Switch89

Hi all,

I have been trying to research and understand Jesus. I have been impressed with some Earl Doherty's writings, however, I think that the view of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet has some merit (and also leads me to believe that there was a historical Jesus after all). Bart Ehrman has expounded on this in a book called "Jesus". An excellent blog post about the topic can be found here:
http://exapologist.blogspot.com/2007...y-i-think.html

neilgodfrey

Many of the points listed in that article are circular.

Usual arguments about inversions or reversals of fortunes and the status quo, as well as those about "leaving all" to follow God, are not necessarily evidence of the "apocalyptic" at all in the sense meant here. Jewish "scriptures" speak of these things among the pious at all times.

The idea of leaving all behind to follow God is embedded within the narratives of Abraham and Elisha. Why assume an apocalyptic context when we come to narratives of Jesus?

The theme of dramatic reversals of fortunes and status is embedded in the prayers and visions of Hannah and Joseph. Why assume an apocalyptic meaning for this trope when we come to Jesus?

The idea of the godly being temporary sojourners in the world, and having to guide their lives accordingly, is a well-known feature of Wisdom literature. Why impute apocalyptic assumptions into the Jesus narratives when the Wisdom themes apply just as well?

As for the John the Baptist reference in the linked article, we only have Christian testimony for his apocalyptic interest. The followers of John the Baptist themselves today (Mandaeans) do not seem to have the same view, but are closer to gnosticism.

Even the message of God or the Son of Man coming in clouds is an image very familiar among the metaphors of the biblical authors of history, wisdom and the prophets who clearly saw it as being just as poetic as the references to the stars falling from the heavens. Cities and kingdoms fell at the hands of armies. Poets and prophets described these events in terms of cosmic collapses, with God "visiting" or "coming to" them in clouds, etc.

The poetic prophets also spoke of the lame being healed, the destitute prospering, the prisoners freed, etc, as the signs of the new kindgom -- or restoration after Babylon. Ancient "saviour kings" used the same terms in monuments glorifying their liberating and good-shepherd like reigns. No-one reads the latter inscriptions literally. And I doubt the original gospel author, "Mark", ever meant his narrative to be anything more than another metaphor for the kingdom among the believers -- just as the same metaphors were understood to be metaphors by the ancient prophets and kings.

Neil

Godmachine

I've never really doubted the existence of a man who lived at that time on whom the myth is based. I do not believe that man was anything more than a man. I've done some research into the life of Christ as well and found a lot of conspiracy theory stuff. Seems like all the 'scholars' on the subject have a slightly different take on the real story behind the historical Jesus. Personally I find it very strange that Jesus himself did not leave a single piece of writing. The most revered figures in both Judaism and Islam - Moses and Mohamed respectively - wrote the 'sacred' books of those religions. The most revered figure in Christianity apparently wrote nothing.

neilgodfrey

In any discussion of the Synoptic "Little Apocalypse" (Mark 13, Matt 24, Luke 21) it should not be forgotten that a prominent trope found throughout ancient literature (including classics known to those literate in Greek, and novellas from the era of the gospels) was the "divinely inspired prophecy" warning of great dangers before the happy plot denouement. Lead characters and/or their followers were to come face to face with death through repeated horrific tests and genuinely risked failure and death before/if they came through. It is found in well-known epics about Odysseus, Aeneas, Jason, and many characters in the "novels" from certain Hellenistic and Roman times.

That such an "apocalyptic prophecy" should be put in the mouth of Jesus on the eve of his passing through death, with its warning to his disciples who must themselves do likewise, is quite in keeping with the literary and narrative tastes and expectations of the times. In support of this is the mimicking of the images of sun and moon going dark, famines and wars, etc etc -- all these are typical "apocalyptic" metaphors and tropes found throughout both Jewish and Greek literature from the days of Isaiah and Hesiod. They are drawn from the literature well-known at the time, not from "current news events".



Neil

Gawen

Perhaps...but what IS the real story?

nickpecoraro

http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

Take a look at this reference.

The Jesus story may have originated in Jewish writings which were adapted to create the Jesus fiction.

nickpecoraro

Godmachine

That's the point. Nobody knows

Rick Sumner

The obvious response to this (all the way through, really) is that we aren't "assuming" anything. The context given the sayings and actions in the extant sources all attribute an apocalyptic context. That's not an assumption.

Whether Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet or not, we aren't "imputing" anything "into the Jesus narratives." The "Jesus narratives" are, quite clearly, describing an apocalyptic prophet. Whether they're reliable or not is another issue, but that they are narrating an apocalyptic prophet isn't an assumption. Calling it one doesn't make it true.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

neilgodfrey

Maybe so, but I'd like to be reminded of the specifics. Some of those actions and sayings in the gospels that were presented in the linked article as "self-evidently" apocalyptic I showed have their direct counterparts in non-apocalyptic literature.

Jesus commanding to leave the dead to bury their dead, along with simply leaving all, families included, is surely echoing the theme we find in Elijah's call of Elisha, for example, or with the requirement of Patriarchs and their descendants to come out of/not to return to Babylon or Egypt, or to have nothing to do with -- destroy if possible -- the world/idols around them.

Even the "cleansing of the Temple" has its counterparts in the stories of the good kings purging the Temple and restoring "pure worship". The narrative does not address Malachi, but turns instead to Jeremiah, a prophet associated with King Josiah, a paradigm of restoration of pure temple worship.

Reversals of the conventional worldly order are part and parcel of narratives about the godly from as early as Genesis. Hannah, David, Ruth, Sarah, Jacob and Esau, Joseph, Saul, Gideon, Babylon, Egypt, The Psalms, . . .

"Radical interim ethics" surely find their counterparts in the instructions given to the godly who are by definition deemed strangers, pilgrims, sojourners, in the world. Is there any "radical ethic" in the gospels that does not have its counterpart in the Wisdom literature of the Hebrews, Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Cynics, Stoics?

Yes, I am "reading" literary traditions "into" the gospels here, particularly Mark's. But I am attempting to show that the apocalyptic reading is equally a "reading into" the sayings and actions found in this gospel in particular.

Surely whichever reading we accept is contingent upon the models of gospel authorship and origins that we embrace?

I prefer to limit the discussion to Mark's gospel for most part -- "the extant sources" as I understand their extent are either derivative from Mark (Matthew, Luke), or quite unlike it (John). Of course Mark's gospel speaks of the kingdom being "at hand" etc. But the notion of the "apocalyptic" is not so black and white in the broader literary/theological context.


Neil Godfrey

spamandham

Jesus might be mythical, he might have been an apocolyptic preacher, or he might have been any number of other options.

We really don't know, because everything we have in regard to Jesus is too absurd to make any sense of it. The origin of the Jesus story does not shine through.