What Difference Does It Make?

Christ is risen! But what difference does it make? When those who have celebrated Easter in churches and at sunrise services go on about their daily affairs, is there a discernible difference between their behavior and that of the multitudes who do not believe that Christ arose?

Obviously there should be a difference! Consider two forlorn disciples on the road to Emmaus, thinking that their Lord was dead and that his body had been stolen. Suddenly they were made aware that the stranger with whom they had been conversing was none other than the Lord himself returned from the grave. They immediately went back seven miles to Jerusalem to share the good news with their comrades (Luke 24:13–35). If belief in the resurrection of Christ does not make us want to tell others about it, then do we really believe?

A Christian believer is different because he has a message of good news for everyone. A few other religions are like this, but most Buddhists, Hindus, and certainly most adherents of Judaism seem to feel no compulsion to attract others to their faith. They resent it when Christians are not willing to look upon their own religion as an ethnic distinctive, much like language or cuisine. Shortly after his resurrection, Jesus told his disciples “that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in all nations.” That glorious command is still operative.

However, Christians are not simply to relay their own experiences or to repeat by rote what has been handed down. They are to be students of the Word of God. While Jesus was walking with the two on the road to Emmaus, “beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Shortly afterward, appearing to the eleven, “he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures” (v. 45). A person who says he believes the resurrection but who is indifferent to the study of the Word of the risen Lord must not be surprised if others doubt that his faith is real.

Another difference that belief in the resurrection makes is the presence of joy. Not the ephemeral joy of those who are responding only to pleasant surroundings but the deep-seated joy of those who know that they have peace with God, that their sins are forgiven because Christ has died for them and risen again. When the Lord appeared to the eleven, they were so happy that it is said, paradoxically, that they “disbelieved for joy” (Luke 24:41). But even after he departed, they “returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple blessing God” (vv. 52, 53).

Once when two of the disciples, Peter and John, were going to the temple, they showed yet another consequence of resurrection faith. A lame beggar asked them for alms. Peter had compassion on him and said, “I have no silver and gold, but I give you what I have; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.” The lame man not only walked but leaped in praise of God! Peter did what he could, not only to share with the man the good news of eternal life, but to help relieve his temporal misery as well (Acts 3:1–8). Resurrection faith not only focuses on future salvation but exhibits itself in concern with present needs as well.

The difference that belief in the resurrection makes is especially noticeable in times of persecution. At this Easter season the church in Uganda, for instance, is more keenly aware of Christ’s resurrection than are believers in easier circumstances. Christians in Kampala dug a grave in which to bury the murdered archbishop Janani Luwum, but he was never buried there. The Sunday after his death, Christians gathered at the cathedral and then went outside to praise God around the empty grave for the life and witness of Janani Luwum. The symbolism was not lost on anyone there, though everyone knew that the archbishop’s body was buried in his native village in northern Uganda. This church has become stronger in its proclamation and its caring in these difficult days.

Sharing the good news, studying God’s Word, experiencing true and abiding joy, helping relieve present needs—these are some of the consequences that flow from genuine belief that Christ is risen and that he is the living Lord. What a difference it makes!

‘Jesus’: Handled With Care

After three years of work, the brilliant film and stage director Franco Zeffirelli finished his production of Jesus of Nazareth, and it was aired by NBC on Palm Sunday and Easter. The film was seen not only in the United States but also in Great Britain and Italy (Italians got to see all seven hours; British and American viewers saw a six-hour abridgment). Contrary to the dire predictions and critical comments of some conservative Christians, Zeffirelli’s film follows the gospel accounts almost to the letter. The acting is superb. Peter Ustinov as Herod the Great and Rod Steiger as Pontius Pilate stand out. Zeffirelli filmed his story of Jesus in Tunisia and Morocco, with some interior scenes in Rome. The camera work, particularly for the massacre of the innocents, is beautiful and moving. The depiction of the resurrection is the best ever filmed.

