Vorkosigan

Hoffman's got it right. The point I am making is not that we could conclude one thing or the other, but that since the account is fiction, we can't make a postive conclusion about historicity without the outside vector. You're free to make a negative conclusion, but that has to be based on some other critical principle. In the Temple Ruckus case, I opted for fiction because there are two outside vectors -- low historical plausibility, and silence in all other sources. Further, in the Temple Ruckus it seems that every line is either from Mark's hand or the Old Testament. Other critical principles can apply. In this case it is quite possible that Herod had John killed at his wife's request, and we don't have silence in the other sources. So the outside vectors suggest a historical kernel. But the account itself is clearly fiction.

Yup. All we would know is that he died, but then, we know that about everybody....

Yup. You wanna claim that Jesus caused a ruckus in the Temple, you need that outside vector. The Markan account is fiction on every level. Doesn't mean it didn't happen. It only means you can't use Mark to prove it.

Vorkosigan

Rick Sumner

Why is it more likely that John was executed "lest he stir the people" than for criticizing Herod's marriage (which, incidentally, is also an event attested by Josephus, and thus historical despite Vork's method)? Do you think it's unlikely that John did the latter? Why? Would Herod execute John for publicly criticizing such a marriage? Why or why not? Why is a combination of the two impossible?

What reason do you have to favor Josephus?

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Rick Sumner

If I've misunderstood your intentions, then apologies, however, we can't securely make a negative conclusion about it either though--it lends nothing either way.

Actually, we know considerably more than that. We don't simply know that he died, we know that he was executed. We know that beheading was a common form of execution for crimes not punished by crucifixion. We know that Herod did, in fact, marry Herodias, we know that at least some Jews (at Qumran, there could be others we're not aware of) would not endorse such a marriage.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

spin

I think that was really entailed in Vork's rhetoric and he would acknowledge it.

This is all well and interesting (though I think the most common execution other than crucifixion was lapidation, I guess beheading was possible). We know that Richard I did go off to the crusades, he was captured and ransomed, his brother John did misrule the country, but how does that help us with the historicity of Robin and Marion?


spin

Rick Sumner

I was under the impression that beheading was runner-up, though noted that I wasn't certain. Do you have a source?

I'm not discussing the historicity of Jesus, at the moment, I'm discussing the nature of Mark's narrative of John's execution, and what can be ruled out from it.

Regards,
Rick Sumner