Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ApostateAbe · 02-14-2010, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

John 2
After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples.

Why does Jesus of Nazareth go to Capernaum with his mother and brothers?

Was this a family outing? Why are they off to Capernaum when they all came from Nazareth?

Mark 3
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

It must have been a strange trip to Capernaum with his family following Jesus and his disciples and the two parties arguing over the sanity of Jesus....

When you mix elements from two or more different gospels, then you are bound to find even more weirdness than if you had them all separately without trying to mix them or resolve them. Each gospel was written by a different Christian group, and each of them made their own set of contributions and edits. The writer of the gospel of John did not try to make his own account mesh with the gospel of Mark, Matthew, Luke, L or Q.

Chili · 02-14-2010, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saramago

Both involve Jesus, his family, the disciples, Capernaeum, and "the" story of Jesus as related in the gospels.

And, since you mentioned that these 2 events take place at different times:

The John 2 passage takes place 3 days after Jesus's baptism by John (John 1:29-2:1) and "not many days" before Passover and Jesus's show of temper at the temple in Jerusalem (John 2:12-16).

Yet Jesus is reported elsewhere to have immediately gone from his baptism to spend 40 days and nights alone in the wilderness (Mark 1:9-13)...and, he is reported elsewhere to have overturned tables etc in the temple in Jerusalem either the day he entered the city (Luke 19:36-45, Matthew 21:1-13) or the day after he entered the city (Mark 11:1-17), near the end of his ministry.

I do not accept that pointing out actual discrepancies in the text, and asking questions, is "slamming Christianity" or "twisting Biblical passages to your own purposes". It meets the stated goals of this freethought discussion board. If you don't like it, you are free to go to any of the numerous sites where people can wallow in their twisted interpretations of how it all makes perfect sense.

In the OP, which I was responding to, there was no actual discepancy in the text. Two unrelated scriptures were quoted in an attempt to make them seem about the same event, which they weren't. If that's not twisting Biblical passages, I don't know what is.

Not so sure if the 40 days in the desert do not describe the general mood of Jesus, and if Capurnaum is 'home' I doubt very much if he went back 'home' in Luke and John. He was supposed to be a new creation, remember, who was reborn of God and I am sure that the Cana event took place in his subconscious mind while the Jesus in Mark was not invited there and therefore went 'back home' where he was tempted by the devil etc. That he had nothing to eat just means that he was severed from God and so was starving spiritual nourishment in the conscious mind where he chose 'thunder and lightning boys' James and John to be his aids at evangelistic ralleys.

Thanks spin, that was a nice tip.

Steven Carr · 02-14-2010, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

Another thread with no visible purpose but to slam Christianity, but I will clarify one thing. These two passages are not related to each other in the Bible. They take place at different times, the John 2 passage just after the wedding in Cana, and the Mark 3 passage later in his ministry. To try to tie them together in this way is to twist Biblical passages for purposes of your own agenda, whatever that may be.

So why did Mary of Nazareth, and James of Nazareth follow Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples to Capernaum, and didn't Jesus family notice that he had a lot of disciples?

Of course they are separate in the Gospels. You are not supposed to read them together, no more than one episode of Friends is supposed to make sense of loose ends in another episode of Friends.

It is only sceptics who read ALL the Gospels and wonder how they tie together. They were never intended to make sense as a whole life of Jesus, only as separate bits.

Mark 3
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

Why were his family shocked at the crowds around their son - the only Jew they knew who had never committed a single sin in his entire time with them?

Especially when Walrus claims they had been following Jesus around for some time , and had already seen miracles?

maryhelena · 02-14-2010, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Mark 3
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

The AV translation of 3:19b has an error. It should be "Then he went home" (εις οικον), the same idiom as Mk 2:1, where it was known that he was "at home" (εν οικω). So where is home, if not Capernaum?

spin

I’m getting rather interested in Capernaum...

Wikipedia Capernnaum

Quote:

Archaeological evidence demonstrates that the town came into existence in the second century BC, in the Hasmonean period. The site had no defensive wall and extended along the shore of the nearby lake (from east to west).

