Resurrection of Christ

It's Easter this weekend and I'm learning new things about Christianity everyday :)

So - there was a talk today about the meaning of Easter, and I feel the speaker made a couple of really good points:
1. Evidence will never be overwhelmingly convincing, because that would negate our role in terms of searching, in having Faith - a means by which the believer can be distinguished from the non-believer. As Baha'u'llah comments in the Kitab-i-Iqan, the general reason that God conceals His meanings in His words, appears to be to divide the peoples of the world:

"Know verily that the purpose underlying all these symbolic terms and abstruse allusions, which emanate from the Revealers of God's holy Cause, hath been to test and prove the peoples of the world; that thereby the earth of the pure and illuminated hearts may be known from the perishable and barren soil. From time immemorial such hath been the way of God amidst His creatures, and to this testify the records of the sacred books." (Baha'u'llah)

The book of Daniel states: "Go thy way Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."
2. Christ means nothing without the context of God - it doesn't make sense. In the same way now, Christ Himself, doesn't make sense without Baha'u'llah. Even extended to: God, this eternal religion, doesn't make sense without Baha'u'llah. Our creation, our existence, doesn't make sense without Baha'u'llah - just as our existence doesn't make sense without God.

Interesting things he commented on, that I disagree with:
1. That Christ was physically resurrected
2. If Christ wasn't physically resurrected, there would be no point in believing in Him
3. The Kingdom of God refers to conduct of believers on an individual level, as opposed to a social transformation

How could the early believers have accepted Christ before his "resurrection" - what was the grounds whereby they accepted Him?
Is it possible to believe in the Second Coming of Christ, while not believing in a bodily resurrection?
In the context of the Second Coming of Christ having already taken place - what does this mean for the resurrection?
What of the tomb that was found empty?

So, here, as a beautiful summary is 'Abdu'l-Baha's explanation regarding the resurrection:

Question.—What is the meaning of Christ’s resurrection after three days?
Answer.—The resurrections of the Divine Manifestations are not of the body. All Their states, Their conditions, Their acts, the things They have established, Their teachings, Their expressions, Their parables and Their instructions have a spiritual and divine signification, and have no connection with material things. For example, there is the subject of Christ’s coming from heaven: it is clearly stated in many places in the Gospel that the Son of man came from heaven, He is in heaven, and He will go to heaven. So in chapter 6, verse 38, of the Gospel of John it is written: “For I came down from heaven”; and also in verse 42 we find: “And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?” Also in John, chapter 3, verse 13: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”
Observe that it is said, “The Son of man is in heaven,” while at that time Christ was on earth. Notice also that it is said that Christ came from heaven, though He came from the womb of Mary, and His body was born of Mary. It is clear, then, that when it is said that the Son of man is come from heaven, this has not an outward but an inward signification; it is a spiritual, not a material, fact. The meaning is that though, apparently, Christ was born from 104 the womb of Mary, in reality He came from heaven, from the center of the Sun of Reality, from the Divine World, and the Spiritual Kingdom. And as it has become evident that Christ came from the spiritual heaven of the Divine Kingdom, therefore, His disappearance under the earth for three days has an inner signification and is not an outward fact. In the same way, His resurrection from the interior of the earth is also symbolical; it is a spiritual and divine fact, and not material; and likewise His ascension to heaven is a spiritual and not material ascension.
Beside these explanations, it has been established and proved by science that the visible heaven is a limitless area, void and empty, where innumerable stars and planets revolve.
Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ’s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.
Such is the meaning of the resurrection of Christ, and this was a true resurrection. But as the clergy have neither understood the meaning of the Gospels nor comprehended 105 the symbols, therefore, it has been said that religion is in contradiction to science, and science in opposition to religion, as, for example, this subject of the ascension of Christ with an elemental body to the visible heaven is contrary to the science of mathematics. But when the truth of this subject becomes clear, and the symbol is explained, science in no way contradicts it; but, on the contrary, science and the intelligence affirm it.

My favourite thing from His explanations - is how it is emphasized that the spiritual meaning is so much more significant than the literal meaning.