Easter: What Did Early Christians Believe?

(It may not be what you think or believe today).

Easter is the high holy day of Christianity and deservedly so.  It defines the relationship between humanity and the divine, life and death, sin and redemption in a complicated faith story.  Believers hold that God sacrificed his only Son, to take away the sins of the world, as the ultimate scapegoat, who then ascended to heaven in his human form.  By doing so, he enabled humans to follow, and participate in everlasting life.

 Naturally, other religions don’t share this view, and, more to the point, are puzzled by it.  Maybe you are, too. Monotheists, like Jews and Muslims, see a vast, impassable chasm between God and humanity.  God is other.  The combination of man and God in one being is incomprehensible.  

Polytheistic traditions, however, are very familiar with gods popping down to earth in human form, procreating, fighting, blessing, miracle making.  Think of Zeus fathering most of the heroes, like Perseus, Theseus, and Heracles, by young virgins, like Alcmene and Danae. They don’t see anything particularly unusual about these trips back and forth between heaven and earth, or of Jesus being both god and man. 

 What may interest you, and you have surely inferred this from the readings of the Canonical and non-Canonical Gospels and the title of today’s service, is that for hundreds of years, people who considered themselves Christians didn’t believe the Easter story as we currently know it, either.  The range of interpretations of Jesus’s death and resurrection stories encompasses the full range of monotheistic and polytheistic views – not unlike the range of beliefs represented by Unitarian Universalists in this or any congregation. 

A Detective Story... What Happened to Jesus's Body?

Pretend that you are a detective.  Pick your favorite: Sherlock Holmes, Nero Wolfe, Miss Marple.  Think about how they think; how they gather and sift information.  Now plunk that person down in a year around 30 CE.  

Now imagine that grieving family and friends of Jesus appeal to you with the startling news that his newly dead body, that of a convict, executed by the Romans - is missing from its tomb.  They want your help in figuring out what happened.  What questions will you ask?  What conclusions will you draw from what you do hear and what you don't hear, from the consistencies and the discrepancies of your sources and the evidence? Bear in mind, that as a contemporary witness, you know nothing about the later theologies of the Resurrection or the Trinity.  You just know that an itinerant Jewish teacher, seen by some authorities as a rabble-rouser, was arrested and rapidly condemned to a particularly ignominious death, and now his family and friends say his body is missing.  Hmmmmm!

Now, fast forward 2000 years.  You are still a detective, but this time, a sociological, religious detective.  You sift through the early Christian documents (the canonical gospels and the apocryphal ones and various letters that were circulating then as well), and Jewish documents and political ones.  These writers had choices about what to include and what to leave out.  What do you notice about the choices that the writers made?  What conclusions do you draw about the documents, the writers, and the believers? 

We will play both of these roles, first as contemporary detective and then as literary/historical detective. We will look at many of the same passages, first in one light and then in the other.  What do you conclude?  What questions remain?  Do they matter to you?