I already admitted my error there. However, there is room to dispute whether this Mary knew him well enough to pick him out of a line up to begin with/
The main difference is that Jesus’ true appearance doesn’t strike mortals dead.
If there’s room there, it’s awfully tight. While the whole “Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married” business is probably hogwash, it’s still pretty clear that they were close. I mean, I’m lousy at remembering faces, but if someone had cured me of demonic possession, I’m pretty sure I’d remember him. And I wouldn’t exactly go to mourn at the execution of a stranger, either, nor have taken on the duty to annoint his corpse.
I don’t care one way or the other. But, Cecil disagrees with you.
Doesn’t Jesus cast the devils out of her post resurrection.
Actually, it’s the detail of women working with a male corpse that strikes me as strange. Jewish communities have long had burial societies who ritually cleanse the dead prior to burial. Whether a member knows the deceased is irrelevant, every body receives the same care.
However, burial practices were obviously different then. The stuff going on in the Dead Sea scroll caves still strikes me as weird. Sweeping bones into side pits? What’s up with that?
No, it was before. Luke describes her as part of his entourage during his ministry and says Jesus had already cast out her devils.
After this, Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The Twelve were with him, 2and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary (called Magdalene) from whom seven demons had come out; 3Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.(Lk. 8:1-3)
Notice that Luke also claims that MM was giving JC and the 12 financial support. I think it’s pretty safe to conclude that she knew what he looked like.
I sit corrected.
He woke up on the wrong side of the tomb.
For your first point, translations differ. The one I linked to does not say that they were prevented from recognising him, it just says that they did not know who he was. I personally do not speak Aramaic, but if you do, perhaps you would tell us which is the more accurate version. As I understand it, the older translations are full of errors and liberal interpretations, while the newer ones are generally more reliable.
As for your second point, perhaps Jesus was famous for breaking bread, so when he performed his ritual, then they knew who their companion was.
In that story the lack of recognition was only momentary. Mary had a brief glance at the “gardener” through tear-filled eyes. She didn’t ttake a good look at him until he called her name.
I have yet to see any convincing argument that there IS a device.
Here’s a though for you: The Roman soldiers sent to arrest Jesus didn’t recognise him either, until Judas kissed him. Why is that? Some miracle that changed his appearence? Or something else?
Is that particular gospel in Aramaic or Greek? If it’s Greek, we can just ask Diogenes to interpret the original text. If it’s Aramaic, I say we ask one of the Dopers fluent in Hebrew.
Something else. It’s part of a whole series of details that make no sense, or are factually in error, and add up to blaming the Jews for killing Jesus. Betrayal by kiss? Wouldn’t it make more sense to just point to the guy?
I don’t think that this was a characteristic commonly attributed to Greek gods either. There is reference to a similar belief in Exodus, but since John wasn’t writing for a Jewish audience, I’m not sure it’s relevant.
Zeus has sex with mortals as a swan, bull, shower of gold, etc. But, never as himself. When Hera convinces one lover that her beau is not the rich merchant he claims, Zeus is tricked into showing himself to the woman as he really is. She is killed instantly. Her fetus survives. Zeus quickly scoops the fetus up, cuts open his own thigh, stuffs the kid in, and sews up the wound. A few months later, Dionysus pops up.
OTTOMH, I cannot think of any but the minor gods appearing to mortals (half-breeds such as Heracles, Aeneas, etc do not count) without fatal consequences.
Not just a reference. The Jews are told to light incense over the ark so that the smoke will obscure the face of G-d. When two kids try to sneek a peek, they are struck dead. G-d, being a hard ass when it comes to the rules, demands that their father make atonement for raising such disobedient, impious kids.
The mother of Dionysus, Semele, when offered by Zeus anything she asked for, requested to see Zeus’s true form. Bound by his offer, he did so and she burned to a crisp. Zeus saved the fetal Dionysus by sewing him up in his own thigh until birth. I don’t believe this was a trait limited only to Zeus (the true-form-blazing-fatal-to-humans thing, not the baby-in-the-thigh thing).
It’s not Aramaic, it’s Greek (which I do know).
The literal breakdown of Luke 24:16 is as follows:
Hoi | de | opthalmai | auton | ekratounto | tou | me | epignomai | auton
The | but | eyes | their | were taken hold of/restrained/held in check | [so that] not | they could recognize | him
Fixing the syntax for English we get “But their eyes were restrained [lit. ‘taken hold of’] so that they could not recognize him.”
It doesn’t say “they didn’t know him,” it definitely says they we held back from being able to recognize him. The translation you linked to (Contemporary English Version) is not only wrong but one of the more execrable versions I’ve seen. It is not true that newer translations are necessarily better. Some of them (especially the ones that try to convey “contemporary” English) are very loose, paraphrased, biased and selective in what they omit. Here are some better renderings of Lk. 24:16 from BibleGateway:
[(NIV)]but they were kept from recognizing him.](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2024:16;&version=31;)
(NASB) But their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him.
(KJV) But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
(ESV) But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.
(ASV) But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.
(Young’s Literal Translation) and their eyes were holden so as not to know him
Yeah, that’s it. Jesus was the only guy in world who ever broke bread.
Of course it’s a device. Whatever choice an author makes, he makes for a reason. The authors of the Gospes weren’t just randomly inserting plot points with no purpose behind them.
The Romans weren’t part of Jesus’ entourage, for one thing. They weren’t disciples or followers and had no reason to know what he looked like.
For another thing, Mark needed a device by which Jesus could be betrayed by a Jew.
For the record and for future reference, the entire New Testament was composed in Koine Greek. Only the Old Testament (aka, the Hebrew Bible) was written in Hebrew (with a smattering of Aramaic).
There is a chapter in the New Testament that states that Jesus knew they were coming after him to arrest him and he Hid! The reason being, his time has not yet come,as to why they wouldn’t recognize him the second time is a thought to ponder.
Monavis
That’s interesting. Would you be able to dig it up so I could see it? My specific knowledge of the Bible is pretty limited.
Although, if I understand correctly, Jesus and those around him would have spoken in Aramaic. So any dialogue you read in the Gospels is, at best, a translation of what was actually said. (And it’s a translation of a translation if you’re not reading the original Greek.) Not that that’s relevant to this particular point.
Not only that, but seconds before, she’d been peering into a dark tomb. Her eyes are dilated, she turns around and sees a person against the sunlight. She’s dazzled for a bit, then makes out who it is.
Okay, you obviously know much more on this subject than I do. I’ll accept that yours is the correct translation.
:rolleyes: Again with the sarcasm. No, he wasn’t the only person in the world to break bread. But if he was famous for a particular ritual involving bread and wine, then performing that ritual would get him recognised.
Yeah, that’s kinda my point.
I’m not sure that the Last Supper was exactly famous less than a week after Jesus’ death. Unless I’m mistaken and you’re referring to something I don’t remember.
With that long hair and all, he probably had major slab-head too.