No mention of what exactly is the archaeological evidence. Do you know if there is some evidence that actually says that this site is the Capernaum of the gospel story?

I know Josephus has some story re falling off his horse and was taken to Capernaum.

Life: 72

Quote:

..... 72. As soon as I had gotten intelligence of this, I sent two thousand armed men, and a captain over them, whose name was Jeremiah, who raised a bank a furlong off Julias, near to the river Jordan, and did no more than skirmish with the enemy;.........And I had performed great things that day, if a certain fate had not been my hinderance; for the horse on which I rode, and upon whose back I fought, fell into a quagmire, and threw me on the ground, and I was bruised on my wrist, and carried into a village named Cepharnome, or Capernaum. When my soldiers heard of this, they were afraid I had been worse hurt than I was; and so they did not go on with their pursuit any further, but returned in very great concern for me. I therefore sent for the physicians, and while I was under their hands, I continued feverish that day; and as the physicians directed, I was that night removed to Taricheee.

The issue I have with this is the date - around 99 ce - and that earlier, around 75 ce, Josephus seems to be telling a more interesting story re Capernaum...

Josephus War ch.3 published around 75 ce.

Quote:

7. Now this lake of Gennesareth is so called from the country adjoining to it. Its breadth is forty furlongs, and its length one hundred and forty; its waters are sweet, and very agreeable for drinking, for they are finer than the thick waters of other fens; the lake is also pure, and on every side ends directly at the shores, and at the sand; it is also of a temperate nature when you draw it up, and of a more gentle nature than river or fountain water, and yet always cooler than one could expect in so diffuse a place as this is. Now when this water is kept in the open air, it is as cold as that snow which the country people are accustomed to make by night in summer. There are several kinds of fish in it, different both to the taste and the sight from those elsewhere. It is divided into two parts by the river Jordan. Now Panium is thought to be the fountain of Jordan, but in reality it is carried thither after an occult manner from the place called Phiala: this place lies as you go up to Trachonitis, and is a hundred and twenty furlongs from Cesarea, and is not far out of the road on the right hand; and indeed it hath its name of Phiala [vial or bowl] very justly, from the roundness of its circumference, as being round like a wheel; its water continues always up to its edges, without either sinking or running over. And as this origin of Jordan was formerly not known, it was discovered so to be when Philip was tetrarch of Trachonitis; for he had chaff thrown into Phiala, and it was found at Paninto, where the ancients thought the fountain-head of the river was, whither it had been therefore carried [by the waters]. As for Panium itself, its natural beauty had been improved by the royal liberality of Agrippa, and adorned at his expenses. Now Jordan's visible stream arises from this cavern, and divides the marshes and fens of the lake Semechonitis; when it hath run another hundred and twenty furlongs, it first passes by the city ]Julias, and then passes through the middle of the lake Gennesareth; after which it runs a long way over a desert, and then makes its exit into the lake Asphaltitis.

8. The country also that lies over against this lake hath the same name of Gennesareth; its nature is wonderful as well as its beauty; its soil is so fruitful that all sorts of trees can grow upon it, and the inhabitants accordingly plant all sorts of trees there; for the temper of the air is so well mixed, that it agrees very well with those several sorts, particularly walnuts, which require the coldest air, flourish there in vast plenty; there are palm trees also, which grow best in hot air; fig trees also and olives grow near them, which yet require an air that is more temperate. One may call this place the ambition of nature, where it forces those plants that are naturally enemies to one another to agree together; it is a happy contention of the seasons, as if every one of them laid claim to this country; for it not only nourishes different sorts of autumnal fruit beyond men's expectation, but preserves them a great while; it supplies men with the principal fruits, with grapes and figs continually, during ten months of the year (7) and the rest of the fruits as they become ripe together through the whole year; for besides the good temperature of the air, "it is also watered from a most fertile fountain.The people of the country call it Capharnaum. Some have thought it to be a vein of the Nile, because it produces the Coracin fish as well as that lake does which is near to Alexandria. The length of this country extends itself along the banks of this lake that bears the same name for thirty furlongs, and is in breadth twenty, And this is the nature of that place.

