Freethought & Rationalism Archive

PhilosopherJay · 12-12-2009, 10:15 PM

Hi Back Again,

Yes, as far as I know this particular approach is original. I do think that there is original base material in the crucifixion tale and many details have been added to it from Jewish scriptures. The trick is to separate out that source material and see if what is left over is based on historical or allegorical material.

If we take the material that we have, it seems that John preserves material that is extremely similar in mentioning the time and the Kingship at issue. So we can add this:

Quote:

Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" 19.15 They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."
33They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull). . (from Mark) 15.25And it was the third hour, when they crucified him... 15.33 And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was the [a] Son of God!"

The main problem here is that the narrative moves from the sixth hour back to the third. We should assume the original material moved forward, so the sixth hour material should be put with the sixth hour material.
Also, another problem is that the Jewish first response is an answer to the second statement by Pilate and the second response is an answer to the first statement. We have to assume the the statements have been transposed. We can easily enough put them in the correct order.

Finally there is this exchange "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'" 19.22 Pilate answered, "What I have written I have written." Pilate's answer seems out of place as he could always correct the writing, so that can be taken out without losing anything.

Quote:

Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover;
Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him! 19.16 Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.
33They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull).
15.25And it was the third hour, when they crucified him. 15.26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, "The King of the Jews."... The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'" it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."
And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was the [a] Son of God!"

Looking at this, it appears that the last line is out of place because they have only been talking about the Jesus as a King. So the last line would make more sense read as "Truly this man was a king."

Quote:

Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover;
Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him! 19.16 Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.
33They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull).
15.25And it was the third hour, when they crucified him. 15.26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, "The King of the Jews."... The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'" it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."
And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was a King"

This reconstruction suggests that the story has to do originally with a man saying he was a king of the Jews and getting crucified for it. God shows that he was the real king after he dies by making the Earth dark for three hours. I guess the moral is to trust and have faith in the man who says he is King.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back Again

Interesting post, Jay. Your take is that there could be original source material (perhaps historic) which provides details and a framework for the crucifixion story in the gospels. The gospel accounts, however, have been tweaked in order to seemingly fulfill out-of-context prophecy from Hebrew scripture. I'm curious if this is something you came up with independently. I have not seen this particular twist being discussed here or anywhere else.

PhilosopherJay · 12-13-2009, 07:47 AM

Note to Self,

The squeezing of two events into the sixth hour period doesn't really work in this reconstruction. Rather then smooching together the two six o'clock events, It makes more sense to allow them to be on two separate days. We may assume that John was edited to make it appear that the events he is describing happened on one day instead of two in order to make it match the one day account of the synoptics. The squeezing of the events into one day would have been because of Greek writers of the gospels following Aristotle's dictum that a tragedy should take place in one day. It makes more sense for Pilate to be saying, "Behold your King" after they have beat him up. Thus we have.

Quote:

19.1 Then Pilate took Jesus and scourged him. 19.2 And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and arrayed him in a purple robe; 19.3 they came up to him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!" and struck him with their hands. 19.4 Pilate went out again, and said to them, "See, I am bringing him out to you, that you may know that I find no crime in him." 19.5 So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, "Behold the man!"...
Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" The chief priests answered, "We have no King but Caesar. Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your king?
19.15 They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!"

Then follows:

Quote:

15.25 [the next day]And it was the third hour, when they crucified him. 15.26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, "The King of the Jews."... The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'"...
And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was the [a] Son of God!"

There is a parallel structure in the releasing of Barabbas, where Pilate says "Behold the man" pointing to Barabbas and the condemnation of Jesus, where Pilate also says, "Behold the man". The story makes sense and is complete if we take it that Barabbas is the subject of the story both times that Pilate says, "Behold the man." It is only because Pilate scourges Barabbas and redresses him as a King that the Jews change their mind. This would be pretty much the entire original story. It would have been a tale about the Robber-King Jesus Barabbas:

Quote:

[Just before the Passover Feast, there was an insurrection against the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate][Mark]...15.6Now at the feast he used to release for them one prisoner for whom they asked. 15.7And among the rebels in prison, who had committed murder in the insurrection, there was a man called Barabbas. 15.8And the crowd came up and began to ask Pilate to do as he was wont to do for them. 15.9And he answered them, "Do you want me to release for you the King of the Jews?"[John] They cried out again, "... Barabbas!"
Then Pilate took Jesus [Barrabas] and scourged him. 19.2 And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and arrayed him in a purple robe; 19.3 they came up to him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!" and struck him with their hands. 19.4 Pilate went out again, and said to them, "See, I am bringing him out to you, that you may know that I find no crime in him." 19.5 So Jesus [Barabbas] came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, "Behold the man!"...
Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" The chief priests answered, "We have no King but Caesar. Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your king?
19.15 They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!"
[Mark] 15.25 [the next day]And it was the third hour, when they crucified him. 15.26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, "The King of the Jews."... The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'"
And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus [Barabbas] uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when [Pontius Pilate], who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was the [King].

The point of the original story would have been that as long as Jesus Barabbas was a handsome fellow in his outlaw costume, the Jews recognized him as their king and wanted Pilate to release him. As soon as Pilate beat him up and dressed him as a king, the Jews changed their mind. The irony is that it turns out that Jesus Barabbas really was the God appointed King of the Jews. This is shown when there is darkness on Earth for three hours just before he dies.

This is a delightful and pointed political fairy tale about the fickleness of popular opinion and the cruelty and mistakes of Pontius Pilate. Over the decades, writers change and develop it into later pre-gospel and gospel material.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

PhilosopherJay · 12-13-2009, 01:31 PM

Hi aa5874,

I think Isaiah 60 could be the origin of the darkness at midday line.

Quote:

2 See, darkness covers the earth
and thick darkness is over the peoples,
but the LORD rises upon you
and his glory appears over you.

3 Nations will come to your light,
and kings to the brightness of your dawn.

However, it might be a connection that people make because there are so many other clear connections to Old Testament texts. It certainly isn't as explicit as other connections.

I wonder if anybody knows of another ancient story where death of a king or deity is associated with sudden darkness?

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

The problem is that the story is still a construct based on Hebrew scriptures.
Let us take out the passages that refer to and are almost certainly derived from Hebrew scriptures. All we have left is this report:

Even when we strip out the passages that are brought into the text from Hebrew scriptures, we are getting a story that is mythological in nature. A man is crucified, the earth goes dark, the man who crucifies him admits that he was a holy man (a son of god).

But, if we are dealing with passages which were lifted from Hebrew Scripture without regard for context then even "the sixth hour darkness over the earth" may have been lifted from the book of Job or Isaiah.

Job 5:14 -

Isaiah 60.2

Now, even idea of the utterance of Jesus appears to originate from Psalms 22.1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philosopher Jay

However, the exclamation by the soldier seems designed to prove that the man who was crucified was a holy man. One can imagine two situations that would lead to such a story: 1) a man was actually crucified and someone is trying to prove that this particular crucified man was holy and therefore writes this myth about the man or 2) The writer is trying to make the general point that sometimes holy people (sons of God) get crucified, so he is using this fictional/mythological story to illustrate his point. The point would be that because a person is crucified, it does not necessarily mean that the person was bad or unholy.

But, it is reasonable to assume that if many many Jews were crucified that many holy men were also executed in that fashion. What could have been special about Jesus?

Simon BarCocheba, considered the Messiah, fought and died to save the Jews from their enemies and he was NOT deified.

If a Jew was really crucified there would probably be no story at all to tell. Another Jew was crucified, perhaps one of thousands.

aa5874 · 12-13-2009, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

I think Isaiah 60 could be the origin of the darkness at midday line.

But, you will notice that Job 5.14 contains the precise time-line, noonday, midday, or around the sixth hour for the darkness.
Job 5.14

Quote:

They meet with darkness in the daytime, and grope in the noonday as in the night.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philosospher Jay

I wonder if anybody knows of another ancient story where death of a king or deity is associated with sudden darkness?

It is claimed that the founder of Rome, Romulus, after a reign of 37 years ascended to heaven during a sudden eclipse of the Sun.

Quote:

At length, after a reign of thirty-seven years, when the city had become strong and powerful, and Romulus had performed all his mortal works, the hour of his departure arrived.

