Pure Nonsense (part 3)

The Gospel author reports that after Peter makes his observations there at the empty tomb, “he went home, wondering what had happened” (24:12c).  The reader must bear in mind that, at that point, Peter did not believe that Jesus had been raised.  This is not suggested by the text.  Why would he?  Such was an absurd notion.  Peter is not said to have, then and there, come to a belief, but that he merely wondered at how and why the tomb was empty.  One can only imagine the potential explanations that were then running through his mind.  Surely, it is reasonable to conjecture that Peter believed that the body had been stolen.  At any rate, the fact that Peter is not said to have come to immediately believe that Jesus had been raised from the dead as the explanation for the empty tomb, is yet another indication that there was no expectation of Jesus’ resurrection.           

Peter’s position reflected what would most likely have been the generally held position of the followers of Jesus.  As far as those followers were concerned, Jesus was dead and His movement was over.  Yes, there had been some successes, but He had been crucified as a false messiah by the leaders of His own people, and as a rebel challenger to Rome’s power and the claims of the Caesar.  Now, those that were closest to Jesus would have been in fear for their own lives, and quite rightly based on the common practice of the day, hiding behind locked doors, knowing that the execution of previous messianic claimants was followed by the gathering up of his followers by the Roman authorities, and their subsequent execution as well.

The disciples, as evidenced by the Gospel narratives, thought that the report of the women was pure nonsense.  Peter, as one that had gone to the garden, was bewildered and unable to come up with a suitable explanation for what he saw at the empty tomb.  Of course, they were not the only skeptics.  Further evidence that a resurrection was the last thing on the minds of those closest to Jesus can be found in the story of the disciples on the road to Emmaus.  There, the reader finds some disciples (not part of the twelve, but disciples nonetheless) traveling from Jerusalem.  While traveling, “They were talking to each other about all the things that had happened.” Luke writes that “While they were talking and debating these things, Jesus Himself approached and began to accompany them (but their eyes were kept from recognizing Him)” (Luke 24:14-16). 

Even a personal appearance by Jesus was not able to undo the fact that these people knew that dead people stayed dead.  Their speech betrayed their mindset and the realities of the day, as they, in speaking about Jesus and His crucifixion, said “we had hoped that He was the one Who was going to redeem Israel” (24:21a).  They spoke in the past tense about Jesus.  This redemption, for them, would have meant the overthrow of Rome and the Romans and any of those that supported Rome being driven from the land with the establishment of the kingdom of God (Israel regaining national autonomy and beginning to rule all over nations), thus signifying the end of their God’s cursing and Israel’s long exile from their God’s promise to them of land and self-rule and the respect and admiration of all nations. 

They “had hoped” that He was the One Who was going to accomplish this, but with His death, that hope rightly ceased to exist.  No actual messiah would be crucified by Rome; and again, they knew that dead men do not lead messianic movements.  The death of the leader of a messianic movement meant the end of the messianic movement.  If that death was via crucifixion, with the potential messiah put down by the ruling powers, then that person, the movement, and all of its followers were shamed.