Late on the first Easter Sunday, after the Lord had risen from the sepulcher, ten of the disciples gathered for the evening in the upper room of a house in Jerusalem (John 20). They were afraid and probably confused. Since their leader had been crucified by the Roman power, as organized by their own Jewish leaders, they feared that now his followers might also be hunted down and punished. They closed and locked the doors. Were any of the women there? The story does not say, but Peter and John were, who saw and talked with the angels that morning, and the stories of the women were known. Some time must have been spent wondering and perhaps arguing - was He really alive? How could they know it was really Him? This kind of thing, coming back to life after you’re dead, this doesn’t happen in this real world, there must be some mistake!

Then two of the followers, not of the twelve, but the two that had gone to the village of Emmaus, came in, excited and bursting with their news. They had seen Him! They had walked with Him for seven miles and He had told them wondrous things! They had only recognized Him when He broke bread and ate with them. "Don’t doubt us, it really was Jesus!"

And then as they all talked and argued, there He was, standing with them in the room. "Peace be unto you," He said, and He showed them His hands and feet and His side, where he was wounded. He calmed them, and told them that just as he had come down to mankind, so they must go out and teach to all people all the true things that He had taught in the years He was with them.

It was these truths about how to live one’s life that were saving, not the disciples themselves. These saving truths have the power to remit or retain sins, because they were from the Lord, the disciples only transmitted them from the Lord to those who would listen and take them to heart. Then He breathed on them - representing His holy spirit - so that they would not only want to pass these truths on to people, but would also be given the words to say whenever the times came. And then He was gone again.

Thomas was not there that night. We don’t know why. And Thomas, when he heard the story, just could not swallow it. "Except I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe", he said. (John 20:25.)

The next verse tells us that the next Sunday they gathered again, and that Thomas was present this time. As before, the Lord was suddenly there, saying again, "Peace be unto you", and then directly to Thomas, "Reach hither thy finger… and reach hither thy hand… and be not faithless but believing". Now Thomas's response was, "my Lord and my God". It seems as if the Lord came this time just to convince Thomas, because it was Thomas who needed Him.

I think He does work this way. I am reminded of another story, from the gospel of Mark (Mark 9:17-27) where a father comes to Jesus with a young son who is possessed by a devil, and asks Jesus to cure him, and is asked in turn: "Do you believe I can do this?" In Mark 9:24 the father responds. Crying out, he said with tears, "I believe, help thou my unbelief."

I think many people have this conflict between lingering doubts and a desire to have the doubts taken away. If we carry on and make our decisions in life as if the doubts were indeed gone, then indeed they will lose their strength and actually will be gone.

These are the only details given of these two meetings in Jerusalem. Chronologically the next post-Easter stories are the ones that take place in Galilee.

John does go on to say at the end of his gospel "...many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of His disciples which are not written in this book. But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God...." (John 20:30-31). Perhaps there were more post-Easter stories that weren't written down, but the ones we do have are strong. For the disciples who were involved, there was an unstoppable impact from the life and teachings of the Lord, and His crucifixion, and physical death, and now - in these stories - His resurrection. Hearing the Lord's charges to them, these Galilean fishermen and their colleagues launch out into the wide world, and work to achieve the Great Commission, enduring hardships and persecution, and succeeding - probably beyond their wildest dreams!

4292. In the internal historical sense 'he said, Your name will no longer be called Jacob, but Israel' means that they could not as [the descendants of] Jacob play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature that was imparted to them. This becomes clear from the meaning of 'Jacob' in the Word as his descendants, dealt with above in 4281, and from the meaning of 'name' as the essential nature, dealt with immediately above in 4291. The new nature itself is meant by 'Israel' in the internal sense, for 'Israel' is the celestial-spiritual man and consequently the internal man, 4286. And since 'Israel' means the celestial-spiritual man, and so the internal man, 'Israel' also means the internal spiritual Church. For whether you use the expression spiritual man or spiritual Church, it amounts to the same thing because any spiritual person in particular is the Church, even as many are in general. If the individual person in particular were not the Church, no Church in general could exist. The expression Church is used in everyday language to describe a congregation in general; but each member of the congregation must be a Church if that greater Church is to exist. Every general whole incorporates parts that are like that whole.

[2] The implications of this particular matter - the inability of [the descendants on Jacob to play the representative part, except by virtue of the new nature imparted to them, meant by 'Israel' - are as follows: It was specifically Jacob's descendants who were to represent the Church but not specifically Isaac's since Isaac's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau. Still less was it specifically Abraham's, for Abraham's descended not only through Jacob but also through Esau, and likewise through Ishmael, as well as through his sons by his second wife Keturah, who were Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, Shuah, and the sons of these, see Genesis 25:1-4. Now because Jacob's descendants insisted that they should be representative, as shown just above in 4290, they could not represent as Jacob, or as Isaac, or as Abraham. The reason why they could not do so as Jacob was that 'Jacob' represented the external aspect of the Church, but not the internal. And they could not do so as Isaac at the same time or as Abraham at the same time for the reason advanced immediately above.

[3] So that they could represent the Church therefore, a new name had inevitably to be given to Jacob, and through that name a new nature, which new nature was to be a sign of the internal spiritual man, or what amounts to the same, of the internal spiritual Church. That new nature is meant by 'Israel'. Every Church of the Lord is internal and external, as has been shown several times already, the internal Church being that which is represented, the external that which represents. The internal Church is also either spiritual or else celestial, the internal spiritual Church being represented by 'Israel', but the internal celestial Church at a later time by 'Judah'. Therefore a division also took place, and the Israelites became a kingdom on their own and the Jews another on their own. But these matters will in the Lord's Divine mercy be discussed later on. From this it is evident that 'Jacob', that is, Jacob's descendants, could not represent the Church as Jacob, for that would have been to represent solely the external aspect of the Church. They had to do so as Israel as well because 'Israel' is the internal aspect.

[4] It has been shown in various places already that it is the internal which is represented and the external which represents, as may also be seen in the human being. A person's speech represents his thought, and a person's action represents his will. Speech and action are the external aspects of the person, thought and will the internal. In addition the various looks seen on a person's face represent both, that is to say, both his thought and his will. It is well known to everyone that the looks on a person's face are representative, for the looks on the faces of people who are sincere enable their interior states to be seen. In short, every part of the body represents some facet of a person's inclination (animus) and mind (mens).

[5] It is similar with the external aspects of the Church, for these are like the body, while its internal aspects are like the soul. There were, for example, the altars and the sacrifices on them, which, as is well known, were external things. There was likewise the bread of the presence, also the lampstand with its lamps, as well as the fire that was kept burning all the time. Anyone can recognize that these external things represented internal ones, as likewise did everything else of a ritual nature. The fact that these external things could not represent anything external, only what was internal, becomes clear from the considerations introduced already. So 'Jacob' could not represent as Jacob, because 'Jacob' means the external aspect of the Church, but he could do so as Israel because 'Israel' means its internal aspect. This is what is meant by a new nature being imparted to enable the descendants of Jacob to play the representative part.