ȱ

AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱ
ResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ
CanonicalȱandȱApocryphalȱTextsȱ
ȱ
TOBIASȱNICKLAS,ȱREGENSBURGȱ

Theȱ emptyȱ tombȱ storiesȱ inȱ earlyȱ Christianȱ Gospelsȱ tryȱ toȱ expressȱ inȱ
narrativeȱ whatȱ textsȱ likeȱ 1Corȱ 15:3Ȭ5ȱ sayȱ inȱ theȱ formȱ ofȱ theȱ creed:ȱ Theȱ
crucifiedȱ Jesusȱ ofȱ Nazarethȱ hasȱ beenȱ risenȱ fromȱ theȱ dead.ȱ Theȱ subjectȱ isȱ anȱ
eventȱ whichȱ indeedȱ hadȱ anȱ unprecededȱ historicalȱ effect,ȱ thoughȱ itsȱ
incomprehensibleȱoriginȱremainsȱinȱtheȱfreeȱactȱofȱGod.ȱIfȱtheȱresurrecȬ
tionȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ pointsȱ toȱ God’sȱ interventionȱ inȱ thisȱ world,ȱ thenȱ thisȱ willȱ
openȱ variousȱ possibilitiesȱ toȱ haveȱ angelsȱ playȱ anȱ importantȱ roleȱ asȱ
agentsȱwithinȱtheseȱstoriesȱorȱasȱcommentingȱonȱthisȱevent.ȱInȱthisȱconȬ
tributionȱIȱwouldȱlikeȱtoȱdescribeȱhowȱtheȱvariousȱresurrectionȱaccountsȱ
portrayȱ andȱ developȱ angelȬ(like)ȱ figuresȱ andȱ theirȱ functionsȱ inȱ theseȱ
contexts.ȱ Iȱ shallȱ startȱ withȱ theȱ probablyȱ mostȱ ancientȱ „emptyȱ tombȱ
story“,ȱ theȱ originalȱ endingȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Markȱ (Markȱ 16:1Ȭ8).ȱ Bothȱ
otherȱ Synoptics,ȱ Matthewȱ andȱ Luke,ȱ offerȱ clearlyȱ moreȱ elaboratedȱ
Easterȱ accounts,ȱ whichȱ areȱ atȱ leastȱ partlyȱ basedȱ onȱ Mark;ȱ moreover,ȱ
Luke–ActsȱpresentsȱtwoȱshortȱnarrativesȱonȱJesus’ȱAscension.ȱHowȱdoȱ
theȱ rolesȱ ofȱ angelsȱ developȱ inȱ theseȱ narrativesȱ inȱ comparisonȱ toȱ theȱ
GospelȱofȱMarkȱandȱwhatȱareȱtheȱbackgroundsȱofȱtheseȱdevelopments?ȱ
ButȱtheȱevolutionȱdoesȱnotȱstopȱwithȱtheȱSynoptics:ȱNotȱonlyȱtheȱGospelȱ
ofȱJohnȱprobablyȱpresupposesȱtheȱSynopticsȱ(atȱleastȱMarkȱandȱLuke),ȱ
butȱ extraȬcanonicalȱ textsȱ areȱ interestingȱ inȱ thisȱ respect,ȱ too:ȱ Whileȱ theȱ
secondaryȱ endingȱ ofȱ Markȱ (Markȱ 16:9Ȭ20;ȱ probablyȱ 2ndȱ centuryȱ CE)ȱ isȱ
notȱimportantȱwithȱregardȱtoȱourȱtopic,ȱweȱdoȱseeȱinterestingȱdevelopȬ
mentsȱinȱapocryphalȱtextsȱofȱthatȱtime,ȱe.g.ȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱPeter.ȱȱ

1.ȱMarkȱ16:1Ȭ8ȱ

TheȱdifficultiesȱregardingȱtheȱendingȱofȱtheȱGospelȱofȱMarkȱhaveȱbeenȱ
wellȱknownȱforȱaȱlongȱtime.ȱIsȱitȱpossibleȱthatȱaȱliteraryȱworksȱdoesȱendȱ
withȱtheȱword ga,r?ȱIsȱitȱimaginableȱ(andȱprobable)ȱthatȱatȱitsȱendingȱaȱ
Gospelȱ recountsȱ theȱ fearȱ ofȱ women,ȱ whoȱ doȱ notȱ dareȱ toȱ reportȱ theirȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
294ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

experience?1ȱ Howȱ peopleȱ tookȱ offenceȱ atȱ onȱ thisȱ endingȱ sinceȱ earliestȱ
timesȱ isȱ shownȱ byȱ theȱ variousȱ continuationsȱ whichȱ wereȱ appendedȱ
later.ȱ Butȱ evenȱ theȱ precedingȱ sceneȱ (Markȱ 16:1Ȭ8)ȱ hasȱ itsȱ difficulty:ȱ
Whatȱ partȱ doȱ theȱ womenȱmentionedȱ hereȱ play?ȱ Withoutȱ expressingȱ itȱ
explicitly,ȱfromȱtheȱveryȱbeginningȱtheȱtextȱdoesȱimplyȱthatȱtheirȱbehavȬ
iourȱisȱfoolish:ȱAfterȱJesus’ȱannouncementsȱofȱhisȱpassionȱandȱresurrecȬ
tionȱ (8:31Ȭ33;ȱ 9:31ȱ andȱ 10:32Ȭ34),ȱ afterȱ theȱ confessionȱ ofȱ theȱ centurion,ȱ
whoȱ acknowledgesȱ underȱ theȱ crossȱ thatȱ theȱ „sufferingȱ righteousȱ one“ȱ
(Psȱ22;ȱ69),ȱ„theȱsufferingȱservant“ȱ(Isaȱ42)ȱJesusȱofȱNazarethȱisȱ„theȱSonȱ
ofȱGod“,ȱthereȱis,ȱatȱleastȱaccordingȱtoȱMark,ȱnoȱneedȱtoȱbuyȱodoriferȬ
ousȱoilȱandȱembalmȱtheȱcorpseȱofȱJesusȱ(withȱtheȱintentionȱtoȱpreserveȱ
it)ȱ(Markȱ16:2).2ȱAnyoneȱactingȱlikeȱthisȱcould,ȱaccordingȱtoȱMark,ȱimȬ
possiblyȱ haveȱ understoodȱ theȱ trueȱ significanceȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ death.3ȱ Butȱ
evenȱ theȱ consecutiveȱ actionȱ doesȱ notȱ seemȱ toȱ beȱ calculatedȱ properly:ȱ
Onlyȱonȱtheirȱwayȱtoȱtheȱtombȱtheȱwomenȱrealiseȱthatȱitȱisȱclosedȱbyȱaȱ
largeȱ stoneȱ (Markȱ 16:3).ȱ Toȱ theȱ women’sȱ surprise,ȱ however,ȱ theyȱ findȱ
theȱstoneȱalreadyȱrolledȱawayȱwhenȱtheyȱarriveȱatȱtheȱtomb.ȱ
Theȱdescriptionȱofȱtheȱsceneȱtakingȱplaceȱinȱtheȱtombȱisȱremarkable:ȱ
Whyȱdoesȱtheȱtextȱnotȱwriteȱofȱanȱ„angel“ȱwhomȱtheȱwomenȱencounter,ȱ
butȱofȱaȱneani,skoj,ȱaȱ„youngȱman,“ȱwhoȱisȱseatedȱonȱtheȱright,ȱinstead?ȱ
Aȱlookȱatȱancientȱparallels,ȱwhereȱangelsȱareȱdescribedȱasȱyouthsȱshowsȱ
theȱextraordinarinessȱofȱtheȱMarkanȱaccount:4ȱ
1.ȱAccordingȱtoȱtheȱfifthȱchapterȱofȱtheȱbookȱofȱTobitȱGII,ȱTobitȱadȬ
dressesȱ theȱ angelȱ Rafaelȱ threeȱ timesȱ asȱ neani,skoj (Tobȱ 5:5,7,10ȱ GII;ȱ seeȱ
also;ȱOldȱLatin:ȱiuvenis).ȱOnȱtheȱoneȱhandȱthis,ȱofȱcourse,ȱexpressesȱtheȱ
factȱthatȱRafaelȱactuallyȱappearsȱtoȱhimȱasȱaȱyoungȱman.ȱButȱmoreoverȱ
aȱ secondȱ aspectȱ canȱ beȱ observed,ȱ whichȱ theȱ textȱ (GIIȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ Oldȱ
Latin)ȱemphasizesȱatȱtheȱendȱofȱ5:4:ȱTobitȱaddressesȱRafaelȱasȱaȱ„youngȱ
man“ȱbecauseȱheȱ–ȱcontraryȱtoȱtheȱreaderȱ–ȱisȱignorantȱofȱtheȱfactȱthatȱheȱ
speaksȱtoȱanȱangel.ȱ
2.ȱAȱpassageȱinȱFlaviusȱJosephus’ȱAntiquitatesȱ(AJȱ5,8,2ȱ§ȱ277)ȱisȱfreȬ
quentlyȱ mentionedȱ asȱ aȱ parallel,ȱ too:ȱ Withinȱ theȱ frameworkȱ ofȱ
Josephus’ȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ theȱ SimsonȬcycleȱ theȱ announcementȱ ofȱ SimȬ
son’sȱbirth,ȱmadeȱbyȱanȱangel,ȱisȱtold:5ȱWhenȱtheȱwomanȱwasȱallȱaloneȱinȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
1ȱȱ Onȱtheseȱproblemsȱseeȱalso,ȱe.g.,ȱGiesen,ȱAuferstandene.ȱ
2ȱȱ Onȱtheȱanointmentȱasȱ„analogielosemȱVorgang“ȱseeȱPesch,ȱMarkusevangeliumȱ529Ȭ
530.ȱ Lührmann,ȱ Markusevangeliumȱ 269,ȱ speaksȱ ofȱ aȱ twofoldȱ anachronism:ȱ Jesusȱ isȱ
alreadyȱembalmedȱaccordingȱtoȱMarkȱ14:3Ȭ9ȱandȱafterȱ15:42Ȭ47ȱalsoȱburied.ȱ
3ȱȱ Seeȱ alsoȱ Schenke,ȱ Markusevangeliumȱ 351,ȱ who,ȱ however,ȱ pointsȱ toȱ theȱ women’sȱ
loveȱasȱtheirȱmotiveȱofȱconduct.ȱ
4ȱȱ Theȱ parallelsȱ areȱ used,ȱ mostȱ ofȱ theȱ timeȱ withoutȱ anyȱ substantialȱ comparisons,ȱ toȱ
showȱthatȱMarkȱsupposedlyȱreflectsȱsimilarȱancientȬJewishȱcustoms.ȱ
5ȱȱ TranslationȱaccordingȱtoȱH.ȱClementz.ȱȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 295ȱ

theȱhouse,ȱanȱangelȱofȱGodȱ(a;ggeloj)ȱappearedȱuntoȱherȱinȱtheȱshapeȱofȱaȱslenȬ
derȱandȱbeautifulȱyouthȱ(neani,aj)ȱ….ȱTheȱdifferenceȱtoȱMark’sȱdescriptionȱ
isȱobvious;ȱJosephusȱfirstȱletsȱitȱbeȱknownȱthatȱanȱangelȱappearsȱtoȱSimȬ
son’sȱ motherȱ –ȱ andȱ onlyȱ hereafterȱ describesȱ hisȱ appearance.ȱ Inȱ Mark,ȱ
however,ȱtheȱwordȱ„angel“ȱdoesȱnotȱoccurȱinȱthisȱcontext.ȱ
3.ȱTheȱthirdȱchapterȱofȱ2Maccabeesȱtellsȱaboutȱanȱattemptȱmadeȱbyȱ
Heliodoros,ȱKingȱSeleucus’ȱchancellor,ȱtoȱconfiscateȱtheȱTemple’sȱtreasȬ
ury.ȱWhenȱHeliodorosȱandȱhisȱguardsȱwalkȱintoȱtheȱtreasuryȱchamber,ȱ
however,ȱtheyȱbecomeȱwitnessȱtoȱaȱtremendousȱepiphanyȱ(2Maccȱ3:24):ȱ
Notȱ onlyȱ doesȱ aȱ horseȱ withȱ aȱ „gruesomeȱ rider“ȱ withȱ goldenȱ weaponsȱ
andȱinȱgoldenȱarmorȱappearȱwhichȱisȱchargingȱfuriouslyȱatȱHeliodorosȱ
andȱkickingȱatȱhimȱwithȱitsȱhoofs,ȱthereȱareȱalsoȱtwoȱneani,ai „filledȱwithȱ
enormousȱ power,ȱ inȱ radiantȱ beautyȱ andȱ majesticallyȱ clothed“ȱ menȬ
tioned,ȱwhoȱincessantlyȱwhipȱHeliodorosȱseverely,ȱuntilȱheȱfallsȱtoȱtheȱ
groundȱ (2Maccȱ 3:26Ȭ27).ȱ Whileȱ Heliodorosȱ liesȱ thereȱ toȱ die,ȱ theȱ highȱ
priestȱOniasȱbegsȱtoȱsafeȱhisȱlife,ȱwhereuponȱbothȱyoungȱmenȱappearȱtoȱ
Heliodorosȱonceȱagain6ȱandȱrevealȱtoȱhimȱwhyȱhisȱlifeȱisȱbeingȱsparedȱ
(2Maccȱ3:33Ȭ34).ȱInȱcontrastȱtoȱtheȱfirstȱtwoȱexamples,ȱ2Maccabeesȱdoesȱ
notȱ explicitlyȱ callȱ theseȱ youngȱ menȱ „angels“,ȱ butȱ yetȱ clarifiesȱ muchȱ
moreȱdistinctlyȱthanȱMarkȱdoesȱthatȱtheyȱmustȱbeȱangels.ȱTheyȱareȱacȬ
companyingȱ theȱ „greatȱ Epiphany“,ȱ thatȱ isȱ stagedȱ byȱ Godȱ whoȱ isȱ deȬ
scribedȱasȱ„LordȱofȱtheȱSpirits“(2Maccȱ3:24)ȱhere.ȱȱ
4.ȱInȱthisȱlightȱalsoȱsomeȱpassagesȱfromȱtheȱvisionsȱofȱtheȱShepherdȱofȱ
Hermasȱareȱpossiblyȱofȱinterest.7ȱIȱchooseȱjustȱtwoȱsignificantȱexamples.ȱȱ
VisionȱIIȱ4ȱtellsȱofȱaȱdreamȱofȱHermas:ȱWhileȱIȱsleptȱhowever,ȱbrothers,ȱ
Iȱ receivedȱ aȱ revelationȱ fromȱ aȱ beautifulȱ youngȱ manȱ (u`po. neani,skou euveideȬ
sta,tou),ȱwhoȱspokeȱtoȱme:ȱ„Whoȱdoȱyouȱthinkȱisȱtheȱoldȱwomanȱfromȱwhomȱ
youȱ receivedȱ theȱ letter?“.ȱ Noȱ angelȱ isȱ explicitlyȱ mentionedȱ here.ȱ Butȱ beȬ
causeȱtheȱpassageȱtellsȱofȱaȱrevelation,ȱ(atȱleast)ȱtheȱreaderȱunderstandsȱ
thatȱtheȱyoungȱmanȱmentionedȱmustȱinȱfactȱbeȱanȱangel.ȱButȱmaybeȱtheȱ
textȱ consciouslyȱ speaksȱ ofȱ aȱ neani,skojȱ (andȱ notȱ anȱ „angel“)ȱ here.ȱ Thisȱ
seemsȱprobableȱwhenȱtakingȱaȱlookȱatȱVisionȱIII:ȱHere,ȱnextȱtoȱtheȱ„oldȱ
woman“,ȱwhomȱHermasȱtakesȱforȱtheȱSibylȱatȱfirstȱbutȱwhoȱisȱrevealedȱ
inȱVisionȱIIȱ4ȱasȱbeingȱtheȱ„church“,ȱsixȱyoungȱmenȱturnȱup,ȱwhoȱbuildȱ
aȱmagnificentȱtowerȱonȱtheȱoldȱwoman’sȱcommand.ȱThenȱHermasȱasksȱ
whatȱ thisȱ towerȱ standsȱ for.ȱ Again,ȱ heȱ isȱ toldȱ thatȱ itȱ isȱ theȱ „church“.ȱ
However,ȱ theȱ followingȱ isȱ ofȱ interest:ȱ Evenȱ thoughȱ theȱ contextȱ –ȱ beȬ
causeȱ allȱ thisȱ isȱ aȱ vision!ȱ –ȱ makesȱ clearȱ thatȱ weȱ areȱ confrontedȱ withȱ
heavenlyȱcreatures,ȱHermasȱwantsȱtoȱknowȱwhoȱtheȱsixȱyouthsȱareȱwhoȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
6ȱȱ 2Maccȱ3:33ȱexplicitlyȱrefersȱtoȱ3:26ȱ–ȱtheȱsameȱyoungȱmenȱareȱconcernedȱhere!ȱ
7ȱȱ Textȱaccordingȱto:ȱLindemannȱ/ȱPaulsen,ȱVäter.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
296ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

