Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JoeWallack · 03-05-2006, 06:11 PM

The More The Maryier

JW:
Now let's see how "Mark" honors Jesus' Mother: (NIV)

3:
30 "He said this because they were saying, "He has an evil spirit."
31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."
33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

Matthew 12:
"And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation."
46While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."[g]
48He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."

Luke 8
18 "Therefore consider carefully how you listen. Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has will be taken from him."
19 Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you."
21 He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice."

JW:
X-Uh-Jesus:
"Mark" had just given a story of Jesus being accused of having an Evil spirit. In a continuous flow "Mark's" Jesus' Mother and Brothers come to Jesus as Outsiders and interrupt his teaching, presumably because they have a problem with it. This Jesus Explicitly identifies those listening to him as his Mother and Brothers (Replacement).

"Matthew" tones this down by leading in with a universal comment (to avoid the Implication that Jesus own family thought he had an Evil spirit as well).

"Luke" completely exorcises the Evil spirit lead in. The rhetorical question is dropped as is the identification of the listeners as the Mothers and Brothers.

So we see the gradual lessening/removal of "Mark's" theme of Insiders replaced by Outsiders for the same Role (here Mother and Brothers). Understand Dear Reader?

Mark:
6:
"Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.
Footnotes:
1. Mark 6:3 Greek Joses, a variant of Joseph"

Matthew:
53 "When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him.
But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor."
58And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith."

Luke:
" "

JW:
X-Uh-Jesus:
Here "Mary" is named and is identified as the mother of James and Joses (Joseph).

"Matthew" makes "The Carpenter" Jesus' father instead of Jesus. He also changes the identification of the Family because in "Mark" they hadn't been properly introduced.

"Luke" exorcises the entire story which is especially ridiculous when you have a Virgin Birth story and Bar Mitzvah story earlier in your Gospel.

Mark:
15:
38 "The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and[d] saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son[e] of God!"
40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. 41In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there."

Matthew 27:
54 "When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son[e] of God!"
55 Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons."

Luke 23:
47 "The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, "Surely this was a righteous man." 48When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things."

JW:
X-Uh-Jesus:
At Jesus' Death there is a Mary, Mother of James and Joses. Especially note that of the three woman identified, only this woman is identified as a Mother. And, so Mary, Mother of James and Joses, was there at Jesus' death just as Mary, Mother of James and Joses, was there at Jesus' birth. Note that this Mary, Mother of James and Joses, from Galilee, and presumably the Type of follower identifed in 3:34, cared for Jesus' needs, Same as the other Mary, Mother of James and Joses from Galilee.

"Matthew" adds another mother to the descriptions.

"Luke", true to Form, drops almost all of these connections.

So in summary we have the following evidence that "Mark" Created a "Mary" at The End to illustrate his Replacement Theme:

1) In the previous post we saw good evidence that "Mark" did the same thing with Jesus' father.

2) "Mark's" Jesus Explicitly identifies by Narrative illustration the Replacement of Jesus' Mother with Followers.

3) The Mother at Death is Mary, Mother of James and Joses, just like Jesus' mother (we'll explain the other names in following posts).

4) This Mary is the only one Identified as a Mother at Jesus' Death.

5) This Mary was also from Galilee.

6) This Mary was a Follower of Jesus fitting the Narrative in 2)

7) This Mary is described as caring for Jesus' needs, just like his real Mother.

Nexus, who are Jesus' Brothers?

Joseph

STORY, n.
A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

michael wellenberg · 03-06-2006, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

There are other indications in Mark that the writer of it knows the Temple is destroyed. Many of his citations of the OT involve violence occurring in the Temple, or the destruction of the Temple -- the famous cite in the Temple Ruckus marries one reference to the first Temple at Shiloh, destroyed, with a vision of a future Temple where all nations worship.

