Resurrection in Acts of Paul
(avg. read time: 8–16 mins.)
As should now be a familiar pattern for the Acts of Andrew and Acts of John, the body of texts known as the “Acts of Paul” consists of varying extents and varying groupings of text, some of which exist only in fragments, and the whole of which has something of a collection or possibly composite character. There may be earlier testimony to its existence in Tertullian (Bapt. 17), but it probably emerged around the same time as the other apocryphal Acts we have examined. It is also distinguished from the others in being looked at more positively while still not being considered canonical as far as any extant testimony tells us (Hippolytus, Comm. Dan. 3.29; Origen, Princ. 1.2.3; Comm. Jo. 20.12; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.3.5; 25.4).
In our analysis of what this text has to say about resurrection, the Acts of Paul and Thecla will be the most relevant. Other elements, like the Martyrdom of Paul, are included as part of the Acts, though it will be treated in a separate section of this entry. One part of the Acts that we will not review here is what has sometimes been called 3 Corinthians. Though it belongs here, it fits better with our analysis of early apocryphal epistles (and otherwise Epistula Apostolorum would be alone in this category until we get to the Nag Hammadi texts). In any case, as usual, we will first consider explicit references to resurrection and then follow with examination of implicit links to resurrection.
Explicit References
Acts of Paul and Thecla
The Acts of Paul and Thecla tells the story of St. Thecla, a young virgin noble from Iconium who is converted by Paul’s preaching, accompanies him in his work as his disciple, and devotes the rest of her life to preaching and teaching the Christian way. The Acts describe Paul’s gospel in the opening after mentioning his companions: Demas and Hermogenes. The first is a name mentioned in Paul’s letters (Col 4:14; Phlm 24), though his time with Paul did not end well (2 Tim 4:10). Hermogenes is also a name listed as one who turned away from Paul in the same letter denouncing Demas (2 Tim 1:15). The opening describes them as full of hypocrisy, but Paul did them no harm, looking only to the goodness of Christ, but he loved them and, by doing so, he made the words of the Lord sweet to them, as he did for “the birth and resurrection [ἀναστάσεως] of the Beloved” (1).1 In accordance with this, he gave them an account of each word of the majesty/magnificence/might works of Christ as they were revealed to him (1).
This summary of the gospel adds to the diversity of forms we have seen to this point while also being consistent with many others in including Jesus’s resurrection. Less common is the reference to his birth. But the summary functions by appeal to bookend events. Technically, the story could be extended back further to Jesus’s annunciation (as well as incarnation thereupon), but it could also be extended forward to Jesus’s ascension. But the referenced events serve their function well enough.
The reference to the revelation of Jesus to Paul is reminiscent of Galatians (1:12; 2:2; cf. 1:16) and how Paul describes receiving the gospel he proclaimed. As Gal 1 and 2 bear out, this gospel agrees with the gospel the other apostles proclaimed (cf. 1 Cor 15:1–11; Gal 1:1). And the revelation Paul received was the appearance of the risen Jesus to him, which further shows why resurrection was central to his gospel proclamation. At least on these points, the Acts of Paul is consistent with the historical Paul (among others, see here, here, here, and here).
Onesiphorus is also featured in this story, and like the other two he is mentioned in 2 Timothy, albeit positively (1:16; 4:19). He takes Paul into his house upon finding the man by his description.2 When Paul is welcomed into his house, we are told, “there was great joy, bowing of knees, breaking of bread, and [the] word of God concerning abstinence/self-control [ἐγκρατείας] and resurrection [ἀναστάσεως]” (5). This summary of Paul’s teaching is somewhat reminiscent of a remark attributed to Galen in an Arabic text quoting his lost summary of Plato’s Republic, which would have been written in the late second century: “We now see the people called Christians, though they have drawn their faith from mere allegories, sometimes acting like true philosophers. For their lack of fear of death and of what they will meet thereafter is something we can see every day, and likewise their restraint in cohabiting.”3 The lack of fear for death is something we have seen previously (and will see again elsewhere) linked with resurrection hope (see here and here, as well as, implicitly, texts we see here and here). Abstinence is linked with the same here as a matter of theological ethics. They are distinguishing marks of the Christian movement that appear together because both emphases manifest a driving concern for what one does with one’s body.
