Saints, last week we began our preparation to begin a study of the Old Testament teachings on the resurrection. Now, no doubt it might have surprised some of us to hear that the Resurrection finds its foundation within the context of the Old Testament. We think of the Resurrection as a New Testament doctrine. However, it was our basic position that I introduced you to last week that the Resurrection, like other New Testament teachings, must have its beginning in the Old Testament books. how it was presented in the New Testament reveals the fact that the Old Testament is the origin for our understanding of the resurrection. There were three headings under which I wanted to examine this preparatory reality with you this year, which were the fact of the resurrection, that it was affirmed in Jesus's instruction, that the resurrection was assumed in the Jewish belief system, and that the resurrection was argued directly from the Old Testament scriptures. These are the three things that we began to look at last week. We discussed just the first of these last week. that the resurrection was affirmed in Jesus's instruction. What we saw in examining Jesus's teaching on the resurrection was that he simply affirmed the fact of the resurrection in two senses. One sense was as an act of resurrection. One could really refer to this as a resurrection in time. Both the resurrection of Lazarus in John chapter 11 and Jesus' own resurrection are an example of these acts of resurrection, the occurrence of resurrection in time. The second sense that Jesus referred to the resurrection was the resurrection event. And the event known as the resurrection was presented by Jesus as future to the hearers of his message. In John 5, which we just read, we saw Jesus refer to the event of the resurrection as coming a day when all will be brought out of the tombs, some to a resurrection of life and some to a resurrection of judgment. That's the resurrection event. Jesus' own resurrection prefigures this event. And we will see this more clearly today. So in Jesus' teaching, he didn't try to prove the resurrection. He simply assumed the resurrection. And this tells us for him to assume it means it was already an established fact, which would have pointed us back to the Old Testament. However, Jesus' teaching also came from we saw last week, that is, he attached this idea of the resurrection to himself and what he saw and what he heard of the Father. And he also, we saw last week, attached his teaching of the resurrection to the Old Testament scriptures. It's all the things that we saw last week in our study of the fact that the resurrection was affirmed in Jesus' instruction. Now what was particularly interesting about Jesus's instruction on the resurrection was that he never attempted without being solicited to prove it. Rather he simply straightforwardly affirmed the fact that it was going to occur. Now sometimes He did more than that. He taught on a particular facet of the resurrection. He gave more information on it. But he never tried to demonstrate it or to validate it. He simply assumed its validity. This fact leads us to the second reality under which I want to consider the resurrection in the Old Testament this morning, which is the resurrection was assumed in the Jewish belief system. Not only did Jesus believe in the resurrection, The people that Jesus taught believed in the resurrection as well. Let's look at this more closely this morning. Every people group possesses beliefs that come from a common history and a common experience. This was true of the Jews. This was due to the fact of several reasons. First off, the Jews could point to the fact that they originated from one individual, and that individual was Abraham. And they could track directly their lineage back to him. But to compound this strong sense of common identity, you also have to remember that they also had a mutual religious heritage. And this came from a number of important reasons. First and most importantly, the Jews had an authoritative source of information on their spiritual lives. We call it the Old Testament. And in the Old Testament, they saw clearly what they were to do spiritually speaking. And the Old Testament stretched throughout their whole existence as a nation, as a people. So they not only look back to what the scriptures said, but as you read the Old Testament, you see that the Old Testament also addressed the children of Israel where they were in history. So it was both a past text as well as a present ongoing text, all the way almost to the birth of Christ. So we see here that the Jews had a strong stamp, a strong brand of both racial and religious identity. If anybody was a harmonious group of people, a homogenous group of people, the Jews were definitely that. But the Jews were not monolithic. As you study the Jewish people, particularly around the time of Christ, around the first century AD, what you see is that they were also a very diverse people. So there were a lot of similarities, but there were also a lot of diversities. For example, if you read the New Testament, what you see is you see different groups. You see the Pharisees, you see the Sadducees, you see the Herodians, you see the Zealots. These are all groups that you might be familiar with from the New Testament. But there were other groups that existed maybe that you didn't know of. For example, the Essenes were also a group that existed in the first century. You may not have heard of them, but they were a Jewish sect. So what we see is although there was similarity, there was also diversity in the Jews at this time. That being the case, it is still striking that the Jews held so much in common with one another. Of particular interest to us this morning is their common acceptance of the idea of the resurrection within all the Jewish groups at this time. This was evidenced in the New Testament writings. Take, for example, Matthew chapter 22. Turn there with me this morning to the 22nd chapter of Matthew. We looked at this chapter last week, and it is in this chapter that we have Jesus' one and only defense of the doctrine of resurrection. And it was given in the context of an attack. But the attack didn't come from the pagan world. It came from within the Jewish system itself. Matthew 22 falls within the section of Matthew's gospel usually referred to as the Passion Week, the last week of Jesus' life on the earth before his crucifixion. Jesus