Freethought & Rationalism Archive

darstec · 07-23-2010, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Why The First Gospel -- Mark -- is a Post 70 CE Work quoting a comment on vridar

Shroud on Jewish Encyc.

Interesting.
From your quote above:
"The rich grew very extravagant in this respect, securing fanciful and costly garments, and establishing a custom which became a burden upon mourners of the middle and poorer classes, who could ill endure the expense and yet desired to show the highest respect for their dead. This caused R. Gamaliel, about fifty years after the destruction of the Temple, to inaugurate the custom of using a simple linen shroud for rich and poor alike "

The italic section suggests that, despite the "probably" referring to being buried as the Egyptian dead, the poor were struggling to keep up with the rich and were not using shrouds.
The bold section suggests that Gamaliel's example also involved, circa 120CE, the poor using a shroud after that time thereby showing they were not previously which after all was why he inaugurated the new custom.

Some time ago we had a report here of a body found in a tomb dated by the archaeologists concerned to pre-temple destruction [although the newspaper report was not highly specific about how] which was buried in an apparently wealthy tomb but was wrapped in a shroud.
The body was of a victim of leprosy which may have been a factor.

Couple of things to consider. The single shroud idea was second century, therefore GJohn was at least second century. There are more indicators of the gospels late date but they have already been considered elsewhere.

Joshua was not poor. His authors did not intend for him to be poor. First of all he and his father were called 'tekton' which despite all the garbage theologians throw at us, is not a carpenter. At the very least he would have been a highly skilled artisan like a Tiffiny though that use of the word is uncommon. In Greek literature the most common use of the word indicates a person of fairly great wealth like a builder of cities or a shipbuilder. Major and wealth endeavors.

In addition most theologians keep forgetting about the Magi or wise men. They were said to provide 'the greatest prince of the world' with tribute worthy of such title. We need only look at some of the tributes paid to other Jewish princes or kings as told in the bible. King Solomon was given a gold pile about 45 foot X 45 foot X 90 foot. And two other piles one of silver and another of gemstones. I think the author's intention would indicate the king of kings was paid at least that tribute in gold, frankincense and myrrh, with the last being worth more than the first. After all they were able to move to a foreign country, live there for some years, move back to Galilee and set up shop as tektons.

Now course this is all fairytale but you can't leave out any of the stories. It would be like wondering how Harry Potter was such a good wizard and ignoring the fact that his father was one of the greatest.

aa5874 · 07-23-2010, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

The single shroud idea was second century, therefore GJohn was at least second century. There are more indicators of the gospels late date but they have already been considered elsewhere.

So, the shroud of Turin is still fake if a single wrapping was introduced only in the 2nd century.

According to the "fake authorship" gospels Jesus was crucified in the 1st half of the 1st century.

andrewcriddle · 07-23-2010, 12:54 PM

The passage about Gamaliel and burial customs is online at Ebel Rabbathi

Quote:

The rabbis taught: At first in the houses of the rich (mourners), silver and gold baskets and white glass were used:
and in those of the poor, willow baskets and colored glass were used, and the poor felt ashamed; and it was enacted that only willow baskets and colored glass should be used by all. At first they used to leave the face of the deceased uncovered and used to carry him on an expensive bier if he belonged to the rich class; but they used to cover his face (for their faces grew dim from hunger) and carry him on a common bier if he belonged to the poor class, and the poor people felt ashamed. So it was enacted that all should be covered and be carried on a common bier. At first they used to carry the rich in braided beds, and the poor in common ones, and the poor felt ashamed, and it was enacted that all should be borne in a common bed. At first spices used to be placed at the side of those who died from bowel-troubles, and those who suffered from that disease while still living used to feel. ashamed; and it was enacted that spices should be placed at the side of every deceased person out of respect to those who were suffering from that disease while still living. At first the expenses accompanying the burial of a deceased person were more burdensome and painful to his relatives than the death itself, and they used to leave the corpse and run away, until Rabban Gamaliel, the Nasi, directed that he be buried in flaxen garments; and it became customary with the people to bury the dead in flaxen garments. Said R. Papa: "And at present, even in a flaxen garment of the value of one Zuz."

It is Gemara which makes its historical value uncertain.

