Ben C Smith

You are correct. And yet this has nothing to do with a Jewish expectation of a son of God coming along, since Jewish exegetes, even and probably especially Jewish Christian exegetes, routinely took psalms and other scriptures out of context.

Mark 1.11 practically memos us that Psalm 2 is where Mark or one of his tradents got the notion of a son of God, at least in part.

Ben.

aa5874

Psalms 2.7 is not about any physical son of God of Moses in any literal sense. Psalms 2.7 may refer to an entire nation, a group of people or someone already living when the Psalmists wrote his poetic passage.
The entire OT does not have any concept or prophecy that relates to the Messiah coming as the son of God and baptizing with the Holy Ghost.

This concept of the Messiah, as related in the NT, coming as the son of God and baptizing in the Holy Ghost, is not mentioned by Josephus when expounding on the expectation of a Messiah.

Wars of the Jews 6.5, "...But now, what did most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in the sacred writings, how, "about that time one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth".

This is a clear indication that Jews did not expect a son of God filled with the Holy Spirt, coming upon him like a dove, in the first century.

Perhaps the concept came from Egypt.

Diogenes the Cynic

The phrase had a figurative meaning, though, not a literal one. "Son of God" was an appelation for kings or for people chosen or favored by God (which is why it was applied to the Messiah), but the ancient Jews had no notion at all of a literal, biological descendant of Yahweh. Demi-gods and offspring of gods mating with humans was a pagan idea, not a Jewish one.

Ben C Smith

I agree with this, and have boldfaced the part that disagrees with the assertion made by aa____ to the effect that the Jewish tradition was devoid of any such concept as the son of God (he wrote that there was never any idea of a son of the God of Moses).

I also agree that the more literalistic application of the figure as we find it in the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke is probably based on pagan ideas. However, I think it is clear that the basic idea of the messiah as the (adopted) son of God as we find it (nonliterally) in Mark precedes the more paganized, as it were, idea of the messiah as the (somewhat more literal) divine offspring of God as we find it in Matthew and Luke.

Ben.

aa5874

You have ignored the fact that the author of Mark was likely not a Jew. This author, it appears, fabricated his Jesus from out of context passages of the OT, and then probably incorporated his pagan ideas into his Jesus.

If one bears in mind the writings of Philo and Josephus, there are no indications whatsoever of any expectation of a Messiah, or that a Messiah had already come , as the Son of God and recieved the Holy Spirit of God after being baptized by John the Baptist. This "son of God Messiah" tradition simple did not exist in the 1st century, even to this day among the Jews.

The author of Mark also subtlely made his readers aware of this non-Jewish "son of God Messiah" tradition, when he made Jesus say to his Jewish disciples, "The son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him....and he shall rise the third day"

And the Jews, his so-called disciples, did not understand a single word.

And based on the OT, it would certainly be suicidal for a Jew to claim he was the Son of God and to be equal to Him, he would be a dead man walking. He could never enter a synagogue or the Temple with such a proposal, he would propably be beaten or stoned to death for blasphemy before those blasphemous words were fully delivered.

No wonder the author of Mark made sure, through out his gospel, that his Jesus called himself the son of man and was careful to make only elements of the Spirit world say, " Thou art the son of God".(Mk 3.11)

And to show that no Jew had any concept of the Messiah as the Son of God, the author of Mark let Jesus, the so-called Son of God, ask his Jewish disciples what the Jews think of him: (Mk 8.27-28)

"Whom do men say that I am?'

"John the Baptist,...Elias.. one of the prophets"


It should be clear that no Jew expected a son of God as the Messiah, and that the author of Mark was probably not a Jew, so did the author of gMark get his son of a God Messiah concept from Cerinthus, who claimed his Christ is the son of another God and entered Jesus when he was baptized?

