hmike...The account of the communal resurrection in Matthew 27:51-54 shows signs of later redaction by a Paulinist who attempted to awkwardly harmonize the story with Pauline theology. The Diatessaron attests an early stage in the text that lacked the Pauline touches.
What Happened to the Body?
by hmike 32 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Carmel
I can't remember the reference, but in one history text I recall reading where the wife of Constantine commissioned a delegation to go to Jerusalem and recover the body of Jesus. The physical resurrection apparently was not a central teaching of the church at that time or she would have not considered that the body was still burried some where near the west gate. I blieve there are Jewish traditions that also give the same account.
carmel of the "wish I could remember better" class
-
hmike
What if he wasn't resurrected? .... Well, many of those crucified as criminals by the Romans would be thrown into common graves (usually lime ones which did a quick job of decomposing the flesh). There'd be no way to easily point to a body to refute the claims. I don't find that a very inspiring ending to a life that meant alot to so many - but its one possible (and also a likely) scenario.
Well it is all just speculating on plausibilities. But assuming the crucifixion really did happen to this man Jesus, and the gospels give an accurate portrayal of his socioeconomic status , its not too much of a stretch to presume that his fellow low class jews, or even his family had no real influence to get permission from the Romans to take possession of the body right away. Kinda hard then to pick it out of a common grave without modern day DNA forensics. I don't want to make his followers out to be opportunists or cynical in that scenario. Its only one possibility. Again, if real, I like to think that someone did get possession of the body so that it was given a decent burial.
Hi,
I brought back this ancient post to speculate about this specific issue brought up by Midget-Sasquatch. Some time ago, I was watching a show on the History Channel about Jesus, and they mentioned the idea that his body was dumped in a mass grave for criminals and lost. After working on the posts I made in the "Historical Jesus" topic, I got to thinking...
Let me make the assumption that there actually was a 1st C. Jew named Jesus who went around teaching about God, love, mercy, and forgiveness, and who did many good things for people (not necessarily of the miraculous type, as we would consider a miracle to be). This man made enough of an impression in the area at the time for people to write about him and his deeds, even if I were to concede that the written accounts were a generation removed and based on oral transmission, in which case they could have been embellished along the way. It seems reasonable to me that he would have attracted at least one, and probably a few, wealthy, influential benefactors who had been personally touched by his work, or at least wanted to support his efforts for whatever reason (this sometimes happens with independent, charismatic leaders). These benefactors may have been unwilling or unable to prevent the execution of Jesus, but, considering him to have been a good man who was unjustly killed, and perhaps out of gratitude and a desire to honor him in some way, wouldn't have wanted him treated as a common criminal in death, and so took possession of the body for an honorable burial.
To me, this is more reasonable than losing track of the body in a mass grave.