With such talk of water and fountains and wonderful beauty in nature, soil that is fruitful and palm trees and fig and olive trees - this place is the ambition of nature - plants that are natural enemies agree together, a happy contention of the seasons, supplies fruit beyond men’s expectation...Are we not seeing here a vision of Camelot, of Arcadia?

Taking Josephus at his word, that he was not unfamiliar with the prophets etc and had visions and could interpreted them - is he not here dealing with an abstract ideal rather than the geography of the region? And if he was familiar with the geography of the region why the tall story re Philip: “Philip was tetrarch of Trachonitis; for he had chaff thrown into Phiala, and it was found at Paninto”.

Quote:

“The Jordan’s course from Banias, through the swamps of the Huleh (Semechonitis),into the Sea of Galilee (Gennesarat) and finally the Dead Sea (Asphaltitis), is of course accurately traced. But it is geologically impossible for water to run from the Phiale (nowcalled Birkat Ram) to Banias. Nevertheless, Josephus says that Philip, whom he calls ‘tetrarch of Trachonitis’, himself made this gravity-defying discovery by means of a scientific experiment.The king ‘had chaff thrown into the pool of Phiale and found it cast up at Panion’. Since this result is physically impossible, given the geological relationship of the two sites, we can only speculate that Philip’s assistants in this experiment, eager to please, manipulated the evidence to match the king’s theory".

CAESAREA PHILIPPI: BANIAS, THE LOST CITY OF PAN: John Francis Wilson

So, we have Josephus giving an idealist utopian landscape that is watered from a fertile fountain that the people call Capernaum - - and he adds to this story an incident regarding Philip that is plainly not in accord with the region’s geography.

This is the Josephus of around 75 ce - a Josephus with a keen sense of idealism - and then we have the later Josephus, writing around 99 ce, who remembers that years ago he fell of his horse and that the name of the place he got taken to was Capernaum - though he quickly moved on to somewhere else...

Perhaps the archaeological evidence does establish that Capernaum existed around the time of the gospel storyline - however, from the early writing of Josephus - it seems evident that the name ‘Capernaum’ might well have had a more philosophical connotation as well...’Capernaum’ as the source of the water of life....

Anyway, whatever, bottom line is that the gospel storyline is quick to get Jesus out of Nazareth and on the road to Capernaum...why Capernaum is the question...

(my formating)

Chili · 02-14-2010, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

[So why did Mary of Nazareth, and James of Nazareth follow Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples to Capernaum, and didn't Jesus family notice that he had a lot of disciples?

They did, and that is what is wrong with it. Mary of Nazareth does not belong in Capernaum until after crucifixion. It was James of Nazareth who was 'from his mother's womb [Mary] untimely ripped' here and that is why Jesus had all those spectators singing halleluia's because another one 'got saved.'

If we call Capenaum the TOK and Jerusalem the TOL it is easy to see why Capernaum is a good old famliar source for water:
from maryhelena

Quote:

"it is also watered from a most fertile fountain.The people of the country call it Capharnaum. Some have thought it to be a vein of the Nile,

Then if you go to Rev.13 and call the second beast 'reborn' from the TOK instead of the TOL (the first) you will recognize the 2 Jesus' of John's Jesus (Krestos) and Mark's Jesus/James (Kristos).

Quote:

Of course they are separate in the Gospels. You are not supposed to read them together, no more than one episode of Friends is supposed to make sense of loose ends in another episode of Friends

It is only sceptics who read ALL the Gospels and wonder how they tie together. They were never intended to make sense as a whole life of Jesus, only as separate bits..

They are different but their intricate weave tells me that they had only one author so that in the differences they can be complimentary to each other.

Quote:

Mark 3
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

Why were his family shocked at the crowds around their son - the only Jew they knew who had never committed a single sin in his entire time with them?

Not sure if it says in Mark that Jesus never sinned but the allusion to the law may just mean that he did. He had nighmares for sure in 'the storm at sea' parable of Mk 4, which only tells us that he had 'no rest by night or by day" (Rev.14:11).

