Steve Weiss

Searching for some historical evidence that will verify the existence of a resurrecting, miracle-working man/god is a waste of time and resources. One would be doing the same in trying to find evidence for Clark Kent and Superman from the planet Krypton. The claim for the existence of miracles excludes the alleged performers of same from serious consideration as real persons.

la70119

No, it does NOT mean a nail is thrust through Saul into a stone wall. IF the event ever happened, which it might not have, it is OBVIOUS Saul and his son(s) were thrust onto pikes, spikes or hooks projecting from the town wall in such a manner that they hanged (talah) and were caused to stand. Yes, Josephus uses ἀνασταυρόω which doesn't always mean "nail to a cross." In this case it means "impale on a pike" and the verbiage that Josephus (Ant. 6.4.8, lines 374-5) uses, τα δέ σωματα άνεσταύρωσαν πρός τά τείχη της βηθσάν πόλεως (but the bodies they impaled [thrust onto pikes] against the town wall of the City of Bethshan). His text is available in the Perseus Digital Library, here, and you can click on each word to access a short definition and a lexica menu, or look up each word, here. I have paid careful attention to the definitions, cases, prepostitions, etc., to know that Josephus did NOT mean "nail up." Same with his other references, and those of the Septuagint and Philo. Obviously you thought I have bought into the stupid Christian / Jehovah's Witnesses' conception of "impale" as "microimpale," that is, "transfix by hammering through with nails."

Have you even SEEN the epigraphy from the Ancient Near East? Here's a nice sampling. You do know what happens when people are impaled, don't you? As soon as the pale is flipped up to be planted, they are quite literally hanging in the air.

Traditional sources? Traditions CHANGE through time, duvduv. Especially when it influences the definition of words. I thought you knew that. David W. Chapman went through the traditional sources (Targumin, Mishnah, Talmud, etc.), working his way upstream through the tradition, and concluded that during Roman times, talah usually meant "crucify" for human penal suspension especially when the context meant "hanged alive" or was constructed with 'al 'etz. This obviously buttresses the work of the team of scholars who translated the 1985 Tanakh, because before crucifixion was invented, there was impalement. You know, fasten a person onto a pike, with the pike, then flip the pike vertical and plant it so the person is hanging in the air and if still alive, continuously tortured.

No, Haman and his sons were hanged by impaling on pikes in mid air. Exra 6:11 among other sources describes this method of hanging by the Medes/Persians: lifted up and impaled on a timber set upright.

I swear, talking with you is like talking to a brick wall.

:banghead:

Duvduv

The Biblical descriptions of Josephus are as full of holes as Swiss cheese, and we have discussed this before, including in his fanciful tale of Massada. And since you don't like the word traditional let's use the word classic.
You will not find a single classic Jewish commentary describe hanging the way you do in reference to the use of talah in the Scriptures.
And those commentaries can disagree on many things in historical events, often relying on different sources.

In the case of Saul, the commentary ofRabbi David Kimchi disntiguishes a difference because of the use of the word TAKA in this type of hanging, which is not the same as TALA.

Duvduv

I did some further research and the distinction in the case of Saul is because it says "into the wall" such that taka and tala mean the same thing otherwise per Numbers 25 and 2 Samuel 21 regarding the other sons of Saul. The body of Saul was thus not just swinging from a rope at Beit Shean.

James The Least

I think it's the other way around. The gentiles invented the new mystery religion through the expedient of a radical interpretation of the scriptures that no rabbinical Jew would have made. The goal was to secure monotheism and rebrand it as a religion safe for gentiles. The vilification of Jews was seen as a necessary step to legitimize this process. The gospel of Mark was written as an allegorical story to dramatize how the supposed 'new covenant' was formed. It had nothing to do with preserving the words and teaching of a "historical" Jesus.

Godfrey

Does it? What about all the many "miracle-working" gurus throughout history who have verifiably existed? Is Peter Popoff a real person?

Why couldn't Jesus have been such a sham artist? Or why couldn't the so-called miracles have been attributed to him after a very real death?

If the latter is the case, I'm interested in knowing where and how and why these stories originated.

aa5874

Why couldn't a character be Mythological who was Sinless, the Son of God, God the Creator, that walked on water, transfigured, resurrected and ascended???

It is most absurd to suggest that a character is most likely historical if ALL we read about him is MYTH.

Jesus is a PERFECT Myth--No history and ALL mythology.

semiopen

וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ דָּוִ֗ד וַיִּקַּ֞ח אֶת־עַצְמ֤וֹת שָׁאוּל֙ וְאֶת־עַצְמוֹת֙ יְהוֹנָתָ֣ן בְּנ֔וֹ מֵאֵ֕ת בַּעֲלֵ֖י יָבֵ֣ישׁ גִּלְעָ֑ד אֲשֶׁר֩ גָּנְב֙וּ אֹתָ֜ם מֵרְחֹ֣ב בֵּֽית־שַׁ֗ן אֲשֶׁ֙ר )תָּלוּם] (תְּלָא֥וּם) [שָׁם( )הַפְּלִשְׁתִּים] (שָׁ֙מָּה֙] [פְּלִשְׁתִּ֔ים[ בְּי֙וֹם הַכּ֧וֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּ֛ים אֶת־שָׁא֖וּל בַּגִּלְבֹּֽעַ׃
(2Sa 21:12 WTT)

The is the masoretic text. I'm assuming that the various parentheses etc are added but am not sure what they means. Is the text corrupt?

I see the phrase TLVM TLAVM both look like TLH to me, I don't see a K.

I also don't see where "into the wall" appears.

Just out of curiosity, what does hanged mean if it doesn't mean impale? It doesn't seem to be like a rope around the neck.

aa5874

The earliest gMark, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, has NOTHING whatsoever to do with any 'new covenant'.

We can go through gMark word by word, line by line and chapter by chapter and we will NOT see any 'new covenant'.

It is the complete opposite. gMark was written to FULFILL the words of the prophets of OLD.

Sinaiticus Mark 4 It is Documented that gMark did NOT introduce any 'new covenant'.

gMark was written to fulfill supposed the words of the prophets of OLD--After the Jewish Temple fell c 70 CE.

Duvduv

At the end of 1 Samuel 31 you see that they placed him (tak'u) IN THE WALL. In 2 Samuel 21 the verse simply mentions them having been hung up as a word alone without the intent of having been attached into the wall. I presume that had 2 Samuel 21 restated the placing into the wall it would have used the verb taka.

In Deuteronomy when the body was hanged up on the scaffold the hands were tied together and very shortly after the hanging by the hands the body was removed.