Resurrection and Scripture in Luke 24
(avg. read time: 3–7 mins.)
The stories of Luke 24 are remarkable for many reasons. One of those reasons is because Jesus himself teaches the disciples about how the Scriptures declare the necessity for the major gospel events to happen (24:25–27, 44–47). Previously, I have gone over how the major elements of gospel proclamation, including the major gospel events, go back not only to events in Jesus’s life, but also to his teachings presented in the Gospels. This element, too, is part of what Jesus passed on to his disciples, though the “key” for understanding Scripture in this way was only presented to them after his resurrection. Interestingly, no specific texts are cited, though Luke tells of how he went through the Scriptures showing how they pointed to the major gospel events. This summary helps make sense of what we generally see about the role of Scripture in the earliest gospel proclamations and the summaries thereof.
Most of the references to Scripture being fulfilled by Jesus’s resurrection and the other gospel events remain at the general level. That is, the authors and speakers refer to “scriptures” being fulfilled, usually without giving specific texts. Our earliest gospel summary from 1 Cor 15 is one such general reference (vv. 3–4). Besides Luke 24, the same applies to Matt 26:24 // Mark 14:21, Matt 26:54–56 // Mark 14:49; Mark 9:12–13; Luke 18:31; John 2:18–22; 17:12; 20:9; Acts 3:18, 21, 24; 8:35; 10:43; 17:2–3, 11, 18; 18:28; 26:6–8, 22–23; 28:23; and Rom 1:1–4. Indeed, given Luke 24 and the explicit statements of all the different parts of Scripture Jesus talked about, there was no one text that was at the root of this belief that the gospel events happened according to the Scriptures. In the proclamations of Acts, when specific texts are linked to the resurrection, it is precisely multiple texts that appear, not the same one in every case (Acts 2:22–36; 4:10–11; 13:27–37). Furthermore, it is more likely that the resurrection on the “third day” feature of this belief, noted in both 1 Corinthians and Luke, came from a memory, particularly the discovery of the empty tomb, than that it was woven out of whole cloth from a particular text (especially if that one text was Hos 6:2, which otherwise shows no impact on the NT). In Luke and elsewhere, the process moved from the events to the Scriptures, not the other way around.
As such, it has been a tendency for scholars to describe this belief about resurrection and the fulfillment of Scripture as one of general thematic fulfillment or fulfillment of Scripture as a whole. Given the aforementioned texts, this view certainly has merit, and this aspect of Scripture fulfillment certainly seems to have been part of early Christian teaching, but in light of the many exceptions, it is more likely that the teaching, whether inscribed in a “creed” like 1 Cor 15:3–7 or otherwise taught, was open to articulation from multiple specific texts. The use of specific Scriptures would not undermine the general point; rather, they would supply corroborations and instantiations of the same. I have already examined the use of Ps 118 in reference to the major gospel events in the parable of the wicked tenants present in all the Synoptic Gospels. I have also noted the use of Zechariah in texts where Jesus talks about the major gospel events about to unfold. Likewise, Jesus describes the outcome of his trial in terms of Ps 110 and Dan 7, indicating that these texts provide a framework for understanding the major gospel events. Jesus had also applied the “sign of Jonah” to his resurrection in Matt 12:39–40. Beyond the statements of Jesus, we see multiple references to the fulfillment of Scripture in John 19 (vv. 24, 28, 36–37). As I already noted, in the proclamations of Acts, we see several texts linked to the major gospel events, including Pss 2 (13:33); 16 (2:25–27; 13:35–37); 110 (2:34–35); 118 (4:10–11); Isa 53 (8:32–33); and 55 (13:34). Additionally, Joel 2:28–32 appears as a text that was not fulfilled by the gospel events, but as one fulfilled because of the gospel events and the fruit they produced in Acts 2. Furthermore, Paul goes on to cite specific texts in the rest of 1 Cor 15 in reference to Jesus’s resurrection, the general resurrection, and the connection between them.
