Such masses of content! Today, Davila points to Jenkins, on the appearance of Christ to the five hundred. Which, to Jenkins, looks much like Luke 2's depiction of the Holy Ghost upon a good deal more than five hundred.
Jenkins' article convinces me, overall. Jenkins himself implicitly credits N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (2003). I wonder if I could make Jenkins' argument even more convincing.
Indeed, docetism was a thing in early Christendom. We can deduce this from orthodox antidocetism: already 1 John insisted upon a tactile experience, which epistle / encyclical was in turn already ascribed to the Apostle John later in Luke. Jenkins is surely correct to flag Luke as later (and dependent). Luke is also later than Paul's first scroll of epistles (and dependent).
Another point (I'd add in favour) is that Luke's Ascension posts a limit upon post-Resurrection dialogues, speeches, and general appearances as were already rife in Luke's day, possibly not always orthodox. (That Gospel which Ignatius quoted to Smyrna is a rare orthodox example.) Even Luke cannot rewrite the vision of Paul, so v. 9:5 has Jesus make that cameo, the final cameo. Instead Luke wants the Holy Spirit to make those appearances. This theory isn't really Trinitatian thought, although it will develop into that direction. More, Luke's aim was gatekeeping: if people were seeing Jesus, these visions were fake (if not gay). Only Luke's sect had access to the Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment