24 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb, taking the spices that they had prepared. 2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they went in, they did not find the body.[** you do not have permission to see this link **]
is it reasonable to assume that the remembered words of jesus which were conveyed to the disciples were taken as idle tales?
i’m thinking that why would luke want the women to narrate their experience without backing it up with the remembered words?
Just reading the plain words of the Scripture, it seems to me that (1) the women remembered words Jesus said while he was still in Galilee, (2) they told the disciples everything that happened when they went to the tomb and (3) the disciples considered the story about what happened at the tomb to be an idle tale. I do not read the verse as meaning the disciples considered Jesus’ words to be an idle tale. That is just my plain reading.
Lawyerskeptic said
Just reading the plain words of the Scripture, it seems to me that (1) the women remembered words Jesus said while he was still in Galilee, (2) they told the disciples everything that happened when they went to the tomb and (3) the disciples considered the story about what happened at the tomb to be an idle tale. I do not read the verse as meaning the disciples considered Jesus’ words to be an idle tale. That is just my plain reading.
That’s right. It also makes sense that the women’s story was considered an idle tale since women were seen as gossipers and not reliable; however, this has the flavor of Markan unlikely witnesses and I am willing to believe that Jesus did not see his crucifixion as the culmination of his ministry. Geza Vermes wrote that it seemed to hit the disciples out of the blue. We can certainly view the whole “the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners, and be crucified” speech as a later theological development as Christians thought more about the significance of posthumous sightings. Also, this may feed back into your suspicion about the disappearance of disciples from the stories.
Lawyerskeptic said
I’m happy you think so, but I don’t see the connection. Can you clarify?
Sure!
Part of that is in the sense that this looks like a Markan “unlikely witnesses” ( a literary device?) . The more important part is that this definitely reflects
theological developments. Consider that it is highly unlikely that Jesus saw his death as part of his mission. Do you think his disciples would have been receptive to the whole idea being put on his lips. It seems that, I can not think of its source in the text- the early poem casting Jesus as taking on the form of a servant etc may have been the original understanding of the posthumous sightings: Jesus was raised not because he was God, but because he was a loyal servant who pleased god very much and was rewarded.
If you’re someone like Peter and this is what you believed, I would think the whole ” Son of Man must be handed over to sinners, and be crucified speech” on the lips of Jesus might be a bit hard to swallow (I haven’t finished HJBG; yet).
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)