KrisK10

1 Cor 15:5 reads: "he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve".

This passage seems to suggest a tradition at one time that the 12 were thought of as separate from Cephas (not a group that Cephas was a part of, as the later gospels outline). Has anyone ever heard of the idea, or seen any scholars argue, that the initial Christian hierarchy had Peter at the head with a separate group of 12 others?

I note that Luke, in both his gospel and Acts, names one of the disciples as "Judas son of James" (Lk 6:16; Acts 1:13). And yet Mark and Matthew never mention that name; they have another name, and one that Luke never mentions: Thaddaeus (Mk 3:18; Mt 10:2).

Thinking out loud here. Is it possible that these are two separate people, both disciples, making the total disciple count 13 (Peter plus 12 others, as suggested in 1 Cor 15:5)?

Kris

Mageth

Another simple explanation is plausible:

1) He appeared to Cephas.

2) He then appeared to the 12, which is inclusive of Cephas.

So the total would be only 12 if one accepts that explanation.

KrisK10

Mageth,

I accept your possibility and I recognize that I'm splitting hairs. I'm mostly proposing that they are separate based on how I envision most people would have wrote such a statement. If I intended that Jesus appeared to Cephas and then a group of 12 which included Cephas, I would have said something that accommodated that fact, perhaps something like: "he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve as a whole" (if a group vision was the case) or "he appeared to Cephas, then to the rest of the twelve" (if individual appearances were the case). If Peter and the 12 were separate, I would have wrote it just as it appears in 1 Cor 15:5. Basically just trying to float a balloon here to see if anyone has run into any ideas that address this.

Kris

mountainman

Greetings.

Recently I have been having a look through the Nag Hammadi
texts available in English translations (from the original Coptic)
on the web, and in fact had recently posted a question here:

Was the Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles written by a non christian?
See the link in that thread to the text itself.


Nobody seemed interested as to why I thought
the text of NHC6.1 was written by a non-christian,
so I have no bothered to explain why I think this.


However to answer your question, the text obviously
satisfied your criteria. The title of the text is:
The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles.

However, there is no further internal explanation of
the number twelve inside the text itself, except
a direct reference to there being ELEVEN apostles
in total.

Both the title (implying 13 apostles) and the direct
reference in the text to 11 apostles suggest that
there is more to this text than meets the eye.

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

KrisK10

That's interesting Pete. I noticed that Toto too in your previous thread found this interesting. I swear I had no idea that you had just discussed this same topic last week. Thanks much for the reference!

This is of interest to me because if in 1 Cor 15:5 (which I treat as a very early tradition) "the 12" is a separate entity that does not include Cephas, then that is good evidence IMO that the claim of appearance there to the 12 could just as easily or more easily have intended individual appearance experiences instead of a simultaneous group appearance experience (note too that Paul or the tradition elaborates that the 500 had an appearance "at the same time", but not so for the 12). If individual appearance experiences were intended, this seems to me to bolster the hypothesis that the claims of appearances come from hallucinations which, IMHO, are virtually always, if not always, private in nature. I basically think it impossible for 12 people to see the image of the same dead person at the same time (not counting drug use or some lighting reflection phenomena in which everyone talks each other into it being the same person).

Kris

dog-on

or Cephas and Peter were originally not considered the same person.

KrisK10

I can't come up with any reason why, if Peter, who I'm assuming is the same person as Cephas, was separate from the 12, later tradition would then make Peter part of the 12.

Perhaps then the most reasonable explanation for the phrase "he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve" and the title of the manuscript “The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles” is that both intend that Peter (Cephas) was part of the 12. That we would say it slightly differently today to make that more clear may just be because of differences in the languages.

I'm not real up on the Cephas being a different person than Peter theory, but is there really anything too it? If so, why does Cephas disappear from the later tradition?

Kris

Roland

Of course, where in the gospels does it show Jesus appearing FIRST to Peter, then to Peter with the other gospels?

KrisK10

I've noticed that too Roland. In fact, the NT has no appearances which don't have others there to help bear witness to it, with the exception of the solo appearance to a woman (Mary, in GJohn). Even the testimony of Paul's vision in Acts has others there see the light or hear the voice. It makes me wonder, if the initial appearance experiences were private in nature, perhaps there was a need over time to make them group experiences to add to their credibility.

Kris

Toto

KrisK10: the Peter-Cephas dispute comes up here periodically. You can search the forum from the button on the top right, and find previous threads such as Galatians 2, Peter and Cephas together?? or Is Paul's "Cephas" the same person as Mark's "Peter"?

But I still think it is strange to look for an "explanation" of what you call a "tradition" when it is so likely to be a literary convention or a mere story.