We regret that these comments could not have appeared in our last issue, prior to the two-part NBC show. Efforts to see all or part of the film in time to give our readers some preview of what Zeffirelli had done were to no avail. NBC told us that the film was still being edited—not quite the case. We learned later that the film had been shown to some religious leaders (including Billy Graham and Bill Bright of Campus Crusade, whose responses were affirmative) and selected members of the press. Granted, a religious film is new stuff for NBC. But surely its publicity staff should have made it top priority for the religious press to get an advance look at the film—particularly in view of the virulent attack made by university president Bob Jones. NBC gets no applause for its handling of the press.

And neither is there applause for Bob Jones, who, considering his university’s drama department and his outspoken Christian commitment, ought to have known better. He attacked the film (and its director and producer) without seeing it. That is inexcusable and unethical. Producer Vincenzo Labella reported at a New York press conference that when he offered to set up a screening for him, Jones attacked Labella’s Catholicism. Jones accused Zeffirelli of depicting a Jesus who was not the incarnate son of God. Nothing could be further from the truth. As Zeffirelli explained at that same press conference, “I set out to make a film of the God-Man, an impossible task. It is a miracle we finished, and were guided all the way.” Originally he had ended the film with Zerah, the priest, saying “Now it begins” as he stands in the empty tomb of Jesus. But, explained the director, “that was too pat, too cutesy. That’s not how the life of Jesus ended.” So he finished with Jesus comforting the disciples and sending them into the world to preach the Gospel. And that ending to the film is absolutely right.

The NBC staff is to be commended for showing Jesus of Nazareth, though it would have been more effective had it been shown on consecutive evenings as Roots was by ABC. And since Zeffirelli wanted twelve hours, not just six, it would have made his editing task a little easier.

Viewers disturbed about some missing miracles, such as Jesus’ walking on water, should be informed that they were included in the longer Italian version. Zeffirelli wants to release Jesus of Nazareth as a feature film. Perhaps then he’d be able to include everything he had to leave out for television. It would certainly be the first film of Jesus that spurned grandiosity for quiet adherence to the word and the spirit of the New Testament.

Sunday School Is a Start

Evangelicals everywhere outside the United States are curious about America’s “born again” President. A recent Western visitor to Eastern Europe found Christian congregations electrified as he simply described Jimmy Carter’s regular attendance at Sunday school and worship services in Washington’s First Baptist Church. They could conceive of the possibility of a nation’s chief executive attending an occasional event in a church, but to hear that “one of their own kind” was leaving the White House on Sunday mornings to join other believers in a study of the Bible was almost more than they could comprehend.

President Carter is doing something that no other chief executive has done in modern times. There have been several who attended Sunday services of worship in recent years, but this does not communicate the same thing as participation in a Bible class. By taking a Bible in hand and studying along with other members of his church, the President is showing that he is more than a spectator at an ecclesiastical event. He is demonstrating his need for instruction from God’s Word. And by attending regularly he is stressing the value of systematic study. His widely publicized participation in class discussions and his ready answers to the teacher’s questions reinforce the point.

Mr. Carter’s example comes none too soon. Sunday-school attendance continues to decline in America, and biblical illiteracy increases at an alarming rate. The biblically illiterate church is not only a scandal but also a danger. When the people in the church do not know the teachings of the Bible and are unable to share them, the church is not far from collapse.

While there are encouraging signs that many young Christians spend much time studying Scripture, most of America’s churchgoers spend very little. The hour at Sunday school is the only hour many churchgoers spend with the Bible all week. (That’s hardly in balance with the hours they spend in front of television or in various recreational pursuits.) Even those with regular devotional practices that include Bible reading and prayer do very little systematic study of the Scriptures.

Sunday school is a good starting point, but it is only a start. America’s flabby churches will be strengthened to do their divinely commissioned work only as their members discipline themselves to study the Word, and then to proclaim it. When President Carter studies his lesson in preparation for his occasional teaching assignements, he is setting a still better example. The strong church needs more than little lessons remembered from childhood.

