Posts by Leolaia

77

Resurrection Appearance to James the Just

by Leolaia in

apostle paul provides an early list of jesus' resurrection appearances in 1 corinthians 15. it is important because this list was written before our canonical gospels were written and thus serves as an independent source of information.

paul writes:"christ died for our since, in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared first to cephas and secondly to the twelve.

next he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died; then he appeared to james, and then to all the apostles; and last of all he appeared to me too; it was as though i was born when no one expected it.

Leolaia

It's very, very late for me, so I can't write my usual long-winded response and so I will have to keep it short.

Pete raises a good point of "brother of the Lord" not being a literal sanguine relationship. This is possible, though the idea that it is must have arisen early since there is a James mentioned in the synoptics (I can't check which ones at the moment) who was explicitly designated as one of the other sons of Joseph and Mary. Narkissos....an apparition story may have not been necessary for James' authority, but considering that Paul's epiphany story was pretty much what his whole claim to apostleship was based on -- and this is a guy who never even knew Jesus in the flesh, I still think it would have been natural for James to cover his bases and claim a story for himself. Not that I'm saying that this is the case, I'm just saying I don't think it to be implausible. About the provenance of the Epistle of James, I forgot what I said earlier, but I don't think it was among Jewish-Christians in Judea but rather in Syria -- specifically Antioch, where James had his influence among Hellenistic Jews as Galatians shows; moreover, Syria is where many of the Jamesian Jewish Christians moved to after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and occupation of Judea in the 70's (I read this somewhere in a work on the history of Jewish Christianity). This fits nicely with assuming a publication date of about 80-90 for James. Finally, there is the internal evidence of James itself. I refer you to Patrick J. Hartin's JAMES AND THE Q SAYINGS OF JESUS (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991). The evidence indicates that James is dependent on sayings source that stands between that of Q and Matthew -- one could call it a pre-Matthean redaction of Q, and so this would suggest that James originated in the same community as the later redactions of Q. And since this version of Q reveals itself arising from an anti-Pharisaic law-abiding Jewish-Christian group, that would fit well with what we know of Jamesian Christianity. Koester (1990:171) has a similar opinion:

It is evident in the discussion of the gospel tradition of the Epistle of James that the sayings and parenetic materials used in that writing were closely related specifically to Matthew 5, and in general to a Jewish-Christian perspective that advocated adherence to the law without demanding observance of circumcision and dietary legislation. The Epistle of James also shares with the Sermon on the Mount the rejection of the Pauline thesis which claims that Christ is the end of the law. The author of this epistle and the redactor of Q who produced the Sermon on the Mount belong to the same Jewish-Christian milieu; both share the decision that the followers of Jesus belong to law-abiding Israel and that fulfillment of the law, though without any emphasis upon circumcision and ritual law, is the appropriate interpretation of the teachings of Jesus.

Hartin's book is quite interesting, though I haven't finished reading it. I look forward to comparing this with the Petrine Jewish-Christianity of the Kerygma Petrou in the other book I'm reading. Always a student,

Leolaia

31

Manuscript varients betray deliberate altertion of NT

by peacefulpete in

non-roman fonts used: spionic .

this article is also available in transliteration and text-only formats.

editor's note: bart ehrman delivered the kenneth w. clark lectures at duke divinity school in 1997. this article, though slightly modified from the oral presentation, preserves the original flavor of the lecture.

Leolaia

Mark 10:46 is one central piece of evidence showing that canonical Mark derives from Secret Mark, as it explains the pointless mention of a visit to Jericho (describing Jesus' entering and leaving Jericho without telling what happened there) and the change in subject from singular to plural:

"And they came into Jericho. And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, but Jesus did not receive them. And as he left Jericho with his disciples and a large crowd..." (Secret Mark 10:46)
"And they came into Jericho. And as he left Jericho with his disciples and a large crowd..." (Mark 10:46)

