"their eyes were kept from recognizing him"

One of the classes that I teach each semester is Principles of Bible Study. My first lecture in this class each semester is entitled, “Jesus as a Bible Student.” The lecture is an exposition of Luke 24. It is the one text that I repeatedly take my students to throughout the semester. Verse 27 is the key verse: “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, [Jesus] interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” There is hardly a class hour that goes by when I do not stress that the Bible student has not really understood any particular text unless we have discerned how it testifies to or finds its ultimate reference point in the Person and Work of Christ. When my students walk out of my class at the end of the semester I want them to be convinced of the fact that the overall structure of biblical revelation finds its cohesiveness only in Christ’s Person and Work.

One of my lectures addresses a question that is raised with a careful reading of Luke 24:15-16. In telling us of the two disciples who had lost hope that Jesus was the one to redeem Israel because he had been crucified, Luke says: “While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.” The question I ask my classes is, “Why were their eyes kept from recognizing Jesus?” After all, their dashed hope was due to the fact that Jesus had died. Why didn’t Jesus just say, “Men, why have you lost hope? Look at me. I have been raised from the dead! I’m alive!” Why didn’t Jesus restore their confidence that he was the redeemer by letting them recognize him? Why was it that “their eyes were kept from recognizing him”?

Well, one of our newest Eucatastrophe readers commented on my March 14th post (MORALISM VS. CHRIST-CENTERED EXPOSITION by Tim Keller) by quoting from a book entitled Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theological Perspective. What I love about this quotation is that it answers my question the same way I have answered it in class. I had not yet found any book that addresses this issue until I was given this excerpt. I immediately went and checked the book out of our college library. Enjoy! In discussing the report of Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James to the disciples of Jesus' resurrection, Francis Watson writes:

“…their report to the disciples met with disbelief. The account of the vision was dismissed as nonsense (leros), a futile attempt to compel reality to conform to one’s desires; and the emptiness of the tomb (which Peter was able to confirm) evoked only perplexity at the strange and distressing fact that Jesus’ corpse had undoubtedly disappeared (Luke 24:10-12, cf. vv. 22-24). As yet, in other words, there was no framework available within which the message of Jesus’ resurrection would make sense. It is for this reason that the two disciples on the way to Emmaus are represented as not recognizing the traveler who joined them on the road - not because he appeared to them ‘in another form’ (en hetera morphe)…but because the conditions were not yet in place within which faith becomes a possibility. The statement that ‘their eyes were kept from recognizing him’ (Lk. 24:16) stems…from [Luke’s] understanding of faith. Faith in the risen Christ originated and originates not in unmediated experience but through the mediation of Holy Scripture. According to the earliest Christian preaching accessible to us, Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, was buried, and was raised on the third day - again, in accordance with the scriptures. Thus, in response to the two disciples’ expression of sorrowful perplexity, the unrecognized Jesus simply did not make himself recognizable but engaged in scriptural interpretation, saying to them,’ “O foolish people, slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself’ (24:25-26)… It was therefore the role of the unrecognized interpreter of holy scripture to show them that they already possessed, in the experiences of today, yesterday and the day before, the key to the renewal of their scripturally-grounded hope which would set that hope for the first time on a firm, unshakeable foundation…Having momentarily glimpsed the risen Christ, the disciples recall how their hearts burned within them ‘while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the scriptures’ (Luke 24:32). The fire is the light and warmth of the dawning faith in the resurrection, understood not as an isolated marvel but within the comprehensive context established by Holy Scripture” (Text, Church and World: Biblical Interpretation in Theological Perspective, pp. 289-290).