One day as he was reviewing his people in the Campus Martius, near the Goat's Pool, the sun was suddenly eclipsed, darkness overspread the earth, and a dreadful storm dispersed the people.

When daylight returned, Romulus had disappeared, for his father Mars had carried him up to heaven in a fiery chariot.

The people mourned for their beloved king; but their mourning gave way to religious reverence, when he appeared again in more than mortal beauty to Proculus Julius, and bade him tell the Romans that they should become the lords of the world, and that he would watch over them as their guardian god Quirinus.

See http://bulfinch.englishatheist.org/b...n/Romulus.html

PhilosopherJay · 12-13-2009, 06:26 PM

Hi aa5874,

I am not so hot on Job 5;14 being the source. The surrounding material is so out of context with the crucifixion scene:

Quote:

12 He disappointeth the devices of the crafty, so that their hands cannot perform their enterprise.

13 He taketh the wise in their own craftiness: and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong.

14 They meet with darkness in the day time, and grope in the noonday as in the night.

15 But he saveth the poor from the sword, from their mouth, and from the hand of the mighty.

Of course, taking Hebrew Scripture lines out of context seems to be a normal thing for Christians, but in this case, the convergence may be coincidental.

I think Amos 8:9 and 10 is the best candidate for the source:

Quote:

9 "In that day," declares the Sovereign LORD,
"I will make the sun go down at noon
and darken the earth in broad daylight.

10 I will turn your religious feasts into mourning
and all your singing into weeping.
I will make all of you wear sackcloth
and shave your heads.
I will make that time like mourning for an only son
and the end of it like a bitter day.

The Romulus story works well too. Apparently there was a solar eclipse associated with the birth of Romulus and his starting to work on the city of Rome, as well as on his death. A Solar Eclipse is associated with the Roman Goddess Anna Perenna and the ides of March, which is associated with the death of Julius Caesar.

So darkness in the daylight would have been a well known special effect to any literature citizen of Rome.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

I think Isaiah 60 could be the origin of the darkness at midday line.

But, you will notice that Job 5.14 contains the precise time-line, noonday, midday, or around the sixth hour for the darkness.
Job 5.14

It is claimed that the founder of Rome, Romulus, after a reign of 37 years ascended to heaven during a sudden eclipse of the Sun.

Quote:

At length, after a reign of thirty-seven years, when the city had become strong and powerful, and Romulus had performed all his mortal works, the hour of his departure arrived.

One day as he was reviewing his people in the Campus Martius, near the Goat's Pool, the sun was suddenly eclipsed, darkness overspread the earth, and a dreadful storm dispersed the people.

When daylight returned, Romulus had disappeared, for his father Mars had carried him up to heaven in a fiery chariot.

The people mourned for their beloved king; but their mourning gave way to religious reverence, when he appeared again in more than mortal beauty to Proculus Julius, and bade him tell the Romans that they should become the lords of the world, and that he would watch over them as their guardian god Quirinus.

See http://bulfinch.englishatheist.org/b...n/Romulus.html

ph2ter · 12-15-2009, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi Back Again,
...
Looking at this, it appears that the last line is out of place because they have only been talking about the Jesus as a King. So the last line would make more sense read as "Truly this man was a king."

Quote:

Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover;
Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him! 19.16 Then he handed him over to them to be crucified. 33They came to a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull). 15.25And it was the third hour, when they crucified him. 15.26 And the inscription of the charge against him read, "The King of the Jews."... The chief priests of the Jews then said to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews,' but, 'This man said, I am King of the Jews.'" it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar."
And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour...15.37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last. 15.39And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was a King"

This reconstruction suggests that the story has to do originally with a man saying he was a king of the Jews and getting crucified for it. God shows that he was the real king after he dies by making the Earth dark for three hours. I guess the moral is to trust and have faith in the man who says he is King.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

I think you are on something.

Look 1 Sam 11:14:
Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and there reaffirm the kingship.” So all the people went to Gilgal and confirmed Saul as king in the presence of the Lord. There they sacrificed fellowship offerings before the Lord, and Saul and all the Israelites held a great celebration.