entered Jerusalem at the beginning of the Passion Week with much fanfare and pomp and circumstance by the people, but the religious leaders didn't share that same enthusiasm. We see this in Matthew 21, verses one through 17. Well, in that chapter, in Matthew 21, verse 23, through Matthew 22, verse 14, Jesus confronted the religious leaders at the temple and about their issues of authority and the issues of the kingdom. Their inability to deal with Jesus, however, and his teaching, led them to organize an assault against Jesus. Look at verses 15 and 16. Then the Pharisees went and counseled together how they might trap him, Jesus, in what he said. And they sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. Their failure, however, led to the Sadducees taking their turn. Look at verse 23. On that day, some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him and questioned him. Now what we see here in Matthew's recording of this event was that he identified that the Sadducees as to their belief system, part of which involved the rejection of the resurrection. Of no other religious sect in Judaism was this said, and history indicated that this was in fact the case. So here we see that the lone group within Judaism who did not hold to the position of the resurrection was the Sadducees. And Matthew identified that fact. Well, why did he identify it? He identified it because you would assume because they were Jews that they would have believed in the resurrection, but because they didn't, Matthew had to identify them as being opponents of the resurrection. This tells you that their question about the resurrection was disingenuous. So as you read on, This led Jesus into one of his only defenses of the doctrine of resurrection. And he openly stated his opposition to the Sadducees disbelief. Notice verse 29. But Jesus answered and said to them, you are mistaken, not understanding the scriptures or the power of God. So after the Sadducees explained their particular question that they had for Jesus, Jesus began to refute what they didn't believe about the resurrection. And notice how he said that they didn't understand the scriptures or the power of God. Christ's response here indicated that as far as he was concerned, the resurrection in Judaism was a no-brainer, which he would go on to defend in the following verses. It was the assumed position of those who understood the scriptures and those who understood the power of God. The Sadducees should have realized that the resurrection was a valid doctrine. Turn next to Mark chapter 9. Mark chapter nine. Here we see more evidence that in the Judaism of Jesus' day, they believed in the resurrection. Mark chapter nine. In the ninth chapter of Mark, we have this great event called the transfiguration. This is the event where Jesus goes on the mountain with Peter, James, and John in verses one through eight, and he transfigures himself. He reveals his deity to these disciples. Now, although they had already confessed Jesus' deity in verse 29 of chapter 8, look at what Mark 8, 29 says. It says, Thou art the Christ. It was obvious from what happened after that confession in Mark 8, verses 31 through 33, that they were still confused on who Jesus was. Because when Jesus told them that he was gonna die on the cross, when he was gonna be turned over to the Gentiles and die, they contradicted Jesus. So they obviously didn't understand that him being Christ meant that they had to obey him. So Jesus took Peter, James, and John on the mountain and he transfigured himself. He revealed himself to them. On their way down the mountain, a conversation ensued. Notice verses nine and 10 of Mark chapter nine. And as they were coming down from the mountain, he gave them orders not to relate to anyone what they had seen, until the Son of Man should arise from the dead. And they seized upon that statement, discussing with one another what rising from the dead might mean. Now, question here for you. Were the disciples, were Peter, James, and John confused about the resurrection? Why were they discussing among themselves what the resurrection might mean? I thought they already understood the resurrection. Well, at first it looks like they're confused on the resurrection, but that's not why the question is being asked. How do I know this? Well, first off, remember, this is not the first time they're hearing about the resurrection. We already, in Mark chapter eight, verse 31, Jesus already brought the resurrection up. Another reason we know that the resurrection wasn't the issue was notice the question they asked. The question they asked was not about the resurrection. Look at verse 11 of chapter 9 of Mark. And they asked him, saying, why is it that the scribes say that Elijah must come first? This is the question. Now, follow what's going on. Jesus is transfigured before them. They start going down the mountain. Jesus says, don't tell anybody what you just saw until after the resurrection. And they begin talking amongst themselves, resurrection? What in the world is Jesus talking about? What do you mean resurrection? And then they ask Jesus a question. But the question isn't about the resurrection. The question is about Elijah. What's going on here? Well, obviously, it was not the resurrection about which they were struggling to understand. What they were struggling to understand was the relationship of Jesus Christ, the Messiah, to the idea of needing to be resurrected. After all, in their minds, he was clearly the Messiah. Therefore, Elijah should have come first, at least according to the Old Testament scriptures. Remember, Malachi chapter four, verses four through six, says that Elijah is gonna come before the Messiah comes. So, they have a question. They had just seen Elijah in the transfiguration. In chapter 9, verses 4 and 5, you'll notice Elijah and Moses came to speak to Jesus. So they just saw Elijah, and they see Jesus, and they see Elijah talking to Jesus, but Elijah hadn't come yet. So the question is, why is Elijah supposed to come first, and why are you talking about being resurrected? What's the point? What would have to happen for Jesus to be raised from the dead? He'd have to die. And if Jesus died, what would that mean to his mission? In their minds, his mission would have failed. Follow what's going on in their minds. They are thinking that Jesus, you're saying that you're gonna have to die, but you're the Messiah. The Messiah doesn't die. Maybe