ApostateAbe

No, that would not be a point of agreement. But, I get the implicit sense that you agree with me on my own proposition, so I leave happy.

storytime

Why do you think the myth was created? What would the Jews in those days have to gain by it? Maybe a more respectful Jewish-Gentile relation? In those days did the Jews teach that Gentiles also had a place in the world to come, and of which the Gentiles took as meaning they were equal to the Jews and blessed as inheritors with them? Would Jews have compromised their traditional doctrines of faith by inviting Gentiles into their religious kingdom of their Hebrew god?

Jesus excluded Gentiles per his Jewish laws of Moses and prophet sayings. The story seems to make a twist with the character Paul who preaches to the Gentiles because the Jews don't want to hear his nonsense.

If we want to discover the history behind the myth of Christ, why do you think the myth was created?

ApostateAbe

Yes, that is what I am talking about. To take it a step further, a mythicist may go through the passages of the New Testament and explain them in terms of their own theory--who invented each passage and why--a lot like the way of the Jesus Seminar. Why was there this myth of John baptizing Jesus? Why was there this myth of Jesus orating so many length parables? Why were the geneologies of Jesus important to these people? Was Peter a real human being? If so, what part did he have in the whole game? What about James? Or Paul? Or John the Apostle? Or Cephas? Why was there a myth of a betrayal by Judas and a crucifixion? I am not asking you to answer all of these questions (please don't right now), but to answer them would be a beginning of giving a "Jesus myth" theory substance.

dog-on

Abe, how many of these are answered if Mark was originally a play?

ApostateAbe

Maybe a bundle of them. Any especially dramatic elements would be answered. You just have to answer for the long lines of tedious narration, the genealogies, the long sermons, and so on. Even if the details don't really fit, it would still be a good start, and I encourage it.

dog-on

You are referring to Matthew, Luke and John. I am just referring to Mark.

I think that Mark works pretty well, as a play.

show_no_mercy

None of those apply to Mark though.

dog-on

I wonder how long it would take to perform Mark.

ApostateAbe

Sure! Somethin you might think about doing is to rewrite the gospel of Mark in play format. The format of a play is where you have alternating lines of speech.

NARRATOR: It is written in Isaiah the prophet, "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way— "a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'

JOHN THE BAPTIST: "After me will come one more powerful than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."

[Jesus is baptized by John]

GOD: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased."

And so on.

Some ancient plays have a certain syllabic rhythm, so you can see if you can find it in the quotes of the gospel. Give the profile of those who first invented it, and tell how it evolved into its present form. Just see if your own theory can compete with the established theory, that Mark was a purely a spoken religious tradition that was passed from the Christian Jews to the Christian Greeks who wrote it down.

ApostateAbe

You are right about the genealogies. It does have tedious narration and long sermons. See Mark 4 and Mark 7, for example. It reads like something that would interest a religious adherent much more than someone looking for entertainment, but it is not impossible for it to have originated as a play.