The Case of the Empty Tomb by Kyle Butt, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=896

The Case of the Empty Tomb

by	Kyle Butt, M.A.

Around the year A.D. 165, Justin Martyr penned his Dialogue with Trypho. At the beginning of chapter 108 of this work, he recorded a letter that the Jewish community had been circulating regarding the empty tomb of Christ:

[A] godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilaean deceiver, whom we crucified, but his disciples stole him by night from the tomb, where he was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that he has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.

In approximately the sixth century, another caustic treatise written to defame Christ circulated among the Jewish community. In this narrative, known as Toledoth Yeshu, Jesus is described as the illegitimate son of a soldier named Joseph Pandera. He further is labeled as a disrespectful deceiver who led many away from the truth. Near the end of the treatise, under a discussion of His death, the following paragraph can be found:

Diligent search was made and he [Jesus—KB] was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden.

Upon reading Justin Martyr’s description of one Jewish theory regarding the tomb of Christ, and another theory from Toledoth Yeshu, it becomes clear that one common thread unites them both—the tomb of Christ had no body in it!

All parties involved recognized the fact that Christ’s tomb laid empty on the third day. Feeling compelled to give reasons for this unexpected vacancy, the Jewish authorities apparently concocted several different theories to explain the body’s disappearance. The most commonly accepted one seems to be that the disciples of Jesus stole His body away by night while the guards slept (Matthew 28:13). Yet, how could the soldiers identify any thieves while they slept? And why were the sentinels not punished by death for sleeping on the job and thereby losing their charge (cf. Acts 12:6.19)? And an even more pressing question comes to the mind—why did the soldiers need to explain anything if a body was still in the tomb?

When Peter stood up to preach on the Day of Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ, the crux of his sermon rested on the fact(s) that Jesus died, was buried, and rose again on the third day. In order to silence Peter, and stop a mass conversion, the Jewish leaders needed simply to produce the body of Christ. Why did not the Jewish leaders take the short walk to the garden and produce the body? Simply because they could not! The tomb was empty. The Jews knew it and tried to explain it away, the apostles knew it and preached it boldly in the city of Jerusalem, and thousands of the inhabitants of Jerusalem knew it and converted to Christianity. John Warwick Montgomery accurately assessed the matter when he wrote: “It passes the bounds of credibility that the early Christians could have manufactured such a tale and then preached it among those who might easily have refuted it simply by producing the body of Jesus” (1964, p. 78). The tomb of Jesus was empty, and that is a fact.

REFERENCES

Montgomery, John Warwick (1964), History and Christianity (Downers Grover, IL: InterVarsity Press).

From Mark Copeland... "CHALLENGES CONFRONTING THE CHURCH" Sectarianism

                  "CHALLENGES CONFRONTING THE CHURCH"

                              Sectarianism

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson, we examined the challenge of
   denominationalism...
   a. Which involves the organization of local churches under 

      various hierarchies
   b. Each denomination with its unique names, presenting a divided
      picture of church
   c. Contrary to the prayer of Jesus and the doctrine of Paul

      - Jn 17:20-23; 1Co 1:10-13

2. A similar challenge confronting the church is what I describe as sectarianism...
   a. Though I use the term in a rather unique and limited sense
   b. But as a problem I have seen arise even in opposition to denominationalism
   c. Leading to a perspective of the church that is akin to a
      denominational mindset

[What do I mean by sectarianism?  Let’s begin by considering some
dictionary definitions...]

I. DEFINING SECT AND SECTARIANISM

   A. WHAT IS A SECT....?
      1. A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group
         by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice
      2. A religious body, especially one that has separated from a
         larger denomination
      3. A faction united by common interests or beliefs
      -- The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

   B. WHAT IS SECTARIANISM...?
      1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sect or sectarian
      2. Limited in character or scope: parochial
      -- Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary

   C. OBSERVATIONS...
      1. Sect and sectarianism are often used as synonyms for
         denomination and denominationalism
      2. In this study, I am limiting my use of the terms to these definitions:
         a. Sect:  a faction united by common interests or beliefs
         b. Sectarianism:  Limited in character or scope: parochial
      3. I am making what may be an arbitrary, but hopefully useful,distinction
         a. Denominationalism:  a mindset that sees nothing wrong with
            dividing up the body of Christ into various denominations
         b. Sectarianism:  a mindset that views the body of Christ as
            limited to a select group of churches identified by a
            particular and somewhat arbitrary set of doctrinal practices

[Using these two terms as such, perhaps I can clarify the distinction
further by reviewing two erroneous views of the church of Christ...]

II. MISCONCEPTIONS OF THE CHURCH

   A. THE DENOMINATIONAL MISCONCEPTION...
      1. The Church of Christ is made up of those churches with the name
         "Church of Christ"
      2. The "Church of Christ" (as such) is but one denomination among many
      3. Together with other denominations, they constitute the
         universal church, the Body of Christ
      4. Those who hold this view include:
         a. Those in other denominations, because of their
            denominational mindset in which they view their own church
            (denomination) as but a part of the Body of Christ
         b. Sadly, many in "mainstream" churches of Christ, who are
            increasingly accepting a denominational view of the church

   B. THE SECTARIAN MISCONCEPTION...
      1. The Church of Christ is made up only of those churches with the
         name "Church of Christ"
      2. Those churches (as such) constitute the one, true church, the
         Body of Christ
      3. People in any other congregations cannot possibly be members of
         the Body of Christ
      4. Those who hold this view include:
         a. Many in "mainstream" churches of Christ, especially those
            who view "Church of Christ" as the official and exclusive
            name for the Lord’s church
         b. Many in "non-mainstream" churches of Christ, including those
            tending to identify themselves on the basis of one
            particular issue

[With this peculiar distinction between denominationalism and
sectarianism hopefully made clear, let me suggest two...]

