Ben C Smith

Perhaps, but is not audience knowledge an obvious option in this case? These relationships are given where the identifiers usually come. It appears that they were meant to identify the person thus written of.

Ben.

aa5874

And further, one must be able to identify the "audience".

The supposed events about Jesus occurred at around 30 CE, gMark was written when? Who was the real author of gMark? And where was gMark first circulated?

When a book is written, is it only those who know the characters in the book will read it?

Who are the "intended audience" of a work of fiction?

"Intended audience" is a very poor explanation.

thentian

Oh yes, I certainly agree that the author of gPeter probably got his info from Josephus. Still, I think it would be interesting if it could be shown from other sources that there was a centurion Petronius in Iudaea at the time. Apparently, roman soldiers were eager to inscribe their names on suitable surfaces around where they were camped, and lots of ostracha has also been dug up. Unfortunately, what you usually get when searching the net is papers that only mention examples of these inscriptions and ostracha, so it will be lucky to find a specific person/name.

I don't want to derail this topic, so if I do find a good candidate for gPeter's centurion, I'll make a new topic about it.

Cheers!

spamandham

I think that's a good possibility, and it fits with the differing genealogies in Matthew and Luke, as well as helping to explain the context of Titus 3:9 "But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless." as well as 1 Tim 1:4 "nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work—which is by faith."

To me at least, all of these are evidence of individuals or groups trying to claim authority through blood relations.

aa5874

Jesus being the mother of Jesus was not regarded as a foolish controversy of genealogy during the supposed time Titus or Timothy was written.

The authors of Matthew, Luke and John all claimed Mary was the mother of Jesus and there is no indication that the endless genealogies controversies were related to Mary being the mother of Jesus, perhaps rather to the supposed genealogies of the so-called husband of Mary.

spamandham

Whether or not Jesus' mother's name was Mary, is not the controversy I'm referring to.

We have the strongest form of textual evidence available to us that there was conflict as to Jesus' ancestry in the writings of Matthew and Luke, and apparently also at the time of the writings of Titus and 1 Timothy. How and why could that happen?

Even if Jesus is fictional, it makes little sense for two diverging genealogies. Surely it isn't a simple error, considering Matthew and Luke are the same up through Zerubbabel. The authors had motivation of some kind to promote different genealogies. The simplest explanation for that is genealogies were a way of claiming authority (a known Jewish tradition anyway) through a blood relationship with Jesus.

aa5874

And who were the Jews in your scenario? Jesus, Mary, Joseph, Heli.....?

And if Jesus did not exist, who would claim authority through a blood relationship? His non-existant mother and brother?

There is no evidence that there were any records of any one called Jesus whose mother was Mary, whose supposed father was Joseph, who was crucified under Pilate and was believed to have been raised from the dead.

It would appear that the OT or Septuagint was used to supply the names in the genealogies that are common to both gMatthhew and gLuke, and the rest of the names were simply made up.

The conception of Jesus as recorded by gMatthew and gLuke was simply made up, making up genealogies is the next logical step.

spamandham

No. Actual ordinary Jews. Not legendary figures. Appeal to genealogies is present in the Jewish scriptures, in the NT, and continues on even today. Is there really any doubt about such a practice among ordinary Jews?

Someone who thought he existed...that seems obvious.

Why would inventing a genealogy be the next logical step?

...and why do the genealogies differ in Matthew and Luke? Your model has to explain all the data.

aa5874

You need to show that there were actual Jews who thought Jesus of the NT existed during the days of Tiberius.

It is your simplest explanation that cannot explain all the data and that is what I have pointed out to you.

And the only authors to have recorded conception and nativity stories are the ones to have genealogies, therefore my position is supported by the information available.

JoeWallack

JW:
Regarding Mary, it's clear that according to "Mark" the answer is no:

1) The later "Mary" is not identified as Jesus' mother. Normally this would end the serious discussion and a better question would be why someone is even asking the question. Specifically here though, "Mark" in general prefers Literary Style over straight-forward communication (by itself negating a "biography" label) which opens the door to non-explicit intent.

The Irony here is that Bauckham, who concludes the same Mary, and Ben, who thinks Bauckham's conclusion is a serious one, specifically need to accept the Literary Style above to have the same Marys but in general reject that "Mark" prefers Style over biography.

Different Marys is still not only going to be the default position but the probable one no matter what the General themes and treatment of individual characters is based on 1). Here though every Theme of "Mark" supports different Marys:

2) "Mark's" general theme is that everyone close to Jesus abandoned him.

3) "Mark" specifically says Jesus' family thought he was crazy.

4) "Mark" uses the same names to indicate Replacement.

Additionally:

5) The women at the end are said to be followers of Jesus.

6) The women at the end have different families. Rather than a clue that these are the same Marys the purpose is to Distinguish different Marys.

7) None of the other Gospels think it is the same Mary.

Bauckham concludes that they are the same Marys. His credibility is impeached and he should not be considered an expert or professional regarding Biblical commentary.

And since the Marys are different...



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page