In spite of the many words Jesus had spoken to His disciples about His forthcoming death and resurrection, it still came as a complete shock to them—first that He whom they had come to believe in as the Messiah would be so brutally murdered, and second that a person whom they knew to be completely dead and past resuscitating could really live again. Such is the power of death as an impenetrable veil of darkness that the devil has used throughout history to enslave men by their fears. But it was from such that Jesus came to deliver us by partaking of the same death we must all experience for our sins, but then being raised from the dead to demonstrate that through the power of God death need not be our final reality as something to be feared. Having come to an experiential understanding of His previous words that He would rise from the dead, which before could only be understood by faith, they were now in a position to understand what the Scriptures had foretold but they were previously unable to see; Luk 24:45. How many other things in Scripture that have yet to be fulfilled can also at the present time only be understood by faith, until such time as our faith is made sight and we have the experiential knowledge of hindsight to more fully understand those things that we now see only as through a glass darkly?
How does Luke summarize in three parts the central truth to which Jesus opened their minds to understand, from which they were earlier prevented from seeing except by faith, and that became the hallmark teaching of the gospel? Luk 24:46-47. Note: the Greek emphasizes three infinitives in succession to highlight this summary: to suffer, to rise again, and to preach or proclaim as a herald. What is the significance in light of modern evangelical theology that Jesus didn’t more simply and to the point say that the Christ would die, but that He would suffer? Why in fact was it actually necessary (see Luk 24:26) that He suffer? I.e., if all that mattered was that the spotless Lamb of God die as a propitiatory sacrifice to pay the penalty for our sins so we could be forgiven, why then didn’t God provide for Christ’s throat to be slit as the other Passover lambs to die a more merciful death, and not only allowed, but actually required, that He suffer as He did such a torturous death? See 1Pe 2:19-25, 4:1-2, Mat 1:21; cf. Heb 5:7-9, 12:5-11. And rather than Christ’s death that is commonly proclaimed today for the forgiveness of sins, what does Luke note is to be heralded for the forgiveness of sins? See again Luk 24:47 and note the textual variation: Some manuscripts (cf. the KJV) read repentance and forgiveness of sins, while others read repentance for forgiveness of sins. However, evidence for the latter reading is older and better attested so that the 4th edition of the UBS Greek New Testament assigns it a B rating, meaning it is almost certain. See also Luk 3:3 where Luke records John the Baptist using the same formula.
Where in the TaNaK does it talk about the Messiah suffering, to where Jesus would have taken His apostles in opening their minds to understand the Scriptures? See Gen 3:15,21 (cf. Gal 3:27), Num 21:6-9 (cf. Joh 3:14-15 and note that it is the standard that represents Jesus, upon Whom the chastening for our sins by the serpent fell), Deut 21:23 (cf. Gal 3:13), 2Sa 7:1-13 (how could the Messiah reign forever in a mortal body?), Psa 22:1,7-8,12-22 (cf. Mat 27:35,39-44,46), Psa 34:19-20 (cf. Joh 19:36), Psa 41:9 (cf. Joh 13:18), Psa 69:21 (cf. Mat 27:34,48), Isa 50:6 (cf. Mat 26:67, Joh 19:1), Isa 53:4-9 (cf. Mat 8:17, 27:12-14,57-60, Luk 23:9, Joh 19:9, Act 8:30-35, 1Pe 2:22-24, 3:18), Dan 9:24-26, Zec 13:7 (cf. Mat 26:31,56).
Just as it was not entirely clear in the Jewish Scriptures that the Messiah would suffer, so that only after it happened was Jesus able to open the minds of His disciples so they could more fully understand them, so too is the resurrection from the dead not expressly developed in our Old Testament. Recall that the Sadducees, who were well-versed in the Scriptures, even denied that there was a resurrection; see Act 23:8. From where then in the TaNaK does the hope of a resurrection from the dead come? See Gen 3:21 in light of the Lord’s command in Gen 2:17, which from the very time of the Fall already offered the hope of some sort of redemption, which hope was further revealed to later authors (cf. Psa 49:15, 71:20). See also Job 19:25-27 which is one of the oldest passages in the Bible, as well as Isa 26:19 and Dan 12:2. Eze 37 and the vision of the valley of dry bones, while speaking of a restoration of the nation of Israel, nevertheless describes it using a picture of the resurrection of completely dead and departed bodies, which in terms of Biblical prophecy can also be understood as foreshadowing the future resurrection of the true Israel of God composed of both Jews and Gentiles who are of the faith of Abraham (Rom 9:6-8, Gal 3:7-9). See also Mat 22:23-33 and our discussion on Mat 22:31-33, where Jesus demonstrated to the Sadducees that the resurrection was clear even from the Law of Moses, which they only accepted as authoritative: In short, God could hardly be called a God to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the rewarder of these who earnestly sought Him if there was no resurrection, for they died in faith, having not received the promises, but saw and welcomed them from afar; see Heb 11:6,13.