Further the writer of Mark probably knows Josephus' Wars -- Ted Weeden has uncovered 24 parallels between the trial scene before Pilate and the description of Jesus ben Ananias, building on the work of Craig Evans. Lawrence Wills (1997, p160) describes some of the parallels:

*he enters Jerusalem for a pilgrimage festival (Sukkot)
*he delivers an oracle against Jerusalem, the Temple, and the people
*he is seized by leading citizens
*he is beaten, later scouraged
*he offers no answer to interrogators
*he is taken by them to the Roman procurator
*he is considered a madman (exestokos; compare Mark 3:21 exeste, and also John 7:20)
*he prophesies his own death
*he dies

One should add, of course, that his name was "Jesus." Weeden says he thinks that the gospel dates from 85, at least.

Mark 13 is clearly meant to be read in conjuction with the Crucifixion, for which it functions as a typology.

Mark 13
Jesus Passion

Disciples before Councils
Jesus before Sanhedrin

Disciples beaten in Synagogues
Jesus beaten after Sanhedrin Trial

Disciples before Governors
Jesus before Pilate

Disciples brought to trial and "handed over"
Jesus on trial and "handed over"

Brother betrays brother
Judas betrays Jesus

Disciples hated in Jesus' name
Reaction to Jesus' claim to be the Blessed One.

If you put the Abomination of the Desolation in there, which follows immediately on this, it is a reference to Jesus' Crucifixion. See my blog entry on this (and don't miss the comments) for why this probably indicates that Mark was written after 130.

If the writer of Mark knows Josephus' bio, from which he might derive the Crucifixion scene of three men crucified together and one surviving, then that puts him after 110.

Another late dating datum -- the Gospel of Mark makes extensive use of the conventions of Hellenistic Romantic/Historical fiction -- city entrances, being taken for a divine being, portents while visiting the temple, suffering from jealous enemies, trials before the local potentate, crucifixions, resurrections, empty tombs, and many other aspects of Mark are conventional elements in Greek fiction of the 1-3 centuries. However, this really appears to have gotten going after the second half of the first century, and its heyday was the second and third centuries. Hence Mark belongs to the second century, most likely.

Several references to persecution in Mark also speak to a time long after the founding. So do the anti-Jewish polemics in Mark, which point to a time long after 40 and long after 75 as well.

Mark 13 is not based on a source -- it is vintage Markan style and structure.

BTW, Jesus opines that his followers will be hated for "my name's sake" in Mk 13. Early Christians did not refer to themselves by Jesus' name, but called themselves the Church of God or the Saints or the Elect. "Christian" came into use much later. So in fact, that datum specifically rules out your early date for Mark as well.

Not necessarily. For the writer of Mark could be writing much later than 47/8, since he need merely pick up the animus toward James in Paul's letters, OR he dislikes the disciples for reasons that have nothing to do with Pauline problems, but because he wants to teach a lesson to the faithful hearing his gospel.

Vorkosigan

I still cannot see anything in Mark´s ch. 13 that forces to assume a Markan knowledge of the siege and fall of Jerusalem and the temple. No mention of (the Jewish) revolt (13:7 vs Luke 21:9), no reference to besieging troops (cf. Luke 21:20) or to people being slain and captured (cf. Luke 21:24), and, to be noted, there is also no hint at the most outstanding feature of the events during the conquest of Jerusalem, namely the setting it on fire, related by Josephus.
So how are we to assume that Mark knew of what really happened (and knew of Josephus, at that) given his not recounting the most eminent detail, the burning of the temple ?

While I share Weeden´s notion that the attitude of Mark towards the disciples is mainly negative, I (not surprisingly) disagree with his dating Mark´s gospel after the fall of Jerusalem and with his substituting Mark´s real enemies by the disciples. In fact the latter issues are linked together. On the ground that Mark wrote after 70 Weeden is bound to regard the disciples as surrogates for Mark´s actual opponents.

