Ben C. Smith wrote:
I do think it interesting that some early writings (such as 1 Peter, but there are others) seem to focus on the suffering more than on the death. But words cannot express how much I disagree with your overall answer to the question. Approaches differ, I suppose.
Yes, Ben, approaches differ, but it’s not my intention to offend anyone.
Of the other early Christian writings which emphasize Jesus’ suffering, I believe the Epistle of Barnabas in particular is interesting. But in this text not only suffering (παθειν) is important. Below I will also discuss the noun ζωἠ and the verb ζωοποιεω because when combined with παθειν (and with αναστασις εκ νεκρων) they provide a clear picture of the core of Christian origins.
First of all, in Barnabas the suffering theme is elaborated in detail without any connection with ‘death’ and/or ‘resurrection’. I only quote the most important verses:
• V:2:
‘He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities, by his stripes we were healed.’
• V:13:
‘And he was willing to suffer thus, for it is necessary that he should suffer on a tree, for the Prophet says of him, “Spare my soul from the sword”, and, “Nail my flesh, for the synagogues of the wicked have risen against me.” ’
• VI:7:
‘Since therefore he was destined to be manifest in the flesh his Passion was foretold.’
• VII:2:
‘If then the Son of God, though he was the Lord and was destined to judge the living and the dead suffered in order that his wounding might make us alive, let us believe that the Son of God could not suffer except for our sakes.’
Let us also take a look at the two occasions when ζωἠ is used in the first chapter:
• Verse 4:
ὅτι μεγαλη πιστις και αγαπη ἐγκατοικει ἐν ὑμιν ἐπ’ ἐλπιδι ζωης αυτου: ‘because great faith and love dwell in you in the hope of his life.’
• Verse 6:
Τρια ουν δογματα ἐστιν κυριου· ζωης ἐλπις …: There are then three doctrines of the Lord: the hope of life …
These ‘life’ translations are not really convincing. Is Jesus’ mere physical existence meant? How could this be a source of hope? Or Jesus’ exemplary conduct? As far as I can see, Jesus' exemplary behavior is not a theme of this text.
I believe there is a better option, for which I address myself to Josephus. At the end of his
Life he describes crucifixion of three rebels, one of whom survives (Life 421):
‘Two of them died in the physicians’ hands; the third survived.’ (ὁ δε τριτος ἔζησεν).
If ‘to live’ would be the only possible translation of the verb ζω (and, as ancient Greek words are quite elastic, this is not to be expected) one would expect ‘the third lived’ at the end of the sentence above. But from the context it is clear that ‘survived’ is the correct translation here. I believe we can look at the verb ζω and the substantive ζωη in the same way, which means that, depending on the context, ‘survival’ is a possible translation of ζωἠ. This yields the following translations of these two verses:
• Verse 4:
‘because great faith and love dwell in you in the hope of his survival (=in the hope aroused by his survival).’
• Verse 6:
‘There are then three doctrines of the Lord: the hope of survival (= the hope aroused by (Jesus’) survival …’
So in the first chapter of this writing maybe the hope which stems from Jesus’ spectacular survival (at the moment when so many others died) is emphasized. In verse 6 Jesus’ survival is even considered the very first element of Christian doctrine. As ‘survival’ is the historical equivalent of the mythological ‘resurrection’, the core of Christian beliefs, this sounds quite convincing.
Then there is the use of the verb ζωοποιεω in VI:17 and later on in XII:5 (I leave aside the other mentions of this verb):
• VI:17:
πρωτον το παιδον μελιτι, ειτα γαλακτι ζωοποιειται: ‘A child first survives (or stays alive) on honey, and afterwards on milk’.
• Now we use this ‘survive’ translation in verse XII:5, which interestingly combines the ‘suffering’ and ‘survival’ themes:
‘Again Moses makes a representation of Jesus, showing that he must suffer (παθειν), and shall himself survive (ζωοποιησει) though they will believe that he has been put to death, by the sign given when Israel was falling…’
I believe this verse is of utmost importance. It says that:
• Jesus suffered (from torture and execution on the cross).
• The Romans thought they had put him to death.
• Jesus survived unexpectedly.
• This happened when Israel was falling, so at the end of the war (August 70 CE).
• A sign – of hope, of God’s intervention – was given at the moment when Israel fell in ruins, and this sign was a counterweight to near-total annihilation.
• There is a parallel between Moses’s unexpected survival of an attempt of infanticide and Jesus’ unexpected survival of his execution.
This is nothing but my chronological theory in a nutshell. Loeb translates ζωοποιησει as ‘shall himself give life’, but in my opinion this translation makes the whole sentence meaningless.
Verse XII:5 completes as follows:
‘…(for the Lord made every serpent bite them, and they were perishing, for the fall took place in Eve through the serpent) in order to convince them that they will be delivered over to the affliction of death because of their transgression’. Knowing that the serpent was the standard of the Roman cohorts, this second part of the verse fully supports the first. The tone of the Epistle of Barnabas is very anti-Jewish and this explains the last part of this verse: the author says that so many Jews died during the war because of their wickedness.
It goes without saying that
την εκ νεκρων αναστασιν in V:6 has nothing to do with resurrection after three days of physical death, but that here also Jesus’ survival and recovery from the midst of so many deadly war victims is meant. Once more, it’s all about the war.