from Google Images
Luke tells us that, on the same day in which Jesus rose from the dead, two of his disciples left Jerusalem and journeyed toward Emmaus (Luke 24:13). Josephus writes of an Emmaus, west of Jerusalem.[1] He says it is 60 furlongs from Jerusalem. Luke tells us that two men walked to and from Emmaus in 1 day, which was from Jerusalem three score or 60 stadia (G4712 – Luke 24:13; cf. Luke 24 33, 36; John 20:19).
According to Jewish Weights and Measures in Josephus’ Works (p.727):
| 1 stadia | 1 furlong | |
| 1 cubit | 21 inches or 1 foot, 9 inches | |
| 400 cubits | 1 furlong or 1 stadia | 700 feet |
| 2000 cubits | 5 furlongs or 5 stadia | 3500 feet (Sabbath Days Journey) |
| 4000 cubits | 1 Jewish mile | 7000 feet |
In such a case, 60 furlongs (stadia) would be 24,000 cubits or 42,000 feet or 6 Jewish miles (7.95 American miles). Therefore, according to the above information Josephus’ Emmaus (60 furlongs) would be the same as Luke’s Emmaus (60 stadia).
Both of the disciples seem to be included in the rest of Luke 24:9 and had been with the Apostles in the Upper Room. One was named Cleopas,[2] who was probably the same as Cleophas (John 19:25), the husband of Mary who was the mother of James the Less (one of the Twelve) and Joseph (cf. Mark 15:40). The other disciple is named Simon (Luke 24:34). One theory is that this Simon is Peter (Luke 24:34; cf. 1Corinthians 15:5), but this couldn’t be so, since the two returned to the Eleven (Apostles) in Jerusalem (Luke 24:33), and Mark claims they weren’t believed by the Apostles (Mark 16:12-13). So, if Peter and Simon are the same person, why would he, as one of the Eleven, believe Jesus hadn’t risen?
As the two walked along, they were discussing **all** the events that occurred during the past few days (Luke 24:14), no doubt, seeking to make sense of them (cf. Luke 24:19-20). Luke tells us that Jesus joined them, as they walked, but he was in another form according to Mark, so they were unable to recognize him (Luke 24:15-16; cf. Mark 16:12).
How should we understand Mark’s phrase: another form (Mark 16:12)? The word is used by Mark only here. It is used elsewhere only in Philippians 2:6-7 for the form of God and the form of a servant, but this doesn’t tell us how Jesus may have looked to the two disciples in Luke. Perhaps it pertains to the posture Jesus took with them, that is, he approached them as a stranger. I don’t believe Mark means that Jesus changed his physical appearance, nor does he appear to be in a ‘glorified’ form as some believe.
The phrase is used seven times in the Septuagint, and from here we may obtain a better understanding of what Mark means. It is used, for example, in Daniel 4:36 for the appearance (G3444) Nebuchadnezzar enjoyed when he returned to his former glory, meaning his “excellent majesty” was returned to him. In Daniel 5:6, 9 and 10 the Greek is translated appearance (G3444) for the “kings countenance” being changed. In Daniel 7:28 it is used of Daniel’s own countenance (appearance – G3444) being changed after seeing the vision.
There is, therefore, no reason to believe that after his resurrection Jesus no longer looked like he did before his crucifixion. Rather, the two disciples weren’t expecting to see Jesus, and this, coupled with their own lack of faith in his resurrection, hid Jesus’ identity from them. If one’s worldview is challenged, one will believe almost anything, no matter how foolish, in order to support his own understanding of reality. Consider the fact that on several occasions Jesus clearly told his disciples of his coming crucifixion (Matthew 16:21; Luke 9:22), yet, because of the fact they were taught that Messiah doesn’t die (cf. John 12:34; 2Samuel 7:13; Daniel 2:44; 7:14), they had no place to categorize Jesus’ words. They simply didn’t know in what context they were true. Similarly, these two disciples couldn’t recognize Jesus, because they would not believe he was alive. After all, rising from the dead was pure nonsense (Luke 24:11). They simply had no context in which to believe this stranger was Jesus.
_______________________________________
[1] See JOSEPHUS, Wars 7.6.6
[2] Also called Alphaeus (cf. Luke 6:15). Both Cleopas and Alphaeus are Greek variations of the same Hebrew name Chalpai, or Hhalpai.