But there are many other things that Secret Mark explains. There is evidence that the original version of Mark underwent revision before the canonical edition was disseminated: the common omissions of passages and phrases from Mark in Luke and Matthew which may be viewed as later additions to the text (cf. Mark 2:27-28; 4:26-29; 10:21, 23, 24; 12:29-31; 14:51-52), divergences in Mark from the wording in Luke and Matthew which may be viewed as instances where Luke and Matthew preserve the original form of the text (cf. "To you is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven/God," Matthew 13:11; Luke 8:10; "To you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God," Mark 4:11), and there is special vocabulary in Mark which is absent in parallel passages in Matthew and Luke (especially didakhe kaine "new teaching" and thambsthai/ekthambeisthai "to be amazed"). Most strikingly, the terms "to teach" and "teaching" (didakhe) occur frequently in Mark where they are absent in parallel passages in Matthew and Luke (cf. Mark 1:27; 2:13; 4:1-2; 6:30, 34; 8:31; 9:31; 10:1; 11:17; 12:35-38, etc.) All this suggests that Mark was redacted after its use by Luke and Matthew.

Several of the common omissions in Matthew and Luke are directly related to Secret Mark. The rich youth that Jesus resurrects in Secret Mark 10, who forms a direct parallel with the Lazarus of John 11, recalls the rich youth in Mark 10:17-22 and according to Mark 10:21 Jesus "looked at him and loved him (emblepsas auto egapesen auton)." This passage is omitted in the parallel pericopes of Matthew 19:16-22 and Luke 18:18-25. But this phrase forms a direct parallel with Secret Mark 10:34:4, which says "the youth looked at him and loved him (emblepsas auto egapesen auton)." As pointed out in the last paragraph, Matthew 13:11 and Luke 8:10 lack the wording of Mark 4:11 where the word musterion "mystery" occurs in the singular: "To you is given the mystery [musterion] of the kingdom of God." This is paralleled again in Secret Mark 10:34:6 which remarks that "Jesus taught him the mystery [musterion] of the kingdom of God." But the most enigmatic verse in Mark also has a parallel in Secret Mark. At the scene of Jesus' arrest, Mark 14:51-52 mentions a rather bizarre happening: "And a young man followed him dressed in a linen cloth over his naked body (peribeblemenos sindona epi gumnou); and they seized him, but he left the linen cloth and ran away naked." This story is absent in the parallel accounts in Matthew 26:47-56 and Luke 22:47-54. But the resurrected youth in Secret Mark was described in exactly the same manner: "After six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth came to him, dressed in a linen cloth over his naked body (peribeblemenos sindona epi gumnou)" (Secret Mark 10:34:5). The simplest explanation of the overall pattern is that the first edition of Mark lacked the characteristic language (e.g. the frequent use of didakhe), the comment about Jesus loving the young man in the rich youth story (Mark 10:17-22), the resurrection story (Secret Mark 10:34:2-6), the story about Jesus on his way to Jerusalem possibly accompanied with the rich youth (cf. Secret Mark 10:46), and the story of the youth fleeing the scene at Jesus' arrest (Mark 14:51-52), and it was this version that Matthew and Luke used. Then the gospel was edited and expanded with these pericopes added, producing Secret Mark. Finally, several of these additions were removed (leaving intact such episodes as the naked youth at the arrest scene), producing our canonical Mark in the NT. Changing "mysteries" from plural to singular in Mark 4:11 would have also logically been from the same hand that inserted the resurrection story that referred to the "mystery of the kingdom of God".

This emphasis in Secret Mark on the resurrected youth might also relate to the Empty Tomb story in Mark. Mark 16:5 says that when Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James, and Salome "entered the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed (exethambethesan)." This reference is simply to a young man in a white robe and nothing more, while Gospel of Peter 13:55 refers to "a young man, comely and clothed with a brightly shining robe," Luke 24:4 refers to "men in dazzling apparel," and Matthew 28:2-3 refers to "an angel of the Lord ... [with] an appearance like lightning and raiment white as snow." These texts seem to attest an evolution of the presence of a young man into an angelophany. One connection with Secret Mark is the figure of the young man, another is the presence of this young man inside a tomb in a resurrection narrative. A third is the use of the verb exethambethesan "astonished," which occurs only in Mark and is absent in parallel passages in Matthew and Luke (cf. Mark 9:15; 10:24; 10:32). One possibility is that the redactor of Secret Mark wanted to identify this announcer of the Resurrection with the youth that Jesus had himself resurrected.