the reason that your mission is gonna fail is because Elijah hasn't come yet. You see, from the Old Testament, their expectation was Elijah comes first, then the Messiah comes, and then the kingdom comes. Jesus, by you having to die, maybe means your mission failed, and maybe your mission failed because Elijah didn't come, although we just saw him in the transfiguration. So that's what's going on in their minds. Jesus responds to them. Look at verses 12 and 13. And he said to them, Elijah does first come and restore all things, yet how is it written of the Son of Man that he should suffer many things and be treated with contempt? But I say to you that Elijah has indeed come, and they did to him whatever they wished, just as it is written of him. Who's Jesus talking about here? John the Baptist. Jesus, with this statement, began to expand their understanding of the mission. You see, the mission to them was for the Messiah to come to vindicate the Jews, to overthrow the Romans, and then the mountain of the Lord would become the chief mountain to which all the nations would stream, according to Isaiah chapter two, verses one through four. They were looking for the immediate coming of God's kingdom. But there was a problem. The problem was you couldn't have physical restoration without spiritual restoration. You see, the Jews, although they thought they were spiritually alive, they were, in fact, spiritually dead. Listen. You cannot have the blessing of God without having the life of God. And once you have the true life of God, you realize that the more weighty blessings of God are of a spiritual nature. Follow me. Let me just give you an illustration of this. This is the problem with the prosperity movement. This is the problem. The prosperity movement wants God to bless their lifeless corpse. And that was the Jewish problem. The Jewish problem was they felt they were okay. They felt they were already righteous. They didn't need a spiritual restoration. All they needed was for God to give them the good stuff. But Jesus says, you can't have the good stuff without my death. In other words, there must be spiritual restoration before there's physical restoration. God was not going to give his blessings of any form to spiritually lifeless people. And it's not just the prosperity movement that falls into this same trap. But we also, in our circles, inadvertently fall into the exact same trap. Let me tell you how. When we begin our gospel by promising people that God loves them and has a wonderful plan for their life before we tell them that they are sinners and in need of a Savior. You see, you can't reverse these things. The need must go before the answer. We want to give people the answer and we haven't established the need yet. So what we see here in the disciples is the same problem that exists today. All we need is for God to bless our mess. But Jesus says, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I've got to die first. You see, they weren't thinking the Messiah was going to die. That made no sense. They had no category for the Messiah needing to be resurrected. That's why they were discussing, what does he mean, the resurrection? They were clueless. Because in their mind, they were OK as a nation. The atoning death of Christ. of which the disciples had failed to truly understand was prefigured in the Old Testament through the clear statements of the Messiah's suffering. And they would not fully comprehend this until Jesus' resurrection. So we see here that it was not the resurrection that the disciples misunderstood, but rather they misunderstood Jesus' relationship to the resurrection. The resurrection was already an established reality in their minds as Jews. Turn next to Luke chapter 9. Luke chapter 9. In Luke chapter 9, we have a couple of examples of this very thing. First off, With the spread and impact of Jesus' ministry through his disciples throughout this region of Galilee, it would be expected that the Roman government would eventually catch wind of what was going on. Jesus's popularity was so immense that Luke 9 verse 7 indicated that Herod, the Tetrarch, heard of all that was happening. But Herod was confused. Notice Luke says, and he was greatly perplexed because it was said by some that John had risen from the dead and by some that Elijah had appeared and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. What we see here regarding the resurrection was that it was as good a solution as any for the people as to what was going on. They had no problem postulating that this Jesus was in fact a resurrected saint from old. They understood the resurrection and immediately went to it as a way of explaining who Jesus was. Now they didn't understand Jesus, but they understood the resurrection. We also see this a little bit later in the same chapter. Verse 18, it says, and it came about that while he was praying alone, the disciples were with him, and he questioned them saying, who do the multitude say that I am? What was the response? Verse 19, and they answered and said, John the Baptist, and others say Elijah, but others that one of the prophets of old has risen again. From these two passages it seems very clear here that the common man in the street in ancient Israel understood the reality of the resurrection and that such was one of the first ways that they explained the events that were taking place surrounding Jesus. So clearly The Jews from the Old Testament would have understood the resurrection because it was already an established fact of their system when Jesus came to the earth. Turn to Luke chapter 14. Luke chapter 14, we see this common perspective again. We looked at Luke chapter 14 last week and you remember that what's taking place here is that Jesus was invited to a Sabbath dinner party and he blew the party up. We saw that last week. First off, he messed up because he healed a sick man on the Sabbath right in front of the religious leaders who were infuriated at him for doing that. And then he confronted everybody at the dinner party for the hypocrisy. And then he turned to the guy who invited him to the dinner party and confronted him because he invited people who could pay him back. So Jesus blasted everybody at the dinner party. But in making his statement, you remember last week that we saw at the very end of the statement, he indicated that when you do things, not for reward here on earth, but you do things for reward in heaven, God