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!

114. Who was dead and is alive. That this signifies that He is rejected, and yet that eternal life is from Him, is evident from the signification of being dead, when said of the Lord, as denoting to be rejected (concerning which see above, n. 83), and from the signification of being alive, as denoting that eternal life is from Him in (concerning which see also above, n. 84). The Lord is said to be rejected when He is not approached and worshipped, and also when He is approached and worshipped only as to His Human, and not at the same time as to the Divine. At this day therefore He is rejected by those within the church who do not approach and worship Him, but pray to the Father to have compassion on them for the sake of the Son, although no man, or angel, can ever approach the Father, and worship Him directly, the Divine being invisible, with which no one can be conjoined in faith and love. For that which is invisible cannot come into the thought, nor, consequently, into the affection of the will; and what does not come into the thought, does not enter into the faith, for what pertains to faith must be an object of thought. So also what does not enter into the affection of the will, does not enter into the love, for the things which pertain to the love must affect a man's will, as all a man's love resides in the will (see The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem 28-35). But the Divine Human of the Lord can be thought of and enter into the faith, and thence into the affection of the will, or into the love.

[2] It is therefore evident, that there can be no conjunction with the Father unless from the Lord, and in the Lord. This the Lord Himself teaches very clearly in the Evangelists.

In John:

"No one hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath brought him forth to view" (1:18).

Again:

"Ye have neither heard the Father's voice at any time, nor seen his shape" (5:37).

In Matthew:

"Neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him" (11:27).

In John:

I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me" (14:6).

Again:

"If ye know me, ye know my Father also; he that seeth me seeth the Father"; (Philip) "believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? believe me, that I am in the Father, and the Father in me" (14:7-11);

and that the Father and the Lord are one (10:30, 38).

Again:

"I am the vine, ye are the branches; without me ye can do nothing" (15:5).

[3] It is therefore evident, that the Lord is rejected by those within the church who approach the Father directly, and pray to Him to have compassion for the sake of the Son; for these cannot but think of the Human of the Lord, as of the human of another man, thus they cannot think of His Divine in the Human, and still less of His Divine united with His Human as the soul is conjoined with the body, according to the doctrine universally received in the Christian world (see above, n. 10 and 26).

Who is there in the Christian world, that acknowledges the Divine of the Lord that desires by this acknowledgment to separate His Divine from His Human? Nevertheless, to think of the Human alone, and not at the same time of the Divine in the Human, is to regard them as separate, which is not to think of the Lord, or of both as one person, although the doctrine received in the Christian world is, that the Divine and Human of the Lord make not two persons but one person.

[4] Those who constitute the church at this day do, indeed, think of the Divine of the Lord in His Human, when they speak from the doctrine of the church; but it is quite otherwise when they think and speak within themselves apart from doctrine. But let it be known, that a man is in one state when he thinks and speaks from doctrine, and another when he thinks and speaks apart from it. When a man thinks and speaks from doctrine, he thinks and speaks from the memory of his natural man; but when he thinks and speaks unfettered by doctrine, his thought and speech are then from his spirit. For to think and speak from the spirit, is to think and speak from the interiors of one's mind, therefore, what he then speaks is his real faith. The state of a man also after death is such as were the thought and speech of his spirit within himself unfettered by doctrine, and not such as were his thought and speech from doctrine, if the latter has not become one with the former.

[5] Man has two states as to faith and love, one while he is in doctrine, and another when he is unfettered by it, but the state of his faith and love apart from doctrine saves him, and not the state of his speech concerning faith and love derived from doctrine, unless the latter has become one with the former. Man does not know this, although to think and speak from doctrine concerning faith and love, is to speak from the natural man and its memory, is evident from this circumstance alone, that both the evil and the good can think and speak in this way when they are with others. And it is for this reason that evil equally with good prelates, or prelates who have no faith equally with those who have faith, can preach the gospel, to all appearance with a similar zeal and affection. The reason is, that, in such case, a man, as stated, thinks and speaks from his natural man and its memory; but to think from the spirit is not to think from the natural man and its memory, but from the spiritual man, and from the faith and affection of this man. From this alone it is evident, that there are two states pertaining to man, and that the former state just referred to does not save him, but the latter. For after death a man is a spirit, therefore such as he was in the world as to his spirit, such does he remain after his departure out of the world.

[6] Moreover, that there are two states pertaining to the man of the church, it has been granted me to know from much experience; for after death a man can be brought into either state, and also is actually brought into both; many, when they have been brought into the former state, have spoken like Christians, and from their speech were believed by others to be Christians, but as soon as they were brought back into the latter state, the state of their own spirit, they then spoke like diabolical spirits, and in complete opposition to what they had spoken before (see the work Heaven and hell, n. 491-498, and n. 499-511).

[7] From these considerations it also is evident how it is to be understood that the Lord is repudiated at this day by those who are within the church, that is, that from doctrine indeed the Divine of the Lord must be acknowledged and believed equally as the Divine of the Father; for the doctrine of the church teaches, that, "as is the Father, so also is the Son, uncreate, infinite, eternal, omnipotent, God, Lord, neither of them greater or less, before or after the other" (see the creed of Athanasius). Notwithstanding this, however, they do not approach and worship the Lord as Divine, but they worship the Divine of the Father, as is the case when they pray to the Father that He may have compassion on them for the sake of the Son. When they use these words, they do not in the least think of the Divine of the Lord, but of His Human separate from the Divine, thus of His Human as similar to that of another man. They then think not of one God, but of two, or three. To think in this way of the Lord, is to repudiate Him; for not to think of His Divine in conjunction with His Human, which nevertheless are not two persons but one person, and make a one as soul and body, is by separation to exclude the Divine.

[8] I have occasionally talked with spirits who, whilst they lived in the world, were of the Popish religion, and I inquired whether they ever thought in the world concerning the Lord's Divine? They said that they had thought on the subject as often as they were in doctrine with insight, and that then they acknowledged His Divine to be equal with that of the Father, but apart from doctrine, they thought of His Human alone, and not of His Divine. They were asked why they say that the power, which belonged to the Human of the Lord, was given Him by the Father, and not by Himself, since they acknowledged His Divine to be equal to that of the Father? They then turned away, without answering; but they were told that the reason was, that they arrogated to themselves all His Divine power; which they could not have done, unless they had separated the Divine from the Human. That the Lord is repudiated by them, every one may conclude from this circumstance, that they worship the Pope as the Lord, and that they no longer ascribe any power to the Lord.

[9] I will here relate a great scandal uttered by the Pope who was called Benedict XIV. He declared openly that he believed, when he lived in the world, that the Lord had no power, because He had transferred it all to Peter, and thence to his successors; adding that he believed that the Romish saints have more power than the Lord, because they retain it from God the Father, but that the Lord abdicated it entirely, and conferred it on the Popes; but that still He must be worshipped, because without such worship the Pope would not be worshipped with sanctity. But this Pope, because he arrogated to himself what was Divine, even after death, was, after some days, cast into hell.