Holy Week
I am a fan of N. T. Wright; here is a link to an interesting article on the Easter accounts by him and Craig Evans. I am struck by how behind I am in my reading. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/aprilweb-only/114-42.0.html
I was thinking today about the women at the tomb. Why did they go there this morning? They took spices to anoint the body, which means they didn't expect it to be resurrected. They expected it to be there. But how where they going to get to it? A rock and guards were in the way. Did they think the guards would move the rock? Why, since they were under orders not to? What were these women thinking?
Their actions don't make sense, really. But I don't conclude from that that the Biblical account is wrong. As N. T. Wright argues in the link above, women were considered to be entirely unreliable witnesses in the first century, so using them as verification of the accounts proves that the accounts were not polemical, or made up later to prove something. The male writers of Scripture would not choose of their own volition to use female testimony.
So, the account is correct, but their actions make no sense. And that is my point. Whatever they were doing there that morning, it didn't have to do with logic. (And don't take from this that women are illogical!) It had to do with faith and devotion. They went because they hoped to find a way to show their hearts for Jesus. Maybe, some how, they would get to do it. I, for one, have done things only because of crazy hope and love, not knowing if it would pay off, gambling even, if you will, that I can express my love or see the loved one or fulfill my duty. Taking a chance, a risk--and good grief, these women were taking a chance to confront those guards.
And what did they do when they heard the news--they ran. I surely would have.
I was thinking today about the women at the tomb. Why did they go there this morning? They took spices to anoint the body, which means they didn't expect it to be resurrected. They expected it to be there. But how where they going to get to it? A rock and guards were in the way. Did they think the guards would move the rock? Why, since they were under orders not to? What were these women thinking?
Their actions don't make sense, really. But I don't conclude from that that the Biblical account is wrong. As N. T. Wright argues in the link above, women were considered to be entirely unreliable witnesses in the first century, so using them as verification of the accounts proves that the accounts were not polemical, or made up later to prove something. The male writers of Scripture would not choose of their own volition to use female testimony.
So, the account is correct, but their actions make no sense. And that is my point. Whatever they were doing there that morning, it didn't have to do with logic. (And don't take from this that women are illogical!) It had to do with faith and devotion. They went because they hoped to find a way to show their hearts for Jesus. Maybe, some how, they would get to do it. I, for one, have done things only because of crazy hope and love, not knowing if it would pay off, gambling even, if you will, that I can express my love or see the loved one or fulfill my duty. Taking a chance, a risk--and good grief, these women were taking a chance to confront those guards.
And what did they do when they heard the news--they ran. I surely would have.
Comments