Your reading of ch. 13 in connection with and as typology of the passion is very interesting, indeed. This would but mean, as far as I understand, that it is not to be called upon as a witness that Mark´s picture is that of an eye- or ear-witness of the Jewish war. Do you really take the desolating sacrilege to be the crucifixion ?

I hold for the moment to my notion that ch. 13 is an exhortation for Mark´s community to stand fast during the time of the absence of the Lord and not to become lethargic through a delay of the parousia (cf. 13:33-37). Mark´s picture of the tribulation (13:7-8, 14-20), obviously culminating in the destruction of the temple, does not mirror Mark´s present time nor does it resemble the events of the Jewish war, it is an apocalyptic scenario of the end time in the future.
This is the case with 13:9-13 as well. The confrontation with the synagogue, especially, is no witness at all for a late date. It precisely started at the moment when the post-Easter community began to proclaim that Jesus was the Messiah !
Though Mark does show experiences of denials (cf. 8:38) and persecution (cf. 10:39) his account mirrors a comparatively quiet period of the early Christianity. His community does not seem to live in constant fear and suffering. – so how can he write in view of the Jewish war ? – but rather seems to struggle with the absence of the Lord and their standing alone in the efforts to convince an unbelieving – but not a priori hostile – world of their faith.
But the delay of the parousia being vexing Mark admonishes his fellow believers to keep awake (not to sleep like the disciples did in Gethsemane) and to keep away from false prophets (in adressing the disciples he ironically mirrors them ; actually he is speaking to his community).

MW

michael wellenberg · 03-06-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Michael,

Just by way of comparison, I would date Mark chapter 13 to the 130's.

THE SYNOPTIC APOCALYPSE (MARK 13 PAR):
A DOCUMENT FROM THE TIME OF BAR KOCHBA by Hermann Detering

Jake

If ch. 13 be dated around 130 and Mark´s is a coherent opus of a piece, let me ask you one question, Jake : Did Mark deliberately (and with a tricky smile) shorten Matthew and Luke in order to be acclaimed as the earliest evangelist by 20th-century exegetes ? Or is it the other way round and Luke is to date around, say, 170 and Matthew after 200 ?

MW

michael wellenberg · 03-07-2006, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

BTW, Jesus opines that his followers will be hated for "my name's sake" in Mk 13. Early Christians did not refer to themselves by Jesus' name, but called themselves the Church of God or the Saints or the Elect. "Christian" came into use much later. So in fact, that datum specifically rules out your early date for Mark as well.

Vorkosigan

Not at all. Were early Christians not baptized, for instance, "on the name of Jesus" ? And, by the way : Mark´s extensive concern for the Baptist shows a very early stage reflecting his value and the importance and positive role of the disciples of John within the post-Easter community (cf. also 6:29 as indirect stroke against Jesus´disciples who did not bury their master !)

(short appendix to my former reply)

MW

Julian · 03-07-2006, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

I still cannot see anything in Mark´s ch. 13 that forces to assume a Markan knowledge of the siege and fall of Jerusalem and the temple. No mention of (the Jewish) revolt (13:7 vs Luke 21:9), no reference to besieging troops (cf. Luke 21:20)

Not entirely true if we look outside chapter 13. Here in Mark chapter 5 we read:

9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many.
10 And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.
11 Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
12 And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
13 And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.

I have bolded the word Legion, and other words of interest, which I believe is a reference to a Roman legion, specifically Legio X Fretensis. Legio X was one of the legions which occupied Jerusalem around 70. Fretensis comes from Fretum which in latin poetical meaning can mean the sea, i.e. the swine (people who eat pigs) are sent into the sea (Fretum -> Fretensis). Doesn't 2000 seem like a lot of swine? It does seem a reasonable size for about 1/3 of a legion, which frequently operated in sections. Maybe that is how many legion soldiers you can fit on the Mount of Olives. Just speculation, that last bit, of course...