The Israelite Kingdom was established at Gilgal. But the place was a cult place from times before:

Joshua 4:19:
On the tenth day of the first month the people went up from the Jordan and camped at Gilgal on the eastern border of Jericho. And Joshua set up at Gilgal the twelve stones they had taken out of the Jordan. He said to the Israelites, “In the future when your descendants ask their fathers, ‘What do these stones mean?’ tell them, ‘Israel crossed the Jordan on dry ground.’

Joshua 5:2:
At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make flint knives and circumcise the Israelites again.” So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites at Gibeath Haaraloth (Gibeath Haaraloth means hill of foreskins.)

Joshua 5:8:
And after the whole nation had been circumcised, they remained where they were in camp until they were healed.
Then the Lord said to Joshua, “Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.” So the place has been called Gilgal (Gilgal sounds like the Hebrew for roll) to this day.
On the evening of the fourteenth day of the month, while camped at Gilgal on the plains of Jericho, the Israelites celebrated the Passover. The day after the Passover, that very day, they ate some of the produce of the land: unleavened bread and roasted grain. The manna stopped the day after they ate this food from the land; there was no longer any manna for the Israelites, but that year they ate of the produce of Canaan.

The name Golgotha is very close to the Hebrew word denoting a wheel, galgal. Gilgal is a place where axis of the Wheel stand, the World Tree at the center of the World. Very appropriate for the place of Jesus' crucifixion and very appropriate for the King.

ph2ter · 12-15-2009, 02:15 AM

The placename Golgotha gives me some more inspiration.

Gilgal means "anything rolling" (Jer 51:25; Isa 17:13; Gen 29:10). Everything round rolls easily and every spherical thing is called gilgal. Also the heavens are called gilgallim on account of their spherical form.

Interestingly, Mark has a rolling stone at the place of Golgotha (Mark 15:46: And he bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud, and laid him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.)

The World tree and a well are the two main elements of every sanctuary. The World tree turns around the same way as the heavens turn around axis mundi. This is in mythology connected with the rolling stone of a heavenly mill, a millstone which produces thunderbolts, the main weapon of thunder-god

The story in Mark in some way symbolically parallels also Gen 29:

Quote:

1Then Jacob continued on his journey and came to the land of the eastern peoples. 2There he saw a well in the field, with three flocks of sheep lying near it because the flocks were watered from that well. The stone over the mouth of the well was large. 3When all the flocks were gathered there, the shepherds would roll the stone away from the well’s mouth and water the sheep. Then they would return the stone to its place over the mouth of the well.
4Jacob asked the shepherds, “My brothers, where are you from?”
“We’re from Haran,” they replied.
5He said to them, “Do you know Laban, Nahor’s grandson?”
“Yes, we know him,” they answered.
6Then Jacob asked them, “Is he well?”
“Yes, he is,” they said, “and here comes his daughter Rachel with the sheep.”
7“Look,” he said, “the sun is still high; it is not time for the flocks to be gathered. Water the sheep and take them back to pasture.”
8“We can’t,” they replied, “until all the flocks are gathered and the stone has been rolled away from the mouth of the well. Then we will water the sheep.”
9While he was still talking with them, Rachel came with her father’s sheep, for she was a shepherdess. 10When Jacob saw Rachel daughter of Laban, his mother’s brother, and Laban’s sheep, he went over and rolled the stone away from the mouth of the well and watered his uncle’s sheep. 11Then Jacob kissed Rachel and began to weep aloud. 12He had told Rachel that he was a relative of her father and a son of Rebekah. So she ran and told her father.
13As soon as Laban heard the news about Jacob, his sister’s son, he hurried to meet him. He embraced him and kissed him and brought him to his home, and there Jacob told him all these things. 14Then Laban said to him, “You are my own flesh and blood.”

PhilosopherJay · 12-15-2009, 11:57 AM

Hi ph2ter,

This would be good if we could definitely get from the word Golgotha to the word "gilgal" meaning anything rolled or wheel. I would suggest that we don't have to go that far back.