haveȱ builtȱ theȱ towerȱ (IIIȱ 4).ȱ Onlyȱ thenȱ isȱ explained:ȱ „Thoseȱ areȱ theȱ holyȱ
Angelsȱ ofȱ God,ȱ theȱ firstȱ created;ȱ Toȱ themȱ theȱ Lordȱ hasȱ givenȱ hisȱ wholeȱ creaȬ
tion…“(IIIȱ4).ȱ
Thisȱmeans,ȱhowever,ȱthatȱtheȱsceneȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱMarkȱhasȱanȱ
exceptionalȱpositionȱwithinȱearlyȱJewishȱandȱChristianȱliterature:ȱMarkȱ
neverȱ explicitlyȱ statesȱ thatȱ theȱ neani,skojȱ mustȱ beȱ anȱ angel.ȱ Theȱ readerȱ
canȱonlyȱdeduceȱitȱfromȱhisȱdescriptionȱ(andȱmaybeȱfromȱhisȱmessage):ȱ
Heȱ isȱ clothedȱ withȱ aȱ whiteȱ garmentȱ (onȱ whiteȱ clothingȱ ofȱ angelsȱ seeȱ
alsoȱ1Enȱ71:1;ȱTLeviȱ8:2;ȱTJobȱ3:1;ȱ4:1;ȱ5:2;ȱ2Maccȱ11:8ȱandȱothers).ȱWhiteȱ
clothingȱwasȱmentionedȱinȱMarkȱforȱtheȱlastȱtimeȱinȱ9:3ȱatȱJesus’ȱtransȬ
figuration,ȱwhereȱitȱwasȱmadeȱclearȱthatȱtheȱTransfiguratedȱOneȱemitsȱaȱ
glimpseȱofȱGod’sȱgloryȱformerlyȱconcealedȱwithinȱhimself.ȱTheȱmotifȱofȱ
theȱ „frightening“ȱ womenȱ (16:5)ȱ asȱ wellȱ asȱ theȱ openingȱ wordsȱ ofȱ theȱ
angel’sȱ annunciationȱ „Doȱ notȱ beȱ alarmed!“ȱ (bothȱ timesȱ theȱ verbȱ
evkqambe,omaiȱ isȱ used)ȱ alsoȱ indicateȱ thatȱ thisȱ eventȱ mustȱ beȱ anȱ epiphany,ȱ
orȱmoreȱpreciselyȱanȱangelophany.ȱTheȱcontentsȱofȱtheȱangel’sȱspeechȱisȱ
plain,ȱ butȱ Christologicallyȱ speakingȱ highlyȱ important.ȱ Markȱ 16:6ȱ doesȱ
notȱ speakȱ aboutȱ Jesusȱ asȱ theȱ Christȱ orȱ theȱ Sonȱ ofȱ God,ȱ butȱ ratherȱ asȱ
Jesusȱ ofȱ Nazarethȱ (seeȱ alsoȱ Markȱ 1:9;ȱ 10:47;ȱ 14:68)ȱ toȱ whomȱ theȱ wordsȱ
„theȱcrucifiedȱone“ȱareȱattributed.8ȱThisȱhumanȱbeingȱJesusȱofȱNazarethȱ
whoȱwasȱcrucified,ȱisȱnowȱsaidȱtoȱhaveȱbeenȱrisen.ȱThroughȱtheȱuseȱofȱ
theȱpassiveȱhvge,rqh theȱactingȱofȱGodȱwithȱregardȱtoȱtheȱdeceasedȱJesusȱ
isȱemphasized.ȱThisȱrisenȱJesus,ȱhowever,ȱisȱnoȱlongerȱinȱthisȱplace,ȱbutȱ
goesȱ forthȱ toȱ Galilee,ȱ theȱ regionȱ whereȱ theȱ Jesusȱ storyȱ hadȱ startedȱ acȬ
cordingȱ toȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Mark.ȱ Thereȱ heȱ willȱ appearȱ toȱ womenȱ andȱ
disciples.ȱ Doȱ theȱ closingȱ wordsȱ „justȱ asȱ heȱ toldȱ you“ȱ implyȱ aȱ hiddenȱ
critique?ȱInȱfact,ȱwomenȱandȱdisciplesȱshouldȱhaveȱknownȱfromȱJesus’ȱ
wordsȱ whatȱ wouldȱ happen.ȱ However,ȱ evenȱ inȱ spiteȱ ofȱ theȱ epiphanyȱ
theyȱstillȱdoȱnotȱunderstand.ȱThisȱmightȱbeȱtheȱkeyȱtoȱtheȱquestionȱwhyȱ
theȱtextȱusesȱneani,skoj insteadȱofȱa;ggelojȱtoȱreferȱtoȱtheȱangel.ȱWithȱreȬ
gardȱtoȱthisȱquestion,ȱIȱsuspectȱthatȱtheȱtextȱhasȱaȱdoubleȱmeaning:ȱTheȱ
womenȱ onlyȱ„see“ȱaȱ youngȱ man,ȱ butȱ doȱ notȱ understandȱ thatȱ theyȱ areȱ
encounteredȱbyȱanȱangel,ȱwhoȱbringsȱaȱheavenlyȱmessageȱtoȱthem.ȱBeȬ
causeȱofȱthisȱtheyȱreactȱinȱaȱcompletelyȱwrongȱwayȱandȱdoȱnotȱtellȱanyȬ
oneȱanythingȱaboutȱtheirȱexperience.ȱTheȱreader,ȱhowever,ȱunderstandsȱ
thatȱ aȱ revelationȱ accountȱ isȱ beingȱ told.ȱ Soȱ theȱ angel’sȱ wordsȱ areȱ adȬ
dressedȱtoȱhim.ȱTheȱfactȱthatȱtheseȱwomenȱfailȱtoȱreactȱtoȱthisȱrevelationȱ
appropriatelyȱurgesȱtheȱreaderȱtoȱcompleteȱtheȱGospel’sȱopenȱendȱwithȱ
hisȱownȱactȱofȱproclamation.ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
8ȱȱ Gnilka,ȱ Evangeliumȱ 342,ȱ isȱ rightȱ whenȱ heȱ writesȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ hereȱ isȱ „gänzlichȱ imȱ
HinblickȱaufȱseinȱirdischesȱSchicksalȱbeschrieben.“ȱȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 297ȱ

Aȱ completelyȱ differentȱ explanationȱ asȱ toȱ whyȱ theȱ textȱ speaksȱ ofȱ aȱ
neani,skojȱandȱnotȱofȱanȱa;ggeloj,ȱhasȱbeenȱgivenȱbyȱM.ȱMeyer,ȱwhoȱconȬ
nectsȱtheȱcanonicalȱtextȱofȱMark’sȱGospelȱtoȱfragmentsȱofȱtheȱsoȬcalledȱ
„secretȱGospelȱofȱMark“.9ȱAccordingȱtoȱMeyerȱinȱtheȱ„secretȱGospelȱofȱ
Mark“ȱ aȱ subȬplotȱ canȱ beȱ detectedȱ whichȱ isȱ notȱ toȱ beȱ foundȱ inȱ theȱ caȬ
nonicalȱtext.ȱInȱthisȱsubȬplotȱaȱneani,skoj playsȱaȱroleȱwhichȱcanȱbeȱcomȬ
paredȱ withȱ theȱ roleȱ ofȱ „belovedȱ disciple“ȱ inȱ theȱ gospelȱ ofȱ John.10ȱ Theȱ
lineȱ ofȱactionȱ reconstructedȱ byȱ MeyerȱbeginsȱinȱMarkȱ 10:17Ȭ22,ȱ theȱ acȬ
countȱaboutȱtheȱrichȱman,ȱwhoȱasksȱJesusȱwhatȱheȱneedsȱtoȱdoȱinȱorderȱ
toȱinheritȱeternalȱlife.ȱMeyerȱsuggestsȱthatȱthisȱyoungȱmanȱisȱtheȱsameȱ
whoseȱresuscitationȱisȱmentionedȱinȱfragmentȱ1ȱofȱtheȱ„secretȱGospelȱofȱ
Mark“ȱ(toȱbeȱplacedȱbetweenȱMarkȱ10:34ȱandȱ35).11ȱAccordingȱtoȱMeyerȱ
theȱ richȱ man’sȱ repudiationȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ narratedȱ inȱMarkȱ 10:22ȱ hasȱdrivenȱ
himȱtoȱhisȱdeath;ȱthenȱhisȱresuscitationȱbyȱJesusȱisȱnarrated,ȱwhichȱleadsȱ
himȱ toȱ respondȱ toȱ Jesus’ȱ loveȱ (Markȱ 10:21)ȱ withȱ love.ȱ Nowȱ theȱ youngȱ
manȱisȱinitiatedȱbyȱJesusȱintoȱtheȱsecretȱofȱtheȱKingdomȱofȱGod.ȱMoreȬ
over,ȱ theȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ hisȱ clothingȱ withȱ theȱ wordsȱ peribeblhme,noj
sindo,na evpi. gumnou/ȱ(secretȱMarkȱfrg.ȱ1)ȱcorrespondsȱtoȱMarkȱ14:51ȱwhereȱ
theȱ youngȱ manȱ appearsȱ again.ȱ Meyerȱ findsȱ aȱ furtherȱ indicationȱ ofȱ theȱ
youngȱ manȱ inȱ theȱ secondȱ fragmentȱ ofȱ „theȱ secretȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Mark“,ȱ
whichȱmustȱbeȱinsertedȱinȱMkȱ10:46.ȱTheȱtextȱthenȱwouldȱturnȱoutȱtoȱbeȱ
asȱ follows:ȱ „Andȱ heȱ comesȱ toȱ Jericho.ȱ Theȱ sisterȱ ofȱ theȱ youthȱ whomȱ
Jesusȱlovedȱwasȱthere,ȱalongȱwithȱhisȱmotherȱandȱSalome,ȱbutȱJesusȱdidȱ
notȱ receiveȱ themȱ (fem.).ȱAndȱ asȱ heȱ wasȱ leavingȱ Jerichoȱ withȱ hisȱ disciȬ
plesȱandȱaȱlargeȱcrowdȱBartimaeusȱsonȱofȱTimaeus,ȱaȱblindȱbeggar,ȱwasȱ
sittingȱbyȱtheȱsideȱofȱtheȱroad.“12ȱFinally,ȱaccordingȱtoȱMeyer,ȱtheȱmysȬ
teriousȱpassageȱinȱMarkȱ14:51Ȭ52ȱtellsȱthatȱtheȱbelovedȱyoungȱmanȱfleesȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
9ȱȱ Cf.ȱMeyer,ȱSecretȱGospel.ȱ–ȱTheȱveryȱobscureȱcircumstancesȱunderȱwhichȱtheȱ„secretȱ
GospelȱofȱMark“ȱwasȱdiscoveredȱneedȱnotȱbeȱrepeatedȱhere.ȱTheȱvoicesȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱ
areȱconvincedȱthatȱthisȱtextȱisȱaȱforgeryȱhaveȱnotȱbecomeȱanyȱmoreȱsilentȱinȱtheȱpastȱ
yearsȱthanȱthoseȱwhoȱactuallyȱwantȱtoȱseeȱtracesȱofȱanȱantiqueȱapocryphonȱinȱtheȱalȬ
legedȱ Letterȱ ofȱ Clemensȱ ofȱ Alexandria,ȱ discoveredȱ byȱ M.ȱ Smith.ȱ Iȱ myselfȱ amȱ veryȱ
scepticalȱwithȱregardȱtoȱthisȱtextȱandȱhaveȱarguedȱmyȱpointȱinȱmyȱcontributionȱNickȬ
las,ȱTraditionsȱaboutȱJesusȱinȱApocryphalȱGospels.ȱ–ȱForȱaȱtextȱofȱ„secretȱMark“ȱcf.ȱ
M.ȱSmith,ȱClementȱofȱAlexandria,ȱandȱLührmann,ȱFragmenteȱ182Ȭ185.ȱ
10ȱȱ FurtherȱonȱthisȱalsoȱMeyer,ȱSecretȱMark.ȱ–ȱForȱaȱcriticalȱreviewȱofȱMeyer’sȱargumentsȱ
seeȱalsoȱEvans,ȱMarkȱ8Ȭ16,ȱ427Ȭ428.ȱ
11ȱȱ Thisȱconnection,ȱhowever,ȱcanȱonlyȱbeȱestablishedȱthroughȱanȱartifice:ȱMeyer,ȱSecretȱ
Gospelȱ 122Ȭ123,ȱ hasȱ toȱ insertȱ theȱ neani,skoj ofȱ theȱ Mattheanȱ parallelȱ (Mattȱ 19:20Ȭ21)ȱ
intoȱMark’sȱtext.ȱAccordingȱtoȱhimȱMatthewȱhasȱpreservedȱtheȱoriginalȱwordingȱofȱ
theȱ pericopeȱ here.ȱ Furthermore,ȱ heȱ hasȱ toȱ decideȱ forȱ theȱ weaklyȱ attestedȱ readingȱ
plou,siojȱinȱMarkȱ10:17ȱ(seeȱalsoȱLukeȱ18:18,23).ȱMoreover,ȱtheȱwordsȱofȱtheȱrichȱmanȱ
evk neo,thto,j mou,ȱwhichȱcouldȱimplicateȱthatȱheȱisȱnoȱlongerȱyoung,ȱareȱusedȱtoȱshowȱ
thatȱheȱisȱstillȱyoung.ȱ
12ȱȱ Meyer,ȱSecretȱGospelȱ125.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
298ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

