Matthew's Strange Little Story

Matthew 27:52-53 and the Resurrection Context

Turn with me, please to Matthew chapter 27. Matthew chapter 27 as.

Most of you know it is.

Week before Celebration of The resurrection of Christ for many years. I would have been gone on this evening out in the Mesa Standing and passing out tracks. I missed that but I Think most of you know why we don't get to do that very often anymore.

I'm not sure we'd still be doing it. Even if those folks hadn't shown up the Mormons don't like to talk about stuff much anymore. It's a odd thing but yeah as it may. Much discussion even though it's been sort of pushed to the side by other important issues.

We certainly could have profitably addressed other topics today in light of what's going on in our in our world in our land, but Certainly at this time of year we hear much from.

Skeptics.

The media loves.

Unbelievers and Rarely gives true believers at least knowledgeable true believers an opportunity to Give a meaningful testimony to a belief in the resurrection of Christ and what that would Mean in their lives and really mean to everyone's life in light of the fact that when the Apostle Paul stood on Mars Hill He specifically asserted that God would judge every person by this man Christ Jesus whom he raised from the dead and So the resurrection of Christ is Not just relevant to believers.

It is relevant to everyone. It is part and parcel of the reason That we proclaim the lordship of Christ and Say he is Lord to all people that he is Lord of all people Including the many in our day that do not submit to his lordship.

The Strange Little Story in Matthew 27

There is a little brief text in the story of the crucifixion of Jesus that is frequently the focus of a great deal of Speculation and in some instances mockery. Matthew chapter 27 verses 52 and 53 It is stuck in the middle of the narrative of the crucifixion.

You will notice that it is placed right at the point of Jesus's death. Verse 50 and Jesus cried out again with loud voice and yielded up his spirit and behold the veil the temple was torn in two From top to bottom and the earth shook and the rocks were split.

The tombs were opened and many bodies the Saints who had fallen asleep were raised and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many and Then it just sort of moves on and says now the centurion and those who are with him keeping guard over Jesus when they saw the Earthquake and the things that were happening became very frightened and said truly this was the Son of God.

And so you have this this story. It almost seems like a little Fragment here and In many instances I have experienced in my own ministry a Number of times when various opponents of the Christian faith either atheists or Muslims in particular have made reference to this particular text and and in essence referred to it as the zombie apocalypse as.

The the zombies.

Stumbling into Jerusalem. And They would say how can how can someone believe these things. How can someone Accept these things. You've got two people in in grave clothes stumbling about in Jerusalem and and how can anyone believe this.

Because Mark doesn't mention it. Luke doesn't mention it. John doesn't mention it. Paul doesn't mention it. There's no other reference to it other than these two verses. There's certainly nothing recorded in ancient history though.

Of course there isn't a whole lot of ancient history being written around this time. Especially about events here. But Josephus doesn't mention it and none of those external sources that that once in a while one might Be able to look to.

It's not like you had Fox News or CNN around in those days, so you can't exactly look in the archives, but Only Matthew makes reference to this. And just a couple of years ago. Actually, I don't think it's a full two years ago quite a controversy broke out amongst conservative evangelicals here in the United States.

A man by the name of Mike like Hona a Christian scholar and apologist author of a huge tome on the resurrection of Christ in that very large 700 some odd page work. Identified this particular text as possibly being somewhat a hyperbolic or mythical.

That it.

Might not actually be narrating a Historical event, but it might be somewhat more apocalyptic or something like that that we don't necessarily have to take it as a historical rendering. And. A rather well-known individual by the name of dr. Norman Geisler Asserted that Mike like Hona was abandoning the doctrine of inerrancy that he really wasn't holding to that doctrine and that he was abandoning it in giving this kind of Interpretation of this text and people lined up on both sides of that particular issue.

And fought it out for a while and really. As far as I can see no particular Conclusion was ever drawn from that that particular situation as is often the case unfortunately. What are we to think of this?

What are we to think of this particular text and?

Given that.

There's so much skepticism expressed in our day. If someone were to express to us an objection based upon this text How might we think through what Matthew says here? Well first of all Notice the chronology of what is said here.

It says the tombs were opened and many bodies of the things so these are. These are holy individuals.

These aren't just.

Plain old folks these are individuals who evidently died as as. Maybe we would think of Simeon or someone like that someone who was.

Well known to the Lord.

Many of the Saints had fallen asleep were raised and coming out of tombs after his resurrection now. This is interesting. There seems to be a process here you have the the earth shaking and the rocks splitting the tombs are open and Yet these individuals do not come out of the tombs until After Christ's resurrection and they entered the holy city and appeared to many.

So we have many bodies of the Saints and they appear to many now. How many is that? I don't know we're not told. We're not told but there is something that actually has to be recognized here that unfortunately in most of the discussions is not Recognized and is not brought forth and and that is it would seem to me That what you have here would have to be something parallel something similar to what happened in John chapter 11 with Lazarus for one simple reason if They enter into the city, and I don't think there's any reason here to think that.

This is the picture here should be of a bunch of people that are doing like this going That type of a situation. Even though that's what some people would like to try to picture it as These individuals are recognized.

Well, how are they recognized? I would suggest you they're recognized because the same way that Lazarus is recognized. That is that this was someone who had died recently and hence there were still people who could Recognize who they were not everybody walking down the street would go.

I know that guy he died about three years ago. I think that they would obviously go to individuals that they knew and Obviously since they had been buried there in the district of Jerusalem. They were they were local individuals local godly people.

The process of their coming out of the tombs begins at the death of Christ, but they do not precede him. It is not until after His resurrection that they enter into the holy city now if they come out of the tombs before that they've got The same amount of time period here.

That's why the idea of the zombie apocalypse thing doesn't work. I mean there there's And and I doubt that they're alone either. So if this is similar to the Lazarus situation, then these be individuals who?

Either. They appear for a period of time as a witness to the resurrection of Christ. Because they they would have known just as the demons knew who Christ was these Saints would know who the Son of God was and.

Hence, this is a.

An.

Auxiliary testimony to what God has done in Christ just as Lazarus was a Preview in a sense. Here you have one that accompanies that.

That.

That's I think the best possibility is that's. What is really going on here is that they they appeared to many. Why would they appear to many so either they're there for a brief period of time? And then the Lord took them back to himself.

In some way I mean, it's a supernatural event one way or the other. Or like Lazarus they Lived however much longer you would naturally live given their age or something like that and passed away again.

They don't.

They don't live forever. They're not if this isn't a Resurrection like what you're going to have it the end of time where where death is no longer the issue. These are individuals who are not still running around Jerusalem today witnessing for Jesus or something.

And I think it's obviously a limited number as well but the question still remains even after. Thinking it through and realizing that most of the wild objections are two wild Readings of the text rather than to what it's actually saying we still have to ask the question.

Well, why is it that only Matthew? records this particular Situation. Why is it that that mark does not or Luke does not. This is the only only place that we know anything about this. Why why would that be well?

Unfortunately a large portion of the Christian Academy today is not in a position to answer that question very meaningfully because they have accepted.

Overwhelmingly.

And not so much on the weight of the evidence, but because there's just so much to know anymore that you have to trust other people and Unfortunately it becomes real easy to just sort of go with the flow.

I mean that explains to be pretty honest with you why 80 of American voters between the ages of 18 and 29 support gay marriage. It's not because the arguments are overwhelming. It's go with the flow be in the in crowd well if it works in society it works amongst the academics as well, and so the majority of you is that you have mark writing first and then Matthew and Luke both have mark and They're editing and changing and using another source called the Q source.

We've talked about this in Sunday school for years and Sort of reworking stuff. Well if that's the case then you're really in a in a bind here because Matthew's coming up with stuff that Luke's never heard of and marks never heard of and and You just wonder where in the world it came from now.

I have always held that the most the only meaningful Way of looking at the relationship of Matthew Mark and Luke. Is that they are drawing from the same? Well of the oral tradition of the church the the retelling of the stories the eyewitnesses in the in the church.

But that they're not writing in the same place. They're not in collusion with one another. They're writing to different audiences and as such each one as an author has a choice of including. What he is going to include.

Matthew is writing to the Jews and so he has a particular connection to Jerusalem and so within that context here is a a portion of the story that was told a portion that came down from those eyewitnesses a portion from those people who lived in Jerusalem that Matthew was aware of and you'll notice there's You could take verses 52 and 53 out and It would just continue to flow.

The earth shook and the rocks were split. Skip down to 54 now that's in Turian and those who are with him keeping guard over Jesus when they saw the earthquake. The things were happening they get afraid.

So it's not like Matthew had to put this in here. It's not like this is a key element of my story now listen carefully here, so why would he do so? Why would he really? Sort of interrupt the narrative because he he sort of skips out of the timeline.

He's talking about the centurion is about to be a witness to Jesus the Son of God and things like that. And he sort of skips out of that to tell this strange little story. Well, why would that be well it seems to me because it was a part of the tradition that he himself Received it was a part of the gospel message the preaching of the church that he himself Had received and this was the best place to put it.

Because this is the tombs are open many of the bodies the Saints would fall and were raised at that point but they did not come into the city and so after his resurrection and. So this seemed to him to be the best place to put it so in other words.

I don't see any evidence that.