III. EXAMPLES OF SECTARIANISM

   A. INSISTING ON ONE EXCLUSIVE NAME...
      1. The Scriptures use a variety of terms describing the Lord’s
         church - e.g., Ro 16:16; 1Co 1:2
      2. But some insist there is only one scriptural name (e.g., Church of Christ)
      3. This limits one’s view of the church universal to only those
         churches with the "right name"
      4. When there could be other New Testament churches scriptural in
         every way, but who choose to use a scriptural designation other
         than "Church of Christ"

   B. IDENTIFYING FAITHFULNESS BY ONE PARTICULAR DOCTRINE...
      1. Churches are often judged by their stand on particular issues
         a. E.g., the issue of institutionalism
         b. E.g., the issue of divorce and remarriage
      2. This can lead to rather arbitrary standards of faithfulness
         a. For example, a church is deemed faithful if it is "non-institutional"
         b. While in fact it may engage in other unscriptural practices
            or be lacking in critical Christian attitudes (e.g., love)
      3. I often hear people asking:  "Can anyone recommend a NI Church of Christ?"
         a. Is this not reflecting a sectarian mindset, "limited in
            character or scope"?
         b. Why not ask for "...a Baptist Church of Christ?" or "...an
            Episcopal Church of Christ?"
      4. Is this not dangerously close to a denominational mindset?
         a. Inadvertently creating a new denomination?
         b. Perhaps leading to "The NI Church of Christ"?

[This is not to lessen the seriousness of erroneous doctrines and
practices, for Jesus clearly warned of the danger of false doctrine
among churches (Re 2-3).  But how can we avoid the sectarian mindset
that can easily lead to denominationalism...?]

IV. AVOIDING SECTARIANISM

   A. WITH A PROPER VIEW OF THE CHURCH UNIVERSAL...
      1. Remember what we covered in our first lesson on the universal church:
         a. Began on the day of Pentecost, composed of all Christians
         b. The Lord adds those who are being saved, He determines membership
         c. There is just one spiritual body, there is no earthly organization
      2. Thus the church universal is not composed solely of a select
         group of churches:
         a. Wearing one official name
         b. Defined by one particular issue
         c. Listed in a specialized directory of churches

   B. WITH A CAREFUL EVALUATION OF LOCAL CHURCHES...
      1. The faithfulness of local churches are determined ultimately by the Lord
         a. Jesus knows and judges His congregations - e.g., Re 2:2-3
         b. Congregations with false teachers might be tolerated for a time - Re 2:4-6
      2. Any evaluation we make is subject to our limited knowledge
         a. Certainly we should do our best to be faithful, and find
            faithful, churches
         b. But we must be careful in our judgment of other churches
            - cf. Jm 4:11-12
      3. Careful not to discount the possibility of other faithful
         churches unknown to us
         a. Scriptural in every way, but perhaps using a different
            scriptural name
         b. Though not listed in "our" directory of churches, or known
            by our association

CONCLUSION

1. Denominationalism and sectarianism can be distinguished by their
   views of the church...
   a. Denominationalism’s view of the church too broad
   b. Sectarianism’s view of the church is too narrow

2. Yet sectarianism often leads to denominationalism...
   b. By inadvertent use of denominational language ("NI Church of Christ")
   a. By a backlash to improper narrow-mindedness typical of sectarianism

My prayer is that we might avoid both denominationalism and sectarianism
with a proper view and understanding of the Lord’s church universal and
His churches local, while serving the Lord simply as Christians in
congregations faithful to His Word...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

 

From Gary... "knowledge"

Knowledge is a transitory, inexact thing; it fluctuates in depth, meaning and relevancy over time and can distort truth.  Wisdom clarifies knowledge. It gives depth and meaning and purpose to understanding.  To truly comprehend life, first look within, then above for guidance. Ultimately, truth, wisdom, knowledge and insight is found from only one source...

1 Corinthians, Chapter 1 (WEB)

 20  Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the lawyer of this world? Hasn’t God made foolish the wisdom of this world?  21 For seeing that in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom didn’t know God, it was God’s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save those who believe.  22 For Jews ask for signs, Greeks seek after wisdom,  23 but we preach Christ crucified; a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to Greeks,  24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God.  25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.  26 For you see your calling, brothers, that not many are wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, and not many noble;  27 but God chose the foolish things of the world that he might put to shame those who are wise. God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong;  28 and God chose the lowly things of the world, and the things that are despised, and the things that are not, that he might bring to nothing the things that are:  29 that no flesh should boast before God.  30 But of him, you are in Christ Jesus, who was made to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption:  31 that, according as it is written, “He who boasts, let him boast in the Lord.”

Think you are smart; there is always someone smarter!!!  Think you "know" something- think again!!! The depth of knowledge is not limited to a comprehension of something, it develops by a personal interaction of feelings and physical interplay.  Heady stuff!!! Simply put, know what you can know, to the depth you are capable of and THEN boast- not about yourself, but about God who gave you life in the first place.