atȱJesus’ȱarrest,ȱjustȱlikeȱtheȱotherȱdisciplesȱhadȱdone,ȱandȱtherebyȱevenȱ
leftȱbehindȱhisȱgarments,ȱwhichȱrepresentedȱtheȱclothingȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱ
preparedȱ forȱ baptism.ȱ Theȱ neani,skojȱ inȱ theȱ tombȱ (Markȱ 16:5Ȭ7)ȱ isȱ thenȱ
notȱ toȱ beȱ interpretedȱ asȱ anȱ angel,ȱ butȱ ratherȱ asȱ theȱ belovedȱ youth,ȱ
whoseȱ storyȱ beganȱ inȱ Markȱ 10:17Ȭ22.13ȱ Againȱ heȱ wearsȱ theȱ ritualȱ garȬ
ment,ȱwhich,ȱhowever,ȱisȱnowȱwhiteȱlikeȱafterȱbaptism,ȱwhichȱremindsȱ
usȱofȱtheȱjustifiedȱonesȱofȱtheȱApocalypseȱ(Revȱ7:9);ȱ„Theseȱwhiteȱrobesȱ
reservedȱforȱglorifiedȱChristiansȱrecallȱtheȱgarbȱofȱinitiatesȱintoȱsomeȱofȱ
theȱmysteryȱreligionsȱofȱantiquity:ȱinȱtheȱmysteriesȱofȱIsis,ȱthoseȱofȱtheȱ
Orphics,ȱtheȱAndanianȱmysteries,ȱandȱtheȱlike,ȱtheȱfaithfulȱwerdeȱcomȬ
monlyȱdressedȱinȱwhiteȱlinen.“14ȱWhileȱtheȱwomenȱfleeȱandȱdoȱnotȱdisȬ
perseȱtheȱyouth’sȱmessage,ȱheȱstandsȱforȱtheȱfutureȱofȱtheȱbeliefȱinȱtheȱ
crucifiedȱ andȱ risenȱ Jesusȱ ofȱ Nazareth.ȱ Asȱ fascinatingȱ asȱ Meyer’sȱ interȬ
pretationȱ mightȱ seemȱ toȱ beȱ atȱ firstȱ glance,ȱ asȱ severeȱ areȱ itsȱ problemsȱ
(apartȱ fromȱ theȱ questionȱ whetherȱ theȱ „secretȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Mark“ȱ rightlyȱ
mayȱ beȱ countedȱ asȱ anȱ ancientȱ textȱ insteadȱ ofȱ aȱ forgeryȱ manufacturedȱ
muchȱ later).ȱThisȱisȱalreadyȱ visibleȱ inȱ theȱ issueȱ whetherȱ fragmentȱ 1ȱ ofȱ
„secretȱ Mark“ȱ reallyȱ canȱ beȱ connectedȱ toȱ Markȱ 10:17Ȭ22ȱ (seeȱ fn.ȱ 11,ȱ
above).ȱButȱMeyerȱalsoȱdoesȱnotȱexplainȱwhyȱMarkȱ16:1Ȭ8ȱshowsȱallȱtheȱ
elementsȱ ofȱ epiphanyȱ mentionedȱ aboveȱ andȱ whereȱ theȱ youngȱ manȱ
foundȱ hisȱ insightȱ afterȱ hisȱ flightȱ accordingȱ toȱ Markȱ 14:51Ȭ52.ȱ FurtherȬ
more,ȱitȱremainsȱunclearȱwhyȱMarkȱ16:5ȱpresentsȱtheȱyoungȱmanȱwithȬ
outȱ(definite)ȱarticle.ȱOughtȱtheȱtextȱnotȱimplyȱthatȱtheȱwomenȱsawȱto.n
neani,skon,ȱwhenȱitȱwouldȱconcernȱtheȱalreadyȱknownȱfigureȱfromȱ10:17Ȭ
22ȱandȱ14:51Ȭ52?ȱ

2.ȱMattȱ28:1Ȭ8ȱ

Matthew’sȱemptyȱtombȱstoryȱdiffersȱfromȱMark’sȱaccountȱinȱnumerousȱ
ways.15ȱ Hereȱ womenȱ –ȱ inȱ thisȱ caseȱ Maryȱ Magdaleneȱ andȱ „theȱ other“ȱ
Maryȱ–ȱalsoȱgoȱonȱtheirȱwayȱtoȱtheȱtomb.ȱButȱMatthewȱdoesȱnotȱseemȱtoȱ
beȱ interestedȱ inȱ aȱ negativeȱ evaluationȱ ofȱ bothȱ women.ȱ Heȱ focusesȱ
mainlyȱ onȱ theȱ eschatologicalȱ significanceȱ ofȱ whatȱ happenedȱ atȱ Jesus’ȱ
resurrection.ȱ Becauseȱ ofȱ this,ȱ gapsȱ areȱ filledȱ andȱ questionsȱ answeredȱ
whereȱtheȱMarkanȱtextȱleavesȱthingsȱopen.ȱSurelyȱevenȱMatthewȱdoesȱ
notȱdescribeȱtheȱactualȱeventȱofȱJesus’ȱresurrection.ȱHowever,ȱtheȱangelȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
13ȱȱ SeeȱMeyer,ȱSecretȱGospelȱ128Ȭ130.ȱ
14ȱȱ Meyer,ȱ Secretȱ Gospelȱ 129.ȱ Onȱ theȱ supposedȱ connectionsȱ betweenȱ earlyȱ Christianityȱ
andȱancientȱMysteryȱcults,ȱwhichȱcanȱbeȱderivedȱtherefrom,ȱseeȱalsoȱMeyer,ȱYouths.ȱȱ
15ȱȱ MoreȱelaboratelyȱonȱtheȱrelationsȱofȱbothȱversionsȱcompareȱLuz,ȱEvangeliumȱ26Ȭ28,ȱ
397Ȭ400.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 299ȱ

notȱ onlyȱ revealsȱ theȱ significanceȱ ofȱ theȱ eventsȱ toȱ theȱ women,ȱ heȱ alsoȱ
embodiesȱ God’sȱ interactionȱ withȱ theȱ world.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ alreadyȱ expressedȱ
throughȱ theȱ motifȱ ofȱ „theȱ greatȱ earthquake“ȱ (seeȱ alsoȱ Zechȱ 14:4Ȭ5;ȱ onȱ
earthquakesȱ asȱ anȱ eschatologicalȱ signȱ seeȱ alsoȱ Markȱ 13:8;ȱ Mattȱ 24:7;ȱ
Lukeȱ 21:11;ȱ Revȱ 6:12;ȱ 8:5;ȱ 11:13,19;ȱ 16:18;ȱ atȱ theȱ deathȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ Mattȱ
27:54;ȱ asȱ aȱ signȱ ofȱ God‘sȱ wrathȱ Ezȱ 38:19).16ȱ Butȱ maybeȱ theȱ earthquakeȱ
pointsȱevenȱmoreȱspecificallyȱtowardsȱresurrection.ȱInȱfact,ȱatȱleastȱacȬ
cordingȱtoȱtheȱLXXȱversion,ȱtheȱvisionȱonȱtheȱresurrectionȱofȱtheȱdeadȱ
bonesȱ ofȱ Israelȱ toldȱ inȱ Ezȱ 37:1Ȭ14ȱ isȱ alsoȱ introducedȱ byȱ anȱ earthquakeȱ
(Ezȱ37:7ȱLXX).ȱButȱmostȱofȱallȱMattȱ28ȱshowsȱaȱcorrelationȱtoȱMattȱ27:51Ȭ
52,ȱwhereȱtheȱtremblingȱofȱtheȱearthȱatȱJesus’ȱdeathȱisȱconnectedȱtoȱtheȱ
openingȱofȱtheȱgravesȱandȱresuscitationȱofȱmanyȱsaints.ȱ
WithȱregardȱtoȱourȱtopicȱitȱisȱinterestingȱthatȱMattȱdoesȱnotȱsimplyȱ
speakȱofȱanȱangelȱbutȱratherȱofȱanȱ„angelȱofȱtheȱLord“ȱ 17,ȱwhoȱalreadyȱ
playedȱaȱpartȱonȱthreeȱdifferent,ȱratherȱdecisiveȱoccasionsȱinȱtheȱGospel.ȱ
Theȱ angelȱ ofȱ theȱ Lord,ȱ whoȱ accordingȱ toȱ Mattȱ 1:20;ȱ 2:13ȱ andȱ 19ȱ apȬ
pearedȱ repeatedlyȱ toȱ Josephȱ inȱ aȱ dream,ȱ namelyȱ toȱ convinceȱ himȱ toȱ
recognizeȱJesusȱasȱhisȱson,ȱtoȱsafeȱhimȱfromȱHerodes’ȱwrathȱandȱtoȱreȬ
turnȱ fromȱ Egyptȱ toȱ Israel,ȱ nowȱ descendsȱ fromȱ heaven,ȱ rollsȱ awayȱ theȱ
stoneȱfromȱtheȱtombȱandȱsitsȱdown.ȱCanȱweȱappreciateȱthisȱasȱaȱsignȱofȱ
triumphȱoverȱdeath?18ȱ
Thisȱ angelȱ isȱ alsoȱ describedȱ moreȱ thoroughlyȱ thanȱ theȱ „youth“ȱ inȱ
theȱGospelȱaccordingȱtoȱMark:ȱ
Markȱ16:5ȱ ȱ...ȱneani,skon kaqh,menon evn toi/j dexioi/j peribeblhme,non
stolh.n leukh,n
Mattȱ28:3ȱ ȱh=n de. h` eivde,a auvtou/ w`j avstraph. kai. to. e;nduma auvtou/
leuko.n w`j ciw,nÅ
Theȱwordsȱ„likeȱaȱflashȱofȱlightning“ȱfindȱtheirȱmostȱsignificantȱparallelȱ
inȱtheȱportrayalȱofȱanȱangelȱinȱDanȱ10:6ȱLXX;ȱkai. to. pro,swpon auvtou/ w`sei.
o[rasij avstraph/j.ȱ Anȱ interestingȱ parallelȱ toȱ theȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ theȱ garȬ
mentsȱ asȱ „whiteȱ likeȱ snow“ȱ weȱ findȱ inȱ 1Enoch,ȱ whereȱ inȱ chapterȱ 14ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
16ȱȱ Gnilka,ȱ Matthäusevangeliumȱ 493,ȱ speaksȱ ofȱ aȱ „theophanicȱ element“,ȱ Wiefel,ȱ EvanȬ
geliumȱ489,ȱaboutȱaȱ„theophanicȬcosmicȱsignal“.ȱ–ȱNeverthelessȱIȱregardȱitȱimprobȬ
ableȱthatȱtheȱ(imageȱofȱan)ȱearthquakeȱisȱusedȱhereȱasȱaȱtoposȱtoȱrepresentȱaȱmiracleȱ
ofȱdeliverance,ȱasȱSand,ȱEvangeliumȱ581,ȱargues.ȱFrankemölle,ȱMatthäuskommentarȱ
519,ȱisȱcorrectȱwhenȱheȱarguesȱthatȱtheȱtextȱexplicitlyȱnotesȱthisȱ(ga,r!)ȱandȱpaintsȱtheȱ
angel’sȱdescendanceȱasȱcauseȱofȱtheȱearthquake.ȱȱ
17ȱȱ Daviesȱ /ȱ Allison,ȱ Gospelȱ 665ȱ n.ȱ 20,ȱ however,ȱ emphasizeȱ thatȱ theȱ usageȱ ofȱ theȱ termȱ
„amgelȱ ofȱ theȱ Lord“ȱ doesȱ notȱ implyȱ thatȱ theȱ textȱ speaksȱ herȱ aboutȱ „Godȱ inȱ visibleȱ
form“.ȱȱ
18ȱȱ Cf.,ȱ e.g.,ȱ Fiedler,ȱ Matthäusevangeliumȱ 424.ȱ –ȱ Sand,ȱ Evangeliumȱ 581,ȱ callsȱ thisȱ „hoȬ
heitliche[s]ȱVerhalten“.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
300ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

