dog-on

Possible, but of course, this is a work of fiction. No HJ there...

The Paul angle puts me into the post 135AD camp for a possible date for G Mark. Good attestations to the existance of this work, prior to this time, (actually prior to Ireneaus), are basically non-existent. I discount 1Clement and Ignatius as having been proven to have been written at the time favored by Christians.

Ok

Attestations?

AoI, etc....

Ok, so how do we start from the historical part?

JoeWallack

JW:
In an Irony that I think the author of "Mark" would really appreciate, Christianity went through all of Papias' writings looking for and claiming to find early support for identification of "Mark". A majority of current Mainstream Christian Bible scholarship now confesses to us that what Christianity preserved from Papias does not refer to "Mark". Therefore, rather than support that "Mark" was known prior to Papias, early 2nd century, Papias is evidence that "Mark" was unknown at the time of Papias.

So in trying to preserve supposed evidence for an early dating of "Mark" Christianity has unwittingly preserved evidence for the opposite.



Joseph

dog-on

I left off Papias due to the fact that I think there may be a bit more Eusebius than Papias, in "Papias' alleged" works...

Minimalist

Well, exactly how many of these "resemblances" are we supposed to consider? The prisoner exchange? Seems to be a total invention. The good thieves? The Romans did not crucify thieves. Waking Pilate up in the middle of the night? Um...right! The High Priests breaking their own laws to conduct a trial ON PASSOVER? Give me a break.

andrewcriddle

What is your evidence for this ?

The thieves LHSTAS are presumably meant to be something like highway robbers and I would expect them to be liable to the death penalty in that society.

Andrew Criddle

Minimalist

Andrew,

Crucifixion was reserved for non-Romans, slaves and rebels. Common criminals were dealt with in the arena for the amusement of the crowd.

I did not say that thieves were not liable for capital punishment. I said they were not crucified. In general, crucifixion seems to be a fairly inefficient means of killing someone and when it was done it was done to send a clear message. That message was "Don't Fuck With Us."

So which was your "jesus?' A rebel or a slave?

No Robots

Rebel, of course:

We have found this man perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he is Christ the king.--Lk 23:2.

And, of course, it's a bum rap; but waddya gonna do?

jules?

Moving on to the historic part.......

but first of all dealing with the roots of the mythical jc. Enoch and Revelation are early documents! Enoch and Jubilees were popular with Qumran community. The war scroll speaks of the expected end time when angels engage in battle along side the rightous, sons of light etc against the wicked priest, liers etc. These themes of salvation/damnation are the same as Revelation. The oldest fragments of Revelation indicate 666 was 616, David Parker, Professor of New Testament Textual Criticism and Paleography at the University of Birmingham says that this example of gematria refers to the beast as being Emperor Caligula and not Nero. Caligula ruled from 37 to 41 therefore his reference in Revelations makes it the earliest Christian document. As time moved on Caligula could no longer represent the beast so in typical midrash tradition a slight alteration made Nero [reign 54- 68] the new anti-Christ with the addition of the preface chastising the seven churches a further updating to make the document relevant to the growing faith. The case for Revelation as the document that allowed for Jewish eschatology to break out into the wider world and be the foundation of Christianity as well as the source material for Paul’s ministry and the Gospels is a strong one that accounts for its ultimate but hotly debated inclusion in the orthodox canon.

If JC has element of truth, and this is the very valid point made by previous contributers; then it is about degree. Plenty of rebels were being nailed up in a social and revolutionary climate, which mean the story was based on a nobody or a composite of rebels who did various things and were attributed to have said certain things. Clearly this is hardly an historical Jc. The 'egyptian' gathered his followers on the mount for a sermon so does that make him a splinter of the hj?

