THE STORY OF YESHUA
by miriam berg
Chapter XXVIII
ARIMATHAEA
Could Yeshua have actually been a Zealot, after all? It is
an intriguing line of argument: he was executed as a Zealot;
he was crucified between two men who are called "robbers"
in the translations but the Greek word lestai is the same
as the word Josephus uses to refer to the Zealots; and two of his
disciples were Zealots, Simon called the Cananaean, which is
Aramaic for Zealot, and Judas Iscariot, which comes from the
word sicarii, which is Latin for Zealot, and Simon himself
is called "bar-Jona", which was a slang word for bandit or Zealot.
The teachings on universal love, according to this reasoning,
come from Yohanan rather than Yeshua; so does the use of the
quotation from Hosea about mercy and sacrifice; the saying about
tribute to Caesar actually meant that nothing from Judea should
be given to Rome, because it was God's, and it too was a saying
from Yohanan; the reports of the trial have been tinkered up by
the authors to blame the Jews for Yeshua's death and to show that
the Romans were not responsible, when such a proceeding was
unlikely and it is probable that the Romans knew what they were
doing when they executed Yeshua as a rebel. Why else would the
Romans have executed him as a rebel unless they considered him to
be a rebel, and why would they have considered him a rebel unless
he had led an insurrection? The gospels themselves refer to
"the" insurrection, not "an" insurrection, when telling us
about Bar-Abbas.
The difficulty with this line of reasoning is that it assumes
that the only certain fact in the gospels is that Yeshua was
executed as a rebel, and that everything else was distorted
or falsified to free him from this charge so that he would be
acceptable to the Gentiles. Thus, the visit to his home town
actually culminated in a fight, in which Yeshua and his disciples
were driven out of town; he threatens Chorazin and Beth-Saida with
destruction for not supporting him; Matthew is correct in
reporting that he said he had come not to bring peace but a sword;
there is violence in many of the parables; Luke retains a clue
in Gethsemane when he tells his disciples to sell their cloaks
and buy swords; further, the disciples were already armed, as
they tell Yeshua, "Here are two swords"; they resisted arrest,
one of them slicing off an ear of one of the police, and the
flight of the disciples was not flight but escape while Yeshua
was captured. At the trial Pilate asks the priests if he were
a Galilaean, which was a euphemism for Zealot. Furthermore, the
chief priests could have executed Yeshua themselves for blasphemy
if that is what they thought he was guilty of; the stoning of
Stephen in the Acts of the Apostles proves that they had that
authority. These invidious interpretations all assume that the
reports in the gospels are completely distorted to hide these
facts; but there is too much historical detail which remains
to have been invented by the gospelleers.
Be that as it may, the gospels all report that a man named
Joseph, from a place called Arimathaea, came to Pilate
and entreated that he be allowed to bury Yeshua in his own
tomb. This is a surprise; this man has not been heard of before,
and is never heard of again, although a British legend has it
that he came to England and founded the church at Glastonbury.
There is a village named Ramathaim several miles to the west of
Jerusalem, and it is supposed that Arimathaea meant this village.
It was the home of Elkanah, the father of Samuel, the kingmaker
who anointed both Saul and David. Pilate is surprised; it
usually took two or three days before a person died of crucifixion.
He asks a centurion if he were already dead, and when the
centurion said it was so, Pilate allowed Joseph to take the body.
Then the story says that he took the body down from the cross,
and wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid it in a tomb which had
been hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone against the opening.
We are not told where this tomb was, whether it was in Ramathaim,
or in Jerusalem, although the gospel of John says that it was a
brand-new tomb in the same garden where he was executed. We are
told that the burial occurred on the day before the sabbath,
which would have been the sixth day of the week. Since the
sabbath started at sundown, Yeshua had to have been buried by
sundown. He had been arrested less than twenty-four hours before,
if we accept the reports in the gospels; and he had entered
Jerusalem to the cheering of crowds less than one week before.
However, this story of the tomb is completely unlikely.
Pilate would not have done this, since it was the practice
of the Romans to throw the corpses of those executed as
rebels into a common grave, if not into the valley of Hinnom.
Even then, of course, it might have been expected that the
devoted followers of Yeshua would have retrieved the body in
order to provide it with a decent burial; Judah Maccabee's
brothers had retrieved his body for burial, and the Gibeonites
had retrieved the body of Saul from hanging on the wall of
Beth-Shan, 50 miles to the north of Jerusalem. Matthew in fact
tells us that the chief priests came to Pilate and asked that he
set soldiers to guard the body so that it would not be stolen by
the disciples. There might indeed have been such a tradition,
because both the Jewish leaders and the Romans might have believed
that his followers would use some such excuse to make another
insurrection.
Wherever the tomb was, though, the rumor spread soon after his
death that he had been resurrected, and that he had been seen
by many of the disciples. The gospels first report that Mary
Magdalene, and another Mary, and Salome the mother of Yakub and
Yohan, came to the tomb and found it empty. None of the Synoptics
say that Yeshua was seen, only that the tomb was found empty.
Matthew inserts his explanation that the chief priests told the
soldiers to spread the rumor that the corpse had been stolen by
the disciples.But the gospels completely contradict each other about where
and to whom the sightings of Yeshua occurred. Matthew tells
of only one appearance, in Galilee, on the mountain where he
had named them as disciples. Luke reports two appearances: the
first to two of them, not named, on the third day after the
execution, outside of Jerusalem; the second to all of them in
Jerusalem the same day, appearing suddenly in the midst of them
after vanishing from the first two. John reports that the first
appearance was to Mary Magdalene; the second was to ten of them in
Jerusalem, Thomas being absent, when he also appeared through the
walls since the disciples had locked themselves in; the third was
eight days later, when Thomas was this time with them, and after
doubting it Yeshua asked him to touch his wounds and put his hand
into them to be convinced. Mark, in an appendix which was almost
certainly added later, summarizes the appearance to Mary Magdalene
and the two appearances in Luke. But Saul (Paul), the man who
traveled around the Great Sea preaching the worship of Yeshua,
gives a list of all the appearances which does not include a
single one of the reports contained in the gospels; he includes
an appearance to Yakub, called Yeshua's brother, to Simon alone,
to five hundred of them in Jerusalem, and to himself, which he
elsewhere reports as a light and a voice. So none of these
reports can be trusted; no two witnesses agree; it seems certain
that these could have been little more than what today we would
call hallucinations or people seeing ghosts, or thinking
they saw ghosts, the more so since there is no agreement among
them.
Whatever it was that happened after Yeshua was executed, it
is improbable that his corpse came back to life. Perhaps
he was not really dead, and revived in the cold air; but that
is not the same as rising from the dead. If he had risen,
why wouldn't he have gone to the temple and said, "See, here I
am, back from the dead; this proves I am the son of God?" But
No, we are told only that he appeared to a very few persons,
and then disappeared into the skies. It is impossible to give
any credit to these rumors of the resurrection.
* * * * *
It is a possibility that Joseph of Arimathaea was actually
Yosef, the father of Yeshua,
and that he had written a bill of divorce to Mary
according to the commandment in Deuteronomy some years earlier
and gone to live in Arimathaea, and that Yeshua's harsh opinion
of divorce came from his sorrow over this separation. This
might also explain the similarity between the legends of Yosef,
who planted his staff in the ground, and it then bloomed, and
Joseph who came to Glastonbury in the British Isles and planted
his staff in the ground and it also bloomed.
It is an interesting hypothesis, but there is no direct evidence.
Epilogue