God’sȱthroneȱisȱdepicted:19ȱ“Andȱfromȱbeneathȱtheȱthroneȱwereȱissuingȱ
streamsȱ ofȱ flamingȱ fire.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ difficultȱ toȱ lookȱ atȱ it.ȱ Andȱ theȱ Greatȱ
Gloryȱ wasȱ sittingȱ uponȱ itȱ –ȱ asȱ forȱ hisȱ gown,ȱ whichȱ wasȱ shiningȱ moreȱ
brightlyȱ thanȱ theȱ sun,ȱ itȱ wasȱ whiterȱ thanȱ anyȱ snow”ȱ (14:19Ȭ20).20ȱ Theȱ
factȱ thatȱ hisȱ garmentȱ „isȱ asȱ whiteȱ asȱ snow“ȱ thusȱ showsȱ thatȱ theȱ angelȱ
directlyȱcomesȱfromȱtheȱspheresȱofȱtheȱgloryȱofȱtheȱLord.ȱAndȱagainȱoneȱ
mayȱfindȱconnectionsȱtoȱotherȱpassagesȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱMatthew:ȱTheȱ
comparisonȱ withȱ aȱ „flashȱ ofȱ lightning“ȱ isȱ alsoȱ usedȱ inȱ Mtȱ 24:27ȱ toȱ deȬ
scribeȱtheȱeschatologicalȱcomingȱofȱtheȱSonȱofȱMan.ȱȱ
Accordingȱ toȱ Matthewȱ theȱ angelȱ opensȱ theȱ tombȱ andȱ makes,ȱ
throughȱ hisȱ appearance,ȱ theȱ guardsȱ trembleȱ andȱ fallȱ downȱ toȱ theȱ
groundȱlikeȱdeadȱmen.ȱThenȱheȱrevealsȱtheȱmessageȱofȱJesus’ȱresurrecȬ
tionȱtoȱtheȱwomen,ȱwhoȱhereȱbecome,ȱquiteȱdifferentlyȱfromȱtheȱGospelȱ
ofȱMark,ȱmessengersȱofȱfaithȱ(Mattȱ28:8).21ȱButȱalthoughȱheȱisȱattributedȱ
asȱangelȱofȱtheȱLord,ȱitȱisȱnotȱsaid,ȱthatȱheȱhimselfȱcausesȱJesus’ȱresurrecȬ
tion22ȱ –ȱ theȱ textȱ avoidsȱ describingȱ whatȱ happensȱ inȱ theȱ tombȱ itself.ȱ
Neverthelessȱ heȱ isȱ describedȱ inȱ moreȱ activeȱ termsȱ thanȱ theȱ „youngȱ
man“ȱ inȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Mark.ȱ Hisȱ task,ȱ however,ȱ isȱ notȱ toȱ bringȱ Jesusȱ
backȱtoȱlifeȱagain,ȱheȱmainlyȱfocussesȱ(1)ȱonȱtakingȱawayȱallȱobstaclesȱ–ȱ
theȱenemies23ȱasȱwellȱasȱtheȱbigȱstoneȱ–ȱwhichȱmightȱhinderȱtheȱresurȬ
rectionȱandȱ(2)ȱrevealingȱitȱtoȱtheȱwomen.ȱButȱtheȱfactȱthatȱthisȱisȱdoneȱ
byȱanȱangel,ȱwhoseȱattributesȱisȱdescribeȱhimȱasȱoriginatingȱfromȱGod’sȱ
gloryȱ andȱ whoȱ isȱ evenȱ assignedȱ asȱ „Angelȱ ofȱ theȱ Lord“,ȱ alsoȱ showsȱ
howȱearlyȱChristianityȱemphasizesȱthatȱtheȱcreedȱinȱJesus’ȱresurrectionȱ
cannotȱbeȱattributedȱtoȱone’sȱownȱinspiration,ȱbutȱmustȱbeȱunderstoodȱ
inȱtheȱsenseȱofȱaȱrevelationȱinitiatedȱbyȱGod.ȱFurthermore,ȱtheȱcircumȬ
stancesȱ surroundingȱ thisȱ revelationȱ indicatethatȱ thisȱ resurrectionȱ isȱ
actedȱoutȱbyȱGodȱandȱmustȱbeȱunderstoodȱinȱlightȱofȱitsȱeschatologicalȱ
significance.ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
19ȱȱ Furtherȱparallels:ȱPsȱ51:9;ȱIsaȱ1:18;ȱLamȱ4:7;ȱDanȱ7:9;ȱJosAsȱ16:8,18.ȱ
20ȱȱ Translation:ȱIsaac,ȱEnochȱ21.ȱ–ȱTheȱbackgroundȱisȱEzȱ1:26Ȭ28.ȱFurtherȱonȱthisȱpassage,ȱ
compareȱNickelsburg,ȱEnochȱ264.ȱ
21ȱȱ However,ȱ theyȱ doȱ notȱ containȱ aȱ „missionaryȱ assignment“ȱ inȱ theȱ strictȱ senseȱ ofȱ theȱ
word,ȱasȱLuz,ȱEvangeliumȱ26Ȭ28,ȱ405,ȱemphasizes.ȱButȱcompareȱMattȱ28:19Ȭ20!ȱ
22ȱȱ Luz,ȱEvangeliumȱ26Ȭ28,ȱ402,ȱrightlyȱstates:ȱ„WieȱundȱwannȱJesusȱdasȱGrabȱverlassenȱ
hat,ȱerfahrenȱwirȱnicht.“ȱȱ
23ȱȱ Theȱ factȱ thatȱ theȱ guardsȱ areȱ nowȱ seeminglyȱ dead,ȱ isȱ ofȱ courseȱ consciouslyȱ formuȬ
latedȱasȱcontrastȱtoȱJesus’ȱresurrection,ȱasȱforȱexampleȱSand,ȱEvangeliumȱ581,ȱstates.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 301ȱ

3.ȱLukeȱ24:1Ȭ11ȱandȱActsȱ1:9Ȭ11ȱ

TheȱemptyȱtombȱstoryȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱLukeȱisȱclearlyȱcloserȱconnectedȱ
toȱtheȱMarkanȱnarrativeȱthanȱtheȱepisodeȱofȱMatthew’sȱGospel.24ȱConȬ
cerningȱ ourȱ questionȱ itȱ isȱ interestingȱ thatȱ Lukeȱ –ȱ likeȱ Matthewȱ –ȱ doesȱ
notȱspeakȱofȱaȱneani,skojȱsittingȱinȱtheȱgrave,ȱbutȱofȱ„twoȱmenȱinȱclothesȱ
thatȱ gleamedȱ likeȱ lightning“ȱ (kai. ivdou. a;ndrej du,o evpe,sthsan auvtai/j evn
evsqh/ti avstraptou,sh|),ȱwhoȱapproachȱtheȱwomen.ȱOnceȱagainȱtheȱdescripȬ
tionȱofȱtheȱclothesȱmakesȱoneȱawareȱthatȱtheȱtextȱisȱconcernedȱwithȱsuȬ
perterrestrialȱbeingsȱhere;ȱagainȱitȱdoesȱnotȱspeakȱaboutȱ„angels“.25ȱ
SomethingȱsimilarȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱinȱtheȱaccountȱofȱJesus’ȱascentȱacȬ
cordingȱtoȱActsȱ(Actsȱ1:9Ȭ11).ȱWhileȱtheȱparallelȱnarrationȱinȱLukeȱ24:50Ȭ
52ȱ tellsȱ thatȱ theȱ disciplesȱ prostrateȱ beforeȱ Jesus,ȱ whoȱ isȱ takenȱ upȱ intoȱ
heaven,ȱ andȱ thenȱ returnȱ toȱ Jerusalemȱ withȱ greatȱ joy,ȱ Actsȱ 1:10ȱ onceȱ
againȱintroducesȱtwoȱmenȱinȱwhiteȱclothesȱwhoȱexplainȱtoȱtheȱdisciplesȱ
whoȱ areȱ completelyȱ concentratingȱ onȱ theȱ sky,26ȱ thatȱ Jesusȱ willȱ returnȱ
theȱsameȱwayȱheȱwasȱtakenȱup.ȱBothȱpairsȱ–ȱbothȱtheȱ„men“ȱinȱtheȱgraveȱ
asȱwellȱasȱthoseȱatȱJesus’ȱAscensionȱ–ȱareȱusuallyȱconsideredȱtoȱbeȱexȬ
planatoryȱ angels,ȱ angeliȱ interpretes,ȱ whoȱ wantȱ toȱ correctȱ theȱ behaviourȱ
ofȱtheȱaddressedȱpersonsȱparticularlyȱinȱActsȱ1:10Ȭ11.27ȱButȱisȱthisȱreallyȱ
theȱcase?ȱInȱtheirȱcommentaryȱonȱtheȱBezanȱtextȱofȱActsȱJ.ȱRiusȬCampsȱ
andȱJ.ȱReadȬHeimerdingerȱhaveȱproposedȱaȱhighlyȱinterestingȱdifferentȱ
interpretationȱofȱtheȱsceneȱwhichȱnotȱonlyȱexplainsȱwhyȱLukeȱspeaksȱofȱ
„men“ȱinsteadȱofȱ„angels“,ȱbutȱalsoȱclarifiesȱwhyȱtheȱtextȱspeaksȱofȱtwoȱ
menȱ(andȱnotȱjustȱoneȱlikeȱMarkȱandȱMatthew).28ȱ
RiusȬCampsȱandȱReadȬHeimerdingerȱpointȱtoȱtheȱconnectionȱofȱtheȱ
passageȱ toȱ theȱ transfigurationȬscene.ȱ Inȱ allȱ threeȱ passagesȱ twoȱ „otherȬ
worldly“ȱfiguresȱappearȱandȱinȱallȱthreeȱcasesȱtheyȱareȱalsoȱintroducedȱ
inȱtheȱsameȱmanner.ȱ
ȱ
ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
24ȱȱ ItȱisȱnotȱpossibleȱtoȱdiscussȱtheȱquestionȱtoȱwhichȱextentȱLukeȱisȱcriticallyȱconcernedȱ
withȱ theȱ ideaȱ thatȱ theȱ risenȱ Jesusȱ isȱ anȱ angelȬlikeȱ being.ȱ Forȱ moreȱ informationȱ see:ȱ
FletcherȬLouis,ȱLukeȬActsȱ63Ȭ70.ȱ
25ȱȱ Thisȱhasȱbeenȱseenȱregularly:ȱCf.,ȱe.g.,ȱFitzmyer,ȱGospelȱ1544.ȱ
26ȱȱ Theȱtextȱusesȱtheȱverbȱ avteni,zw (insteadȱofȱ ble,pw),ȱthroughȱwhichȱaȱstrenuous,ȱconȬ
centratedȱgazeȱisȱbeingȱexpressed.ȱ
27ȱȱ See,ȱe.g.,ȱFitzmyer,ȱActsȱ210,ȱrelatingȱtoȱActsȱ1:10.ȱRegardingȱtheȱcorrectionȱofȱbehavȬ
iourȱseeȱalsoȱPesch,ȱApostelgeschichteȱ1,ȱ73.ȱ–ȱErnst,ȱEvangeliumȱ652,ȱspeaksȱaboutȱaȱ
„leisenȱVorwurfȱanȱdieȱFrauen.“ȱ
28ȱȱ RiusȬCampsȱ /ȱ ReadȬHeimerdinger,ȱ Messageȱ 89Ȭ90.ȱ Whatȱ bothȱ authorsȱ stateȱ withȱ
regardȱtoȱtheȱBezanȱtext,ȱcanȱasȱwellȱbeȱusedȱonȱtheȱAlexandrinianȱtext,ȱbecauseȱthereȱ
areȱnoȱimportantȱdifferencesȱbetweenȱbothȱtextsȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱourȱquestion.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
302ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