The passion is a pretty good dramatisation of Isaiah's suffering servant.
Jesus undergoes the same suffering and for the same goal; that of taking the place of many sinners and praying they might be forgiven. Jesus is ultimately successful in the goal set by god and is highly honoured, yet is rejected by the people who chose a criminal over him, Jesus suffers for other peoples sin, he was wounded and beaten and treated harshly including being pierced but endures it humbly without saying a word, [like a lamb to slaughter] at least in John’s account. He was arrested, sentenced and led off to die. Where as the suffering servant is placed in a grave with evil men and buried with the rich, Jesus is crucified with criminals and placed in the rich tomb in a garden. Mark dramatised the fate of the suffering servant up dating it with the Roman method of execution yet compelled by prophesy to completely contradict actual Roman practises which would have left the body up to rot. They also had the tricky problem of finding a rich tomb owner; enter Joseph of Aramathia. Rich, a secret follower and even having the name Aramathia which means ‘best apostle’ . In some respects Greek drama is a rather clever form of midrash, it is more accessable and for the preacher it cuts down on lengthy scripture with margin notes.

Still no HJ yet, but i still wonder how it all broke out into wider circulation. John Allegro offers Essen origins. The Essene could identify the suffering servant. The prophesy appears to have been played out a century earlier when the founder of the Essene community at Qumran came in direct conflict with Alexander Jannaeus the self imposed High Priest of the Temple and military leader. Jannaeus reigning from 103 to 76 bce. Although the rebellion was in response to Hellenising by Antiochus Epiphanes the new Jewish Priest kings were happy to employ gentile mercenaries and use the foreign practice of crucifixion. Josephus in his Histories mentions Jannaeus’ use of crucifixion as well as the pleasure he took in it. Jannaeus was particularly hated having little authority for the office of high priest he is said to have turned his foreign mercenaries on his subjects who had thrown fruit and insults at him whilst he made public sacrifice the death toll was in thousands. The Qumran community was founded as a direct consequence of the Temple being compromised [at least in Allegro's opinion] and there is reason to suppose that its leader was the legitimate heir to the office of High Priest making him a target. Dead Sea scroll documents relate this history in terms where Zardok, the founder of the community and righteous priest undergoes great suffering and death under the hands of the Wicked Priest also called the Lion of Wrath. The community at Qumran rarely gave actual names and preferred titles the benefit of being vague meant that prophesy could never fail, so for us identifying the Wicked Priest is problematic. However Zardok a.k.a Jesus ben Pandira and the founding of the Qumran community coincide with Jannaeus’ term in office and the Nahum Commentary scroll credits the foreign practice of crucifying political enemies to the Lion of Wrath.

Curiously, and I need some more research on this, the later Rabbanical writings identify a Jesus ben Pandira the son of a soldier as the mistaken JC. Anyway if Zardox aka Jesus was a real person complete with his 12 sitting around practising the Passover, and waiting for the real passover from this age into a new one then he does make a pretty good and complete HJ. However the Passover ritual [at least according to Allegro] appears to have carried on for years and obviously head priests and the 12 would have come and gone making for an awful lot of Zardoxs. It would be a bit like looking back to now from some distant future and observing that Elvis was playing the globe, ressurected from the dead.

There is of course bugger all evidence so I view it as speculation. The passion came from somewhere but more interestly it came from a series of events rather than the simplistic god-man on earth tale. But I am interested in any flaws in this particular speculation.
jules

jules?

I agree and on the basis of historical record there is no HJ, [I used James Bond earlier, but some one actually has his DB4 perfectly preserved in a shed!] The problem is there seems to be a mental illness that afflicts even the most intellectual researcher claiming Jc was historical. On a fun speculative level all we have is a plausibility scale.

angelo

Book of Enoch and other Jewish apocalyptic literature is reflective of early 'christian' belief. agreed?

Early christians are doom mongering end timers expecting the imminant arrival of a heavenly jesus or rather heavenly saviour/destroyer. is this agreeable.

I understand this is the mythical part but i need to start somewhere, and also do some homework.

I am open to variations and in fact they may help, will have to see.
jules[/QUOTE]