Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

THE CLIMAX OF JESUS' MISSION §18.3
Scripture proving the necessity that the Messiah should suffer is also an important
theme for Luke-Acts (24.26). 88 And above all, the way the appearance climaxes in
the revelation at the breaking of the bread (24.30-31,35) provides Luke the link he
evidently wanted between the table-fellowship characteristic of Jesus' mission
and the breaking of bread characteristic of the earliest church (Acts 2.42, 46). 89
At the same time, the signs of older tradition retold by Luke are also clear:
the identification of one of the participants (Cleopas) 90 and of their destination
(Emmaus), 91 the sort of expectations which Jesus' mission must have engendered
for many of his followers (24.19, 21), 92 and the note that some of the male
disciples also saw the empty tomb, despite the silence on the point in the rest of
the Synoptic tradition (24.24). 93 In addition, the account of Jesus' exposition of
Scripture (24.27) probably reflects an early sense within the first post-Easter disciple
groups that only in the light of the resurrection were they enabled to see
prophecies in Scripture to which they had hitherto been blind. 94 Likewise the episode
may reflect that it was precisely in the breaking of bread that the first disciples
became aware of Jesus' continuing presence, not simply as a recollection of
Jesus' earlier table-fellowship, but in celebration of Jesus' presence with them in
a new way. 95 It is a feature of the resurrection appearances which not only Luke
emphasizes, 96 but also John (John 21.12-13).
Is it an answer, then, that Luke came across the Emmaus story in his search
88. Luke 24.26-27, 45-46; Acts 26.23.
89. See above, § 14.8a.
90. Had the name been added later (a tendency in story-telling) it is likely that both disciples
would have been named. Was the other his wife? Cf. John 19.25 — the wife of Clopas
(not Cleopas) (cf. BDAG, Kleopas; Fitzmyer, Luke 1563). According to Hegesippus, there was
a Clopas who was the brother of Joseph, so uncle of Jesus (Eusebius, HE III. 11). Lüdemann,
Jesus 412, is confused here: it was Symeon, Clopas's son, who was therefore 'cousin
(anepsios)' of Jesus (HE IV.22.4). See further A. M. Schwemer, 'Der Auferstandene und die
Emmausjünger', in Avemarie and Lichtenberger, Auferstehung 95-117 (here 105-106).
91. For the confusion regarding the location of Emmaus see J. F. Strange, 'Emmaus',
ABD 2.497-98; Schwemer, 'Auferstandene' 100-101.
92. See above §15.3e-h.
93. Fitzmyer also thinks that Mark 16.12-13 is a snippet of pre-Lukan tradition, which
Luke built up into his dramatic story, rather than a late summary of the Lukan account (Luke
1554-55).
94. From as early as we can trace, Scriptures like Psalms 16 and 110 and Isaiah 53 were
seen to have prophesied Jesus' suffering and resurrection. Would any of the first Christians
have disagreed with Luke's attribution of that interpretation to the risen Christ? Schwemer
notes the link both to the Isa. 6.9-10 motif (see above, §13.1) and to the experience referred to
in 2 Cor. 3.13-16 ('Auferstandene' 113-15).
95. Paul presupposes as a generally recognized given that the Lord's Supper was celebrated
under Christ as host (1 Cor. 10.21; see my Theology of Paul 620-21).
96. Luke 24.41-43; Acts 1.4; 10.41. On Acts 1.4 see further below (7).