Sheshbazzar

The test of mens intelligence and their integrity is their ability to look beyond the superficial JC myth, and fathom the reasons why these text were composed, and what their real purpose is. Which I profess to anyone who will listen, was never to get deep thinking and honest men of integrity to believe in a literal JC, that is only shiny packaging for the shallow and the superstitious.

aa5874

We have been given the reason for the Jesus story.

It was given to us on a platter.

The very writers of the Church gave us the reason.

Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho Hippolytus' "Against the Jews"Aristides' ApologyJustin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho XXXII Tertullian's Answer to the Jews The Jesus story was fabricated using Hebrew Scripture taken out of context to support the Anti-Jewish propaganda that the Jews killed the Son of God.

Zechariah 12:10 KJV

Sheshbazzar

We have been given a reason. One that appears to be reasonable.

But from the beginning all of these writings have been a connected series of propaganda documents, written in metaphors, allegories, subtle allusions and word-plays, 'dark sayings of old' all with the facade of presenting history.
And received for ages by much of humanity with all conviction as being our history!
But more and more we are finding out that much of that 'history' is not history at all.
So now with equal conviction we are now saying; 'myths!'

I suggest that the next phase will be our finding out that these 'myths!' are much more than meets the eye.

I don't believe in the story of creation, the story of Noah and The Flood, the story of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, the story of Moses and the Exodus, the story of Daniel, or the stories of Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, or Paul.
But I do believe all of these myths were the products of an ongoing agenda.
And no, I do not mean by the workings or the agency of any supernatural entity, but by a series of men with a vision, a plan, and a common goal in mind when constructing each of these Biblical tall tales.
They wrote these seed myths, handed them over to the world and then set back and watch the results, then the next man to grasp the concept, devises writes and plants yet another.

That's all right folks, you don't need to tell me that I'm totally weird. I already know it, known it most of my life.
Or that I'm foolish, I already know that too.
Or that I'm nuts, insane, or crazy for even thinking such ridiculous things, I've heard it all before. but while I even laugh at myself and at my foolishness, I still see what I see.

rlogan

This is a picture from the Plain of Gennesaret looking South to Tiberias. We know that we are in the north end of the Plain because we can see the lake curving back to the East on our left:



So this is more than three miles distance, possibly as much as six, whereas this next shot is from Tiberias looking South, to that point in the sea jutting out the furthest, more like three miles distance:




What's great about this older picture is how clearly buildings and walls stand out when there are fewer of them. Herod's palace high over Tiberias would have been visible from just about anywhere on the lake.

The point of these shots is to demonstrate it works both ways: Herod is within eyesight of all Jesus' doings on the Sea of Galilee and likewise Jesus in a boat or on shore at Gennesaret or wherever is going to see Herod's palace walls from wherever he is. It is more than sheer physical domination of the Galilee scene - this is the capital city and King's palace that administratively and economically dominates too.

From our roadmaps we know that Jesus can only go two directions from landing at Gennesaret: he can go North to Capernaum, and he can go south to Tiberias. There are no roads going anywhere else. Sending his disciples hither or receiving guests to heal, or walking himself means there is no choice but to run into Tiberias:

Mark is obviously completely clueless about the logistics of going anywhere from Gennesaret, imagining villages and towns that he can sally forth to when about the only thing that can happen is entering Tiberias. More properly, Mark's audience knows nothing of these geographic logistics.

In the very next chapter of Mark, after the impossibility of avoiding that gigantic elephant of Tiberias we instead see plenipotentiaries coming from Jerusalem to confront him:


So we have the spectacle of the King, his court, and the Jewish churches at Hammath, who can literally see Jesus with their own eyes, having nothing to do with him - but these gallant visitors are arriving from something on the order of 90 miles away just popping in for lunch. They have to pass through the gates of both Hammath and Tiberias along the way, but I guess they remain silent when explaining why they have come so far to have lunch with Jesus.

Geographically speaking the more we look at Mark the more preposterous it becomes as any kind of record for a living human, even if it is just merely a somewhat notable itinerant preacher sans miracles. Stopping in for lunch from 90 miles away is something that cannot physically happen. The thing that should be happening instead does not happen.

Sheshbazzar, yes obviously the text has a completely different purpose, and I know that without even looking at the geography. But for all of us I think it instructive to see the degree of fantasy involved. I had no idea it would be this bad.

andrewcriddle

Although we agree that Mark is the first Gospel, the early Church generally regarded Matthew as earlier. I don't think anyone ever understood the beginning of Mark as a claim to being the first Gospel.

Unless you are arguing that Paul is later than Mark, some version of the resurrection was known before Mark. In general, I think one should distinguish between the claim that important parts of Mark's narrative are pure Markan composition and the much less plausible claim that most of the narrative is pure Markan composition.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

One should note Luke 13:31 which implies Herod was believed (rightly or wrongly) to have designs on the life of Jesus.

Andrew Criddle

Edited to Add

If Herod had put a priority on eliminating Jesus, Jesus would likely not have survived to die in Jerusalem. The ministry of Jesus in Galilee was only possible with limited de facto toleration by Herod. However Jesus preaching in Tiberias itself might have been seen as a provocation.

andrewcriddle

There are (legendary) stories involving Shimon bar Yohai and his efforts to purify Tiberias from corpse pollution which indicate that the status of Tiberias continued to be a problem for strict Jews after the fall of Jerusalem.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

You keep making error after error. In gLuke Jesus was in no hurry to leave.

Take note of the very next very verse. The Lucan Jesus fears NO man. The Lucan Jesus would not have avoided Tiberias because of Herod.

Luke 13Now, examine gLuke 12.

Luke 12

rlogan

Mark 8:4

Jesus has just met with four thousand people and...

Golly - another nonexistent place name. It's amazing how many of these places Jesus went to in Galilee are not actual places! Matthew in a parallel passage (15:39) calls it Magadan. Apologists try to place this on the West Bank of the Sea at a place Josephus mentions (Taricheae).

I don't know why they place it there, but fine. That's two miles North of Tiberias, on the plain of Gennesarat, and we've already healed everyone from that region in Mark 6.

How could this get any worse?

Toto

Comment on Dalmutha (although I can't say I really understand it.)