From Wikipedia:

First Jewish War

X Fretensis was centrally involved in the first Jewish War (66–73), under the supreme command of Vespasian.

In 66, the X Fretensis and V Macedonica went to Alexandria for an invasion of Ethiopia planned by Nero. However, the two legions were needed in Iudaea to suppress a revolt. After spending the winter in Ptolemais Ace (modern Acre, Israel), X Fretensis and V Macedonica relocated in the coastal city of Caesarea Maritima (67/68). This was due to the large number of legions being mobilized in Ptolemais, under Marcus Ulpius Traianus, future governor of Syria and father of the emperor Trajan. During that same winter, the Caesarea camp of Xth and Vth hosted Vespasian, who was forced the following year, to go to Rome to seize power. Vespasian's son, Titus ended the suppression of the revolt.

When Tarichacae and Gamala were conquered, the X Fretensis moved to Scythopolis (modern Bet She'an), just west of Jordan River. In the summer of 68, X Fretensis destroyed the monastery of Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls are believed to have originated. Its winter camp was at Jericho.

By 70, the rebellion in all of Iudaea had been crushed, except for Jerusalem and a few fortresses, including Masada. In that year X Fretensis, in conjunction with V Macedonica, XII Fulminata, and XV Apollinaris, began the siege of Jerusalem, stronghold of the rebellion. The Xth camped on the Mount of Olives. During the siege, Legio X gained fame in the effective use of their various war machines. It was noted that they were able to hurl stones that weighted a talent (about 25 kg) a distance of two furlongs (400 m) or further. The projectiles of their ballistae caused heavy damage to the ramparts. The siege of Jerusalem lasted five months and the besieged population experienced all the terrible rigors of starvation. Finally, the combined assaults of the legions succeeded in taking the city, which was then subjected to destruction.

(Emphasis mine)

I cannot read that section of Mark as anything other than a clear reference to the occupation of Jerusalem.

Julian

Edited to add: As a further connection with the swine it must be mentioned that Legio X had a boar on its standard, a definite insult to the Jews to have that march into Jerusalem. Also, a legion were frequently broken down by cohorts to operate in different sizes. A group of three cohorts would be quite common. The first cohort was 800 men and the rest 600. So the first cohort along with two others would make 2000 men. Strange coincidence, don't you think? Frankly, I have seen modern pig farms that didn't have 2000 swine on them and we are to believe that a herd of 2000 swine are wandering the Decapolis? Sure, I can see swine in that region but not in that number, it is completely unbelievable. Mark picked that number for a reason, what might it have been?

JoeWallack · 03-07-2006, 08:09 AM

He Ain't The Heavy, He's My Brother

JW:
Continuing:

Who were Jesus' Brothers?: (NIV)

6:
"Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him.
Footnotes:
1. Mark 6:3 Greek Joses, a variant of Joseph"

"6.3 τ�*κτων, ὁ υἱός {A}
All uncials, many minuscules, and important early versions read, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary …?” Objection was very early felt to this description of Jesus as carpenter,1 and several witnesses (including P45) assimilate the text to Mt 13.55 and read, “Is not this the son of the carpenter, the son of Mary …?” The Palestinian Syriac achieves the same result by omitting ὁ τ�*κτων.

6.3 καὶ Ἰωσῆτος {B}
The combination of Alexandrian and Western witnesses, along with Θ f 13 33 565 700 al, provides considerable support for the reading Ἰωσῆτος. Codex Sinaiticus and several other witnesses have assimilated the name to Ἰωσήφ in Mt 13.55. According to Lagrange (commentary in loc.), the name Ἰωσῆ (A C W f 1 al) is a transcription of *יוסי‬, the Galilean form of *יוסף‬."

Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. 1994. A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) . United Bible Societies: London; New York

Matthew:
13:
53 "When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him.
But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor."
58And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith."

