing of
themselves. The doubters have eventually become the soundest and even the
warmest believers. Doubt in itself is a cold thing, and, as in the case of
Thomas, it often utters harsh and heartless sayings. Nor need this
surprise
us; for when the mind is in doubt the soul is in darkness, and during the
chilly night the heart becomes frozen. But when the daylight of faith
comes,
the frost melts, and hearts which once seemed hard and stony show
themselves
capable of generous enthusiasm and ardent devotion.
Socinians, whose system is utterly overthrown by Thomas's confession
naturally interpreted, tell us that the words "My Lord and my God" do not
refer to Jesus at all, but to the Deity in heaven. They are merely an
expression of astonishment on the part of the disciple, on finding that
what
he had doubted was really come to pass. He lifts up his eyes and his hands
to heaven, as it were, and exclaims, My Lord and my God! it is a fact: The
crucified Jesus is restored to life again. This interpretation is utterly
desperate. It disregards the statement of the text, that Thomas, in
uttering
these words, was answering and speaking to Jesus, and it makes a man
bursting with emotion speak frigidly; for while the one expression "My
God"
might have been an appropriate utterance of astonishment, the two phrases,
"My Lord and my God," are for that purpose weak and unnatural.
We have here, therefore, no mere expression of surprise, but a
profession of faith most appropriate to the man and the cir***stances; as
pregnant with meaning as it is pithy and forcible. Thomas declares at once
his acceptance of a miraculous fact, and his belief in a momentous
doctrine.
In the first part of his address to Jesus he recognizes that He who was
dead
is alive: My Lord, my beloved Master! it is even He, - the very same
person
with whom we enjoyed such blessed fellow****p before He was crucified. In
the
second part of his address he acknowledges Christ's divinity, if not for
the
first time, at least with an intelligence and an emphasis altogether new.
From the fact he rises to the doctrine: My Lord risen, yea, and therefore
my
God; for He is divine over whom death hath no power. And the doctrine in
turn helps to give to the fact of the resurrection additional certainty;
for
if Christ be God, death could have no power over Him, and His resurrection
was a matter of course. Thomas having reached the sublime affirmation, "My
God," has made the transition from the low platform of faith on which he
stood when he demanded sensible evidence, to the higher, on which it is
felt
that such evidence is superfluous.
We have now to notice, in the last place, the remark made by the Lord
concerning the faith just professed by His disciple. "Jesus saith unto
him,
Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they
that
have not seen, and yet have believed."
This reflection on the blessedness of those who believe without
seeing,
though expressed in the past tense, really concerned the future. The case
supposed by Jesus was to be the case of all believers after the apostolic
age. Since then no one has seen, and no one can believe because he has
seen,
as the apostles saw. They saw, that we might be able to do without seeing,
believing on their testimony.
But what does Jesus mean by pronouncing a beatitude on those who see
not, yet believe?
He does not mean to commend those who believe without any inquiry. It
is one thing to believe without seeing, another thing to believe without
consideration. To believe without seeing is to be capable of being
satisfied
with something less than absolute demonstration, or to have such an inward
illumination as renders us to a certain extent independent of external
evidence. Such a faculty of faith is most needful; for if faith were
possible only to those who see, belief in Christianity could not extend
beyond the apostolic age. But to believe without consideration is a
different matter altogether. It is simply not to care whether the thing
believed be true or false. There is no merit in doing that. Such faith has
its origin in what is base in men, - in their ignorance, sloth, and
spiritual indifference; and it can bring no blessing to its possessors. Be
the truths credited ever so high, holy, blessed, what good can a faith do
which receives them as matters of course without inquiry, or without even
so
much as knowing what the truths believed mean?
The Lord Jesus, then, does not here bestow a benediction on
credulity.
As little does He mean to say that all the felicity falls to the lot
of
those who have never, like Thomas, doubted. The fact is not so. Those who
believe with facility do certainly enjoy a blessedness all their own. They
escape the torment of uncertainty, and the current of their spiritual life
flows on very smoothly. But the men who have doubted, and now at length
believe, have also their peculiar joys, with which no stranger can
intermeddle. Theirs is the joy experienced when that which was dead is
alive
again, and that which was lost is found. Theirs is the rapture of Thomas
when he exclaimed, with reference to a Saviour thought to be gone for
ever,
"My Lord and my God." Theirs is the bliss of the man who, having dived
into
a deep sea, brings up a pearl of very great price. Theirs is the comfort
of
having their very bygone doubts made available for the furtherance of
their
faith, every doubt becoming a stone in the hidden foundation on which the
superstructure of their creed is built, the perturbations of faith being
converted into confirmations, just as the perturbations in the planetary
motions, at first supposed to throw doubt on Newton's theory of
gravitation,
were converted by more searching inquiry into the strongest proof of its
truth.
What, then, does the Lord Jesus mean by these words? Simply this: He
would have those who must believe without seeing, understand that they
have
no cause to envy those who had an op****tunity of seeing, and who believed
only after they saw. We who live so far from the events, are very apt to
imagine that we are placed at a great disadvantage as compared with the
disciples of Jesus. So in some respects we are, and especially in this,
that
faith is more difficult for us than for them. But then we must not forget
that, in pro****tion as faith is difficult, it is meritorious, and precious
to the heart. It is a higher attainment to be able to believe without
seeing, than to believe because we have seen; and if it cost an effort,
the
trial of faith but enhances its value. We must remember, further, that we
never reach the full blessedness of faith till what we believe ****nes in
the
light of its own self-evidence. Think you the disciples were happy men
because they had seen their risen Lord and believed? They were far happier
when they had attained to such clear insight into the whole mystery of
redemption, that proof of this or that particular fact or doctrine was
felt
to be quite unnecessary.
To that felicity Jesus wished His doubting disciple to aspire; and by
contrasting his case with that of those who believe without seeing, He
gives
us to know that it is attainable for us also. We, too, may attain the
blessedness of a faith raised above all doubt by its own clear insight
into
divine truth. If we are faithful, we may rise to this from very humble
things. We may begin, in our weakness, with being Thomases, clinging
eagerly
to every spar of external evidence to save ourselves from drowning, and
end
with a faith amounting almost to sight, rejoicing in Jesus as our Lord and
God, with a joy unspeakable and full of glory.
|
