Christian Living

The Resurrection, Part 1—From Factual Knowledge to Actual Life

by J.W. Phillips
04/17/25
Not For Sale

  Message Writer
  Hire Writer

Tweet

The Resurrection, Part 1—From Factual Knowledge to Actual Life

Were I to ask you—do you believe the resurrection of Jesus is an established fact?—you would assure me that you do. You might not furnish an encyclopedic recitation of those proofs that make this an air-tight case. Yet, you are certain that Jesus did resurrect from the dead.

Despite the certainty of Christians, through the years the fact of the resurrection has been vigorously attacked by many academic disciplines.

The Attacks by Academics

For example, there was a day when science refuted the resurrection. The anti-miracle crowd was adamant, insisting that the laws of nature disallow miracles.

But that argument was taken away by Einstein’s theory of relativity. The universe isn’t a closed system with fixed laws, as previously thought. Miracles can happen.

Thinking otherwise, those rejecting the supernatural promoted other views. For example, the Red Sea didn’t turn into blood; there were just some red clay deposits that somehow got loose. And Jesus didn’t miraculously feed the five thousand. What really happened is that the little lad’s generosity inspired the rest of the crowd to do the same, to share their lunch.

There was this constant attempt to substitute the natural for the supernatural when explaining away the miracles of the Bible.

Scotland’s William Barclay wrote a popular Daily Bible commentary that was full of this stuff. For example, Jesus didn’t raise the widow’s son from the dead; he just saw her son was in a trance and saved him from the harm that could come unless he was brought out of it.

Then came that day that history informed us there was no proof that Jesus even existed, much less that he arose from the dead.

Albert Scheitzer’s book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, was one of many books that contended that the biblical evidence was too skimpy, too fragmentary, to yield valid information.

That view got exposed, however, when we learned that these revisionist historians adopted a method that obliterated the classic canons of historiography, thereby making it impossible to prove any fact of history.

The apologist John Warwick Montgomery proved how untenable this approach was: Their presuppositions became their conclusions; such circular reason completely defies logic.

Much malice toward Scripture also came through literature, whereby books of the Bible were dubiously assumed to be the product of many sources. A given book was said to be spliced together by several sources, each with a different bias. Therefore, no layman could read the Bible and understand it.

That kind of biblical criticism, which virtually emptied the churches of Europe, was destroyed by C.S. Lewis, a professor of Renaissance literature, who challenged men like Rudolph Bultmann with sheer ignorance. What Bultmann and other critics said was way outside their expertise.

In his essay, “Modern Theology and Biblical Criticism,” Lewis pointed out that these different genres of literature used to construct their theories were abused in a manner that revealed these biblical critics didn’t know what they were talking about. What they were imposing upon Scripture was utterly false.

But a generation of seminarians didn’t know that, so they got their degrees and infected their churches.

Science, history, literature, but also philosophy got in on the act by imposing a view of knowledge on biblical interpretation. They called this metaphysical dualism. Yeah, big words but double dumb thinking.

These philosophers, such as Martin Heidegger, separated fact (lower story information) from meaning (upper story truth) by saying it really doesn’t matter if we can’t prove there was a Jesus born in Bethlehem, what matters is that he has been born in our hearts. And it really doesn’t matter if Jesus was resurrected from the dead, what matters is he is alive in our hearts.

But of course, as Francis Schaeffer contended, it does matter! The fact of the resurrection is essential! Therefore, that you believe the resurrection did happen is most important.

However, what is factual will have significantly reduced benefits for you unless it is also actual—actual, in the sense that resurrection life becomes your daily experience.

One may totally accept the resurrection as a valid premise, yet know little about the resurrection as a fulfilled promise. Historical fact and life-giving truth are not the same thing.

Have you ever wondered why your belief in the resurrection has done so little for you? In some ways, you may still be like Peter once was.

From Factual to Actual
Scripture tells us that Peter saw the resurrected Jesus more than once. In fact, the resurrected Jesus appeared to Peter first (I Corinthians 15:5) before he appeared to the other apostles, of which Peter was one. All that happened in the first week after the resurrection.

Was this of benefit to Peter? Yes, it was, but not as much as it could have been.

Someone has painted a picture called “Silent Saturday”. It shows the apostles huddled together in a small room, their heads down, their faces forlorn, their belief shattered; no one says a word. This is silent Saturday, the day after the crucifixion, the day before the resurrection.

Jesus had told the apostles exactly where to meet him the next day, Sunday, but no one went. Why would they? Jesus was dead.