Ben C Smith

From Qumran, 4Q246, column 2 (translation by Martinez; emphasis mine):

He will be called son of God, and they will call him son of the most high. Like the sparks that you saw, so will their kingdom be; they will rule several year[s] over the earth and crush everything; a people will crush another people, and a province another province, until the people of God arises and makes everyone to rest from the sword. His kingdom will be an eternal kingdom....

Ben.

Amaleq13

You need to establish this as a "fact" before it can be "ignored".

This suggests you are too unfamiliar with basic scholarship on Josephus to render such a judgment. What do you know about how Josephus viewed Vespasian, for example?

Please specify where you find this prohibition in Hebrew Scripture.

How does pointing to the ideas held by some Jews establish that "no Jew" held such a concept?

No, you have yet to establish any incompatibility between the two concepts and the actual evidence suggests otherwise.

aa5874

Ben, when was that passage written? And where in the OT do you find such a passage? And who is this son of God? Is this the son of God propagated by Cerinthus? Was Cerinthus the author of the passage?

Just producing a passage that mentions a son of God does not resolve your problem. You must know if the text was written before or after gMark, before or after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, and if this concept was from a small sect living in Alexandria of Egypt, the country of Cerinthus and Philo, from whom , it would appear, gJohn got the concept of the Logos.

You have consistently fail to show that the any of the prophets of the OT specifically claimed a Messiah would be the son of God and will baptize in the Holy Ghost.

If according to the author of Mark his Jesus was never called the son of God by the Jews, but John the Baptist, Elias or one of the prophets, then this a clear indication that your passage does not refer to Mark's Jesus.

"Whom do men say that I am?"

"John the Baptist....Elias...one of the prophets."

When and where did a Jew call Mark's Jesus the son of God and son of the most High?

Read your post carefully, it may be about a Roman Emperor and the Roman Empire.

"He will be called the son of God.....they will rule over the earth and crush everything.....untill the people of God arises and makes everyone to rest from the sword. ...."

To this very day, the Jews do not understand or accept the son of God Messiah concept.

"Thou shall have no other gods before me." Exodus 20.3

Ben C Smith

Sometime before 68. Just like all the other Dead Sea scrolls. (The Romans destroyed the Qumran community in about 68.)

It is not in the OT. I gave you my source. It is 4Q246.

The passage does not give a name. It gives a description.

Here is more. 4Q174:

I will be a father to him and he will be a son to me [from 2 Samuel 7.14]. This (refers to the) branch of David, who will arise with the interpreter of the law who [will rise up] in Zi[on in] the [l]ast days....

Compare 4Q252:

...until the messiah of righteousness comes, the branch of David.

No. Cerinthus flourished well after the Qumran scrolls were cached.

Unless you date Mark very long before 68, this was written before Mark.

Before.

The scroll was found at Qumran. Just like all the other Dead Sea scrolls.

Jewish Babylonian Talmud, Berakoth 17b:

For Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: Every day a divine voice goes forth from Mount Horeb and proclaims: The whole world is sustained for the sake of my son Hanina, and Hanina my son has to subsist on a kab of carobs from one week end to the next.

Nothing here about sons of God.

I must say, this is like picking low-hanging fruit.

Ben.

aa5874

You can only pick low-hanging fruit.

You have still failed show to that the Jews expected a son of God Messiah that would be filled with the Spirit after being baptized by John the Baptist.

The Jews, according to Josephus, in Wars 6.5 expected a physical Messiah, however the author of gMark produced a spiritual Messiah recognised only by the spirit world and through revelation by the God of Moses.

So when the author of Mark asked the disciples to answer the question "But whom say ye that I am", And Peter answered and said "Thou art the Christ" Perhaps God must have just revealed the spiritual Christ to Peter. Now the spiritual Christ, in my words, said, "Dont tell anybody about me, don't blow my cover." ( See Mk 8. 29-30)

From where did the author of Mark get this spiritual Messiah who was recognised only by revelation, demons and the God of Moses?