Reading Wright, RSG, Chapter 3
Time to Wake up (1): Death and Beyond in the Old Testament
I continue The Resurrection of the Son of God in Chapter 3, pp. 85-128. This chapter is the third of the four chapters of Part 1 and covers the content of death and resurrection in the Old Testament. What one finds, surprising to me, is that there is not much resurrection ‘on the surface’ of the text—that is, how the text was likely read when it was composed and originally read. But looking back, there are far more texts that we now can see may have a deeper meaning. And this is to be expected.
One of my professors, Dr. Bock, loved sports and provided some great illustrations from athletic play. One of the excellent ones is the concept of history and what constitutes history using a sports game to illustrate. There is the game as it unfolds—that is, watching the game play by play, wondering what will happen, experiencing it ‘fresh.’ There is also the game looking back—that is, knowing what plays actually impacted the result of the game and watching the game through the eyes of knowing the end already. This is often how the Bible is read and understood. The authors of Scripture many times were experiencing and writing their content in the former manner. We, looking back, tend to read it in the latter manner. We also see this illustrated in the Gospel writers. I think the synoptic gospels (Matthew-Luke) try to present the Jesus story as it happens (the former). You do get narrative hints when the author ‘breaks in’ and tells you this is going to be significant (e.g., Mk. 7:19; Lk. 18:34)! John, on the other hand, is telling the Jesus story as an ‘end-game-summary’ (the latter). Part of good Bible study is seeking to understand and parse what are the views of as-it-unfolds and the knowing-the-end-already. My point: you need both! (It will help you understand the disciples and thus, yourself, because you too exist in an as-it-happens story.)
Now, back to resurrection in the Old Testament. We read the texts through the eyes of the resurrection of Jesus (‘knowing the end already’). But Wright seeks to do a ‘comprehensive’ historical work and part of that work is to try to provide the as-it-happens view too! Don’t worry, later in the book, he will be providing a great deal of content on the end-already view. But the comments on this chapter are attempting to read the text as if this is the first time the ‘game’ is being watched.
Thus, resurrection is rather ‘rare’ in the Old Testament (p. 85) and it comes later, in the prophets. One of the usual texts quoted from Job 19:25-27 is possibly not a good translation (p. 97). But we see that the early Jewish view of death is similar to the Greco-Romans. The dead are dead, they go to a place called ‘Sheol,’ disembodied, and they remain dead (pp. 87-90). There’s nothing more. We do get a couple of odd exceptions—Enoch and Elijah don’t die; and Samuel comes back for a brief visit as a ghost (?) when Saul comes calling (1 Sam. 28).
What is fascinating is the turn Wright takes as he investigates the nature of the hope as it relates to the expectations of the Jewish people for their nation (p. 99ff). Wright may be suggesting that resurrection came from the hope that the Jews had for the nation—that God would rescue, redeem, and restore them as a people. The centuries of belief in this eventually naturally turned towards the conclusion that this would result in bodily resurrection, which is what we see in the prophets! There is a hope that YHWH will restore and part of this hope begins to be expressed in language of resurrection.
The clearest resurrection passage in the Old Testament is Daniel 12:2-3 (pp. 109-115). “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life…” It would be a strange awakening if these are just ghosts, given the last half of Daniel is very much about physical kingdoms and the future of Israel when God comes to establish his kingdom (especially Daniel 7). Wright suggests that Daniel is probably using Isaiah (pp. 115-18), specifically texts Is. 26:19 and the restoration passages in chapters 40-55. The suffering servant is crushed but then exalted (see 53:10-12). I want to emphasize again that if you read this as an ancient Jew, this imagery could be (and was) applied to Israel—they are the suffering people and God is promising their vindication. Of course, the problem was that they (like us) don’t realize (nor desire) that vindication occurs through the suffering! Ugh! The victory of God comes through the cross. Oops, here I am switching to ‘knowing-the-end.’ Back to the Old Testament.
Wright also touches on a passage in Hosea (6:1ff, p. 118) and in Ezekiel (37, dry bones, pp. 119-21). Once again, it may have been read as resurrection, but more likely as a metaphor for the restoration of Israel. The point is that the two are tightly mixed together—expectations of the hope of Israel and speaking of ‘resurrection’ are almost one and the same. This is one of God’s favorite patterns. He’ll promise something, using it as a model, and then physically do it. Or He does the reverse. The Israelites walk through the sea to dry land (Ex. 15) and this model is picked up and used in the NT for what the believer must do as well (1 Cor. 10:1-13; Ro. 6). Think of the Eucharist. Physical things representing spiritual realties of a past, physical event.
Wright ends the chapter by dismissing two alternate hypothesis for the origin of resurrection among the Jewish people, namely, Zoroastrianism and Canaanite origins (pp. 124-27). It would be a bit odd to ground your national expectations and hope in the very beliefs of the people who have conquered you!
In the next chapter, we will move into the Jewish writings between about 200 BC - 200 AD. There, we will see much more on resurrection.