Perhaps this is the reason, of all the stories of people rising from the dead, this one seems to be glossed over the most. If it is important, then why is it only mentioned one time? How significant could it be? Well, If you remember, the disciples didn't even believe that Jesus had risen from the dead until He stood before them and rebuked them for their unbelief. So maybe it is understandable that, even if they had heard the story, they didn't all feel compelled to investigate or add it to their accounts... which, honestly, it is nice that God gave us four accounts of the life of Christ as we get a multi-dimensional overview of what was going on; as opposed to all four accounts repeating all the same stories... what would be the point?
So, I want to explore this story and give a few thoughts to consider about this event that you may not have even heard a sermon about before:
1. These bodies were not glorified and did not ascend to Heaven like Jesus.
How do we know this? Because Jesus is the "firstfruits" of them that slept (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23), and no one else rises (in the same way Jesus rose) until after His return (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). In fact, the title "only begotten Son" does not imply that the eternal Son was brought into existence from nothing. Jesus was the "first begotten FROM THE DEAD" (Colossians 1:18), and it is about His resurrection that God says "This day have I begotten thee (Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5).
Therefore, everyone who was ever risen from the dead (like the widow's son, Jairus' daughter... Lazarus...) did not remain alive in the flesh but were only temporarily brought back to life (similarly to someone who is brought back with a defibrillator or CPR). Of course, you have Lazarus being dead four days and you have Elijah and Enoch being translated without dying in the natural way that one dies, but they still went to Heaven without receiving glorified bodies (I believe their bodies did not physically go with them into Heaven).These "many saints" wouldn't have been any different. They would have only temporarily been brought back to life.
2. These bodies would most likely have only been recently deceased.
This is sort of just "my opinion," but I feel it is a reasonable conclusion. First of all, I don't think these saints could have been from previous generations because they would have obviously not have been recognized by people who knew them (they didn't have photographs back then, so it wouldn't be very convincing for a person with an unfamiliar face to claim they were your long lost relative risen from the dead).
Secondly, there is no other case (that I can think of) where someone is brought back to life after a considerable amount of time dead (Lazarus being the longest at four days). That isn't to say God couldn't do it; obviously He WILL rise up people from all generations one day, but if the idea is simply to revive a body (rather than creating a new body), then it would make sense that there was something to work with.
3. These bodies were apparently not witnessed until after Jesus' resurrection.
At first glance, it might seem as though the bodies came out of the grave immediately after Christ "gave up the ghost." However, the text specifically says that they came out of the grave AFTER Jesus' resurrection. Here are some possible explanations:
- They revived at His death, and then just sat around for three days waiting (this seems unlikely),
- They were resurrected at His death, but remained sleeping until Jesus' resurrection (This seems unnecessary),
- The graves were opened, but they hadn't yet been resurrected (This one seems most plausible to me).
Regardless of the many opinions we might come up with on the specifics of this event, there is no reason to doubt it happened any more than there would be reason to doubt any of the resurrections recorded in the Bible... or even Jesus' resurrection itself. Of course we can trust the Scripture! Most importantly for us, we trust that in the end we too will be resurrected as our Savior to be with Him bodily for eternity!
RSS Feed