When the common omissions and departures from the text of Mark in Matthew and Luke are viewed as the result of the redaction of Secret Mark, an amazingly coherent structure appears in the gospel which reveals the purpose behind the Secret Mark redaction. Secret Mark has altered the original text of ch. 8-10 in a way that creates two resurrection miracles of Jesus, each following a prediction of the Passion, with another prediction of the Passion preceding an allusion of the Resurrection. This creates a foreshadowing of the Resurrection in each prediction of the Passion. Also importantly, the word used to refer to resurrection was changed from egerthenai "being raised" to anastenai "resurrection," and the emphasis on ethambounto "amazement" was also designed to foreshadow the amazement at the Resurrection of Jesus. So, we find the first prediction of the Passion in Mark 8:31 (which ends with the words "and after three days he will rise [anastesetai]"; cf. Matthew 16:21=Luke 9:21), and then six days later he gives a preview of his glorification in the Transfiguration (Mark 9:1-13), immediately after which a crowd came to Jesus and his disciples, "amazed" (ethambethesan) at him (Mark 9:15), and Jesus performs his first resurrection, which in original Mark (as attested by Matthew and Luke) was simply an exorcism of an epileptic child:

"... and the demon departed and he was healed." (*Original Mark; Matthew 17:18=Luke 9:42)
"... and the demon departed and the boy is left as if dead (hosei nekros), and the bystanders said he died (apethanen). But Jesus took him by the hand (kratesas tes kheiros), raised him, and he rose (egeiren auton, kai aneste)." (*Secret Mark; Mark 9:27-28)

This resurrection is an explicit foreshadowing of the Passion being followed by the Resurrection. Then the cycle begins anew in Mark 9:31 where we find the second prediction of the Passion which ends with the words: "...and after three days he will rise (anastesetai)." This is followed by story of Jesus teaching the rich young man (10:17-22), which the redactor has revised to add the notice about "Jesus looking at him loved him" in v. 21. The rich man is unable to unburden himself of his wealth and Jesus' disciples "were amazed (ethambouto) at his words" (Mark 10:23-24). Then the disciples went on the road to Jerusalem, and the redactor has added the words "they were amazed (ethambounto) and those who followed were afraid (ephobounto)" (Mark 10:32; these words are missing in the parallel account in Matthew 20:17-19=Luke 18:31-33). These two words later occur in Mark 16:5-8 of the two women who fled the empty tomb; they were "greatly astonished" (exethambounto) and "afraid" (ephobounto). This statement in Mark 10:32 is thus the second foreshadowing of the Resurrection. The cycle begins anew in Mark 10:33 with the third prediction of the Passion which ends with the words: "... and after three days he will rise (anastesetai)." This prediction is directly followed by the story of the resurrection of the rich youth, who had died. The language of this resurrection miracle directly parallels that of the first resurrection:

"... and the demon departed and the boy is left as if dead, and the bystanders said he died (apethanen). But Jesus took him by the hand (kratesas tes kheiros), raised him (egeiren auton), and he rose." (*Secret Mark; Mark 9:27-28)
"There was a certain woman whose brother had died (apethanen) ... Jesus stretched out his hand and raised him (egeiren auton), taking him by the hand (kratesas tes kheiros)." (*Secret Mark 10:34:4)

This young man this then described as "rich" (plousios) and "the young man, looking at him [Jesus], loved him (ho de neaniskos emblepsas auto, auto egapesen auton), which directly connects him to the "youth" (nestetos; cf. neaniskos in Matthew 19:20) in Mark 10:17-22 who was the "rich man" of v. 25 (plousion), and "Jesus, looking at him [the youth], loved him (ho de Iesous emblepsas auto egapesen auton)" in v. 21, whereas in Secret Mark 10:46, reference also is made to "the young man whom Jesus loved" (tou neaniskou hon egapa auton ho Iesous). Six days after the resurrection Jesus teaches him "the mystery of the kingdom of God," which recalls the Transfiguration occuring six days after the first prediction of the Passion. The youth is dressed "with a linen cloth over his naked body," and then Jesus has a conversation with the sons of Zebedee where the redactor of Mark changed Jesus' Eucharistic foreshadowing of his crucifixion into a metaphor of baptism:

"Jesus answered them and said, 'You do not know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I shall drink?' They said to him, 'We can.' He said to them, 'The cup you will drink. But to sit at my right hand...' " (*Original Mark; cf. Matthew 20:22-23)
"Jesus answered them, 'You do not know what you are asking. Can you not drink the cup that I drink; or can you be baptised with baptism with which I am baptized?' And they said to him, 'We can.' He said to them, 'The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized you will be baptized. But to sit at my right hand...' " (*Secret Mark; cf. Mark 10:38-40)

This statement is possibly key to the other redactional passages of Secret Mark and canonical Mark: the central concept may be of baptism as a mystical union with Jesus in his death and Resurrection. That would explain why the young man is "dressed with a linen cloth over his naked body" -- he is dressed for baptismal initiation, and his death and resurrection qualified him for initiation into the "mystery of the kingdom of God". The concept is strikingly reminiscent of Romans 6:2-6 where Paul says "when we were baptised in Christ Jesus we were baptised in his death; in other words, when we were baptised we went into the tomb with him and joined him in death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the Father's glory, we too might life a new life." The concept is ultimately derivable from Hellenistic mystery religions which have initiation rituals uniting the convert with the dying and rising god. It is important to note that this concept is brought in sharp relief by a combination of Secret Mark with the canonical Mark passages absent in Matthew and Luke; the notion is virtually absent in the original Mark known to the authors of Matthew and Luke.

The connection between baptism and death/resurrection is also established by the word sindona "linen cloth" which is what the youth wears in Secret Mark for his initiation. The sindona is also the burial cloth that Jesus is wrapped with in his tomb (Mark 15:46). The Gethsemane youth who runs away naked in Mark 14:51-52 was also wearing a sindona. The classic mystery of Mark 14:51-52, before the discovery of Secret Mark, was: (1) Who was this bizarre youth who appears out of nowhere in the story, (2) Why was he almost naked? Secret Mark provides an answer, or at least a partial answer. This youth could have been the same one that Jesus resurrected in Bethany and had not changed out of his initiation clothes. On the other hand, this may have been another youth who was wearing a sindona because he was awaiting a baptismal ceremony like the Bethany youth. There may of course have been other material in Secret Mark that shed light on this question but which have not survived. And then there is the question about the youth wearing a "white robe" inside Jesus' tomb and his connection with the Bethany and Gethsamane youths.

None of this is really certain, of course, but it seems to explain a lot by looking at it this way. The Markan passages omitted by Matthew and Luke that I mentioned appear to work together with the known Secret Mark passages to construct a series of foreshadowings to the Resurrection, paired with the three predictions of the Passion. There is also a theme of death as baptism -- as baptism also is a symbolic death of the "old life" as one is reborn. The expanded edition of Secret Mark was then abridged and the more esoteric passages were deleted, but a few (such as the naked Gethsemane youth) escaped the notice of the later redactor to confound later readers.

77

Resurrection Appearance to James the Just

by Leolaia in

apostle paul provides an early list of jesus' resurrection appearances in 1 corinthians 15. it is important because this list was written before our canonical gospels were written and thus serves as an independent source of information.

paul writes:"christ died for our since, in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared first to cephas and secondly to the twelve.

next he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died; then he appeared to james, and then to all the apostles; and last of all he appeared to me too; it was as though i was born when no one expected it.