blesses you in the future. That's what we saw last week. Look at how he ends this in verse 14. He says this. If you do what I ask you to do, Jesus says, you will be blessed. Since they do not have the means to repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous. So Jesus says you will receive payment from God, not now. We're not looking for payment now, we're looking for it in the resurrection, in the future. Well, I indicated last week that what we have here in Jesus' statement is a simple affirmation of the resurrection, but not an act of resurrection, the event of resurrection. But look at the response to Jesus' statement in verse 15. And when one of those who were reclining at the table with him heard this, he said to him, blessed is everyone who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God. That's a weird statement. Jesus said, you will be repaid at the resurrection. And then somebody says, blessed are you if you eat bread in the kingdom. Why did the guy bring up the kingdom and Jesus is talking about the resurrection? Clearly, this dinner guest both knew what event Jesus was referring to, he understood the significance of the event itself, and he connected the event to the kingdom of God. Jesus spoke a parable in response to what this guy said, both affirming the rightness of his link between the kingdom and the resurrection, as well as alerting him to the fact that those who were expected to be part of that resurrection would not be, and those who weren't expected to be a part of it would be. We see this in verses 16 through 24. So from where would the connection between the future kingdom and the future resurrection event, where would that assumption have came from? It would have had to have come from the Old Testament. The Old Testament was the only place that Jesus, the hosts, and the guests at this dinner party would have all gone to for the same information. The Old Testament was where this came from. Another point of demonstration regarding the assumption of the resurrection and the belief of the Jews is found in the book of John. Really, all the passages we looked at last week, John 5, John 6, and John 11, we see that Jesus, in these passages, mentioned the resurrection. And the people that he mentioned it to believed it, apparently, because they didn't contradict him about it. So they assumed the resurrection to be the case. I want to turn to John 11 in particular. Turn to the 11th chapter of John. In the 11th chapter of John we have the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead. The reason I want to look at John 11 is because in John 11 we have a little bit of an interaction between Jesus and Martha. You remember that Lazarus was the brother of Martha and Mary. And Martha and Mary had sent for Jesus. They told Jesus, hey, Lazarus is sick. Come to him. Jesus, we saw last week, delayed. He didn't come for several days until Lazarus died. Then he showed up after he died. He did it on purpose, we saw last week. Well, let's pick up the story in verse 20 of John 11. Martha, therefore, when she heard that Jesus was coming, went to meet him. But Mary still sat in the house. Martha, therefore, said to Jesus, Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died. Even now, I know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you. Jesus said to her, your brother shall rise again. Martha said to him, I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day. Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me shall live even if he dies. And everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this? Stop there. Now notice, in verse 21 and 22, Martha initiated the conversation with Jesus, distraught over the passing of her brother Lazarus, as well as Mary, we'll see later, was also distraught over this, and they both acknowledged that Jesus's presence there in time would have kept Lazarus from passing away. They knew that if Jesus had come when they sent for him, Lazarus would be alive. It was with that hope that they had sent for Jesus in the first place. It was with that hope that they had lived for those last couple of days, hoping and anticipating that Jesus would come. With that hope, they had consoled each other, looking for the appearance of Jesus to stop their brother's death, but he died. Their hopes were dashed. Yet notice in verse 22 that Martha indicated that although her hopes were dashed, although her brother died, she still believed in Jesus. She still believed in Jesus's mission and she still believed in Jesus's capabilities. Notice she said, even now. You see, saints, listen. Martha's faith in Jesus Christ was not based on Jesus doing things for her that she wanted done. Say it again. Martha's counting on Jesus, Martha's looking to Jesus, Martha's faith in Jesus wasn't based on what Jesus did in answer to her requests. And too many of us Our faith in Jesus is attached to what Jesus does for us. If we pray and he answers our prayer and gives us what we want, we believe in him. We trust him. We love him. But what happens when the answer is no? What happens when he says you can't have that? What happens when he says, I'm not going to allow you to do that? Do you still say with Martha, even now? Are you still confident? Are you still committed? Are you still focused on Jesus in spite of his answer? Martha was still confident. Notice after Jesus says in verse 26, do you believe this? So he says, Martha, are you still with me? Notice her response. Verse 27, she said to him, yes, Lord. I have believed that you are the Christ, the son of God, even he who comes into the world. Martha said, I'm still with you, Jesus. Although my brother died, although I asked you to come, and you didn't make it on time, and he's dead, and we buried him, although what I hoped to happen didn't happen, I still believe in who you are. Is that you? Does that describe you? Or when the answer's no, when your life falls apart, do you still believe in Jesus? Even when your life falls apart? You see, Christianity's easy when everything's going okay. An unsaved person can live like a Christian when everything's going okay. But let their world break down for a second. Let problems begin to happen. Let delays in their life begin to happen. Allow all the pieces to crumble, and you'll see what type of Christian you really are. Martha said, yes, Lord. But Jesus responded to her initial statement and affirmation of faith by reassuring her that this