neilgodfrey

Structures like this (there are several possible variants) are another regular feature of ancient writing. Shiner (Proclaiming the Gospel) suggests structures like this were mnemonic devices to assist the storyteller. The patterns of a b c b a c found at different levels throughout the text could be associated with markers along a building gables as one example.

neilgodfrey

I thought about the interpolations question, but then what if the interpolated passages were also patterned like this? And then the circular argument would keep coming up so often I'd get a headache. But I'd get a headache just counting hundreds of syllables anyway. I think this study requires a certain type of scholar.

angelo

This may be slightly off topic. Wasn't all the N/T first written in Greek? The later translations, whether to Latin or whatever, must have numerous mis-translations. It happens naturally in any epic that's been translated to another language. Words have different meanings in different languages. A balanced scholar studying the N/T, would surely come away with the N/T been at best a collection of myths and legends that have no place in history, and that includes the O/T.

aa5874

Mark's Jesus was a disaster, his words before betrayal, "My soul is is exceeding sorrowful unto death...", followed by "...take away this cup....", his last words on the cross, "My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me", and followed by the disappearance of his body, with the short ending of Mark, the other Gospel writers probably had been worried that this Jesus did not represent a Messianic figure or the son of a god.

John's Jesus did radically change those words of failure and abandonment to words of success and accomplishment of his mission on earth and declared, in his prayer before betrayal, " I have glorified thee on the earth, I have finished the work that thou gavest me to do".
And the "cup" which terrified Mark's Jesus was accepted easily by John's Jesus, who said to Peter, "Put up thy sword into thy sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" And on the cross, his final words were, "It is finished". John's Jesus was full of confidence, mission accomplished, and now seemed more like a Messiah and the son of a god.

It appears John did not appreciate Mark's Jesus and fabricated a Jesus to counter Mark's disaster.

angelo

Johns Jesus was God incarnate, existing before the creation of the world.
He was the Word according to John and the Word was God.
By the time he wrote his gospel, the myth had grown to extravagant levels of fable.

JoeWallack

JW:
Continuing with the evidence that "John's" Jesus was fiftyIsh:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/John_6

6:41 "The Jews therefore murmured concerning him, because he said, I am the bread which came down out of heaven.

6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how doth he now say, I am come down out of heaven?"

As always "John" reacts to "Mark's" original Jesus story. How could "The Jews" not address Jesus' father? Now they do. This blatant contradiction in basic information regarding Jesus' supposed father is a huge, huge problem for HJ.


http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/John_7

7:1 "And after these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Judaea, because the Jews sought to kill him.

7:2 Now the feast of the Jews, the feast of tabernacles, was at hand.

7:3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may behold thy works which thou doest.

7:4 For no man doeth anything in secret, and himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou doest these things, manifest thyself to the world.

7:5 For even his brethren did not believe on him.

7:6 Jesus therefore saith unto them, My time is not yet come; but your time is always ready.

7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that its works are evil.

7:8 Go ye up unto the feast: I go not up unto this feast; because my time is not yet fulfilled.

7:9 And having said these things unto them, he abode [still] in Galilee.

7:10 But when his brethren were gone up unto the feast, then went he also up, not publicly, but as it were in secret."

JW:
Note that there is no mention of Jesus' father going to Jerusalem. Presumably because he was too old. If John's Jesus was near 50 than John's Jesus' father would be near 70 and probably too old to travel.


Textual Variation for 6:42 above:

http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/TC-John.pdf

JW:
Translation = the above Textual witness omits "and the mother". This Textual variation is not addressed by Metzger (Ehrman needs to rewrite the whole damn thing). Per Willker the omission is not original. Willker has looked at the issue backwards here. His question is why would some Scribes omit "and the mother" when the question should be why would some scribes add "and the mother"? "John" reacting to "Mark" naturally changes the mother reference to a father reference to sound historical and there is than no need to refer to the mother. Scribes than had incentive to add "mother" to harmonize with "Mark" and "Matthew".

The witness of Sinaiticus, Washingtonianus and range of support along with the preceding explanation makes it Likely that "and the mother" was not original.



Joseph

"He who denies that "John's" Jesus is denying "Mark's" Jesus is the liar." - The Gospel of Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

the_cave

No no, this is midsirected, I think. This is probably related to the traditional age restriction on the study of Jewish esotericism. Jesus claims to know Abraham. The question that is then asked is, how could that be, since Abraham is in heaven and Jesus isn't old enough to study the esoteric tradition yet? (John doesn't necessarily need to have gotten the exact age restriction right.)

angelo

Forgetting John for a moment. The consensus by biblical scholars, is, he was about 30 years of age. Then, if you belive what Dan Brown writes, he died of old age in France, leaving a brood of offspring.

Clivedurdle

This is the solution - why did aJohn use 46? Have the church father's given the answer, that it means Adam?

dog-on

I suppose, from the perspective of John, the question of "about how old was Jesus when he died" would make no sense, since in the beginning God created the Word....