H. R. Rookmaaker

H. R. Rookmaaker, fifty-four-year-old mentor of many a young Christian artist, died suddenly last month of a heart attack. A recent physical examination had not revealed any heart trouble. The day before his death he led a discussion group and lectured—and anyone who has ever heard him speak knows that was an hours-long effort. The next day he conducted the Sunday worship service at the Dutch L’Abri fellowship. He had become a Christian during World War II while he was imprisoned in a concentration camp.

Rookmaaker was a professor of art history at the Free University of Amsterdam. Besides a work on Gauguin, he was the author of Modern Art and the Death of a Culture (InterVarsity), and he edited the Riverside series of old jazz, blues, and spirituals for Fontana Records. He was a member of the programming committee of the Dutch national radio system and of the Board of Censors of Films in Holland.

Francis Schaeffer and Rookmaaker worked together for many years, and many of Schaeffer’s ideas were developed with Rookmaaker’s help. Rookmaaker did all the art history research for Schaeffer’s latest book and film series, How Shall We Then Live?

Rookmaaker’s influence is hard to define. Throughout the world, little groups of artists (such as a group in London) and individual artists have been encouraged and stimulated by his work. He took art and the role of the Christian artist seriously, and he wanted each Christian to do the same. He knew his subject and was recognized in the secular academic field as a first-rate art critic and historian, even by those who disagreed with his views.

Rookmaaker thought that we could see the disintegration of our culture by studying contemporary painting. Once artists painted what they knew, he said last year at Westminster Seminary; now they paint what they see—a sign of the depersonalization of our society. If modern art reflects a change in our spiritual moorings, “how is the Christian artist to fulfill his role?” He tried to help his students at L’Abri answer this question. In Modern Art … Rookmaaker asserts that we are called to be Christians in our anti-Christian age, and that it is not only possible but necessary to have artists who work from a Christian world view.

TO OUR READERS: There will be a three-week interval between this issue, April 15, and the next, May 6. We publish two issues per month.

Franky Schaeffer, an artist who is the son of Francis Schaeffer, thought that Rookmaaker’s most important work was yet to be done. “If my father had died at fifty-four,” he pointed out, “none of his books would have been published. We have lost a person of rare accomplishments and insights.”

One Shattering Step

“Ahab told Jezebel all that Elijah had done, and withal how he had slain all the prophets with the sword” (1 Ki. 19:1).… “When he saw that, he arose, and went for his life” (1 Ki. 19:3).… Elijah’s spirit seems to have become utterly demoralized and panic-stricken.… Through the weary hours he plodded on beneath the burning sun, his feet blistered by the scorching sands.… At last the fatigue and anguish overpowered even his sinewy strength, and he cast himself beneath the slight shadow of a small shrub of juniper, and asked to die. “It is enough now, O LORD, take away my life; for I am not better than my fathers” (1 Ki. 19:4).

What might have been! If only Elijah had held his ground—dwelling in the secret place of the Most High and hiding under the shadow of the Almighty—he might have saved his country.… And his own character would have escaped a stain which has resisted the obliterating erasure of the ages and still remains, fraught with shame and sorrow. Elijah’s influence in Israel never recovered from that one false step. He missed a chance which never came again. And though God, in His mercy, treated him lovingly and royally as a child, He never again reinstated him as a servant in just the position which he so thoughtlessly flung away.

It is a solemn thought for us all! If for one moment we are left to ourselves, we may take a step which may shatter our influence, and forever after put us into a very different position from that which might have been ours if only we had remained true. As children, we may be forgiven; as servants we are never reinstated or trusted quite as we were once.

It is noteworthy that the Bible saints often fail just where we should have expected them to stand. Abraham was the father of those who believe; but his faith failed him when he went down to Egypt and lied to Pharaoh about his wife. Moses was the meekest of men; but he missed Canaan because he spoke unadvisedly with his lips. John was the apostle of love, yet in a moment of intolerance he wished to call down fire out of heaven. So Elijah, who might have been supposed to be superior to all human weakness, shows himself to be indeed “a man subject to like passions as are we” (James 5:17).…

Is there not a warning here for us all?

Reprinted from “Elijah and the Secret of His Power,” by F. B. Meyer (b. 1847), Moody Press Paperback Edition, 1976, pp. 98–101.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.