aa5874

Artifacts in Egypt must be very significant evidence of origin. We cannot assume that places which have nothing of the early writings about Jesus are the geographic location of the early Jesus cult.

We have multiple NT manuscripts dated to the 2nd-3rd century found in Egypt therefore it must be reasonable to deduce that the early Jesus cult was there.

The earliest dated text of Pliny letter about the Christians in Bithynia is probably hundreds of years later.

According to "Church History" and "De Viris Illustribus" it was Mark who was in Alexandria in the time of Philo.

andrewcriddle

On the general point. It seems quite likely that Mark's account is based on earlier isolated stories about what Jesus did in various places and that Mark has joined them together on the basis of his ideas of intrinsic (geographic and other) plausibility. If Mark was not familiar with the detailed Geography of the area then this could easily lead to some rather strange results.

I'm afraid that the idea that Mark invented his narrative without earlier, (not necessarily reliable), sources and traditions to use as a basis is IMO unlikely, and the idea that Mark avoided stories about Jesus set in Tiberias because they could be too easily checked is IMO extremely unlikely.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

Your claims are unsubstantiated. Where do you get your stories from about Mark??

You very well know that gMark is actually an anonymous writing of no known date of authorship and of no known place of origin.

The earliest Apologetic writer to claim Mark wrote a Gospel is found in Against Heresies but those claims are rejected by Scholars universally.


Where are the sources of antiquity that support you?? Why do you assume gMark is history?? Speculative opinion based on imagination is really useless. Any one can guess their own history.

Based on Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius there was NO Messianic ruler called Jesus of Nazareth in the Entire 1st century.

Artifacts for the 2nd century Jesus cult have been found in Egypt. Early Christians of the Jesus cult must have been or was most likely in Egypt.

Sheshbazzar

magic Consistent with the argument being put forth in this thread, I believe Jezuz lack of visiting Tiberias was simply a result of the authors apparent lack of any real knowledge of the geography of Palestine.
It was just one name that he didn't' happen to pull out of his ...er..hat.

Jezuz wouldn't have need red heifer ashes, rituals are for humans serving and obeying the Gawd,
but Jezuz was GawdAllmighty hizself and had these -inhuman- magical powers and could do anything just by speaking one of his magic abracadabra words. All he had to do was like say 'be clean!' in Aramaic and poof! The deed would be done.

.

rlogan

The very definition of a "just so" story. How Mark comes across these isolated stories isn't even part of the story you've offered, but it has to be.

If Mark travelled to collect them, then he would make no geographic errors. If there were documents Mark collected across the region, you are the first to have ever proposed such a thing, out of the blue, and in contradiction to the text and traditions regarding Mark.

Mark instead directly tells us at the outset: The beginning of the Word. Mark is explicitly saying this is the first time the story has been told, instead of telling us he is collecting pre-existing writings about Jesus' travels.

He also immediately and repeatedly tells us that he is using ancient scripture regarding prophecies, and all of them are easy to source in the Hebrew Bible.

Well I can claim the moon landing is unlikely too, but at this site we back our assertions with evidence and logic. You've not done either. If Jesus appears in Tiberias, a story regarding Herod has to be constructed given how fantastical all his wonders are - but there is no such story in Josephus or any other historical piece.

I meant to mention before that Mark does talk about Capernaum, but in odd ways that clash with the travelogue. Jesus goes straight to Capernaum after being baptized in the River Jordan, which is an easy link given that Capernaum is by the Jordan where it enters the Sea.

He allegedly teaches in the Synagogue there and blows everyone away with his teaching. He returns to Capernaum later, but not in association with the travelogue that must necessarily take him from Tyre on South through the Galilee and eventually to Jerusalem. Gee, it is almost as if the writer doesn't know Capernaum is on that road of travel.

He also mentions Nazareth in the same "map-free" fashion. He indicates early on that Jesus is from Nazareth, and later in the book lifts Jesus from the pig story to his own homeland, although not by any known means of travel. You can't go directly from anywhere on the Sea of Galilee to Nazareth. The most logical route would be to head south to Agrippina and then East, if you look at the roadmap above.

I recall Vorkosigan some years ago doing a posting about the structure of Mark and how movement between places is merely a rhetorical device to break up plot segments, and when looking at a map trying to make sense out of Mark's travelogue that is abundantly clear.

Chili

. . . from his mother's womb untimely ripped by camelhair coat John who dunked him even and that set him on a tailspin in the desert where 'wild charismatics' took care of him and the angel of light was there as well.

Or, do you never watch them on TV these days?

aa5874

It simply cannot be mere coincidence that Egypt has provided the most New Testament Papyri.

40% of the recovered NT manuscripts and some dated to the mid-2nd century are from the Oxyrhynchus community in Egypt.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyrhyn...#New_Testament

We also have the Nag Hammadi Codices found in Egypt.

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlalpha.html

Egypt must be an extremely significant region for the early Jesus cult.

The mere fact that such a large percentage of NT manuscripts were found in Egypt after hundreds of years must mean that there were far more manuscripts in that region.

Chili

But it was because the Jesus cult as a cult and that is all it is. It has no place anywhere near Isreal, and we see here now also how prolific that they are. Reading, studying, and writing without end, and I think they they called them sulpher miners in Rev.14:10, did they not?

Sheshbazzar

Now there is a case of really jumping to an unwarranted conclusion.

What evidence has ever been produced that demonstrates the original texs were penned around 50 CE. ?
None.

aa5874

Especially when no "originals" have ever been found and dated in the 1st century.

By the way, how does one determine that a manuscript is an original if we have NO real evidence when any NT book or letter was actually composed??

Surely an "original" NT manuscript will not have the word "original" stamped on its pages or papyri.

If a manuscript is found and dated to the 2nd century why must we assume that there is an original 100 years earlier???

The fact that NO NT manuscripts have been found in the 1st century and in the regions to which the Pauline letters were supposedly sent but found in Egypt from the 2nd century and later support the argument that geography of the early Jesus cult is more likely to be around Egypt than any other place.