Lukeȱ9:30ȱ kai. ivdou. a;ndrej du,o sunela,loun auvtw/(| ȱ

Lukeȱ24:4 ... kai. ivdou. a;ndrej du,o evpe,sthsan )))
Actsȱ1:10 kai. ivdou. a;ndrej du,o )))
Fromȱ theȱ parallelȱ introductionsȱ RiusȬCampsȱ andȱ ReadȬHeimerdingerȱ
concludeȱthatȱtheȱtextȱspeaksȱaboutȱtheȱsameȱcharactersȱhere,ȱbutȱonlyȱ
Lukeȱ9:30ȱtellsȱwhoȱisȱconcerned:ȱoi[tinej h=san Mwu?sh/j kai. VHli,aj)ȱ
MosesȱandȱElijahȱthusȱappearȱinȱdifferentȱimportantȱpassagesȱofȱtheȱ
LukeȬActsȱasȱrepresentativesȱofȱtheȱToraȱtoȱconfirmȱthatȱJesus’ȱinterpreȬ
tationȱofȱhisȱMessianismȱcorrespondsȱtoȱGod’sȱPlanȱasȱindicatedȱbyȱtheȱ
scriptures:ȱ„Thus,ȱtheȱrepeatedȱperdictionsȱofȱJesusȱconcerningȱhisȱpasȬ
sion,ȱ deathȱ andȱ resurrection,ȱ justȱ asȱ hisȱ insistenceȱ onȱ explainingȱ theȱ
Scripturesȱ onceȱ heȱ hadȱ comeȱ backȱ toȱ life,ȱ areȱ validatedȱ byȱ theȱ veryȱ
charactersȱwhoȱpersonifyȱtheȱdivineȱword.“29ȱ
Thisȱsurprisingȱinterpretationȱisȱworthȱtoȱbeȱconsideredȱmoreȱinȱdetail;ȱ
(1)ȱ Itȱ isȱ difficultȱ toȱ answerȱ theȱ questionȱ howȱ weightyȱ theȱ argumentȱ isȱ
thatȱtheȱ„heavenly“ȱfiguresȱareȱintroducedȱinȱallȱthreeȱcasesȱinȱtheȱsameȱ
wayȱ whileȱ hardlyȱ anyȱ importanceȱ mustȱ beȱ givenȱ toȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ allȱ
threeȱareȱalsoȱclothedȱinȱ„characteristicȱgarmentsȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱalreadyȱ
belongȱtoȱtheȱdivineȱsphere“30.ȱOfȱcourse,ȱnotȱonlyȱMosesȱandȱElijah,ȱbutȱ
alsoȱangelsȱbelongȱtoȱthisȱsphereȱ–ȱandȱinȱthisȱlightȱoneȱmightȱconsiderȱ
thatȱonȱallȱthreeȱoccasionsȱtheȱdescriptionsȱofȱtheȱheavenlyȱfiguresȱdifȬ
ferȱatȱleastȱinȱdetails:ȱ
Lukeȱ9:31 oi] ovfqe,ntej evn do,xh|
Lukeȱ24:4 evn evsqh/ti avstraptou,sh|
Actsȱ1:10 evn evsqh,sesi leukai/j
ButȱneverthelessȱthisȱdoesȱnotȱanswerȱtheȱquestionȱifȱtheȱcommonȱdecȬ
larationȱofȱ„twoȱmen“ȱmayȱonlyȱbeȱascribedȱtoȱcoincidenceȱ(orȱpossiblyȱ
toȱ Lukanȱ styleȱ ofȱ writing).ȱ Lukeȱ speaksȱ ofȱ angelsȱ onȱ numerousȱ otherȱ
occasions,ȱbutȱthereȱheȱnamesȱthemȱasȱsuchȱ(seeȱLukeȱ1:11;ȱ1:26Ȭ38;ȱ2:9Ȭ
15;ȱ8:26ȱetc).ȱSoȱLukeȱ24:4ȱandȱActsȱ1:10ȱareȱclearlyȱdifferingȱfromȱotherȱ
angelophaniesȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱLuke,ȱthoughȱconnectedȱtoȱLukeȱ9:30Ȭ31ȱ
byȱtheȱcommonȱintroduction.ȱ
(2)ȱHowever,ȱtheȱquestionȱhasȱtoȱbeȱaskedȱwhyȱLukeȱdoesȱnotȱidenȬ
tifyȱ bothȱ figuresȱ inȱ theȱ graveȱ moreȱ clearlyȱ asȱ heȱ didȱ withȱ Mosesȱ andȱ
ElijahȱatȱJesus’ȱAscension.ȱOnlyȱinȱaȱveryȱscrutinousȱreadingȱofȱtheȱtextȱ
theȱwordsȱkai. ivdou. a;ndrej du,oȱpointȱtheȱreaderȱtoȱaȱpossibleȱconnectionȱ
betweenȱtheȱfiguresȱoccuringȱtimeȱandȱagain.ȱInȱthisȱregardȱtheȱdifferȬ
enceȱ atȱ leastȱ betweenȱ theȱ scenesȱ ofȱ transfigurationȱ andȱ ascensionȱ (acȬ
cordingȱ toȱ Actsȱ 1:9Ȭ11)ȱ isȱ striking.ȱ Accordingȱ toȱ Lkȱ 9:33ȱ atȱ leastȱ Peterȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
29ȱȱ RiusȬCampsȱ/ȱReadȬHeimerdinger,ȱMessageȱ90.ȱ
30ȱȱ RiusȬCampsȱ/ȱReadȬHeimerdinger,ȱMessageȱ90.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 303ȱ

immediatelyȱrecognizesȱtheȱheavenlyȱfiguresȱasȱMosesȱandȱElijah,ȱwhileȱ
inȱActsȱ1,10ȱbothȱremainȱnotȱonlyȱunnamedȱbyȱtheȱnarrator,ȱbutȱ(obviȬ
ously)ȱalsoȱunknownȱtoȱtheȱdisciples.ȱ
(3)ȱ Perhapsȱ theȱ mainȱ argumentȱ againstȱ RiusȬCampsȱ /ȱ ReadȬ
HeimerdingerȱisȱthatȱLukeȱ24:23ȱ(evenȱinȱtheȱBezanȱtext)ȱdescribesȱtheȱ
women’sȱexperienceȱatȱtheȱgraveȱasȱanȱovptasi,a avgge,lwn,ȱaȱfactȱbothȱauȬ
thorsȱ doȱ notȱ mention.ȱ Butȱ evenȱ thisȱ isȱnoȱ compulsatoryȱ reasonȱ toȱ disȬ
missȱ theȱ MosesȬElijahȬthesis,ȱ becauseȱ itȱ isȱ notȱ theȱ narratorȱ ofȱ Luke’sȱ
Gospelȱwhoȱspeaksȱinȱ24:23,ȱbutȱtheȱtwoȱdisciplesȱwalkingȱtoȱEmmaus,ȱ
whoȱevidentlyȱhaveȱnotȱ(yet)ȱunderstoodȱtheȱsignificanceȱofȱtheȱevents.ȱ
Theȱ argumentsȱ mentionedȱ aboveȱ thusȱ cannotȱ refuteȱ RiusȬCampsȱ
andȱReadȬHeimerdinger’sȱthesis,ȱbutȱinȱmyȱopinionȱtheyȱatȱleastȱmakeȱ
itȱquiteȱimprobable.ȱ
Whicheverȱ wayȱ oneȱ mightȱ decide:ȱ Theȱ functionȱ ofȱ bothȱ heavenlyȱ
creaturesȱinȱJesus’sȱgraveȱandȱatȱhisȱascensionȱisȱtoȱcriticiseȱtheȱbehavȬ
iourȱofȱtheȱaddressedȱpersonsȱandȱtoȱinterpretȱwhatȱhasȱhappened.ȱ
ContraryȱtoȱtheȱparallelȱaccountsȱofȱMarkȱandȱMatthewȱtheȱheavenȬ
lyȱcreatures’ȱassignmentȱisȱrestrictedȱtoȱ that:ȱNeitherȱLukeȱ24:5bȬ7ȱnorȱ
Actsȱ1:11ȱgiveȱanȱexplicitȱassignmentȱtoȱtheȱpersonsȱaddressed.ȱ

4.ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱJohnȱȱ

Inȱ theȱ Easterȱ accountsȱ ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Johnȱ angelsȱ onlyȱ haveȱ aȱ veryȱ
marginalȱ roleȱ toȱ play.ȱ Hereȱ itȱ isȱ Maryȱ Magdaleneȱ alone,ȱ whoȱ firstȱ
comesȱtoȱtheȱgraveȱandȱrecognizesȱthatȱtheȱstoneȱhasȱbeenȱtakenȱawayȱ
(Johnȱ20:1).ȱShe,ȱhowever,ȱdoesȱnotȱreceiveȱaȱrevelation,ȱbutȱsheȱisȱtheȱ
oneȱwhoȱinformsȱPeterȱandȱtheȱBelovedȱDisciple,ȱwhoȱbothȱhurryȱtoȱtheȱ
grave.ȱ Althoughȱ theȱ Belovedȱ Discipleȱ reachesȱ theȱ graveȱ earlierȱ thanȱ
Peterȱheȱdoesȱnotȱenterȱit.ȱButȱwhileȱPeterȱjustȱentersȱtheȱgraveȱandȱseesȱ
theȱvernicleȱandȱstripesȱofȱlinenȱlyingȱthere,31ȱtheȱotherȱdiscipleȱenters,ȱ
seesȱandȱbelievesȱ(Johnȱ20:8).ȱTheȱbelovedȱdiscipleȱthusȱdoesȱnotȱneedȱanȱ
angelȱ toȱ interpretȱ theȱ visibleȱ signsȱ ofȱ Jesus’ȱ resurrectionȱ –ȱ heȱ obtainsȱ
faithȱonȱhisȱown.ȱInȱthisȱlightȱalsoȱtheȱfollowingȱsceneȱconcerningȱMaryȱ
Magdaleneȱ(Johnȱ20:11ff.)ȱmustȱsurelyȱbeȱinterpreted:ȱSheȱalsoȱhasȱonlyȱ
seenȱ theȱ emptyȱ grave,ȱ butȱ notȱ madeȱ aȱ confessionȱ ofȱ faith.ȱ However,ȱ
whenȱsheȱbentsȱoverȱtoȱlookȱintoȱtheȱtombȱ(20:11),ȱsheȱalsoȱseesȱsomeȬ
thing:ȱContraryȱtoȱPeterȱandȱtheȱBelovedȱdiscipleȱsheȱ„sees“ȱtwoȱangelsȱ
inȱwhite;ȱoneȱisȱsittingȱinȱtheȱplaceȱwhereȱJesus’ȱheadȱhasȱbeenȱlaidȱandȱ
theȱotherȱwhereȱhisȱfeetȱhaveȱbeenȱplaced.ȱContraryȱtoȱbothȱMarkȱandȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
31ȱȱ VeryȱprobablyȱtheȱtextȱresemblesȱtheȱLazarusȬstoryȱ(Johnȱ11)ȱhere.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
304ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

Lukeȱ Johnȱ unambiguouslyȱ speaksȱ ofȱ angelsȱ here.ȱ Thisȱ isȱ whyȱ theȱ deȬ
scriptionȱ mayȱ beȱ quiteȱ concise.ȱ Theȱ mostȱ significantȱ differenceȱ toȱ theȱ
Synopticȱaccounts,ȱhowever,ȱconsistsȱinȱtheȱfactȱthatȱtheseȱangelsȱdoȱnotȱ
giveȱ anyȱ interpretationȱ ofȱ theȱ events,ȱ butȱ onlyȱ addressȱ Maryȱ withȱ theȱ
question:ȱ„Womanȱwhyȱareȱyouȱweeping?“.ȱ
Whileȱ theȱ belovedȱ discipleȱ becameȱ aȱ believerȱ afterȱ seeingȱ justȱ theȱ
linenȱclothȱandȱvernicle,ȱMaryȱreactsȱwithȱalmostȱtheȱsameȱwordsȱasȱinȱ
20:2ȱwhenȱsheȱjustȱfoundȱtheȱemptyȱtomb:ȱ
20:2ȱ h=ran to.n ku,rion evk tou/ mnhmei,ou
kai. ouvk oi;damen pou/ e;qhkan auvto,nÅȱ
20:13ȱ h=ran to.n ku,rio,n mou(
kai. ouvk oi=da pou/ e;qhkan auvto,n
Throughȱ thisȱ theȱ angels’ȱ taskȱ isȱ actuallyȱ accomplished.ȱ Maryȱ turnsȱ
roundȱ andȱ seesȱ Jesus,ȱ butȱ doesȱ notȱ recognizeȱ himȱ immediately.ȱ Onlyȱ
whenȱ heȱ callsȱ herȱ name,ȱ isȱ sheȱ ableȱ toȱ overcomeȱ herȱ ignorance,ȱ andȱ
recognizeȱhimȱasȱherȱ„master“ȱ(20:16).ȱNowȱsheȱcanȱproclaimȱthatȱsheȱ
hasȱseenȱtheȱLordȱ(20:18a).ȱHowȱcanȱthisȱdifferentȱroleȱofȱtheȱangelsȱinȱ
John’sȱGospelȱbeȱexplained?ȱTheȱanswerȱisȱratherȱobvious:ȱaccordingȱtoȱ
theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Johnȱ onlyȱ Jesus,ȱ theȱ Christȱ andȱ Sonȱ ofȱ Godȱ (Johnȱ 20:30Ȭ
31),ȱtheȱIncarnateȱWordȱofȱGodȱ(1:1.14)ȱisȱtheȱdistinguishedȱRevealer.32ȱ
Meetingȱhimȱmakesȱitȱpossibleȱtoȱobtainȱfaith.ȱSeeingȱhimȱmeansȱseeingȱ
theȱ Gloryȱ ofȱ God.ȱ Alreadyȱ inȱ theȱ sceneȱ ofȱ Lazarus’ȱ resurrectionȱ Jesusȱ
revealsȱtoȱMarthaȱthatȱheȱisȱ„theȱresurrectionȱandȱtheȱlife“ȱ(Johnȱ11:25).ȱ
Soȱ itȱ wouldȱ beȱ inconsistentȱ ifȱ somethingȱ asȱ significantȱ asȱ theȱ resurȬ
rectionȱofȱJesusȱwouldȱhaveȱtoȱbeȱinterpretedȱbyȱangelsȱandȱnotȱbyȱJeȬ
sus,ȱtheȱRevealerȱhimself.ȱ
Ifȱ oneȱ wantsȱtoȱ understandȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Johnȱ asȱ actuallyȱ playingȱ
withȱ itsȱ Synopticȱ preȬtextsȱ (mostȱ probablyȱ Markȱ andȱ Luke),ȱ thenȱ theȱ
storyȱmayȱsurelyȱbeȱseenȱasȱaȱslyȱdigȱatȱtheȱideaȱthatȱ„angels“ȱ(likeȱinȱ
Markȱ andȱ Luke)ȱ mayȱ haveȱ anyȱ significanceȱ forȱ theȱ revelationȱ ofȱ Jesusȱ
(orȱ itsȱ interpretation).ȱ Theȱ traditionȱ aboutȱ angelsȱ atȱ theȱ tombȱ isȱ byȱ noȱ
meansȱ givenȱ up,ȱ butȱ theȱ angelsȱ hereȱ onlyȱ haveȱ theȱ functionȱ toȱ showȱ
Mary’sȱ perseverenceȱ inȱ misinterpretingȱ theȱ givenȱ situationȱ –ȱ aȱ misinȬ
terpretationȱwhichȱcanȱonlyȱbeȱovercomeȱbyȱtheȱRevealerȱhimself.ȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
32ȱȱ Howȱ farȱ Johnȱ seesȱ Jesusȱ asȱ God’sȱ Revealerȱ canȱ alsoȱ beȱ seenȱ inȱ 1:51,ȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ fewȱ
otherȱpassagesȱinȱJohn’sȱGospelȱwhereȱangelsȱ„occur“:ȱhereȱJesusȱpropheciesȱtoȱtheȱ
disciplesȱthatȱtheyȱwillȱseeȱheavenȱopenȱandȱGod’sȱangelȱdescendingȱandȱascendingȱ
onȱtheȱSonȱofȱMan.ȱTheȱallusionȱtoȱGenȱ28:12,ȱtheȱsceneȱonȱJacobȱandȱtheȱladderȱtoȱ
heaven,ȱisȱclear.ȱTheȱsceneȱisȱinterpretedȱinȱdifferentȱways:ȱIȱfindȱtheȱmostȱprobableȱ
interpretationȱtheȱoneȱthatȱseesȱtheȱSonȱofȱManȱ–ȱlikeȱtheȱladderȱ–ȱtoȱbeȱaȱbridgeȱbeȬ
tweenȱheavenȱandȱearth.ȱThroughȱhimȱrevelationȱisȱpossible,ȱwhichȱisȱmadeȱclearȱbyȱ
theȱimageȱofȱtheȱangel’sȱdecensionȱandȱascension.ȱFurtherȱ(alsoȱonȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱreȬ
search)ȱseeȱNicklas,ȱAblösungȱ190Ȭ197.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 305ȱ