Things Paul & Luke 
Woodrow Nichols
May 17, 2021 at 10:06
The other person at Emmaus wasn’t named Simon, the context is that the disciples in Jerusalem told the two that Jesus had appeared to Simon, meaning Peter. Thus the appearance of Jesus to Peter *I Corninthians 15:5) is attested in Luke, which is peculiar since no details are given.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 17, 2021 at 10:34
The context of Jesus’ appearance to Simon in Luke 24:34 is verse-33 and 35, meaning that Simon was one of the two who went to Emmaus. You want to pull verse-34 out from the middle of verses 33 & 35 and place it as a parenthetical explanation of 1Corinthians 15:5. It still doesn’t work, Woodrow, because, when Jesus appeared to the Eleven (Peter among them) they still didn’t believe, thinking he was a spirit (Luke 24:36) and then thinking it was too good to be true (Luke 24:41). 1Corinthians 15:5 isn’t recorded in the Gospel narratives, unless Peter wasn’t alone (cp. John 21), but it is implied that Peter (Cephas) was alone when the Lord appeared to him.
Woodrow Nichols
May 17, 2021 at 12:01
Then how come it doesn’t say Jesus appeared to Clopas and Simon? After all, he appeared to both and broke bread with both.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 17, 2021 at 18:09
Perhaps, if we knew the identity of Simon, we would know why Luke phrased his narrative as he did at this point. Nevertheless, we don’t have a lot of information, especially concerning Simon’s identity. Yet, you seem to want to say you know who Simon is, claiming he is Peter, despite what Luke says later and what Mark and John disclose in their narratives, all of which conclude none of the Apostles believed Jesus had arisen, until he appeared to all of them together.
Woodrow Nichols
May 17, 2021 at 18:16
I always score high on reader’s comprehension, Eddie, and believe me, the disciples are talking to the two from Emmaus when they disclose that the Lord has appeared to Simon. Since Simon Peter per 1 Corinthians 15:5 allegedly saw Jesus first among the disciples, then I reckon he’s the Simon. But clearly your view is against the narration.
Woodrow Nichols
Eddie
May 17, 2021 at 19:01
Oh! Pardonne moi! Let me see if I understand now. Your high level comprehension of the text has the Apostles speaking to the two who had just arrived in Jerusalem from Emmaus. They arrived in the upper room in Jerusalem to tell the Apostles that Jesus had, indeed, arisen (Luke 24:33), but the word “saying” in Luke 24:34 points to the Apostles speaking, not the two from Emmaus, but Luke 24:35 points back to the two from Emmaus speaking, telling the Apostles and those with them how they knew the Lord through his breaking the bread with them in Emmaus.
Suddenly, Jesus at this point in time appears to all of them, appearing in the midst of them inside the upper room (Luke 24:36). They (the Apostles) were terrified, because they believed Jesus was a ghost (Luke 24:37). Yet, Peter saw him prior to this event, and all the Apostles testified to the two from Emmaus that Jesus did arise from the dead, because they believed Peter when he told them the Lord appeared to him (cp. Luke 24:34). Why they are afraid and believe Jesus is a ghost, remains to be understood, BUT ANYWAY… Jesus offers them sound scientific proof of his presence by inviting them to touch his hands and feet (Luke 24:39). YET, THEY STILL DIDN’T BELIEVE, because they thought “this is too good to be true” (Luke 24:41). Therefore, Jesus gave them more scientific proof that he wasn’t a ghost. He actually ate some of their meal right before their eyes (Luke 24:41-43). Nevertheless, he had to supernaturally open their understanding (Luke 24:45), because they simply couldn’t believe their own eyes.
Nevertheless, according to your high level comprehension ability, Peter saw the Lord prior to this event, and all the Apostles believed Peter, but somehow lost all presence of mind and couldn’t believe their own eyes when they saw Jesus appear to them.
Do I have it correct now, Woodrow?
woodrow nichols
May 17, 2021 at 19:48
Quote: “And they [the two from Emmaus] rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the Eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,” Luke 24:33 Here we have the two from Emmaus and the Eleven and others.
“Saying…” this would indicate the Eleven and others, “The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.” Then back to the two: “And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread.”
The Eleven and others tell of the appearance to Simon
then the two relate their experience. A single appearance to Simon, and a double appearance to the two from Emmaus. That’s how I read it, Eddie. You can make fun all you want but this is the logical way to read it.
Woodrow Nichols
woodrow nichols
May 17, 2021 at 19:54
The two from Emmaus have no advanced warning of the appearance to Simon and are frustrated by their lack of knowledge: “And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him” Then they relay the experience of the women and the angels to Jesus. Where is the sole appearance to Simon?
Woodrow Nichols