Andrew Criddle

Transient · 07-23-2010, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

Interesting.
From your quote above:
"The rich grew very extravagant in this respect, securing fanciful and costly garments, and establishing a custom which became a burden upon mourners of the middle and poorer classes, who could ill endure the expense and yet desired to show the highest respect for their dead. This caused R. Gamaliel, about fifty years after the destruction of the Temple, to inaugurate the custom of using a simple linen shroud for rich and poor alike "

The italic section suggests that, despite the "probably" referring to being buried as the Egyptian dead, the poor were struggling to keep up with the rich and were not using shrouds.
The bold section suggests that Gamaliel's example also involved, circa 120CE, the poor using a shroud after that time thereby showing they were not previously which after all was why he inaugurated the new custom.

Some time ago we had a report here of a body found in a tomb dated by the archaeologists concerned to pre-temple destruction [although the newspaper report was not highly specific about how] which was buried in an apparently wealthy tomb but was wrapped in a shroud.
The body was of a victim of leprosy which may have been a factor.

Couple of things to consider. The single shroud idea was second century, therefore GJohn was at least second century. There are more indicators of the gospels late date but they have already been considered elsewhere.

Joshua was not poor. His authors did not intend for him to be poor. First of all he and his father were called 'tekton' which despite all the garbage theologians throw at us, is not a carpenter. At the very least he would have been a highly skilled artisan like a Tiffiny though that use of the word is uncommon. In Greek literature the most common use of the word indicates a person of fairly great wealth like a builder of cities or a shipbuilder. Major and wealth endeavors.

In addition most theologians keep forgetting about the Magi or wise men. They were said to provide 'the greatest prince of the world' with tribute worthy of such title. We need only look at some of the tributes paid to other Jewish princes or kings as told in the bible. King Solomon was given a gold pile about 45 foot X 45 foot X 90 foot. And two other piles one of silver and another of gemstones. I think the author's intention would indicate the king of kings was paid at least that tribute in gold, frankincense and myrrh, with the last being worth more than the first. After all they were able to move to a foreign country, live there for some years, move back to Galilee and set up shop as tektons.

Now course this is all fairytale but you can't leave out any of the stories. It would be like wondering how Harry Potter was such a good wizard and ignoring the fact that his father was one of the greatest.

Except that maybe Joseph blew all the loot in Egypt in casinos and brothels?
He was stabbed to death a few years later by some nasty debt collectors who caught up with him in Nazareth.
hmm maybe I should write the 5th gospel

Toto · 07-23-2010, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

....

Some time ago we had a report here of a body found in a tomb dated by the archaeologists concerned to pre-temple destruction [although the newspaper report was not highly specific about how] which was buried in an apparently wealthy tomb but was wrapped in a shroud. The body was of a victim of leprosy which may have been a factor.

2009 thread on the burial shroud from the first century

DNA reveals first case of leprosy

Quote:

What is particularly rare about this tomb is that it was clear this man, which is dated by radiocarbon methods to 1-50 C.E., did not receive a secondary burial. Secondary burials were common practice at the time, where the bones were removed after a year and placed in an ossuary (a stone bone box). In this case, however, the entrance to this part of the tomb was completely sealed with plaster. Prof. Spigelman believes this is due to the fact that this man had suffered from leprosy and died of tuberculosis, as the DNA of both diseases was found in his bones.

Historically, disfiguring diseases - particularly leprosy - caused the afflicted individuals to be ostracized from their communities. However, a number of indications - the location and size of the tomb, the type of textiles used as shroud wrappings, and the clean state of the hair - suggest that the shrouded individual was a fairly affluent member of society in Jerusalem and that tuberculosis and leprosy may have crossed social boundaries in the first century C.E.

Iskander · 07-23-2010, 05:47 PM

DNA reveals first case of leprosy? I may be wrong but the diagnosis of leprosy cannot be made by examining the DNA.

andrewcriddle · 07-24-2010, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

DNA reveals first case of leprosy? I may be wrong but the diagnosis of leprosy cannot be made by examining the DNA.

Maybe remains of the DNA from leprosy bacteria were recovered from his bones ?

Andrew Criddle

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-23-2010, 05:47 PM	#16
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	DNA reveals first case of leprosy? I may be wrong but the diagnosis of leprosy cannot be made by examining the DNA.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.