A.

Matthew sat back and said you know I Need to come up with something that's going to make my gospel better than Mark's and Luke's. You know I think they might outsell me so I need to come up with something cool, and so I'm gonna come up with a story.

About.

Saints popping out of graves and wandering into Jerusalem doesn't make any sense. There's there's no there's just no reason because he doesn't tie it to anything else. There's no reason for this to be here outside of this is what had been proclaimed to Matthew.

This is what the the eyewitnesses of these events had communicated to him as well and so unless you approach the text as a person who Wants to just filter out all the supernatural and we're talking here about the very story.

Well that's at the center of God's entire purpose in the universe. And we're talking about the the self-giving of the Son of God upon the cross of Calvary. Trying to read this whole thing as a as a naturalistic materialist.

Well. You're gonna have some problems. You're gonna have to. You're gonna have to really Thomas Jefferson this thing. Until you've got nothing left, but a little pamphlet. Because you're just hacking out all of the all the supernatural Stuff and in the process of some of you may not know that Thomas Jefferson did that to the New Testament.

He didn't like the supernatural stuff either. He's embarrassed by it, so that's what I refer to there, but anyway. So unless you're going to approach it in that direction I'm still left wondering aside from the fact.

That you want to say well I don't like it when just one gospel says something and we've already asked the question why. Why would why would even have four Gospels if each one of them has to be merely a repetition of the other?

Each one is drawing from a different element of the oral teaching that has been passed down to them and so. Doesn't mean that each one has the exact same thing in front of them. As far as you know we know Luke did research and interviewed people and stuff like that.

But if Luke's in a completely different place Luke's probably in in a number of different places because he travels with Paul but but more toward Asia Minor. Matthew seems to be in the land of Israel itself and so.

It makes perfect sense why they would be drawing from different sources and and including different things so other than that one objection I don't see what the objections are outside of the fact that people misread these texts and.

So.

There are a number of passages and we eventually believe it or not. We'll get to these texts in our synoptic study. It might be Still a few years in the future. My goal is really to get done within 12 years.

How long was pastor and Matthew. I forget how many years it was but I Plenty of them so I I'm not quite there yet. So we eventually will get to these and we will struggle honestly when we put them in parallel to to search for that proper harmonization.

While still allowing each of the authors to have their own point of view and say the things they want to say but in application as we think about the resurrection this. This coming weekend in a special way, I mean obviously every weekend is Resurrection Sunday in a true sense.

It does seem that what you have here is. Maybe in Matthew's mind one of the reasons he wants to include this is That it does seem to show the connection the bridge between the old and the new. Because this is right at the time of Christ and yet you have individuals and and Luke had already shown this to us and in the encounters in the temple and Anna and Simeon and those stories and things like that and and maybe this is Matthew's way of doing something similar as well.

That there were old covenant Saints just as on the Mount of Transfiguration, which Matthew does record for us. Who is it that appears in the mount with Jesus you have Moses and Elijah. Why. Moses Elijah Moses the one through the law came Elijah?

Prophets the law and the prophets testifying of the Messiah and. So you have this this concern especially on Matthew's part to demonstrate the Christianity is not some rejection of what God has done in The people of Israel if a fulfillment of the promises that are even given to them and so here in the resurrection of Christ you have these individuals who Come out of their graves.

They receive new life, but who were they they died before? The crucifixion of Jesus and so you have this connection God had been saving the Saints. And as Paul says in Romans chapter 3 he he did not count their sins against them.

Why. Because the certainty of the cross it's not that he was just winking at their sin. But because the certainty of the cross the faith that they had in him because of what Christ is going to do still brought about their justification and so it seems that possibly it is that one of those links that that helps to Keep us from doing what many Christians have done over the years and that is breaking things apart and just just saying ah That's it's just it's all the old law of the old country.

It's all new to new and seeing the connection that is there. Obviously having to keep the balance because you've either got those people who just try to smush it all together, and there's nothing new in the New Covenant or Those who just chop it in half and chuck the one side and and all you've got is this You have this connection that is provided by this testimony to the resurrection of Christ.

Someday we're going to find out.

Someday, I'm going to.

That's one of my questions. I'm not sure how that's going to work. None of us knows how that's going to work. But it will be something that certainly if we if we need to ask those questions in glory. And it's not something we just Somehow automatically know.

Then it certainly is one of those questions that I think I'm going to be Asking as well, and so an interesting story an interesting segment. Something that someone might throw at you as an objection, but hopefully having thought through it now You'll be able to give a testimony concerning it and maybe help.

Someone who? Might be struggling with it. Maybe the air their objections because they've never heard a meaningful discussion of it. Hopefully that will be helpful to you.