"13.55 Ἰωσήφ {B}
The name Ἰωσῆς (or Ἰωσῆ), which represents the Galilean pronunciation (*יוֹסֵי‬) of the correct Hebrew (*יוֹסֵף‬), appears to be an intrusion from Mk 6.3 into the text of Matthew. The substitution of Ἰωάννης is the result of scribal inadvertence, arising from the frequency elsewhere of references to James and John, the sons of Zebedee. The reading Ἰωάννης καὶ Ἰωσῆς is a manifest conflation, farthest removed from the original."

Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. 1994. A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) . United Bible Societies: London; New York

Luke:
" "

JW:
X-Uh-Jesus:
Per "Mark" Jesus had Four Brothers, James, Joseph, Judas and Simon. Considering potential Contrivance/Creation of Names here, other than Jesus, Simon and Judas probably are the two most important characters in "Mark", followed by James and John. So three of the Names match up. Regarding the lack of a Brother "John", if "Mark" contrived names here in part to diss known historical leaders of Christianity it makes sense to pick on Peter and James and not John since John was not a known Christian leader at the time. Regarding "Joseph" as a brother, this could be Contrived in placing "Joseph" everywhere except as Jesus' father and also be a reminder of the Jewish Bible Joseph and his Brothers. Especially keep in mind that "Judas" is the Hebrew "Judah" with the Possible Figurative significance of Jesus' fellow Jews and another link to the Joseph story.

Now let's review "Mark's" Jesus' General comments about Brothers:

3:
30 "He said this because they were saying, "He has an evil spirit."
31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."
33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

6:
14 "King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying,[c] "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him."
15Others said, "He is Elijah."
And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago."
16 But when Herod heard this, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!"
17 For Herod himself had given orders to have John arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, whom he had married. 18For John had been saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But she was not able to, 20because Herod feared John and protected him, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled[d]; yet he liked to listen to him."

10:
29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first."

12:
18 "Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19"Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrection[c] whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?"
24Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'[d]? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!"

13:
12 "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 13All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved."

JW:
Now let's look at specific names:

1) Simon -

1:
16 "As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men."

Simon is the first Disciple named and identified as a Brother. Compare to:

10:
28 "Peter said to him, "We have left everything to follow you!"
29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first."

"many who are first will be last". And so "Simon" is the last brother of "Mark's" Jesus. Note that "Matthew" changed the order to "Judas" being the last brother. "Mark" was written to diss Simon and "Matthew" was written to diss "Judah". Note that the soul purpose of "Andrew" in "Mark" seems to be to be able to identify Simon" as a Brother.

3:
13 "Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. 14He appointed twelve—designating them apostles[b]—that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15and to have authority to drive out demons. 16These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter 17James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder 18Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot 19and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him."

"Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter". Even "Simon's" name is Replaced. And right after the Real Mothers and Brothers story:

4:
16 "Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away."

We all seem to agree here that this refers to Peter/Rocky. So if someone like Simon who is shown by Narrative as the First and is shown by Narrative to Fall away than they would need to be Replaced. A theme Jesus keeps Harping.

14:
3 "While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head."

Jesus is once again in the Home of a Simon but this time it's Simon who is "sick" and Jesus doesn't/can't make any effort to heal him. And right before...

14:
37 "Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."

and so during Jesus' Grouching Jesus' Replaces Peter's name with "Simon".

15:
21 "A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross."

And now, after Simon Peter Fails to keep Watch and Falls into Temptation, as prophesied, he is Replaced by Simon who, unlike Simon, is able to carry Jesus' cross and Follow him.

Mark:
15:
38 "The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and[d] saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son[e] of God!"
40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. 41In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there."

Matthew 27:
54 "When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son[e] of God!"
55 Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons."

Luke 23:
47 "The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, "Surely this was a righteous man." 48When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things."

And now the Mother Mary is only the Mother of James and Joseph since Judas and Simon have been Lost ("It would have been better for that man if he had not been born").