would not be the last time that she would see Lazarus. Martha's mind went immediately to the resurrection event which like Jesus she looked at as on the last day Jesus then made a clear affirmation of himself being the source of resurrection life in verses 25 and 26. Here we clearly see that Martha openly accepted the validity of the resurrection and the event of the resurrection taking place in the last days. It's obvious that Martha's belief in these things came from the Old Testament. That is where she came to her understanding of the resurrection. Turn next with me to Acts chapter 23. I want you to see just how common this teaching on the resurrection was. Now what's going on in Acts 23? Well, to understand Acts 23, you gotta go backwards. In Acts 21, Paul had concluded a lengthy journey to Jerusalem and when he arrived there he agreed to financially support a group of believers who were finishing a vow to God. We see this in verses 15-26 of chapter 21. While he was prepping himself to perform this duty in the temple, he was identified by the Jews and a riot ensued in verse 27 through 36 of chapter 21 of Acts. In the midst of the confusion, while Paul was being taken in by the Romans and he was being arrested, he asked, and he was allowed to address the people who were trying to kill him. We see this in verse 37 through verse 40. They listened intently to what he was saying until he got to the point where he began talking about the Gentiles. And then they went off. We see this in verses 1 through 30 of chapter 22. Our focus, however, is what happened on the next day, on the next day. On the next day, Paul was taken before the Sanhedrin. And there was a slight disruption there between himself and the high priest. You can see this in verses 1 through 5. And he tactfully maneuvered his way out of the situation in a very interesting way that brings up the issue of the resurrection. Notice what Luke said, beginning in verse 6. But perceiving that one part of the were Sadducees and the other part Pharisees, Paul began crying out in the council, brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial for the hope and the resurrection of the dead. Now Paul's purpose in doing this was revealed by Luke's commentary on the situation in chapter 23, verses 7 through 8. Look what they said. And as he said this, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. And the assembly was divided. For the Sadducees say that there's no resurrection, nor an angel, nor a spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. How deep was this divide? Deep enough to cause the Pharisees to actually take up Paul's defense. Look at verse nine and 10. And there arose a great uproar, and some of the scribes of the Pharisaic party stood up and began to argue heatily, saying, we find nothing wrong with this man. Suppose a spirit or an angel has spoken to him. And as a great dissension was developing, the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them and ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force and to bring him in the barracks. So what we see here is that Paul appealed to the resurrection and his appeal to the resurrection caused the Pharisees and the Sadducees to butt heads because the Sadducees reject the resurrection, the Pharisees believe it. Where would the Pharisees have gotten the teaching of the resurrection from? The Old Testament, obviously. And the Pharisees were the group that was more attached to the common man in ancient Israel. So this was the belief of most of the Jews at this time, because the Sadducees were just a small party within Judaism. Let's continue in the book of Acts. Let's stay in the book of Acts. One chapter later, chapter 24, we encounter the first of Paul's defenses of the gospel in the church before the Roman government. After Paul's initial arrest, the Romans in charge of Jerusalem were informed of a secret plot to kill Paul. And we see this in verses 12 through 22 of chapter 23. They wanted to kill Paul. So in order for them not to do that, the Romans sent Paul to the governor's place in Caesarea. This was almost 60 miles northwest of Jerusalem. And they were hoping that there he would receive a fair trial. We see this in verse 23 through 25. Well, after the Jews arrived in Caesarea, the governor brings Paul in, we see this in verses one through nine, and Paul is put on trial. Look at verse 10. And when the governor had nodded for him to speak, Paul responded. Paul is responding to the Jews. Knowing that for many years you have been a judge to this nation, I cheerfully make my defense." So Paul here begins his defense against what the Jews had said. The Jews had said that Paul's beliefs and the beliefs of the church were against Judaism and against the law. But notice what Paul says in verses 14 and 15. But this I admit to you, that according to the way which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the law and that is written in the prophets. Verse 15, having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. Now notice, saints, that Paul here calls Christianity the way, the way. And he squarely places the way within the historical progress of Judaism found in the Old Testament. That's verse 14, it's clear. And in verse 15, he indicates that the way as well as Judaism both have the same hope in God. Well, what's their hope? Their hope is a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. Where would Judaism have gotten that hope from? They would have gotten it from the Old Testament. The resurrection of the dead, both the righteous and the wicked, must be taught somewhere in the Old Testament. One more passage in the book of Acts. I want to look at Acts chapter 26. Turn there with me. Acts 26. The context of this statement was Paul's third defense of the Christian faith. After his defense before Felix, Felix essentially did nothing with him. Felix was eventually replaced as governor by Festus, who wanted to ingratiate himself to the Jews by sending Paul back to Jerusalem. We see this in Acts 25, verses 1 through 9. Paul knew that if he went back to Jerusalem, that the Jews would kill him in Jerusalem. And Jesus had told him in a vision that he had to go to Rome. Well, what Paul did in verses 10 through 12 of chapter 25 of Acts, is because he was a Roman citizen, Paul made an appeal to Caesar to be heard. So in his appeal to Caesar, he had to be sent to Rome. But before Festus could send him to Rome, King Agrippa