Of course, in the context of this work, placing these two teachings together is also a way of highlighting the importance of abstinence. Scripture well enough attests the centrality of resurrection to Paul’s teaching (for a summary series, see here), and so using it as a reference point for similarly stressing the teaching of abstinence makes sense (the word is also linked with “righteousness” and “the coming judgment” in a summary of Paul’s teaching in Acts 24:25; cf. Gal 5:23). And that principle of ethics is certainly prominent and pervasive in the Acts of Paul and Thecla. We will address the specific quotation of Paul’s teaching here and in 6 below with implicit links.
When Thecla is engrossed with Paul’s teaching, her mother warns her betrothed Thamyris. Naturally, he seeks out the man he takes to be a threat to his betrothal. First, he encounters Demas and Hermogenes, whom he asks about Paul’s teaching. They mischaracterize him by saying that he deprives young men of wives and virgins/maidens of husbands through his teaching that “There is not otherwise a resurrection [ἀνάστασις] for you, unless you remain chaste and do not pollute the flesh” (12). While Paul relates resurrection to abstinence/self-control, as we have seen previously, he nowhere says anything like this to make resurrection dependent on chastity or on not engaging in sex.4
By contrast, they insist they can teach him the true way. That is, they will teach “about the resurrection [ἀνάστασιν] which he says is to come, that it has already happened in the children whom we have, and we rise again [ἀνιστάμεθα] after having come to the knowledge of the true God” (14). This represents a repudiation of Paul’s actual teaching on resurrection. The phrasing of the first statement is similar to the description of how Hymenaeus and Philteus have gone astray from the truth by saying that the resurrection has already happened (2 Tim 2:18). Whatever precisely was entailed by such a claim at the time of 2 Timothy, the version here is linked with two ideas: the raising of children and the knowledge of God. The first works on a wordplay we have seen elsewhere in the Sadducees using the vocabulary for producing children in their question to Jesus (Matt 22:24 // Mark 12:19 // Luke 20:28; see here especially). The evocative wordplay also allowed for a resurrection reading of God “raising up” offspring for David (2 Sam 7:12, using the verb ἀνίστημι). Demas and Hermogenes thus say, like the Sadducees, that the raising up they can expect is not of their own bodies but of their children, which repudiates the teaching on abstinence. But the other raising action referenced with the verb form is linked with knowledge of God. This is more like a gnostic understanding of resurrection and how it is achieved, which has no reference to the body. This could thus be seen as a polemical presentation of the same teaching through the narrative representation of Demas and Hermogenes.
Another reference is possible because of both the verb and the surrounding phrasing in 37. Here, in explanation of why no wild beast in the arena Thecla was sent to die in has touched her, she attests that she is a slave/servant of the living God and has had faith in the Son of God because, “this one alone is the pillar [boundary marker?] of salvation and the foundation/basis of immortal [ἀθανάτου] life. For he is to the tempest-tossed a refuge, to the afflicted a solace, and to the despairing a shelter; most simply, whoever does not have faith in him will not live [ζήσεται] but be dead forever [ἀποθανεῖται εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας]” (37). On the one hand, we have seen previously, particularly in Pauline work, how the language of immortality is linked with resurrection to everlasting life, and so it may be here, considering the teaching on resurrection earlier. On the other hand, the statement that one who does not have faith “will not live” may not be a reference to not resurrecting as such, but it is more about inheriting everlasting life as a result of resurrection. Indeed, it is noteworthy that this statement about the consequence of not having faith in Jesus is the reversal of a resurrection promise in John 11:26, which uses the same basic phrasing of dying forever (ἀποθάνῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα), though there it is a promise that the one who has faith in Jesus will not die forever (on John 11 and its relation to resurrection in John, see here).
