FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-05-2008, 06:58 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
But why keep changing the designation? Avoiding the appearance of favoritism?
I suggested a simple pattern (James and Joses, Joses alone, James alone). But the avoidance of favoritism may have something to do with it; if the readers knew both kids, then maybe Mark was just playing fair between them.

But, if all that fails to float your boat, then I say, with Crossan, I have no idea.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 06:59 PM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thentian View Post
The gospel of Peter only mentions Mary Magdalene and "some friends of her", if that is of interest.

While reading that I noticed that the centurion responsible for guarding the grave was identified by name: Petronius. I thought that was a little curious, so I decided to search for Petroniuses in that general area and time. A general here, a governor there and... a writer.
The governor (of Syria) may possibly be relevant to the centurion in the gospel of Peter. At least, some have suggested a connection.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 07:49 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 694
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by thentian View Post
The gospel of Peter only mentions Mary Magdalene and "some friends of her", if that is of interest.

While reading that I noticed that the centurion responsible for guarding the grave was identified by name: Petronius. I thought that was a little curious, so I decided to search for Petroniuses in that general area and time. A general here, a governor there and... a writer.
The governor (of Syria) may possibly be relevant to the centurion in the gospel of Peter. At least, some have suggested a connection.

Ben.
Hmn... I read up on him but I think it is doubtful. My understanding is that one would need strong connections in Rome to secure a governorship, which is not suggested if you start out as a humble centurion.

A better lead is probably one L. Petronius L. who served with Legio X Fretensis at roughly the correct time. That's the legion that occupied Jerusalem after the war and they were stationed in Syria before that. I think it is just about possible that he was detached to Jerusalem at the time of the crucifixion.

I found this info on a kind of Roman Army fansite (romanarmy.com), but they seem to have done marvellous work collecting historical facts. The reference is a bit hard to understand, though. Here's how it looks under "centuriones":

L. Petronius L. f. Pup. Sabinus Foro Brent., XI 6055

But, If I can't figure ot out I'll try sending them an email!

Cheers!
thentian is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 08:15 PM   #24
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
But why keep changing the designation? Avoiding the appearance of favoritism?
I suggested a simple pattern (James and Joses, Joses alone, James alone). But the avoidance of favoritism may have something to do with it; if the readers knew both kids, then maybe Mark was just playing fair between them.

But, if all that fails to float your boat, then I say, with Crossan, I have no idea.

Ben.
How could mentioning James and Joses alone avoid favoritism when the author implied by a question that Mary had other sons and daugthers.

Mark 6.3
Quote:
Is not this the carpenter the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?.....
What happened to Jesus, Juda and Simon and the sisters?

The avoiding of favoritism idea is not a good idea.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 08:58 PM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The avoiding of favoritism idea is not a good idea.
It is if James and Joses are the only siblings that the Marcan readership actually knew.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:09 PM   #26
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The avoiding of favoritism idea is not a good idea.
It is if James and Joses are the only siblings that the Marcan readership actually knew.

Ben.
And what if they didn't?
aa5874 is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:09 PM   #27
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post

I suggested a simple pattern (James and Joses, Joses alone, James alone). But the avoidance of favoritism may have something to do with it; if the readers knew both kids, then maybe Mark was just playing fair between them.

But, if all that fails to float your boat, then I say, with Crossan, I have no idea.

Ben.
How could mentioning James and Joses alone avoid favoritism when the author implied by a question that Mary had other sons and daugthers.

Mark 6.3
Quote:
Is not this the carpenter the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?.....
What happened to Jesus, Juda and Simon and the sisters?

The avoiding of favoritism idea is not a good idea.

Jesus was not a carpenter or he'd be a sinner. He is the carpenter's son of Mary.

I like your take on this topic and Jesus was not the son of Mary. Christ was and Jesus was the imposter to be crucified. Mark knows (inspired) and can not make bold statements that will snare him by those in the know.
Chili is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:15 PM   #28
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The avoiding of favoritism idea is not a good idea.
It is if James and Joses are the only siblings that the Marcan readership actually knew.

Ben.
I like that as a possible solution.

I think Mark 3:35 may explain why no one is actually directly identified by Mark as
a relative of Jesus: "whoever does the will of God is my brother, sister and mother"

So perhaps Mark is keeping this saying in mind when he identifies Jesus' mother
as the mother of James, Joses or both.

Peter.
Petergdi is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:16 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post

It is if James and Joses are the only siblings that the Marcan readership actually knew.

Ben.
And what if they didn't?
Then, as I stated, I have no idea.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:17 PM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Petergdi View Post
I think Mark 3:35 may explain why no one is actually directly identified by Mark as
a relative of Jesus: "whoever does the will of God is my brother, sister and mother"

So perhaps Mark is keeping this saying in mind when he identifies Jesus' mother
as the mother of James, Joses or both.
That is certainly worth pursuing. Mark definitely has motive to suppress familial ties, at least to a certain extent.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:08 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.