5.ȱTheȱGospelȱofȱPeterȱ–ȱMarkȱ16:4ȱkȱ(Bobbiensis)ȱ–ȱȱ
AscensionȱofȱIsaiahȱ3:17Ȭ18ȱ

WhileȱtheȱGospelȱaccordingȱtoȱJohnȱassignsȱonlyȱaȱmarginalȱroleȱtoȱtheȱ
angelsȱatȱ theȱtomb,ȱ theȱ apocryphalȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Peterȱ notȱ onlyȱfurtherȱ deȬ
velopsȱ severalȱ aspectsȱ ofȱ theȱ Synopticalȱ texts,ȱ butȱ showsȱ evenȱ aȱ newȱ
dimension,ȱwhichȱisȱnotȱfoundȱinȱtheȱcanonicalȱGospels.33ȱ
5.1.ȱLikeȱMatthewȱtheȱGospelȱofȱPeterȱtellsȱofȱtheȱguardingȱofȱJesus’ȱ
tombȱ(V.29Ȭ49),ȱwhichȱisȱaccomplishedȱnotȱonlyȱbyȱaȱcenturionȱnamedȱ
Petroniusȱ andȱ hisȱ soldiers,ȱ butȱ (apparently)ȱ alsoȱ byȱ theȱ Jewishȱ eldersȱ
andȱscribesȱ(V.31).ȱInȱtheȱnightȱbeforeȱtheȱSunday,ȱwhichȱisȱhereȱalreadyȱ
calledȱ„theȱdayȱofȱtheȱLord“,ȱthisȱguardiansȱwitnessȱJesus’ȱresurrectionȱ
whereȱtwoȱangelsȱplayȱaȱdecisiveȱrole.ȱTheȱtextȱrunsȱasȱfollows:ȱ
V.36ȱ kai. ei=don avnoicqe,ntaj tou.j ouvra,nouj kai. du,o a;ndraj kate,lqontaj
evkei/qe polu. fe,ggoj e;contaj kai. evggi,santaj tw|/ ta,fw|/) 37ȱo` de. li,qoj evkei/noj
o` beblhme,noj evpi. th|/ qu,ra| avf v e`autou/ kulisqei.j evpecw,rhse para. me,roj kai. o`
ta,foj hvnoi,gh kai. avmfo,teroi oi` neani,skoi eivsh/lqon)
36ȱAndȱtheyȱsawȱtheȱheavensȱopened,ȱandȱtwoȱmenȱdescendȱfromȱthereȱinȱaȱgreatȱ
brightnessȱandȱapproachȱtheȱtomb.ȱ37ȱButȱthatȱstoneȱwhichȱlaidȱ(there)ȱatȱtheȱenȬ
tranceȱstartedȱofȱitselfȱtoȱrollȱandȱmoveȱsidewards,ȱandȱtheȱtombȱwasȱopenedȱandȱ
bothȱyoungȱmenȱentered.ȱ
Afterȱ itȱ isȱ relatedȱ thatȱ bothȱ guardiansȱ wakenȱ theȱ centurionȱ andȱ theȱ
leadersȱ ofȱ theȱ „Jews“ȱ inȱ orderȱ toȱ tellȱ whatȱ hasȱ happened,ȱ theȱ wholeȱ
groupȱbecomesȱwitnessȱofȱtheȱsubsequentȱscene:ȱ
V.39ȱkai. evxhgoume,nwn auvtw/n a] ei=don pa,lin o`rw/sin evxelqo,ntaj avpo. tou/ ta,fou
trei/j a;ndraj kai. tou.j du,o to.n e[na u`porqou/ntaj kai. stauro.n avkolouqou/nta
auvtoi/j) 40 kai. tw/n me.n du,o th.n kefalh.n cwrou/san me,cri tou/ ouvranou/( tou/ de.
ceiragwgoume,nou u`p v auvtw/n u`perbai,nousan tou.j ouvranou,j)
39ȱAndȱwhileȱtheyȱwereȱtellingȱwhatȱtheyȱhadȱseen,ȱagainȱtheyȱsawȱthreeȱmenȱcomȬ
ingȱ outȱ fromȱ theȱ tomb,ȱ andȱ twoȱ ofȱ themȱ supportingȱ one,ȱ andȱ aȱ crossȱ followingȱ
them,ȱ40ȱandȱtheȱheadȱofȱtheȱtwoȱreachingȱtoȱheaven,ȱbutȱthatȱofȱtheȱoneȱwhoȱwasȱ
ledȱbyȱthemȱoverpassingȱtheȱheavens.ȱ
Theȱsceneȱendsȱwithȱaȱvoiceȱfromȱheavenȱasking:ȱ„Haveȱyouȱpreachedȱ
toȱ Thoseȱ whoȱ sleep?“,ȱ whereuponȱ theȱ responseȱ „yes“ȱ canȱ beȱ heardȱ
fromȱtheȱcrossȱ(V.41Ȭ42).ȱ
Theȱ differencesȱ asȱ comparedȱ toȱ theȱ Synopticsȱ areȱ clear:ȱ Thisȱ sceneȱ
showsȱ onlyȱ veryȱ superficialȱ relationshipȱ toȱ Matthew’sȱ accountȱ –ȱ conȬ
nectionsȱcanȱbeȱfoundȱwithȱregardȱtoȱtheȱguardingȱofȱtheȱgraveȱandȱtheȱ
descentȱ ofȱ oneȱ (orȱ inȱ GosPetȱ specificallyȱ two)ȱ angel(s)ȱ (but:ȱ Mattȱ 28:2:ȱ
a;ggeloj kuri,ou –ȱkatabai,nw;ȱ GosPetȱ 36:ȱ du,o a;ndrej –ȱkate,rcomai).ȱ Evenȱ theȱ
descriptionȱofȱbothȱtheȱ„men“ȱfromȱheaven,ȱwhichȱofȱcourseȱonceȱagainȱ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
33ȱȱ RegardingȱtextȱandȱtranslationsȱseeȱKrausȱ/ȱNicklas,ȱPetrusevangeliumȱ32Ȭ53.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
306ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

functionsȱ asȱ anȱ indicationȱ toȱ describeȱ themȱ asȱ „heavenlyȱ beings“,ȱ difȬ
fersȱ fromȱ theȱ Synoptics.ȱ However,ȱ thereȱ areȱ otherȱ Biblicalȱ textsȱ whichȱ
speakȱ aboutȱ theȱ fe,ggoj,ȱ i.e.ȱ theȱ „brightness“ȱ orȱ moreȱ specificallyȱ theȱ
„glanceȱ ofȱ light“ȱ orȱ „radiance“ȱ ofȱ heavenlyȱ beingsȱ orȱ accompanyingȱ
epiphaniesȱ ofȱ heavenlyȱ beingsȱ (2Samȱ 22:13;ȱ Habȱ 3:4;ȱ Ezȱ 1:4,13,27,28;ȱ
10:4;ȱ43:2ȱallȱLXX).ȱ–ȱOfȱparticularȱinterestȱareȱthoseȱtextsȱwhichȱconnectȱ
theȱ gloryȱ ofȱ Godȱ withȱ „brightness“ȱ asȱ forȱ instanceȱ Ezȱ 10:4ȱ LXX:ȱ kai.
e;plhsen to.n oi=kon h` nefe,lh kai. h` auvlh. evplh,sqh tou/ fe,ggouj th/j do,xhj kuri,ou
(andȱtheȱcloudȱfilledȱtheȱhouseȱandȱtheȱcourtȱwasȱfilledȱfromȱtheȱbrightnessȱofȱ
theȱgloryȱofȱtheȱLord)ȱ.ȱ
AlsoȱcontraryȱtoȱtheȱangelȱinȱMatthew,ȱbothȱmenȱinȱtheȱGospelȱofȱPeȬ
terȱdoȱnotȱrollȱawayȱtheȱstoneȱinȱfrontȱofȱtheȱdoorȱ–ȱthisȱhappensȱonȱitsȱ
own.ȱ Unlikeȱtheȱ angelȱ inȱMatthewȱ theyȱ alsoȱ doȱ notȱ takeȱ aȱ seatȱ onȱ theȱ
stone,ȱ butȱ –ȱ nowȱ namedȱ neani,skoiȱ likeȱ theȱ angelȱ inȱ Markȱ –ȱ enterȱ theȱ
graveȱinstead.ȱThisȱtextȱalsoȱdoesȱnotȱtellȱtheȱactualȱeventȱofȱJesus’ȱreȬ
surrection;ȱitȱdoesȱnotȱdareȱtoȱdescribeȱwhatȱtakesȱplaceȱinȱtheȱtomb.ȱ
Neverthelessȱ theseȱ angels,ȱ whoȱ nowȱ comeȱ outȱ ofȱ theȱ tombȱ toȱ leadȱ
theȱ risenȱ one,ȱ whoseȱ headȱ overpassesȱ theȱ heavens,ȱ outȱ ofȱ hisȱ grave,ȱ
obviouslyȱ doȱ notȱ playȱ theȱ partȱ ofȱ angeliȱ interpretes.ȱ Moreover,ȱ theyȱ inȬ
deedȱseemȱtoȱdemonstrateȱGod’sȱactingȱinȱbehalfȱofȱtheȱcrucifiedȱJesus.ȱ
Theȱroleȱofȱtheseȱtwoȱangelsȱthusȱdoesȱnotȱfindȱanyȱcorrespondenceȱ
inȱtheȱcanonicalȱtextsȱmentionedȱabove.ȱHowever,ȱthereȱareȱinterestingȱ
parallelsȱwithȱtwoȱotherȱChristianȱApocrypha:ȱ
–ȱ Theȱ Latinȱ versionȱ ofȱ Mark’sȱ Gospelȱ inȱ Codexȱ Bobbiensisȱ (k)ȱ inȬ
sertsȱtheȱfollowingȱtextȱinȱMarkȱ16:4:34ȱ
subitoȱautemȱadȱhoramȱtertiamȱtenebraeȱdieiȱfactaeȱsuntȱperȱtotumȱorbemȱterȬ
raeȱetȱdescenderuntȱdeȱcoelisȱangeliȱetȱsurgentȱ(lies:ȱsurgente)ȱinȱclaritateȱviviȱdeiȱ
simulȱascenderuntȱcumȱeo,ȱetȱcontinuoȱluxȱfactaȱest.ȱ
Suddenly,ȱhowever,ȱatȱtheȱthirdȱhour,ȱduringȱtheȱdayȱaȱdarknessȱaroseȱonȱtheȱ
wholeȱofȱtheȱearth,ȱandȱangelsȱdescendedȱfromȱheaven,ȱandȱafterȱheȱwasȱrisenȱinȱtheȱ
GloryȱofȱtheȱlivingȱGod,ȱtheyȱascendedȱtogetherȱwithȱhim,ȱandȱimmediatelyȱitȱbeȬ
cameȱlightȱ(again).ȱȱ
–ȱProbablyȱevenȱcloserȱtoȱtheȱGosPetȱisȱaȱshortȱfragmentȱofȱtheȱAsȬ
censioȱIsaiae,ȱwhichȱspeaksȱaboutȱresurrectionȱandȱascensionȱofȱtheȱ„BeȬ
loved“,ȱi.e.ȱChrist.ȱRegardingȱtheȱcontext:ȱBeliarȱisȱfullȱofȱwrathȱagainstȱ
Isaiah,ȱwhoȱrevealedȱaȱnumberȱofȱthings,ȱwhichȱareȱnowȱenumerated.ȱ
3,14:ȱ Andȱ theȱ twelveȱ whoȱ wereȱ withȱ Himȱ shouldȱ beȱ offendedȱ becauseȱ ofȱ
Him:ȱandȱtheȱwatchȱofȱthoseȱwhoȱwatchedȱtheȱsepulchreȱ15ȱAndȱtheȱdescentȱofȱ
theȱ angelȱ ofȱ theȱ Christianȱ Church,ȱ whichȱ isȱ inȱ theȱ heavens,ȱ whomȱ Heȱ willȱ
summonȱ inȱ theȱ lastȱ daysȱ16ȱAndȱ thatȱ (Gabriel)ȱ theȱ angelȱ ofȱ theȱ Holyȱ Spirit,ȱ
andȱMichael,ȱtheȱchiefȱofȱtheȱholyȱangels,ȱonȱtheȱthirdȱdayȱwillȱopenȱtheȱsepulȬ
ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
34ȱȱ SeeȱalsoȱHarnack,ȱBruchstückeȱ57.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 307ȱ