Leolaia

bebu....The Gospel of the Hebrews is not in the Apocrypha; it was a Jewish-Christian gospel and used by Ebionite and Nazorean Christians who were the spiritual heirs of James and other Jewish Christians from Judea and Syria. While the Gentile churches were heavily influenced by Paul's own idiosyncratic teachings (which relied very little on the teachings of Jesus of the synoptic gospels), the Jewish Christians derived their doctrines more directly from the sayings of Jesus. The epistle of James, published by the Jewish-Christian community of the late first century, is heavily dependent on the sayings later found in Luke and Matthew. The Ebionites aspired to live in poverty, in imitation of the many Jesus sayings that stress this theme. The Gospel of the Hebrews, while not directly a version of Matthew, presented itself as written by Matthew and was probably written in Aramaic and used by Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians in Syria and Judea.

77

Resurrection Appearance to James the Just

by Leolaia in

apostle paul provides an early list of jesus' resurrection appearances in 1 corinthians 15. it is important because this list was written before our canonical gospels were written and thus serves as an independent source of information.

paul writes:"christ died for our since, in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared first to cephas and secondly to the twelve.

next he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died; then he appeared to james, and then to all the apostles; and last of all he appeared to me too; it was as though i was born when no one expected it.

Leolaia

Narkissos.......Thanks for the reference; it's a very interesting article but long and it would take a while to digest. But here are a few reactions. The theory is not as radical as it might seem seem at first blush since the evidence is pretty strong that Galatians has been interpolated (with supporting textual evidence) and the idea that 1 Corinthians 5:15-11 is a later addition is not new (cf. J. Weiss, Volter, Straatman, von Soden, Heinricki, Drummond, Dibelius, and Moffatt), but I am a little more doubtful of interpolation claims that lack evidence from textual criticism than those that have it. The reference to the 500 may plausibly posited as an interpolation, but not for the reasons the author stated. The main reason why the author rejects it -- that it sounds more like a late legendary extravagence -- is wholly unconvincing since similar extravegences are found in early gospel tradition, such as the feeding of 4,000 (Mark 8:9; Matthew 15:38) and 5,000 (Mark 6:35-44; Matthew 16:9; Luke 9:14; John 6:10), which greatly expand the original number of 100 from the OT source (2 Kings 4:42-44) and which overshadow the more modest 500 of 1 Corinthians. The number of 500 is also not so outrageous when compared to 120 of Acts 2:1-13, and if it draws on this tradition, it attests the very early view of Jesus appearances as visionary experiences, of the sort Paul claims he had. These were later replaced in gospel tradition with stories emphasizing the physical corporeality of Jesus' body. The claim that no trace of the 500 exists in the gospel tradition is also not so convincing because the written narrative gospels preserve only a fraction of the 1st century lore circulating about Jesus, and whatever resurrection appearances were originally narrated in Mark have been lost. The main reason I find the interpolation idea somewhat plausible is that it interrupts a structural parallelism: the reference is first to an individual (Cephas), then to a group (the Twelve), then a reference to an individual (James), and then to a group (all the apostles), which the addition of the 500 obscures. Plus the mention that some of the 500 "have died" might also indicate a time later than that of Paul, though this is not conclusive.

I am less convinced that the reference to James is sub-Pauline. The argument that the resurrection story was created to smooth over the competing claim that he rejected Jesus before the crucifixion and explain his authority over the Jerusalem church strikes me as particularly weak. For one thing, we have no reason to assume that Paul or the Paulinist author of the 1 Corinthians passage was aware of the tradition that James had rejected Jesus. One could argue that the latter tradition arose later among Gentile Christians as an anti-Jewish Christian polemic aimed to criticize their founding leader. Second, it strikes me as odd that James the brother of Jesus would not have advanced his own claim of having seen Jesus personally -- particularly in the face of competing claims by those who never even knew Jesus when he was alive (e.g. Paul). Since his followers accepted the resurrection of Jesus as a fact (cf. the reference to "Jesus Christ, our glorified Lord" in James 2:1), I see no reason to doubt the claim of 1 Corinthians 15:7 that James or his followers advanced their own story of Jesus' resurrection, or view this claim as a late accretion to the tradition.

The passage in 1 Corinthians 15:5-11 does interreupt the flow of the text and v. 12 follows nicely from v. 4. So that's one point in favor of the whole passage as being an interpolation. But not all asides are interpolations. And the author's argument that v. 3-5 are also part of the interpolation makes no sense to me. The statement in v. 12 that "now if (ei de) Christ raised from the dead is what has been preached," is logically dependent on an antecedent proposition of Christ's resurrection as being the gospel but nothing in v. 1-2 mentions Christ's resurrection at all. Moreover, the structure of v. 1-4 follows very closely the structure of Romans 1:1-5 which strongly suggests that v. 3-5 were part of the original formula. Moffitt and others point to v. 5-11 as being the interpolation, not the preceding two verses. The strongest piece of evidence, in my opinion, that vs. 5-11 are not an interpolation is the very primitive view of resurrection appearances as visionary experiences, indicated especially by Paul's inclusion of himself as having seen Jesus like Cephas and the rest (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:1-6, Acts 9:3-19; 22:1-16; 26:9-18), which cleaves well with Paul's repeated claims of having received his teaching directly from the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:10, 9:14), as if he were in direct communication with the glorified Jesus, and the very similar statement in the same epistle: "Have I not seen Jesus our Lord" (1 Corinthians 9:1). The docetic character of some of the attested appearance stories (Luke 24:28-31) and the tradition of the appearance of Jesus to Stephen (Acts 7:56) also attest the visionary character character of early epiphany stories, displaced at a later date by an emphasis on corporeal appearances that undermine docetic claims (cf. Luke 24:36-43; John 20:24-28; Ignatius, Smyrnaeans 3:2). Still, it could be argued that the inclusion of Paul's appearance to the list was dependent on the pre-existing statement in 1 Corinthians 9:1.

63

Dean meltdown

by Seven in

howard dean...lol!

now perhaps the party will take a long and serious look at it's only electable candidate-john kerry!!

as dean slips, the democrats' drama rises .

Leolaia

I've liked Clark for his anti-Iraq War stance and the fact that he didn't have anything to do with the vote on Iraq unlike Kerry.

63

Dean meltdown

by Seven in

howard dean...lol!

now perhaps the party will take a long and serious look at it's only electable candidate-john kerry!!

as dean slips, the democrats' drama rises .

Leolaia

Please, please, please, please, please let's not have Nader again dividing the vote and making it a shoo-in for Bush.

16

It was the food that did it!

by onacruse in

ah, to finally know why we die, it makes so much sense!

(bold added)

(1925) the way to paradise pp.

Leolaia

I agree with you except that I think it is possible to have internal development of theology that doesn't have to draw on external pagan sources, and I construe much of the basal material the Israelites developed into their religion was inherited from their own indigenous Canaanite heritage. Eden is probably from external influence, the Flood defintiely was, but I think the folklore about Danel and the rephaim for instance are probably native concepts to the Israelites, inasmuch as they descend from pre-Israelite Canaanite culture.

63

Dean meltdown

by Seven in

howard dean...lol!

now perhaps the party will take a long and serious look at it's only electable candidate-john kerry!!

as dean slips, the democrats' drama rises .

Leolaia

Thank you Dean sooooo much for turning off the American public, bless your heart!!!! I'm starting to get psyched about a Kerry-Clark or Kerry-Edwards ticket.

77

Resurrection Appearance to James the Just

by Leolaia in

apostle paul provides an early list of jesus' resurrection appearances in 1 corinthians 15. it is important because this list was written before our canonical gospels were written and thus serves as an independent source of information.

paul writes:"christ died for our since, in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared first to cephas and secondly to the twelve.

next he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died; then he appeared to james, and then to all the apostles; and last of all he appeared to me too; it was as though i was born when no one expected it.

Leolaia

Apostle Paul provides an early list of Jesus' resurrection appearances in 1 Corinthians 15. It is important because this list was written before our canonical gospels were written and thus serves as an independent source of information. Paul writes:

"Christ died for our since, in accordance with the scriptures; that he was buried and that he was raised to life on the third day, in accordance with the scriptures; that he appeared first to Cephas and secondly to the Twelve. Next he appeared to more than 500 of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died; then he appeared to James, and then to all the apostles; and last of all he appeared to me too; it was as though I was born when no one expected it." (1 Corinthians 15:4-8)

Paul's list omits any mention of appearances to Mary of Magdala or to "women" as in Matthew, Luke, and John. Matthew relates an appearance to the Eleven on a mountain in Galilee, while Mark 16:14 refers to an appearance to the Eleven "as they were reclining at a meal." The appearance to Peter is mentioned in Luke 24:34, alluded to in Mark 14:27-30 and 16:7, John 21, and Gospel of Peter 14:3. The appearance to 500 disciples is not otherwise known, though it might be an allusion to the same sort of group visionary experience as the 120 who experienced Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13). What it interesting is the special mention of an apperance to James, which is not attested in the four canonical gospels of the Western churches. It is however mentioned in the Gospel of the Hebrews, a Jewish-Christian gospel from the Ebionite community which otherwise looked to James the Just as their founding apostle. The relevant passage is as follows:

"And when the Lord had given the linen cloth to the servant of the priest, he went to James and appeared to him. For James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he had drunk the cup of the Lord until he should see him risen from among those that sleep. And shortly thereafter the Lord said, 'Bring a table and bread!' And immediately it is added that he took the bread, blessed it, and broke it and gave it to James the Just and said to him, 'My brother, eat your bread, for the Son of Man has risen from among those that sleep." (Gospel of the Hebrews fr. 7:2)

This story is dependent on the Empty Tomb story of Mark because Jesus is presented as buried with a linen shroud (Mark 15:45), which he then gives to the servant of the priest (cf. Mark 15:1). It is interesting that the apperance to James in the Jewish-Christian gospel occurs at a meal, which recalls the pseudo-Markan reference in Mark 16:14 of Jesus showing himself "to the Eleven themselvs while they were at a table." This latter scene recalls the Last Supper in Mark 14:22-25, and the Gospel of the Hebrews specifically links the meal James has with Jesus with the institution of the Eucharist ("the hour in which he had drunk the cup of the Lord"). The formula of "taking bread, blessing it, and breaking it" derives from the Eucharist narrative (cf. Mark 14:22). The statement about James not eating bread "until he should see [Jesus] risen from among those that sleep," is similarly modeled on Jesus' statement in Mark 14:25 that "I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God." This fasting is also consistent with the lifestyle of the Ebionites.

A non-Eucharistic appearance to the Eleven in Luke 24:36-49 involves eating a meal, but not of bread but of "a piece of grilled fish". This story involves Jesus actually eating food (absent in the Gospel of Hebrews story), but not the bread of the Eucharist. Eucharistic motifs were already recruited in the construction of an earlier scene in Luke 24:13-35 (cf. Mark 16:12-13) in which Jesus has a meal in Emmaus with Cleopas and another "at a table, taking the bread and saying the blessing; then he broke it and handed it to them," and it was this action that identified Jesus as the Christ (v. 35), but like the Jacobian story Jesus is not said to have eaten the bread. I wonder if there is any significance to Jesus eating fish instead of bread -- could it have something to do with the notion of the Eucharistic bread as the body of Jesus? Interestingly though, Jesus refers to the bread as "your bread" though he is the one who hands it to his brother.

16

It was the food that did it!

by onacruse in

ah, to finally know why we die, it makes so much sense!

(bold added)

(1925) the way to paradise pp.

Leolaia

onacruse.....here it is, enjoy!

http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/millions/millions.html