Later, when Tryphaena, a noble woman who had taken care of Thecla, recovered from her fainting spell to see that Thecla survived her ordeal in the arena, she went to embrace Thecla. Then she declared, “Now I believe that the dead are raised/arise [ἐγείρονται]; now I believe because my child lives” (39). This is potentially a metaphorical way of referring to how she has received Thecla back alive, but more likely in the larger context of the work she is referring to becoming convinced of the truth of Christianity. This is represented via synecdoche through the belief that the dead are raised (cf. Mark 12:26 // Luke 20:37; 1 Cor 15:15–16, 32, 35). This reflects the summary of Paul’s preaching and teaching early in the same text (1; 5).
Martyrdom of Paul
In another standard element of apostolic Acts works, we see an account here of a temporary resurrection as Paul raises Caesar Nero’s cupbearer, Patroclus. Somewhat similar to Eutychus, Patroclus falls from an upper story and dies (though not because he fell asleep). Paul prays that the young man should live (ζήσῃ), and they put him on an animal as he departs alive (ζῶντα; 1). Nero hears of his death before he sees Patroclus for himself and hears the story from him. Patroclus tells him that Christ Jesus is the one who made him live and that this one is the King of the ages. Nero is perplexed by this declaration and asks if this King of the ages will destroy all other kingdoms. Patroclus says he will indeed destroy all kingdoms under heaven and that he alone will be forever. When Nero strikes him and asks if he is now a soldier for this King, which Patroclus affirms because, “he raised [ἠγείρεν] me after being dead” (2).
When others among Nero’s chief men declare their allegiance to the King of the ages, Nero thereupon tortures them and commands that all Christians be rounded up and executed. Of course, Paul is among these. When he is brought before Nero, he tells him that if he is executed, he will do the following, “After I rise [ἐγερθεὶς], I will appear to you, because I did not die, but I am alive [ζῶ] in/to my Lord Christ Jesus” (4). Later, Paul will call on Parthenius and Pheretas to have faith in the living God “who raises [εγείροντι] me and all who have faith in him from the dead [ἐκ νεκρῶν]” (5). They say that whenever he dies and rises, then they will believe.
The last event is never actually narrated in the story, but we are told at the end of 5 about Paul’s beheading, at which milk splashed on the tunic of his executioner. While the verb for Paul’s rising is not used, he does indeed appear to Nero and confirms that “I did not die, but I am alive [ζῶ] in/to my God” (6). And Paul warns him of the judgment that is coming for his evil. Paul also appears alongside Titus and Luke who are praying at his grave, but they do not see him—presumably because they are in the midst of prayer and Paul does not interrupt them—while Longus and Cestus, soldiers that Paul spoke to earlier, do see him (7).
While the description of Paul being “alive in/to” the Lord would not necessarily imply literal resurrection having already happened (cf. Luke 20:38; Acts 17:28; Rom 6:11; 14:8–9; 2 Cor 5:15; Gal 2:19), that is presented to be the case here because Paul anticipates appearing to Nero after he is raised/rises. This is either among the earliest uses of using this terminology to reference a non-bodily resurrection, a reference to a raising that is a not a resurrection, or it is peculiar for saying that Paul was resurrected bodily shortly after his death. The last option is the most intuitive use of the language, but it would be the only early source to claim Paul’s resurrection ahead of everyone else. Notably, the equivalent verbiage does not appear in Pseudo-Linus’s expanded and reworked version of this story, although Paul still promises to appear to Nero and does so.5 In using the terminology here, the author may have sought to make more connections with Jesus’s death and resurrection, although a major difference is that Paul’s grave is not suggested to be empty, save by this term itself. That is, the narration of Luke and Titus being at Paul’s grave does not clearly suggest that the grave is empty (this differs from non-narrative texts not referring to the empty tomb as such, which I have commented on here and pp. 140–43 here).