Therefore, when Jesus suddenly appeared to them later, their faith in him was suddenly restored.

Then a week passed, and another week was passing, and there was no Jesus.

Peter obviously knew the resurrection was factual at that point, but for him, it was far from actual. He was still a troubled man.

Since Peter had found some happiness out on the sea once before, he, thinking that was all that was left for him, announced one day, “I go a fishing,” which meant a lot more than let’s go down to the sea and catch a few. In some sense, it was a return to the old life.

So out there on that sea with the wind and the waves and the salty night air Peter drifted in more ways than one. He had vowed such heroism, but so soon afterward he failed—miserably! And now he had to live with that.

Has there been some drifting in your life even though you believe in the resurrection? Are you conscious of guilt eroding your joy? Would you freely admit that your life is hardly an example of resurrection life?

It’s not that you have abandoned Jesus. You haven’t. And it’s not that you want this distancing from him to continue. You don’t.

Yet here you are: knowing Jesus is alive, but he doesn’t seem alive in you.

One of many ways for resurrection life to become actual is for you to believe what Jesus did for you on the cross, and love him for it. Let me explain.

On the cross Jesus paid for your sin. Indeed, he removed it from you entirely!

But if you keep blaming yourself for some sin even after you repented, then resurrection life will elude you.

It is likely that Peter repented the first time he saw Jesus, but the forgiveness offered hadn’t been received.

Encased in guilt and enveloped in self, Peter was a miserable man.

You know what happened next: the breakfast on the beach and that conversation with Jesus that followed.

It is interesting that Jesus didn’t begin the conversation by asking Peter to repent, or by asking him to examine why he had denied him, or by asking Peter to furnish assurances that something like this will never happen again.

None of that. Instead, he asked this one question, do you love me?

There’s a clue here: When the resurrected life becomes actual, the love of Jesus in one’s heart will manifest!

If, however, guilt is allowed to remain on the scene, love for God will retreat. Hence, this question: Do you love me?

The issue here: Was false guilt blocking true love?

You will recall how Peter answered: “Well, I like you a lot.” Not the best answer, so Jesus later asks: Do you even like me a lot?

This question grieved Peter because he knew he couldn’t prove that he even liked the Lord a lot.

Distraught, Peter struggled to answer. Setting forth his record would never do! That record was besmirched!

Desperate for an answer, Peter took refuge in the omniscience of God to reply, “Lord, you know that I love you.”

And, yes, the Lord did know—and Peter needed to learn that. This cleared the way for Peter’s love to surface.

As further proof of his love, Peter was asked to feed the sheep, to speak on God’s behalf.

Of course, this wouldn’t have been said if the Lord was doubting Peter’s love. The Lord made this request to confirm his acceptance of Peter’s love.

Resurrection life starts to shift from factual to actual when you know that God knows you do love him. Further propelling this shift, is when you learn God wants to use you now—and not after a long probation following guilt.

From Learning to Living

Tracking this shift, we discover the first example of Peter feeding and leading took place when guidance was needed to replace Judas.

The book of Acts tells us that “Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples” (Acts 1:15), which at that time included one hundred twenty believers.

Two men had been selected for final consideration, but which of the two should be chosen? Peter’s criterion for that was, “Oh, Lord, you know the hearts of all, show which of the two you have chosen”(Acts 1:24).

Remarkable! That’s exactly what Peter appealed to that morning on the beach, the understanding heart of Jesus!

The lesson he learned there, he used here! This had become precious truth to Peter.

The next time Peter preaches is in Acts 2, to thousands of people at Pentecost; and in Acts 3 he preaches again at Solomon’s Porch declaring in Acts 3:13 these Jews had denied Jesus; and in Acts 3:14 saying it again they had denied Jesus.

Denied? Peter would bring that up? Peter had done that! And many of those who heard him knew he had.

So how is it that Peter preaches on this point? The temptation would have been to skip this point, or at least tone it down.

The tendency of most preachers is to preach at the level of their obedience—that is, to avoid saying anything that would bring their own sin back into focus.

The fact that Peter doesn’t do this demonstrates how free from guilt he had become!

The resurrected life is becoming actual, and not just factual, when one accepts the pardon God gave and knows that God no longer looks at him or her as being guilty.

How freeing that is! 

Resurrection life frees, not only from the tomb but from every form of bondage.

We will continue to follow the life of Peter in subsequent posts in order to see additional evidence in his life that further advances the resurrection transitioning from being factual to becoming actual.