Joan Taylor in Golgotha: A Reconsideration of the Evidence for the Sites of Jesus' Crucifixion and Burial New Testament Studies 44 (1998) 180-203, points out that Jerome in Comm. on Matthew 27:33 (pg. 183)translates it as "Place of beheading" although the root word does originally mean something that was round and could be rolled.

The "place of beheading" makes perfect sense to me. I've suggested previously that much about Jesus is simply a re-editing of John the Baptist material. Originally, the tale was about John the Baptist. Taking John out to the "place of beheading" to be beheaded would make sense. It is like saying he went to an airport to catch an airplane, or they went to a ballpark to play ball. It is just a generic term for the action about to take place. The original Gospel writer who changed the terms "beheading" into "skull," probably did it to disguise the fact that his source material was about John rather than Jesus, since Jesus obviously does not get beheaded.

Even if not about John, we should probably look for a story of a beheading rather than a crucifixion for our source material here.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by ph2ter

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi Back Again,
...
Looking at this, it appears that the last line is out of place because they have only been talking about the Jesus as a King. So the last line would make more sense read as "Truly this man was a king."

This reconstruction suggests that the story has to do originally with a man saying he was a king of the Jews and getting crucified for it. God shows that he was the real king after he dies by making the Earth dark for three hours. I guess the moral is to trust and have faith in the man who says he is King.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

I think you are on something.

Look 1 Sam 11:14:
Then Samuel said to the people, “Come, let us go to Gilgal and there reaffirm the kingship.” So all the people went to Gilgal and confirmed Saul as king in the presence of the Lord. There they sacrificed fellowship offerings before the Lord, and Saul and all the Israelites held a great celebration.

The Israelite Kingdom was established at Gilgal. But the place was a cult place from times before:

Joshua 4:19:
On the tenth day of the first month the people went up from the Jordan and camped at Gilgal on the eastern border of Jericho. And Joshua set up at Gilgal the twelve stones they had taken out of the Jordan. He said to the Israelites, “In the future when your descendants ask their fathers, ‘What do these stones mean?’ tell them, ‘Israel crossed the Jordan on dry ground.’

Joshua 5:2:
At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make flint knives and circumcise the Israelites again.” So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites at Gibeath Haaraloth (Gibeath Haaraloth means hill of foreskins.)

Joshua 5:8:
And after the whole nation had been circumcised, they remained where they were in camp until they were healed.
Then the Lord said to Joshua, “Today I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.” So the place has been called Gilgal (Gilgal sounds like the Hebrew for roll) to this day.
On the evening of the fourteenth day of the month, while camped at Gilgal on the plains of Jericho, the Israelites celebrated the Passover. The day after the Passover, that very day, they ate some of the produce of the land: unleavened bread and roasted grain. The manna stopped the day after they ate this food from the land; there was no longer any manna for the Israelites, but that year they ate of the produce of Canaan.

The name Golgotha is very close to the Hebrew word denoting a wheel, galgal. Gilgal is a place where axis of the Wheel stand, the World Tree at the center of the World. Very appropriate for the place of Jesus' crucifixion and very appropriate for the King.

Chili · 12-15-2009, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

It seems to me that the crucifixion story is a complete and satisfying narrative in itself and the the resurrection story is an add-on or afterthought.

Hi Jay, I think that they are both wrong but that both Mark and Matthew were right in not reporting a resurrection because they had send Jesus back to Galilea to do some more suffering and thus an entry into heaven was not available to them.

I see Mathew and Mark as failed divine comedies for which the reason is contained in the passages that led to this undesired end . . . which was the prevailing mood in those days and is exactly why Luke and John were written to make sure that we do it right.

Aquila Pacis · 04-06-2010, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

I think Isaiah 60 could be the origin of the darkness at midday line.

The darkness (like the whole "crucifixion" account) has nothing to do with the Jewish Bible. It is diegetically transposed from the sources on Caesar's death and funeral, incl. the sixth hour, the earthquake, the moon of blood (in Acts), the rent stones, the temple entrance rent in two, and even the dead resurrecting and walking through the holy city. The parallels continue even in Arius and (especially) Orosius etc.

http://divusjulius.wordpress.com/201...darknesshour6/

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.