Joe,
The designation, “the Eleven,” or “the Twelve” describes the group. It does not have to include all members being present.

Off topic but interesting to me.

Immediately after the cross Christ appears to the women then the ‘eleven as they sat at meat”. Mark 16:14. This tells me Thomas was present. Eleven because Judas was dead.

John 20:24 says, “But Thomas, one of the twelve called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.” (I assume this was the doubting Thomas scene)

Both of these verses appear to occur immediately after the cross.

Are these different events?.

Gideon,
Much debate has occurred over whether διαθήκη should be rendered “testament” or “covenant.” “Will” or “testament” for διαθήκη, בְרִית introduce an entirely new concept to Paul’s argument. Paul’s argument is not death per se, which would afford the idea of “testament,” but substitutionary death. “Testament” does not have the sense of substitution and Paul’s argument would not make sense to a Jewish audience. Difficulties in verses 16-17 are cleared up in verses 18ff. Covenants became valid by shedding the blood of animals, substitutes for people. Through this, heirs obtained “inheritance” (verse 15). The New Covenant became valid with Christ’s substitutionary death for us, satisfying God’s justice.

Can you help me understand how the concept of covenant in the Bible relates to the idea of a testator?
Hebrew 9:16-17, Romans 3:25
Thank you

Bahati,
The nomenclature Old and New Testament only causes confusion and adds nothing to understanding. The term “testament” is misleading. The Bible never talks about “testament.” It only speaks about “covenant.” The Gospels are Old Testament as are the letters of James, Peter, John and Jude. God made the New Covenant with Israel (Jeremiah 31, Ezekiel 11, 36). Thus, the Church is formally outside the New Covenant. We in the Church have the benefit of the indwelling Spirit and the forgiveness of sins through Christ’s work and we know this from Paul (2 Corinthians 3). Reading Jeremiah and Ezekiel gives a completely different picture of the NC and indwelling Spirit than Paul. Peter, James, John, and Jude never mention the New Covenant or the operational power and benefits of the Holy Spirit.

Mike,
Read Genesis 15.6. What did Abraham believe? He believed what God told him. Abraham had God’s righteousness, righteousness that exceeded that of the Pharisees. Salvation was accomplished by Christ’s death on the cross and His resurrection, but people were saved before this by believing and doing what God said. We do not see salvation by faith alone until Paul (with exceptions). See my article, Faith vs. Works in James: Resolving the Problem. It may shed light. The problem with the Pharisees was they lacked faith. They were like the Jews of Moses’ generation who would not enter the promised land (See Hebrews 3).

Confusing. The only way they could have God’s righteousness is the cross which obviously hadn’t happened yet. Correct? The law could never do that.They had to perform the animal sacrifices which I guess they had to believe by faith were sufficient. As I have learned from you salvation for the Jew at this time was attempting to follow the law, believing that Jesus was the messiah and baptism. So wasn’t the Pharisees works, although self righteous in part ,and I guess their baptism part of their salvation. Granted they had tainted the law for their own purposes over the years but I would guess they followed the law very closely. Probably better than most. So was Jesus statement about having the righteousness of a Pharisee more of a tongue in cheek comment?

Mike,
Thank you. The essential problem of the Pharisees was self-righteousness. To surpass their righteousness meant to have God’s righteousness, that is, to trust in Him for salvation. Jesus statement was not a hopeless statement to them for what God looks for is faith, trust, and in that day, Jews had to believe the animals sacrifices covered their sins. The Pharisees thought their works would save them. Lots of church people think the same today.