The absence of other elements to confirm the intuitive interpretation, as well as the indications against it noted above, might suggest that this is either a different kind of raising or a non-bodily, non-metaphorical resurrection that no earlier (non-gnostic) text has suggested to this point. The manner of Paul’s appearance is ambiguous, which could lend itself to either understanding. Likewise, his presence at his grave is lacking in details to specify the manner of his appearance there. In the absence of details, I do not know that we can rule out this text using either the intuitive sense to make an astonishing claim unlike other earlier sources about Paul or this text using a non-intuitive sense. Again, Pseudo-Linus’s version perhaps intentionally left out this verbiage to avoid the suggestion of Paul’s resurrection shortly after his death (though not his appearance to Nero).
Apart from this unusual case, Paul’s declaration of faith in the God who raises the dead (5) fits with many other statements we have seen elsewhere. This includes the use of the prepositional phrase in distinguishing the raising of those who have faith in God from the rest of the dead. But if this is inclusive of a near-immediate resurrection for Paul, then the prepositional phrase operates in two senses of referring to Paul’s separation from the rest of the dead and (later) the resurrection of other faithful ones in the resurrection to everlasting life. Paul would supposedly be either yet another anticipation of the eschatological resurrection or at least an extraordinary temporary one if this is a bodily resurrection.
Implicit Links
The most noteworthy implicit link with resurrection belief actually comes immediately after the reference to resurrection in the summary of Paul’s teaching in the Acts of Paul and Thecla 5. Immediately following the summary, Paul declares various beatitudes in 5–6, including in terms of:
quoting Matt 5:8
chastity
self-control
keeping aloof from the world
a statement similar to 1 Cor 7:29
having fear of God
respecting the word of God (with a promise of comfort matching Matt 5:4)
receiving the wisdom of Christ (with a promise of being called sons of the Most High like Matt 5:9)
keeping one’s baptism
coming to a knowledge of Jesus Christ
loving God so as to no longer be conformed to the world (with a promise of judging angels, per 1 Cor 6:3, and being blessed at the right hand of the Father)
quoting Matt 5:7 (expanding on the same by saying they will not see the terrible day of judgment)
virginity
Resurrection is nowhere explicitly stated in the beatitudes here, but it is implicit throughout. I have noted elsewhere how Jesus’s Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount are eschatologically significant and thus have resonance with promises of resurrection life. Moreover, these blessings are shaped by eschatological awareness, including of the promise of judgment and avoidance of condemnatory judgment. We have seen many other places in which resurrection is linked with final judgment. Thus it is also with the promise of Jesus coming to judge, which likewise implies his own resurrection for him to be able to act as Judge (Mart. Paul 4).
The summary of Paul’s preaching and teaching being related to resurrection also informs these beatitudes and other declarations of Paul. For example, in Acts of Paul and Thecla 17, Paul refers to the gospel he preaches and teaches and how he declares that in him people have hope. That hope is thus implicitly tied to the resurrected Jesus and to resurrection to everlasting life.
The closing of the Acts of Paul and Thecla also provides an implicit link. When the narrative describes the end of her life, it says, “she slept with a beautiful/noble sleep” (43). This description of death fits how resurrection terminology also has the sense of “waking up” or “getting up” from sleep. It fits tendencies we have seen in the OT, NT, Jewish, and Christian literature to refer to death as sleep due it being temporary and ended by resurrection.
Finally, we have already observed how in the Martyrdom of Paul that he references Jesus coming to judge the world (4). In that same context, he pronounces blessing on those who have faith in him because they will have everlasting life when he comes with fire to purge the earth (cf. 2 Pet 3:10–13, on which see here and here). Similarly, the promise of Jesus’s parousia in this section is dependent on his having risen, and Paul’s participation in the parousia also depends on his being resurrected beforehand.
There is here a description of Paul (3), which may or may not be historically accurate, but which nevertheless supplies elements of physiognomic interest.
Translation from Mary Beard, John North, and Simon Price, Religions of Rome, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 2:338.
I make this qualification because Demas and Hermogenes are not operating with a more expansive sense of “chastity.”