chreȱ 17ȱ Andȱ theȱ Belovedȱ sittingȱ onȱ theirȱ shouldersȱ willȱ comeȱ forthȱ andȱ sendȱ
outȱHisȱtwelveȱdisciplesȱ(TranslationȱR.H.ȱCharles).ȱ
Theȱ rolesȱ ofȱ theȱ angelsȱ inȱ theseȱ texts,ȱ whichȱ contraryȱ toȱ theirȱ caȬ
nonicalȱ counterpartsȱ connectȱ resurrectionȱ andȱ ascensionȱ unambiguȬ
ously,ȱshowȱsmallȱdifferencesȱinȱdetails.ȱWhatȱthey,ȱhowever,ȱallȱhaveȱ
inȱcommonȱisȱtheȱfactȱthatȱtheȱangelsȱescortȱtheȱRisenȱOneȱintoȱheaven.ȱ
Whileȱ inȱ Markȱ 16:4ȱ kȱ theȱ angelsȱ clearlyȱ formȱ aȱ kindȱ ofȱ escortȱ forȱ theȱ
Risenȱ Oneȱ andȱ AscIsaȱ alsoȱ pointsȱ toȱ theȱ Risenȱ One’sȱ triumph,ȱ inȱ theȱ
GospelȱofȱPeterȱtheȱangelsȱneedȱtoȱ„support“ȱJesus.ȱComparableȱimagesȱ
areȱfoundȱinȱseveralȱancientȱtextsȱthatȱexpressȱtheȱideaȱofȱangelsȱescortȬ
ingȱ theȱ deceasedȱ onesȱ intoȱ theȱ otherworld:35ȱ Forȱ instance,ȱ inȱ someȱ
Greekȱtextsȱ(forȱexampleȱOd.ȱ24:1Ȭ15;ȱSophocles,ȱAj.ȱ831Ȭ832;ȱEuripides,ȱ
Alc.ȱ743Ȭ744ȱDiogenesȱ Laertiusȱ8:31),ȱ Hermes,ȱ theȱ messengerȱ (a;ggeloj!)ȱ
ofȱtheȱGods,ȱfunctionsȱasȱescortȱforȱtheȱdeceased,ȱbutȱevenȱCharon,ȱusuȬ
allyȱtheȱferrymanȱforȱtheȱdeadȱtoȱcrossȬoverȱtheȱriverȱStyxȱintoȱHades,ȱ
actuallyȱ inȱ someȱ casesȱ takesȱ thisȱ role.ȱ Theȱ ideaȱ ofȱ theȱ deceased’sȱ soulȱ
beingȱescortedȱbyȱaȱguardianȱdaimonȱtoȱjudgementȱandȱfinallyȱtoȱHaȬ
des,ȱisȱknownȱeverȱsinceȱPlatoȱ(Phaidonȱ107cȬ108c;ȱseeȱalsoȱMenander,ȱ
inȱ Clementȱ v.ȱ Alexandria,ȱ str.ȱ 5,130).36ȱ Alsoȱ relevantȱ areȱ theȱ followingȱ
ancientȱJewishȱandȱearlyȱChristianȱtexts:37ȱInȱthisȱrespectȱLukeȱ16:22aȱ–ȱ
theȱsceneȱwhichȱtestifiesȱofȱpoorȱLazarusȱ„beingȱcarriedȱintoȱAbraham’sȱ
lapȱbyȱangels“ȱafterȱdeathȱ–ȱmostȱcertainlyȱisȱtheȱbestȱknownȱtext.ȱFurȬ
thermoreȱ severalȱ passagesȱ fromȱ theȱ Testamentȱ ofȱ Abrahamȱ (Test.ȱ Abr.,ȱ
longȱrecension;ȱ11,5;12,1Ȭ3;ȱ13,12Ȭ13),ȱtheȱApocalypseȱofȱZephanjaȱ(Apoc.Zeph.ȱ
4,1Ȭ7)ȱorȱtheȱApocalypseȱofȱMosesȱ(Apoc.Mos.ȱ37,3Ȭ6)ȱshouldȱbeȱmentioned.ȱȱ
However,ȱ theȱ questionȱ remainsȱ unansweredȱ whyȱ theȱ angelsȱ acȬ
cordingȱtoȱtheȱGosPetȱneedȱtoȱ„support“ȱtheȱRisenȱOne.ȱPossiblyȱthisȱisȱ
bestȱ explainedȱ byȱ theȱ factȱ thatȱ he,ȱ accordingȱ toȱ theȱ GosPetȱ 19,ȱ hasȱlostȱ
hisȱdu,namij,ȱhisȱstrength.ȱThisȱshouldȱnotȱbeȱmisunderstoodȱinȱaȱdoceticȱ
manner,ȱasȱThomasȱHiekeȱrightlyȱargues:ȱ„Dieȱ„‚Kraft‘ȱanȱdieserȱStelleȱ
[ist]ȱ auchȱ nichtȱ einȱ Äquivalentȱ fürȱ Gott,ȱ sondernȱ dieȱ Kraftȱ desȱ Herrnȱ
(Jesus),ȱdieȱWunderwerkeȱbewirkt,ȱwieȱsieȱsoȱoftȱimȱNeuenȱTestamentȱ
beschriebenȱ werdenȱ ...ȱ Sieȱ istȱ esȱ auch,ȱ dieȱ bewirkt,ȱ dassȱ derȱ Herrȱ inȱ
EvPetrȱ trotzȱ derȱ Schmerzenȱ schweigenȱ kannȱ –ȱ undȱ erst,ȱ wennȱ dieseȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
35ȱȱ OnȱtheȱfollowingȱpointsȱseeȱMach,ȱEntwicklungsstadienȱ148Ȭ159;ȱLehtipuu,ȱAfterlifeȱ
198Ȭ205.ȱ
36ȱȱ Evenȱtheȱsirenesȱcouldȱbeȱdescribedȱasȱescortsȱofȱtheȱdead.ȱInȱthisȱcontextȱtheyȱoftenȱ
wereȱportrayedȱasȱfeatheredȱcreatures.ȱForȱmoreȱinformationȱcf.ȱCumont,ȱventsȱ70Ȭ75.ȱȱ
37ȱȱ Hereȱ oneȱ hasȱ toȱ beȱ ratherȱ cautious:ȱ Manyȱ textsȱ consideredȱ toȱ beȱ Jewishȱ pseudepiȬ
graphaȱmightȱnotȱbeȱfreeȱfromȱlaterȱChristianȱinfluences.ȱȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
308ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

Kraftȱihnȱverlassenȱhat,ȱkannȱerȱsterben.“38ȱItȱremainsȱnecessaryȱtoȱaskȱ
whatȱ theȱ backgroundȱ toȱ theȱ preciseȱ descriptionȱ ofȱ theȱ angelsȱ is:ȱ Theȱ
relationshipȱbetweenȱtheȱangels’ȱandȱtheȱLord’sȱmagnitudeȱisȱsurelyȱnoȱ
problem:ȱ Theȱ headȱ ofȱ theȱ risenȱ Lordȱ overpassesȱ heavens,ȱ whileȱ theȱ
headsȱofȱbothȱangelsȱareȱ„only“ȱreachingȱheaven:ȱThisȱcertainlyȱintendsȱ
toȱ explainȱ thatȱ theȱ „Lord“ȱ isȱ greaterȱ thanȱ anyȱ angel,ȱ howȱ giganticȱ heȱ
mayȱ everȱ be.39ȱ Maybeȱ weȱ canȱ nowȱ answerȱ justȱ asȱ easilyȱ theȱ questionȱ
whyȱ theȱ angelsȱ themselvesȱ areȱ portrayedȱ inȱ suchȱ magnitude:ȱ Atȱ theȱ
resurrectionȱ ofȱ theȱ Lordȱ theȱ „greatest“ȱ angelsȱ mustȱ escortȱ him:ȱ Whatȱ
AscIsaȱ 3:17ȱ procuresȱ throughȱ theȱ usageȱ ofȱ namesȱ andȱ attributionsȱ –ȱ
Michaelȱ asȱ theȱ „patronȱ ofȱ theȱ angels“!ȱ –ȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Peterȱ expressesȱ
throughȱtheirȱdescriptionȱasȱgiants.40ȱ
5.2ȱTheȱrestȱofȱtheȱtextȱofȱtheȱGosPetȱisȱlessȱproblematic:ȱWhenȱbothȱ
angelsȱhaveȱdisappearedȱtogetherȱwithȱtheȱResurrectedȱOneȱandȱ(obviȬ
ously)ȱ theȱ crossȱ –ȱ theȱ textȱ doesȱ notȱ sayȱ howȱ thisȱ happensȱ –ȱ heavenȱ isȱ
reopened:ȱȱ
V.44:ȱkai. e;ti dianooume,nwn auvtw/n fai,nontai pa,lin avnoicqe,ntej oi` ouvraȬ
noi. kai. a;nqrwpo,j tij katelqw.n kai. eivselqw.n eivj to. mnh/ma)
Andȱ whileȱ theyȱ (theȱ guards;ȱ TN)ȱ wereȱ stillȱ deliberating,ȱ theȱ heavensȱ wereȱ againȱ
seenȱopen,ȱaȱmanȱdescendsȱandȱentersȱtheȱsepulchre.ȱ
Thisȱman’sȱfunctionȱbecomesȱclearȱinȱV.55:ȱAsȱMaryȱMagdaleneȱcomesȱ
toȱtheȱgraveȱwithȱherȱfriends,ȱsheȱseesȱhimȱasȱaȱyoungȱman,ȱclothedȱinȱ
shiningȱ garment,ȱ sittingȱ inȱ theȱ middleȱ ofȱ theȱ grave.ȱ Thisȱ angelȱ nowȱ
takesȱ theȱ roleȱ ofȱ angelusȱ interpres,ȱ likeȱ weȱ sawȱ inȱ Markȱ andȱ theȱ otherȱ
Synoptics.ȱ Heȱ revealsȱ toȱ theȱ womanȱ whatȱ hasȱ happenedȱ withȱ theȱ
wordsȱ„Whyȱhaveȱyouȱcome?ȱWhoȱdoȱyouȱseek?ȱNotȱthatȱmanȱwhoȱwasȱcruciȬ
fied?ȱHeȱisȱrisenȱandȱgoneȱhence.ȱButȱifȱyouȱdoȱnotȱbelieve,ȱstoopȱdownȱandȱseeȱ
theȱplaceȱwhereȱheȱlay:ȱHeȱisȱnotȱ(there).ȱForȱheȱisȱrisenȱandȱisȱgoneȱtoȱtheȱplaceȱ
fromȱwhichȱhasȱwasȱsent“ȱ(V.56).ȱHereuponȱtheyȱfleeȱinȱfearȱ–ȱlikeȱinȱMarkȱ
(V.57).ȱ

ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
38ȱȱ Hieke,ȱPetrusevangeliumȱ106.ȱForȱtheȱChristologyȱofȱtheȱGosPetȱseeȱalsoȱMyllykoski,ȱ
Kraft.ȱ
39ȱȱ Cf.ȱVaganay,ȱÉvangileȱ300.ȱ
40ȱȱ Mara,ȱ Vangeloȱ 101,ȱ pointsȱ inȱ thisȱ respectȱ toȱ Revȱ 10:1Ȭ3ȱ andȱ writes:ȱ „Leȱ dimensioniȱ
gigantescheȱdeiȱtreȱpresonaggiȱeȱparticolarmenteȱdelȱKýriosȱnonȱhanno,ȱnelȱcontesto,ȱ
unȱsempliceȱvaloreȱspettacolare,ȱmaȱontologico:ȱcomeȱinȱApȱ10,1Ȭ3,ȱlaȱstaturaȱèȱindiȬ
cazioneȱdellaȱloroȱautoritàȱinȱcieloȱeȱinȱterra.”ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 309ȱ

6.ȱConclusionȱ

InȱtheȱnarrativesȱaboutȱJesus’ȱresurrection,ȱbeȱtheyȱemptyȱtombȱstoriesȱ
orȱ ascensionȱ narratives,ȱ oneȱ canȱ observeȱ severalȱ veryȱ distinctȱ rolesȱ ofȱ
angels:ȱ
6.1ȱTheȱfactȱthatȱJesus’ȱresurrectionȱis,ȱinȱallȱtexts,ȱseenȱasȱanȱactȱofȱ
God,ȱmakesȱitȱnecessaryȱtoȱexplainȱitsȱworldlyȱconsequencesȱ–ȱtheȱopenȱ
andȱemptyȱgrave.ȱThisȱisȱwhyȱwithȱtheȱexceptionȱofȱJohn’sȱGospel,ȱallȱ
textsȱdiscussedȱhereȱknowȱtheȱroleȱofȱtheȱangelusȱinterpres,ȱwhich,ȱhowȬ
ever,ȱ atȱ leastȱ accordingȱ toȱ Markȱ (andȱ possiblyȱ alsoȱ toȱ GosPet)ȱ isȱ notȱ
overallȱ sucessful.ȱ Additionally,ȱ atȱ leastȱ inȱ someȱ textsȱ weȱ findȱ theȱ eleȬ
mentȱofȱ(moreȱorȱlessȱdirect)ȱrebukeȱofȱtheȱbehaviourȱofȱtheȱaddressedȱ
personsȱ (mainlyȱ Mark;ȱ Luke;ȱ Acts;ȱ GosPet)ȱ and,ȱ finally,ȱ inȱ Markȱ andȱ
Matthewȱ theȱ angelȱ chargesȱ theȱ womenȱ withȱ aȱ certainȱ (butȱ veryȱ reȬ
stricted)ȱcommission.ȱȱ
6.2ȱTheȱactualȱactȱofȱJesus’ȱresurrectionȱisȱwithdrawnȱfromȱtheȱhuȬ
manȱeye.ȱThereforeȱonlyȱaȱfewȱtextsȱallowȱtoȱdiscussȱ(cautiously)ȱwhetherȱ
theȱ angelȱ asȱ God’sȱ representativeȱ resuscitatesȱ Jesusȱ fromȱ theȱ dead.ȱ Inȱ
theȱcanonicalȱtextsȱMattȱ28ȱtakesȱthisȱaspectȱfurthest.ȱTheȱdescendanceȱ
ofȱ theȱ angel,ȱ whoȱ isȱ assignedȱ Angelȱ ofȱ theȱ Lord,ȱ isȱ accompaniedȱ byȱ
signsȱofȱtheophany,ȱwhichȱunderlineȱtheȱevent’sȱeschatologicalȱsignifiȬ
cance.ȱToȱthisȱatȱleastȱoneȱmayȱconsiderȱtheȱideaȱthatȱtheȱactȱofȱremovȬ
ingȱtheȱstoneȱnotȱonlyȱservesȱtheȱwomen’sȱpurposeȱtoȱenterȱtheȱtomb.ȱItȱ
mightȱ asȱ wellȱ symbolicallyȱ standȱ forȱ theȱ openingȱ ofȱ theȱ graveȱ forȱ theȱ
crucifiedȱ Jesus.ȱ Onlyȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Peterȱ developsȱ thisȱ themeȱ further:ȱ
Althoughȱevenȱhereȱtheȱactȱofȱresuscitationȱremainsȱhidden,ȱtheȱactȱofȱ
theȱ angels,ȱ whoȱ descendȱ fromȱ heavenȱ andȱ takeȱ Jesusȱ fromȱ hisȱ grave,ȱ
canȱ beȱ interpretedȱ asȱ aȱ representationȱ ofȱ God’sȱ actingȱ uponȱ theȱ cruciȬ
fiedȱJesus.ȱ
6.3ȱFinally,ȱinȱtheȱthreeȱapocryphalȱtextsȱmentionedȱabove,ȱoneȱcanȱ
establishȱyetȱanotherȱroleȱofȱtheȱangels.ȱAllȱthreeȱtextsȱcombineȱtheȱideaȱ
ofȱ Jesus’ȱ resurrectionȱ andȱ hisȱ ascentȱ toȱ heaven(s).ȱ Similarȱ toȱ ancientȱ
Jewishȱ (andȱ indirectlyȱ alsoȱ pagan)ȱ ideasȱ oneȱ canȱ discernȱ inȱ allȱ threeȱ
textsȱ angelsȱ whoȱ escortȱ –ȱ partlyȱ asȱ inȱ aȱ triumphȱ –ȱ theȱ Risenȱ Oneȱ intoȱ
heaven(s).ȱ
ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
310ȱ TobiasȱNicklasȱ

