You would think bunny outfit would be more appropriate in this case.
Well, since he came back from the dead I’m thinking a red lined black cape was probably part of the outfit.
So this guy shows up and says he’s your old buddy. He’s got a new body, a new face and new clothes but you believe his story that he has risen from the dead. For the next two thousand years you’re able to convince others that this guy who bore no resemblance to your buddy wasn’t just pulling a scam. I think he was just hoping to cop the keys to your friend’s old Trans-Am.
I wish these folks worked at the Dept Of Motor Vehicles. I have a hard enough time convincing them of my identity and I have credit cards and a birth certificate.
First consider in times past the Hebrew scriptures show in Abrahams case at Genesis 18:1-15 and in Lots’ case at Genesis 19:1-3, the Angels that appeared to them were already clothed when they materialized bodies for themselves.
Now…under the Laws given to Moses, animals were sacrificed for their sins on a regular basis because we’re all in a sinful state before GOD (Romans 5:12). When the animal was sacificed that body was gone, done for, no longer existed. In the perfect Law from GOD given to Moses was impossible to keep showing we need a savior who sacrifice would be enough for once and all time not only for Israel but for the whole human race.
Thus fast forward to Jesus day he said at (Matthew 20:28) …“Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.” He did this according to Hebrews 9:15-28, The body that was crucified and buried (sacificed) is gone to fufill that ransom provision. After his resurrection Jesus materialized a different body with clothing like the earliar angels did. When you read the account, after his ressurection no one recognized him, (Luke 24:15-24) until later when he started to relate many things to them in a way that only he could in that infamous style of teaching.
(1 John 2:1-2) …'My little children, I am writing YOU these things that YOU may not commit a sin. And yet, if anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one. And he is a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, yet not for ours only but also for the whole world’s.”
(1 Corinthians 15:22) …For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive.
I know this is more than what you asked for…but, to understand one point, the whole picture has to sometime be drawn.
No. The Gospels are very unclear on whether the body was wrapped. They directly contradict one another on whether the body was embalmed.and by whom.
Mark: “So Joseph bought some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock…When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body.”
Matthew: “Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock.” No mention of embalming.
John: “Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.”
Luke: “Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid. It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.”
So Mark and Luke both state specifically that the body was not embalmed because there was not enough time before the Sabbath, and both state specifically that the women were going to do it, not Joseph. Matthew makes no mention of embalming at all. John is the only one who says that the body was embalmed, though no explanation is given how the body was embalmed in just a few hours.
Note that the phrase “wrapped it in linen cloth” does not imply wrapping, but simply placing. Especially in the context of Mark and Luke, where later embalming was to take place, it is highly unlikely that it was wrapped.
No, because the word is commonly translated as “coat”. There is no suggestion anywhere that it was a loincloth.
No, though I have seen nothing to suggest otherwise either.
Blake, can you explain how you get from “wrapping” or “placing” (a non-essential distinction in this case) in (a clean, possibly new) cloth to “never placing in a cloth at all, but leaving in a loincloth he died in”? Especially since sindon suggests a fine cloth. I made an egregious mental error upthread in forgetting about the finding of the burial clothes. However, I don’t see the mistake in claiming the synoptics are almost identical in their description of the linen. John does say more, but if you want to be a literalist he never directly claims Jesus was embalmed, although he strongly suggests it.
The notable thing about the young man in Mark is that he was only wearing the robe, and not the usual inner plus outer garment that was common. If Jesus had only worn that, it might have been noticed if someone had seen him in it.
However, I think the description of the linens being in the grave suggest that’s a moot point. Unless you want to take the linens left behind as being only burial strips (and only even suggested beforehand by John) and the robe/cloth as being worn. That takes some strained reading of the text, in my opinion.
I have.
Every reference I have seen on crucifixion says that the victim was stripped naked; a few moderate this by saying “usually”.
Some references:
http://www.roman-colosseum.info/roman-life/roman-crucifixion.htm
http://www.orlutheran.com/html/crucify.html
http://www.theopedia.com/Crucifixion
http://www.frugalsites.net/jesus/crucifixion.htm
I would amend a statement I made above; I implied that all gospels used the same word for the cloth, whereas John only refers to “linen cloths” (othonion, which in this context suggest strips used for burial, but is not exclusive of just a piece of linen cloth).
Also, I see that Blake was earlier responding to the “did Joseph dress him for burial” question. My response wasn’t meant to be affirmative or negative, just what description we have. The main point was that some sort of nice linen cloth (which may or may not have been a robe) would have been at hand.
Mary Magdelene saw him and he was dressed like the gardener, so he must have had some one bring him clothes. Strange that she didn’t recognize him, I guess he changed his looks when he died? It is hard to see how so many who knew him didn’t recognize him, some only recognized him in the breaking of bread. His clothes must have been supernatural because they went through the wall with him when he appeared to the apostles, I would think it hard for material things to go through walls!
Sorry, the substitutionary theory of atonement aside, this statement is just wrong. It’s a critical point of the resurrection that Jesus was raised in the same, yet glorified, body he had before his crucifixion. In fact, that’s how he proved his identity to Thomas, by offering the apostle to feel the holes in his hands, feet and side.
The resurrection of Christ was a prefiguration of the resurrection of all people on the last day. It’s not a new body; it’s a restored body.
I assume he polished his nails, too.
He was still wearing the same clothes from Friday night, muttering about the “worst hangover ever” and how he may have blacked out for a little while.
Surely he would have been naked unless the clothing had risen as well.
If you can speak a word and create a universe, would it be so hard to just say “let there be clothes.”
He resurrected wearing his Mormon magic undies, obviously.
.
People were crucified nude. They were customarily either left on the cross to rot. or buried commonly in lime pits, but going along with the Gospel story he was taken down, wrapped in linen strips (not a shroud or a sheet), and laid on a slab.
Luke says the apostles saw the linen strips on the ground when they came to see he empty tomb. so Jesus would have been naked.
If he had been lain on the slab without being wrapped, he still would have been naked. He would have been crucified naked (no loincloth. The images are a bit of pious censorship), and no one would have put clothes on a dead body.
He is risen indeed.
Technicolor dream coat.
Methinks Jolson has been taught the resurrection view held be the Jehovah’s Witnesses. However, otherwise orthodox Anglicans such as Dorothy Sayers & the late Father Robert Brow have also expressed similar views.
I have always wondered why time was taken to fold the head cloth,and if clothes were put in the tomb for Jesus,and why every one he knew(including his Mother) were surprised that he wasn’t there, when he had said he would rise on the 3d day!!
If my child told me he would die in Friday and arise on Sunday morning, I would just expect him for breakfast, and I sure wouldn’t go to his tomb! His close followers must not have believed him.