Vorkosigan

What citation(s) in Crossan's voluminous writings can you adduce in support of your thesis that Crossan is out to discredit the historicity of the gospel narrative? Supply a few.

Vorkosigan

Chris Weimer

Hey Gamera - how about a little more evidence to go with that ad hom attack. :down:

Diogenes the Cynic

Michael, how do you account for the lack of Messianic identification in Thomas? Why do we see none of Mark's titular signature ("son of man") or any of his apocalyptic overlay?

andrewcriddle

There is a similar list in T. Baarda's essay 'Thomas and Tatian' available in his collection 'Early Transmission of the Words of Jesus' Baarda has also written other relevant essays.

See Also Nicholas Perrin's 'Thomas and Tatian'

Andrew Criddle

Vorkosigan

No clue. I guess I don't account for it. The reproduction of Markan habits of composition inside Thomas works for me, so I don't worry about motives.

Michael

Diogenes the Cynic

Couldn't Mark and Thomas have used the same sayings source (or couldn't Mark have used Thomas itself)? Mark had to get his sayings from somewhere.

Chris Weimer

Diogenes,

IIRC, Michael relies on most of Mark being invented by the author himself, instead of relying on a sayings tradition. I don't agree with that assessment, but it does force one to exclude such a possibility.

Diogenes the Cynic

IIRC, I think he sees a lot of the sayings as originating from a stock of cynic sayings and anecdotes but I had assumed he still saw an intermediate stage between the cynics and their use by Mark. Does he see Mark himself as the sole adapter of the sayings to a Jesus narrative? I guess he can answer that for himself.

Michael, do you think there was a pre-Matthean Q source?

Amaleq13

I found the quote I was thinking of in my collection:

"However, this 2nd century date and the gnostic character of the final document do not answer the question of whether some early source of authentic sayings of Jesus, perhaps even earlier and more original than what we find in the Synoptics, might be preserved in the Gospel of Thomas. The debate on this point has been lively and varied, and it is not likely to come to rest soon." (p.127)

rlogan

It makes so much more sense to me that wisdom sayings precedes the gospel myth.

The most oppressive inertia in all of this area is the fallacy of the "big bang" Jesus Christ superstar origin to Christianity.

If you are willing if only for purposes of argument to set that aside then there are MANY, (not just ONE) itinerant preachers running around - none of which are the linear progenitor to Christianity

"Jesus says" is so easily understood as a metaphorical device: "God's salvation says..."

It can be uttered by all itinerant preachers themselves, it can be uttered by individuals about itinerant preachers or about nobody in particular, and existing wisdom sayings can have this prefix attached to them as they take on a "confucious says" type of collective wisdom.

The "kingdom of God is at hand" flavor of Thomas, without a church heirarchy is a clue to me that it is early. I can't improve upon Diogenes the Cynic's comments about its lack of soteriology & etc.

From an existing setting such as this it is exceptionally easy to have a metamorphasis to a Jesus Christ. A spiritual conception initially, but ultimately a retroactive historical persona that provides a fake linear descent of authority to the phonies consolidating power over disparate groups.

There is great irony in that the creation of Jesus as Christ is the lever by which the faith of the masses can be harnessed for the ends of those that hunger for power.