Quote:

Especially when Walrus claims they had been following Jesus around for some time , and had already seen miracles?

I suspect that the miracles are astute awakenings in his own mind . . . from 'both sides' which then is why the Herodians were still plotting against him and in the end is why Herod does not his pay tribute to Jesus in Mark (Lk.23:12).

Doug Shaver · 02-14-2010, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walrus

They take place at different times, the John 2 passage just after the wedding in Cana, and the Mark 3 passage later in his ministry.

And therefore we should not expect them to be in harmony?

Most Christians tell me that every part of the Bible is harmonious with every other part. Are those Christians misinformed? Should I ignore them from now on?

Chili · 02-14-2010, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

[So why did Mary of Nazareth, and James of Nazareth follow Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples to Capernaum, and didn't Jesus family notice that he had a lot of disciples?

Of course those 'spectators' (disciples) exist only in his own mind with him now being a proud saved sinner (who's name is written in the 'righteousness book' of Billy Graham et al), who next will pray up a storm with thunderous James and John to get the HS down from heaven (the dove forgot to land and stay = no "father and I are one"), and so gets himself on a 'spiritual-high' from where he delivers his 'mountain top' sermon wherein he first starts cussing at the Catholic Church (as in Rev. 14:6-12 but not 13) and than tells everybody that 'you must be saved,' etc.

Vic333 · 02-14-2010, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Of course those 'spectators' (disciples) exist only in his own mind ....

So, an "it was only a dream" interpretation of the Jesus story? Interesting. I might have to run with that.

Chili · 02-14-2010, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vic333

Quote:

Of course those 'spectators' (disciples) exist only in his own mind ....

So, an "it was only a dream" interpretation of the Jesus story? Interesting. I might have to run with that.

Try telling a Baptist that and see what he says. He/they, as you probably know, will join forces and go to war to defend that because to them it is very real because it exists in their own mind. I think they call it 'on fire for the Lord' and they become the 'plague' that will destroy the 'fatherland' to service their 'motherland' (bring division instead of peace). I think they even sing about that in "Amazing Grace."

maryhelena · 02-14-2010, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

John 2
After this he went down to Capernaum with his mother and brothers and his disciples.

Why does Jesus of Nazareth go to Capernaum with his mother and brothers?

Was this a family outing? Why are they off to Capernaum when they all came from Nazareth?

Mark 3
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat. When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."

It must have been a strange trip to Capernaum with his family following Jesus and his disciples and the two parties arguing over the sanity of Jesus....

Just a wild thought....

If there really was no Nazareth at the required gospel date stamp - then just where would Jesus and his family be leaving from, when they were going on that trip to a new residence in Capernaum??

The story goes that somehow Nazareth was an embarrassment, that it was an awkward element of the story re prophecy - thus it must be a real place...

But maybe, just maybe, the supposed embarrassment was not about trying to get OT prophecy to fit Nazareth - but about something else entirely...

If Capernaum was only the later home of Jesus - just what was the original 'home' town?

There is another place that is close to Capernaum, a place that seems to have been something of a difficult issue for the gospel writers - Bethsaida.

The gospel of John has Bethsaida in Galilee - while elsewhere it is simply Bethsaida. Two Bethsaidas? At some stage this seems to have been the conclusion. However, it seems more probably that there was only one Bethsaida - Bethsaida in the territory of Philip. This Bethsaida was re-named Bethsaida Julius, by Philip, in the 15th year of Tiberius - a year that is of prime interest to the gospel storyline of Luke - and a year that the heretic Marcion decided to keep in his version of Luke.

Now, the interesting thing is that the gospel storyline has Jesus visiting Bethsaida Julias in 30 ce - yet the gospel writers make no mention of its new name - just using Bethsaida - thus allowing for confusion re one or two Bethsaidas.

Could the whole Nazareth issue be nothing more than a distraction from the bigger issue re Bethsaida Julias - because, for some reason or another - it was this place and not Nazareth that was the real awkward element for the gospel storyline?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.