dog-on

The Jews, who did not know god, but had they known, would not have executed the lord of glory.

Paul.


Who knew? Everyone except the Jews...

Mark.

robto

Crossan points out somewhere that when Barnabas discusses the goat sacrifice, it mentions the scarlet wool that crowns the goat without ever mentioning Jesus's crown of thorns, and this in spite of the fact that the whole of chapter 6 is concerned with the goat sacrifice as the "type" of Jesus's sacrifice. This is incredible in someone who knew the canonical story of the Passion.

He suggests, rather, that the sort of theologizing of the OT that Barnabas represents is how the Passion story came about. Theology preceded narrative. Barnabas thus represents a pre-gospel stage of Christian writing about the Passion that only later developed into the Passion narrative. (This does not mean that Barn. must pre-date the gospels: it could be a survival of an earlier mode of analysis into a later time.) Thus he agrees with you that, as you put it, "From his exegesis we can learn how the passion typology finally expressed in the Gospels might have come into existence."

I don't know if this line of reasoning is original with Crossan or if he is relying on other scholars - does anyone else know?

andrewcriddle

This seems to be a paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 2:8, but if so it is not an accurate one.

Andrew Criddle

show_no_mercy

It's where the whole Gnostic archons theology derives from. I don't think the Jews were ever considered "rulers of this age" in Paul's letters. Though combining this with the gospel narratives, it's obvious that the Jews were the "rulers" (of Judaism) did not recognize "god" (Jesus) and had (or were responsible) the lord of glory crucified.

dog-on

><