and his wife Bernice came to visit Festus in the governor's quarters in Caesarea. Festus took this opportunity to tell Agrippa what had occurred with Paul and how confused he was in all these Jewish matters. King Agrippa, who was much more knowledgeable on Judaism and on the Jewish customs than was Festus, said that he wanted to hear Paul's defense. We see this in verses 13 through 27. So the next day, Paul was brought before the king. And notice what happens in Acts 26 verses 1 through 3. And a gripper said to Paul, you are permitted to speak for yourself. Then Paul stretched out his hand and proceeded to make his defense. In regard to all the things of which I am accused by the Jews, I consider myself fortunate, King Agrippa, that I am about to make my defense before you today, especially because you are an expert in all the customs and questions among the Jews. Therefore, I beg you to listen to me patiently." Notice here, that King Agrippa, Paul says, was an expert in the customs and questions about the Jews. So he was aware of the Jewish issues. Well, Paul begins in verses 4 through 5 to lay out his background, where he came from. But then notice how he summarized the essence of the problem in verses 6 through 8. He says, and now I am standing trial for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers. The promise to which our 12 tribes hope to attain as they earnestly serve God night and day. And for this hope, O king, I am accused by the Jews, verse 8. Why is it considered incredible among you people if God does raise the dead? This passage here definitively proves my point. Notice how Paul reduced the issue to whether a person can be resurrected. His focus here is on Jesus Christ and Jesus' resurrection, but he paints this picture as part of the bigger picture of God resurrecting the dead. God is gonna raise the dead, Paul says, and that's part of the hope of the fathers of the 12 tribes of Judaism, the hope of the resurrection. So what do we see here about the belief system of the Jewish people? Quite simply, we can say that they solidly affirmed that within their system they believed in the resurrection. That's obvious. Both acts of resurrection as well as the future event of the resurrection. In fact, so much a part of the Jewish belief system was the resurrection that it could be labeled as the essence of their hope. They hoped in the resurrection. They didn't fight over it. They didn't doubt it. They assumed it to be valid. They assumed it to be a part of their beliefs. We can see just how strong an argument this is for the Old Testament origins of the beliefs of the resurrection. When you compare the Jewish response to the resurrection to the Gentile response to the resurrection. Turn to Acts chapter 17 with me. Acts chapter 17. In Acts chapter 17, Paul is defending Christianity to a group of Gentile philosophers in Athens on Mars Hill. You remember the story. And look what he says in verse 30. He says, therefore, having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent because he has fixed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness through a man whom he has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising him from the dead. Now look at how the Gentiles respond to this in verse 32. Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer. But others said, we shall hear you again concerning this. Notice how the Gentiles responded in comparison to how the Jews responded. The Jews accepted what was being said about the resurrection. The Gentiles sneered at what was said about the resurrection. They didn't believe it. It was foreign to them. It was foreign to them because they didn't have the scriptures of the Old Testament in which it was affirmed. Here we see the very essence of their hope. Why did the Jews believe in the resurrection? They believed in the resurrection because it was part of the Old Testament scriptures and it dominated their mind and it dominated their perspective as Jews. My third and final point this morning is that the resurrection was not only a part of Jesus's instruction, it was not only assumed amongst the Jews, but thirdly, the resurrection was argued from the Old Testament scriptures. When you look at the New Testament, what you see is that they argued for the resurrection from the Old Testament. Turn back with me for a moment to Matthew chapter 22. Matthew chapter 22. Since we already looked at Matthew 22, I'm not going to reset the context for you. The Sadducees had asked their question. In verses 23 through 28, they had told a ridiculous story, a story that Jesus confronted in verse 29. Notice what he says. He says, you are mistaken not understanding the scriptures or the power of God. Jesus definitively stated here that their disbelief of the resurrection was built at least partly upon the fact that they didn't understand the scriptures. The word understand here in the text is a Greek word from which we get the word know, know. It was one of four Greek words for the idea of know. The reason the Greeks had so many words for the word know was because there were several different meanings to the idea of know. You could know intuitively. You could know because of your close connection to the object. You could know because of personal experience. These are all different ways of knowing. Well, the particular word that is used here by Jesus meant intelligent comprehension or recognition. It was seeing with the mind's eye. It was knowing clearly, knowing mentally. It was perceiving things as they truly were. Well, Jesus' point here was that they didn't believe the resurrection because they didn't know clearly the scriptures. If they had known the scriptures, they would have believed in the resurrection. What were the scriptures that Jesus was referring to? As you read on in Matthew 22, you'll see it was the Old Testament. In fact, the book of Exodus is what Jesus appeals to. Turn next to Luke 24. Luke 24. Here again, we have another encounter with Jesus, but this time it was after his resurrection. Jesus had been raised from the dead. But not only had he been raised from the dead, also some of his disciples had discovered that the tomb was empty. We see this in verses 1 through 12. Luke then recorded the fact of two of Jesus' followers making their way from Jerusalem to a city called Emmaus. While they were making their way there, they were discussing the matters that had taken place with Christ. While they were walking, verses 14-17 indicated, Jesus himself caught up with them and began conversing with them. But notice the Bible says that they didn't recognize him. They were kept from recognizing him and so Jesus asked them questions regarding their conversation. And they assumed by his questions that he was ignorant of what had taken place regarding Christ. So they began talking about Christ's ministry. They began talking about Christ's arrest and his murder and their hopes. And their hopes were wavering because they didn't quite understand what had gone on with Stevenson verses 18 through 21. Although they had heard of the resurrection, although they had heard of the empty tomb, They were wavering and they were reluctant to see what, because they didn't believe apparently that it could have happened. In verse 22 and 24. Well how did Jesus respond? Notice verse 25 to 27. And he said to them, oh foolish men, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken. Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things? and to enter into his glory. And beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, he explained to them the things concerning himself in all of the scriptures. Here, Jesus squarely founded the events of the final week of his life on the Old Testament Scriptures. His focus in this was upon his suffering and entering into his glory, which mandated his resurrection. And all of these things, he based upon the Old Testament. He taught them from the Old Testament. Turn with me next to John, chapter 2. John, chapter 2. This supports the same idea that the Old Testament scriptures were the place that you would go to find teaching on the resurrection. John chapter 2. Here we have the account of Jesus' first Passover and his cleansing of the temple in verses 13 through 18. During this incident, Jesus made a statement that remained misunderstood by the disciples through his entire earthly ministry. Look at verse 19. He said, destroy this temple, and in three days, I will raise it up. Look at what follows in verses 20 through 22. The Jews therefore said to him, it took 46 years to build this temple, and you will raise it up in three days? But he was speaking of the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken. Believed what scripture? What scripture did they have at this time? The only scripture they had was the Old Testament. So clearly the Old Testament was the place that Jesus based his resurrection in. There must be teaching in the Old Testament on the resurrection in general and the resurrection of Christ. And it was a faulty understanding of the Old Testament that led them to not understand or believe that the resurrection of Christ would take place. Then look at John 20. John 20, we see the same idea in John 20. John chapter 20. Let's begin reading verse 1. On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb while it was still dark and saw the stone already taken away from the tomb. And so she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciples whom Jesus loved and said to them, they have taken away the Lord out of the tomb and we do not know where they have laid him. Peter therefore went forth and the other disciple and they were going to the tomb. And the two were running together and the other disciple ran ahead faster than Peter and came to the tomb first. And stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrapping, laying there, but did not go in. Simon Peter therefore also came following him and entered the tomb and he beheld the linen wrappings lying there. And the face cloth which had been on his head not lying with the linen wrappings was rolled up in a place by itself. So the other disciple who had first come to the tomb entered then also and he saw and believed. But watch this verse. For as yet they did not understand the scripture. that he must rise again from the dead. What do we see? We see, again, a lack of tying the suffering and the resurrection of the Messiah as the result of an insufficient understanding of the Old Testament. Why is it they were confused? It was because they didn't understand the scripture. The Old Testament is the place you turn to to get a fuller understanding of the resurrection, not just the New Testament. As we close our resurrection series this year, I leave you this morning with one final passage that demonstrated just how ubiquitous the teaching of the resurrection was to the Jews and its basis being found in the Old Testament. Turn with me finally one more time to Acts chapter 26. Acts 26, and Paul's defense before King Agrippa. Acts 26. King Agrippa, the expert in Jewish custom and teaching in the Roman governmental system, Look at how Paul closes his defense here as he returns to where he began his defense, which was the resurrection. Notice these verses beginning in verse 22. Listen closely. And so having obtained help from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, stating nothing but what the prophets and Moses said was going to take place. that the Christ was to suffer, and that by reason of his resurrection from the dead, he should be the first to proclaim light both to Jewish people and to the Gentiles. And while Paul was saying this in his defense, Thestis said in a loud voice, Paul, you are out of your mind. Your great learning is driving you mad. But Paul said, I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I utter words of sober truth. For the king knows about these matters. And I speak to him also with confidence, since I am persuaded that none of these things escape his notice. For this has not been done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do. And Agrippa replied to Paul, in a short time, you'll persuade me to become a Christian. And Paul said, I would to God that whether in a short or a long time, not only you, but also all who hear me this day might become such as I am, except for these chains. As I read this this week, I thought to myself, how much ministry in the South is so much like Paul talking to King Agrippa. You see, we in the South love church, don't we? We love Sunday morning. We love getting dressed up and getting everybody neat and tidy and coming to worship service. And it's part of the Southern thing to do. And much like King Agrippa, we know these things. We've heard them our whole life. We went to Sunday school when we were a little child. Big Mama took us to church. And she made sure that we sat and listened to what was