There could have been yet more texts Jesus cited in reference to himself concerning the major gospel events. For the resurrection, it could be that he applied Ps 16 to himself, and this is why it was established so early as a reference for resurrection that it was part of the first gospel proclamation, alongside Ps 110, which we have direct evidence Jesus applied to himself. Paul himself alludes to Ps 110 and Dan 7 like Jesus did in his resurrection argument, as well as Ps 8. Of course, Ps 118 was already used by Jesus in reference to the gospel events, so it is not particularly surprising that Peter uses it in this fashion more forthrightly in application after Jesus’s resurrection and ascension. Jesus also had applied the story of Jonah to himself as indicating what would happen to him after his death. Perhaps other OT resurrection texts or texts related thereto were part of this teaching. For the “third day” element, perhaps at least some of what scholars have proposed may have been part of this instruction, including Gen 1:11–13;1 Exod 19:10–11, 16;2 Lev 23:10–11, 15;3 2 Kgs 20:5;4 Ps 16:9–10;5 Hos 6:2;6 Jon 1:17.7 Sometimes scholars note even longer lists of texts, usually revolving around reference to “three days” or a “third day.”8 We see some of these texts among the earliest commentators, as John Chrysostom extends the connection of Isa 53—traditionally applied to the crucifixion—to resurrection, relying on vv. 8–11 in that passage (Hom. 1 Cor. 38.4).9 He also connects the resurrection to the story of Jonah (particularly 1:17) and Ps 16:10, a set of links he shares with Theodoret (Comm. 1 Cor. 15:3).10 Ambrosiaster cites Hos 6:2 in reference to the resurrection, given the use of resurrection language in that text, as well as its reference to “the third day” (Comm. 1 Cor. 15:4; cf. Tertullian, Marc. 4.43; Adv. Jud. 13.23; Cyprian, Test. 2.25; Aquinas, Comm. 1 Cor. §897). Perhaps some of these were texts that Jesus himself cited, but we also need to reckon with the possibility that other texts came to be read in a similar fashion to the specific ones Jesus cited as early Christian teachers took Jesus’s “key” and applied it to reading more and more Scripture. After all, this is precisely what later generations of Christian teachers did.
And the root for all of this scriptural linkage is Jesus himself. With the disciples on the road to Emmaus he began with Moses, then went through all the prophets to interpret the things concerning himself through Scripture (Luke 24:27). Later, he also said that everything written about him in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms must be fulfilled (24:44). The way Jesus’s teaching is stated here is him summarizing Scripture as a whole. No specific texts are cited in the text of Jesus’s words in either case, but the implication of the first in particular implies that he noted multiple texts concerning himself, and both texts indicate that he is surveying Scripture as a whole. We have also seen both tendencies of citing specific texts and talking about Scripture more broadly in his teaching elsewhere (hence why John applies both tendencies in narration as well). Both tendencies then continue to shape how the earliest teachers linked Jesus’s resurrection (and the other major gospel events) with Scripture. He opened his disciples’ eyes to read Scripture in this fashion. May we pray that he would do the same for us through their teaching and through our own reading of Scripture.
Jens Christensen, “And That He Rose on the Third Day According to the Scriptures,” SJOT 2 (1990): 101–13. He notes a similar notion linking the cross and the tree of life (created on the third day) in Ignatius, Smyr. 1.2; Trall. 11; Barn. 8.5; Justin, Dial. 73; 1 Apol. 41.4.
Cyprian, Test. 2.25; Andreas Lindemann, Der erste Korintherbrief, HNT 9/1 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 331.
James Moffatt, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, MNTC (New York; London: Harper and Brothers, 1900), 238; Jacob Thiessen, “Firstfruits and the Day of Christ’s Resurrection: An Examination of the Relationship Between the ‘Third Day’ in 1 Cor 15:4 and the ‘Firstfruit’ in 1 Cor 15:20,” Neot 46 (2012): 379–93; Joel R. White, “‘He Was Raised on the Third Day According to the Scriptures,’ (1 Corinthians 15:4): A Typological Interpretation Based on the Cultic Calendar in Leviticus 23,” TynBul 66 (2015): 103–19.
Lindemann, Korintherbrief, 331.
Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 529, 531; Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, 553; John C. Poirier, “Psalm 16:10 and the Resurrection of Jesus ‘on the Third Day’ (1 Corinthians 15:4),” Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters 4 (2014): 149–67.
Gregory J. Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, ConcC (St. Louis: Concordia, 2000), 554; Moffatt, Corinthians, 237–38; Lidija Novakovic, Raised from the Dead According to Scripture: The Role of Israel’s Scripture in the Early Christian Interpretations of Jesus’ Resurrection, T&T Clark Jewish and Christian Texts 12 (London: Bloomsbury; T&T Clark, 2012), 126–33.
Justin, Dial. 107; Cyprian, Test. 2.25; Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, 554; Scobie, Ways, 448–49. For more on various proposals, see Karl Lehmann, Auferweckt am dritten Tag nach der Schrift: Früheste Christologie, Bekenntnisbildung und Schriftauslegung im Lichte von 1 Kor. 15, 3–5, QD 38 (Freiburg: Herder, 1968), 205–316.
The occasional suggestion that “according to the Scriptures” is linked with only the resurrection and not the reference to the third day cannot be sustained on a syntactical basis. Furthermore, the similar statement in Luke 24:45–48 rules out that the reference to the third day would naturally be excluded (cf. John 2:18–22). For more on this point, see Poirier, “Psalm 16:10,” 152–53.
Cf. Kistemaker, Corinthians, 531; Lindemann, Korintherbrief, 331; Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, 553.
Cf. Martin Pickup, “‘On the Third Day’: The Time Frame of Jesus’ Death and Resurrection,” JETS 56 (2013): 536–37.