The Resurrection

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

The Resurrection

Post by archibald »

Quick question.......

Is there any mileage in the suggestion that Jesus was not supposed to have resurrected? By which I mean, not cheated death. Just died.

Any hints from texts that not all early groups of followers believed he did (resurrect)?

I read something, somewhere, in passing, that Hegesippus (I think) referred to such beliefs (or lack of beliefs I suppose).
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: The Resurrection

Post by John2 »

Hegesippus appears to refer to the resurrection in EH 3.16:
And when they [the grandsons of Jesus' brother Judas] were asked concerning Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to appear, they answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and to give unto every one according to his works.
That's the only thing I can think of from him.

But Paul seems to be saying that there were Christians (or others) who did not believe in the resurrection in 1 Cor. 15:12-19:
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: The Resurrection

Post by Joseph D. L. »

I'm of the mind of Michael Xoroaster: that the idea of resurrection associated with Logos came about with the eclipse of 59 ad and Revelation, chapter six. The Revelation of Gabriel is also peculiar, though there is ongoing debate over its meaning.

The resurrection of Jesus, I believe, originally had more to do with the spirit of Christ transmigrating from one host to another.

Resurrection seems to be the first priority of the theology, as it was interested in a restored and resurrected Temple. This is why Jesus's resurrection in all canonical Gospels is liken to the Temple. It also confers with Revelation 22:3, in which the curse referred to is the curse of Adam and Eve: manual labour, childbirth, but most of all, death.
archibald
Posts: 323
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 12:07 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Re: The Resurrection

Post by archibald »

Thanks so far guys.

So the mainstream version is Jesus dies, pops back briefly after 3 days (either as a ghostly vision or in apparently corporeal form) and then promises to return again later. It's only the middle bit I'm querying here. Not to mention that the middle bit supposedly happened a few times (eg to 'Paul').

If (and it's clearly a big if) there were followers who did not think the middle bit had happened, they might be.....Judean Jews, who had been following a leader, of some sort (I find myself leaning these days towards thinking he might have been a bit of a political militant, more so than described in the NT) who had gotten himself killed. They would have elected a new leader and more or less carried on, their agenda still needing to be pursued. Possibly they were hoping their leader would return in power at the end times they may have been predicting.
Last edited by archibald on Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: The Resurrection

Post by John2 »

Joseph D.L. wrote:
The resurrection of Jesus, I believe, originally had more to do with the spirit of Christ transmigrating from one host to another.
This may not be exactly what you mean here, but it reminds me of what Hipplotyus says about Ebionites in Ref. 7.22:
They live conformably to the customs of the Jews, alleging that they are justified. according to the law, and saying that Jesus was justified by fulfilling the law. And therefore it was, (according to the Ebionaeans,) that (the Saviour) was named (the) Christ of God and Jesus, since not one of the rest (of mankind) had observed completely the law. For if even any other had fulfilled the commandments (contained) in the law, he would have been that Christ. And the (Ebionaeans allege) that they themselves also, when in like manner they fulfill (the law), are able to become Christs; for they assert that our Lord Himself was a man in a like sense with all (the rest of the human family).


This is idea is thought to be related to the idea of the "Primal Adam" in Paul and the later Clementine writings. Churton, for example, notes that:
... the Pseudo-Clementine romances take the Primal Adam (Man) to be Christ ... Paul was also aware of the "Primal Adam" theory. Paul held Jesus to be the "Second Adam," a restoration of the primal or heavenly Adam whose link to humankind had been sundered by Adam's "original" sin in the garden of Eden ...

https://books.google.com/books?id=01ooD ... es&f=false


And Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects by Frederik, Klijn, Reinink notes that according to Epiphanius:
Some Ebionites say that Adam is Christ ... This concept cannot be found in this precise form in Pseudo-Clementine literature, but it is not difficult to draw this conclusion from certain passages in these writings ... Other Ebionites say that Christ was a spirit, the first creation. He was Lord of the angels. He entered into Adam, appeared to the Patriarchs in bodily form, and finally again assumed the form of Adam and in this guise appeared to mankind. He was crucified and returned "on high." Here we find certain similarities with passages in Pseudo-Clementine literature. The idea of Christ appearing to the Patriarchs is very ancient and can already be found in the writings of Justin Martyr. Finally, some Ebionites say that Jesus was a man on whom Christ descended.

https://books.google.com/books?id=zs43A ... us&f=false
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2099
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: The Resurrection

Post by Charles Wilson »

"You are dust and you return to dust..." (Genesis)
"The dead know nothing..." (Ecclesiastes)

And so on...

One of the UNIQUE appeals of Judaism at that time was a self-consistent philosophy arguing that the breath that is in us all leaves and that's it. We're gone. Contrast that with the idea of an immortal soul and literally hundreds of gods vying for power and you get human sacrifice, etc.

At least, for a particular wing of the religion. The faction that won out allowed that there would be a resurrection. That was all that was needed. The Romans rewrote that into a New Religion that certainly surprised many in that there was (1), a Soul that lived (Impingement of Plato) and (2), the New Religion which replaced the retrograde Judaism was "actually" predicted within the Texts of Judaism.

Not even God could raise a body back to life after 4 days in the tomb - but Jesus could (Joel 6). The idea of human sacrifice being renewed argues that the New religion was a human produced device for effect.
***

My POV argues that there was a Judaic Story that followed the traditional view with no immortal soul. The Priest who Survived Once (but not twice) ends with the Priest on a cross shouting "My God, my God, for this was I spared?" Peter, or someone who travelled with him, sees the Priest die. "...But didn't God promise that he would stand by us all in the Temple? How...?"

This character does not understand and he returns to the Priesthood to finish out his days. Thus, the bewilderment of the Beatitudes. This is what was rewritten into the story of a savior/god, a human sacrifice made immortal.

It wasn't always that way.

CW
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: The Resurrection

Post by Joseph D. L. »

This may not be exactly what you mean here, but...
Actually this is very relevant.

I have long been of the opinion that the Apostles were those who sent to preach the resurrection. This makes the event at Pentecost, when the Apostles are filled with the Holy Spirit, a testament to the resurrection. Indeed, Justin seems to imply just that: that they were Apostles only after the resurrection.

I'm also a proponent of the substitution hypothesis, and that the Lazarus episode, the releasing of Barabbas, and Simon of Cyrene, were in fact allegories for this resurrection. One dies; the other takes their place. Effectively, it's like The Prestige. (Hint, hint)

And I have a critical argument for this that I'm saving for my book, and one source, though apocryphal, that does bare witnesse to this idea. But this reveals the entire inner workings of the tradition and theology.
Post Reply