being said by the preacher. And maybe even when we turned 12 years old, we went down front and we got baptized through some type of experience we had. And so like King Agrippa, we believe the resurrection took place. But like King Agrippa, we haven't committed ourself to that reality. We're church-going people. We're religious folks, but we have not made a personal commitment of ourselves to that reality. We're almost persuaded to be a Christian. But there's something keeping us back. What would people think if I stepped forward to say I needed to be a Christian? I've been a part of a good church for 20 years. I've been a part of this church for five years. What would my family say if they heard that I became a Christian? Because my mom thought I accepted Christ when I was five. What would mama say? What would my friends say who I hang around with, who think I'm a Christian because I come to church? What would they think of me if I get saved? The question is not what people would think of you. The issue is a day is coming when Christ is going to speak, and the dead will be raised. Either those who are righteous will be raised to life, or those who are wicked will be raised to death. Which one do you fit in? Let me tell you something. Growing up in the South is not going to save anybody. Let me tell you something else. Growing up in a Christian home is not going to save anybody. Hell will be packed full of church folk if they Sunday best. Hell will be full literally bursting through the seams with people who grew up in Christian homes Thinking because their mama's over there. I'm gonna be over there You just like King Agrippa You know the facts in fact you could tell the facts to me better than I can tell them to you I But you know what? You still have not made a commitment of yourselves to those realities. Never. Never. Why? I know it. Look at your life. It's obvious. How you're living consistently, day in and day out, tells the whole story of who you are. You're not bearing fruit for Jesus Christ. Please. How can you bear fruit for Jesus and you barely crack your Bible open? In fact, today was the first time you looked at the Bible all week. First time you cracked it open all week was right here. And you say you're a Christian? You come to church on Sunday and you live like hell from Monday to Saturday. You might even raise your hand in church on Sunday. And that means nothing to God. Zip. And the only time you pray is to bless your food. And then two seconds later, you forget whether you blessed it or not. Because it's so rote. It's just rote. Or the only time you pray is you pray to ask for stuff. That's all you do. Why? Because you're consumed with yourself. Evidencing you don't love God, you love self. Growing up in the South, we believe in the Bible. We believe in the resurrection. But it's futile to believe in the resurrection but have not placed your faith and trust in Christ to save you from your sins. History demonstrates that Jesus Christ not only died, but he was raised from the dead. Paul told Agrippa, this stuff didn't happen in a corner. You know it happened. History testifies to the fact that it happened. Only a doofus would not believe that Christ died and was raised. That makes no sense. To not turn from your sinful acts and your sinful thoughts and your sinful attitudes and to turn to Jesus Christ to place yourself under him is foolish. And you're allowing yourself to go into judgment. Today is the day. But not only can you, you must turn to Christ. There are people today, at this very moment, dead who were alive a minute ago. Right now, they're dead now. And just a minute ago, they were alive. Are you better than them? Does God got to give you a chance? Does God got to wait until you come to him before you die? Are you crazy? God owes you nothing. You don't know what the next moment means for you. You have no clue. It's now or never. You've got no guarantee. This is the moment to turn from your life of sin and to turn to Jesus Christ. Today is the day that you can and you must turn to Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Don't be like a gripper. Don't be like a gripper. Almost persuaded is all the way in hell. That's what almost persuaded gets you. My advice to you is very simple today. Repent and believe in Jesus Christ. It's that simple. Repent, turn from your sin, believe, trust in Jesus Christ, who is the resurrected Lord of his church. Don't allow this day to subside without having made a decision to follow him. Heavenly Father, we come before you this morning. Those of us who are saved are first off humbled that you didn't allow us to be almost persuaded. You didn't allow us, dear God, to continue to linger in our social Christianity, in our Southern Christianity, in our moralism. But you showed us how wicked we were. You opened up our eyes to our evil and wicked hearts. And then you opened our eyes to see Jesus. And when we saw Jesus, you gave us legs to run to him and to fall at his feet and to turn from our sin. We thank you this morning for that. We thank you, dear God, for the resurrected Lord of the church, Jesus Christ. But our heart aches, dear God, for our loved ones, our friends who don't know Christ, who think they're going to heaven because of their good works, maybe our wife that thinks she's going to heaven because she made a decision when she was five years old. Maybe her husband because he thinks that he's going to go to heaven because he's a part of the church. But our friends, our husbands, our wife, our loved ones have not personally committed themselves to the truth of Christ. I pray that today, Lord God. You would help that son, that daughter, that husband, that wife, that friend, that loved one. Help them to see today. That today is the day for them to repent and trust Christ. Bring them to the end of themselves. Help them to see, dear God, that they can't make it. They can't change their life. They can't become what you want them to become. They can't turn over another leaf. They can't wait for another day. They can't take one step so you take two. Lord God, I pray that you would straighten them out today. Give them the truth that they are the problem and they must turn from themselves to Jesus. Oh, Lord God. today, today, today, Lord God. Help them to see Jesus for who he truly is, the resurrected master, the resurrected Lord of the church. Glorify yourself this day in your people, I pray. In Jesus' name, amen.