Bibliographyȱ

Cumont,ȱF.,ȱLesȱventsȱetȱlesȱangesȱpsychopompes,ȱin:ȱKlausner,ȱT.ȱ/ȱRücker,ȱA.ȱ
(ed.),ȱ Pisciculi:ȱ Studienȱ zurȱ Religionȱ undȱ Kulturȱ desȱ Alterums,ȱ Münsterȱ
1939,ȱ70Ȭ75.ȱ
Davies,ȱ W.D.ȱ /ȱ Allison,ȱ D.C.ȱ Jr.,ȱ Theȱ Gospelȱ Accordingȱ toȱ Saintȱ Matthewȱ III:ȱ
CommentaryȱonȱMatthewȱXIXȱ–ȱXXVIIIȱ(ICC),ȱEdinburghȱ1997.ȱ
Lindemann,ȱA.ȱ/ȱPaulsen,ȱH.ȱ(transl.ȱandȱed.),ȱDieȱApostolischenȱVäter:ȱGriechischȬ
deutscheȱParallelausgabe,ȱTübingenȱ1992.ȱ
Ernst,ȱJ.,ȱDasȱEvangeliumȱnachȱLukasȱ(RNT),ȱRegensburgȱ1977.ȱ
Evans,ȱC.A.,ȱMarkȱ8:27Ȭ16:20ȱ(WBCȱ34B),ȱNashvilleȱ2001.ȱ
Fiedler,ȱ P.,ȱ Dasȱ Matthäusevangeliumȱ (Theologischerȱ Kommentarȱ zumȱ Neuenȱ
Testamentȱ1),ȱStuttgartȱ2006.ȱ
Fitzmyer,ȱJ.A.,ȱTheȱActsȱofȱtheȱApostlesȱ(AncBȱ31),ȱNewȱYorkȱetȱal.ȱ1998.ȱ
Fitzmyer,ȱJ.A.,ȱTheȱGospelȱAccordingȱtoȱLukeȱ(Xȱ–ȱXXIV)ȱ(AncBȱ28A),ȱGardenȱ
Cityȱ1985.ȱ
FlaviusȱJosephus,ȱJüdischeȱAltertümer,ȱClementz,ȱH.ȱ(transl.),ȱHalleȱ1899ȱ(Ndr.ȱ
Wiesbadenȱ2004).ȱ
FletcherȬLouis,ȱH.T.C.,ȱLukeȬActs:ȱAngels,ȱChristologyȱandȱSoteriologyȱ(WUNTȱ
II/94),ȱTübingenȱ1997.ȱ
Frankemölle,ȱH.,ȱMatthäuskommentarȱ2,ȱDüsseldorfȱ²1997.ȱ
Giesen,ȱH.,ȱDerȱAuferstandeneȱundȱseineȱGemeinde:ȱZumȱInhaltȱundȱzurȱFunkȬ
tionȱdesȱursprünglichenȱMarkusschlusses:ȱSNTUȱ12ȱ(1987)ȱ99Ȭ139.ȱ
Gnilka,ȱ J.,ȱ Dasȱ Evangeliumȱ nachȱ Markusȱ (Mkȱ 8,27Ȭ16,20)ȱ (EKKȱ II/2),ȱ Zürichȱ /ȱ
NeukirchenȬVluynȱ1979.ȱ
Gnilka,ȱJ.,ȱDasȱMatthäusevangelium,ȱII,ȱ(HThKȱNTȱ1.2),ȱFreiburgȱetȱal.ȱ1988.ȱ
Harnack,ȱ A.v.,ȱ Bruchstückeȱ desȱ Evangeliumsȱ undȱ derȱ Apokalypseȱ desȱ Petrusȱ
(TUȱ8.2),ȱLeipzigȱ1893.ȱ
Hieke,ȱ T.,ȱ Dasȱ Petrusevangeliumȱ vomȱ Altenȱ Testamentȱ herȱ gelesen:ȱ GewinnȬ
bringendeȱLektüreȱeinesȱnichtȬkanonischenȱTextesȱvomȱchristlichenȱKanonȱ
her,ȱ in:ȱ Kraus,ȱ T.J.ȱ /ȱ Nicklas,ȱ T.ȱ (ed.),ȱ Dasȱ Evangeliumȱ nachȱ Petrus:ȱ Text,ȱ
Kontexte,ȱIntertexteȱ(TUȱ158),ȱBerlinȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2007,ȱ91Ȭ115.ȱ
Isaac,ȱ E.,ȱ 1ȱ (Ethiopicȱ Apocalypseȱ of)ȱ Enoch:ȱ Aȱ Newȱ Translationȱ andȱ IntroducȬ
tion,ȱ in:ȱ Charlesworth,ȱ J.H.ȱ (ed.),ȱ Theȱ Oldȱ Testamentȱ Pseudepigraphaȱ 1:ȱ
ApocalypticȱLiteratureȱandȱTestamentsȱ(ABRL),ȱNewȱYorkȱetȱal.ȱ1983,ȱ5Ȭ89.ȱ
Kraus,ȱT.J.ȱ/ȱNicklas,ȱT.ȱ(ed.),ȱDasȱPetrusevangeliumȱundȱdieȱPetrusapokalypse:ȱ
DieȱgriechischenȱFragmenteȱmitȱdeutscherȱundȱenglischerȱÜbersetzungȱ(GCSȱ
NFȱ11;ȱNeutestamentlicheȱApokryphenȱI),ȱBerlinȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2004.ȱ
Lehtipuu,ȱO.,ȱTheȱAfterlifeȱImageryȱinȱLuke’sȱStoryȱofȱtheȱRichȱManȱandȱLazaȬ
rusȱ(NT.Sȱ123),ȱLeidenȱ/ȱBostonȱ2007.ȱ
Lührmann,ȱD.,ȱDasȱMarkusevangeliumȱ(HNTȱ3),ȱTübingenȱ1987.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ AngelsȱinȱEarlyȱChristianȱNarrativesȱonȱtheȱResurrectionȱofȱJesusȱ 311ȱ

Lührmann,ȱD.,ȱFragmenteȱapokryphȱgewordenerȱEvangelienȱinȱgriechischerȱundȱ
lateinischerȱSpracheȱ(MThStȱ59),ȱMarburgȱ2000.ȱ
Luz,ȱ U.,ȱ Dasȱ Evangeliumȱ nachȱ Matthäusȱ (Mtȱ 26Ȭ28)ȱ (EKKȱ I/4),ȱ Düsseldorfȱ /ȱ
Zürichȱ/ȱNeukirchenȬVluynȱ2002.ȱ
Mach,ȱ M.,ȱ Entwicklungsstadienȱ desȱ jüdischenȱ Engelglaubensȱ inȱ vorrabbiniȬ
scherȱZeitȱ(TSAJȱ34),ȱTübingenȱ1992.ȱȱ
Mara,ȱ M.G.,ȱ Ilȱ Vangeloȱ diȱ Pietro:ȱ Introduzione,ȱ Versione,ȱ Commentoȱ (Scrittiȱ
delleȱOriginiȱCristianeȱ30),ȱBolognaȱ2002.ȱ
Meyer,ȱ M.,ȱ Theȱ Nakedȱ Youthsȱ inȱ theȱ Villaȱ ofȱ theȱ Mysteries,ȱ Canonicalȱ Mark,ȱ
andȱSecretȱMark,ȱin:ȱMeyer,ȱM.,ȱSecretȱGospels:ȱEssaysȱonȱThomasȱandȱtheȱ
SecretȱGospelȱofȱMark,ȱHarrisburgȱ/ȱLondonȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2003,ȱ149Ȭ167.ȱ
Meyer,ȱM.,ȱTheȱYouthȱinȱtheȱSecretȱGospelȱofȱMark,ȱin:ȱMeyer,ȱM.,ȱSecretȱGospels:ȱ
Essaysȱ onȱ Thomasȱ andȱ theȱ Secretȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Mark,ȱ Harrisburgȱ /ȱ Londonȱ /ȱ
NewȱYorkȱ2003,ȱ109Ȭ134.ȱ
Meyer,ȱ M.,ȱ Theȱ Youthȱ inȱ Secretȱ Markȱ andȱ theȱ Belovedȱ Discipleȱ inȱ John,ȱ in:ȱ
Meyer,ȱM.,ȱSecretȱGospels:ȱEssaysȱonȱThomasȱandȱtheȱSecretȱGospelȱofȱMark,ȱ
Harrisburgȱ/ȱLondonȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2003,ȱ135Ȭ148.ȱ
Myllykoski,ȱM.,ȱDieȱKraftȱdesȱHerrn:ȱErwägungenȱzurȱChristologieȱdesȱPetrusȬ
evangeliums,ȱin:ȱKrausȱT.J.ȱ/ȱNicklas,ȱT.ȱ(ed.),ȱDasȱEvangeliumȱnachȱPetrus:ȱ
Text,ȱKontexte,ȱIntertexteȱ(TUȱ158),ȱBerlinȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2007,ȱ301Ȭ326.ȱ
Nickelsburg,ȱG.W.E.,ȱ1Enochȱ1,ȱHermeneia,ȱMinneapolisȱ2001.ȱ
Nicklas,ȱT.,ȱAblösungȱundȱVerstrickung:ȱ„Juden“ȱundȱJüngergestaltenȱalsȱChaȬ
raktereȱderȱerzähltenȱWeltȱdesȱJohannesevangeliumsȱundȱihreȱWirkungȱaufȱ
denȱimplizitenȱLeserȱ(RStThȱ60),ȱFrankfurtȱa.M.ȱ2001.ȱ
Nicklas,ȱT.,ȱ Traditionsȱ aboutȱJesusȱ inȱ Apocryphalȱ Gospelsȱ(withȱ theȱ exceptionȱ
ofȱ theȱ Gospelȱ ofȱ Thomas),ȱ in:ȱ Holmén,ȱ T.ȱ /ȱ Porter,ȱ S.E.ȱ (ed.),ȱ Handbookȱ forȱ
theȱStudyȱofȱtheȱHistoricalȱJesus,ȱLeidenȱ/ȱBostonȱ2008ȱ[forthcoming].ȱ
Pesch,ȱR.,ȱDasȱMarkusevangeliumȱII.ȱ(HThKȱII/2),ȱFreiburgȱetȱal.ȱ1977.ȱ
Pesch,ȱ R.,ȱ Dieȱ Apostelgeschichteȱ (Apgȱ 1Ȭ12)ȱ (EKKȱ V/1),ȱ Zürichȱ /ȱ NeukirchenȬ
Vluynȱ1986.ȱ
RiusȬCamps,ȱJ.ȱ/ȱReadȬHeimerdinger,ȱJ.,ȱTheȱMessageȱofȱActsȱinȱCodexȱBezae:ȱAȱ
Comparisonȱ withȱ theȱ Alexandrianȱ Traditionȱ 1:ȱ Actsȱ 1.1Ȭ5.42:ȱ Jerusalemȱ
(JSNT.Sȱ257),ȱLondonȱ/ȱNewȱYorkȱ2004.ȱ
Sand,ȱA.,ȱDasȱEvangeliumȱnachȱMatthäusȱ(RNT),ȱRegensburgȱ1986.ȱ
Schenke,ȱ L.,ȱ Dasȱ Markusevangelium:ȱ Literarischeȱ Eigenartȱ –ȱ Textȱ undȱ KomȬ
mentierung,ȱStuttgartȱ2005.ȱ
Vaganay,ȱL.,ȱL’ÉvangileȱdeȱPierreȱ(ÉtB),ȱParisȱ1930.ȱ
Wiefel,ȱ W.,ȱ Dasȱ Evangeliumȱ nachȱ Matthäusȱ (ThHNTȱ 1),ȱ Leipzigȱ 1998.ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM
ȱ
ȱ
ȱ

Brought to you by | Harvard University

Authenticated
Download Date | 6/25/15 8:24 PM