Let he who has Ears See.

So in summary we have the following evidence that "Mark" Created a "Simon" at The End to illustrate his Replacement Theme:

1) In the previous posts we saw good evidence that "Mark" did the same thing with Jesus' Father and Mother.

2) "Mark's" Jesus Explicitly identifies by Narrative illustration the Replacement of Jesus' Brothers with Followers.

3) "Mark" lists Simon as the last Brother of Jesus and has Jesus in Narrative respond to Simon's Cheekiness, who was the first Follower of Jesus, that the First shall be Last.

4) "Mark" has other Brother/Replacement stories with Herod and Levirite marriage.

5) "Mark's" Jesus gives an important teaching about leaving your Brothers for Jesus.

6) "Mark's" Jesus predicts that Brother will betray Brother.

7) Simon is the First Disciple and Identified as a Brother.

8) Jesus Replaces Simon's Name with "Peter".

9) Jesus uses Simon's Replacement name, Peter, to make a pun predicting Simon's failure (and need for Replacement).

10) Before The Passion a "Simon the leper" is referred to.

11) At Peter's hour of failure Jesus changes his name back to "Simon".

12) After Simon's Failure he is Replaced by Simon of Cyrene who carries Jesus' cross.

13) Witness Mother Mary at the crucifixion is no longer the Mother of Simon.

A virtual Zeppelin of reasons.

Nexus, the Replacement of Jesus other Brothers...

Joseph

STORY, n.
A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

michael wellenberg · 03-07-2006, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Not entirely true if we look outside chapter 13. Here in Mark chapter 5 we read:

9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many.
10 And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.
11 Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
12 And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
13 And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.

I have bolded the word Legion, and other words of interest, which I believe is a reference to a Roman legion, specifically Legio X Fretensis. Legio X was one of the legions which occupied Jerusalem around 70. Fretensis comes from Fretum which in latin poetical meaning can mean the sea, i.e. the swine (people who eat pigs) are sent into the sea (Fretum -> Fretensis). Doesn't 2000 seem like a lot of swine? It does seem a reasonable size for about 1/3 of a legion, which frequently operated in sections. Maybe that is how many legion soldiers you can fit on the Mount of Olives. Just speculation, that last bit, of course...

I cannot read that section of Mark as anything other than a clear reference to the occupation of Jerusalem.

Julian

Edited to add: As a further connection with the swine it must be mentioned that Legio X had a boar on its standard, a definite insult to the Jews to have that march into Jerusalem. Also, a legion were frequently broken down by cohorts to operate in different sizes. A group of three cohorts would be quite common. The first cohort was 800 men and the rest 600. So the first cohort along with two others would make 2000 men. Strange coincidence, don't you think? Frankly, I have seen modern pig farms that didn't have 2000 swine on them and we are to believe that a herd of 2000 swine are wandering the Decapolis? Sure, I can see swine in that region but not in that number, it is completely unbelievable. Mark picked that number for a reason, what might it have been?

The story of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20) does seem to have a connection with ch. 13.
In the former Mark defends, in form of a parable, Jesus´ being the Messiah against the challenging question : If Jesus was the Messiah, why is the Holy Land still occupied and suppressed by the pagan Romans ?
Mark´s answer is : It was by Jesus´ permission that the troops remained because no foreign forces could exist in the Messiah´s presence lest he gave them leave to stay.
So Jesus gave the demons (= Romans) leave to remain in the country afflicting the swine (= the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles) and being drowned in the sea (cf. the troops of Pharaoh during the Exodus).
By 5:1-20 Mark both explains the ongoing presence of the Romans in Palestine after the Christ had come, and threatens those who reject Jesus as the Messiah.
In ch. 13 there is also a threat, this time not as a parable but straightforward, and aimed at Jerusalem and the temple hierarchy who has failed to accept and welcome Jesus as the Messiah.
Both stories have in common that Mark is threatening, but since the Romans were still occupying the country as Mark is aware, the threat to them is as unfulfilled as is the threat to Jerusalem when Mark writes ! The temple still stands, and the hierarchy is still in hold of the power.
So precisely the connection of the two passages is one clue that for Mark the fall of the temple will hopefully become reality only in the future.

MW

Julian · 03-08-2006, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

The story of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20) does seem to have a connection with ch. 13.
In the former Mark defends, in form of a parable, Jesus´ being the Messiah against the challenging question : If Jesus was the Messiah, why is the Holy Land still occupied and suppressed by the pagan Romans ?
Mark´s answer is : It was by Jesus´ permission that the troops remained because no foreign forces could exist in the Messiah´s presence lest he gave them leave to stay.
So Jesus gave the demons (= Romans) leave to remain in the country afflicting the swine (= the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles) and being drowned in the sea (cf. the troops of Pharaoh during the Exodus).
By 5:1-20 Mark both explains the ongoing presence of the Romans in Palestine after the Christ had come, and threatens those who reject Jesus as the Messiah.
In ch. 13 there is also a threat, this time not as a parable but straightforward, and aimed at Jerusalem and the temple hierarchy who has failed to accept and welcome Jesus as the Messiah.
Both stories have in common that Mark is threatening, but since the Romans were still occupying the country as Mark is aware, the threat to them is as unfulfilled as is the threat to Jerusalem when Mark writes ! The temple still stands, and the hierarchy is still in hold of the power.
So precisely the connection of the two passages is one clue that for Mark the fall of the temple will hopefully become reality only in the future.

MW

Well, you're cutting it awfully close, timewise. Legio X didn't move into Judea until 67/68 and didn't have any connection to Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives until 70. Wouldn't it be much simpler to simply put the whole thing after 70? It seems far more parsimonious to me.

Julian

Julian · 03-08-2006, 07:27 AM

Taking a look at Michael Turton's pages ( http://users2.ev1.net/%7Eturton/GMark/GMark05.html ), I found this very helpful paragraph:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Turton (Vorkosigan)

Many New Testament scholars see a reference to a Roman legion occupying Palestine, either Legio 1 Italica, which had as its legionary standard a boar and was in the east in around 67, or more likely Legio X Fretensis, which had among its standards a bull, a tireme, a dolphin, and a boar, and was responsible for occupying Jerusalem after the Jewish War (ended 70 CE), staying into the fourth century. After 70 it was stationed in Gerasa for a while (Winter 1974, p180-181). Against this interpretation is the fact that Gerasa is in Gentile rather than Jewish territory, where the legion would not have been viewed so negatively (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p166). However, in the second century Legio X was made the sole occupying legion of "Syria Palestina" (Hadrian's abusive name for the Jewish homeland), so a later date for Mark might be indicated. In addition to the symbol of the pig itself, Myers (1988, p191) points out that this pericope is saturated with military terminology. The term agele that the writer uses for a "herd" of pigs is often used to denote a gaggle of new recruits for the military, the Greek term epetrepsen ("he dismissed them") echoes a military command, and the pigs' charge (ormesen) into the lake sounds like a military attack.

(Emphasis mine)

It simply makes more sense to put this after 70, Mark has far too much knowledge to simply be predicting or hoping.

Julian

JoeWallack · 03-08-2006, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

The story of the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20) does seem to have a connection with ch. 13.
In the former Mark defends, in form of a parable, Jesus´ being the Messiah against the challenging question : If Jesus was the Messiah, why is the Holy Land still occupied and suppressed by the pagan Romans ?
Mark´s answer is : It was by Jesus´ permission that the troops remained because no foreign forces could exist in the Messiah´s presence lest he gave them leave to stay.
So Jesus gave the demons (= Romans) leave to remain in the country afflicting the swine (= the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles) and being drowned in the sea (cf. the troops of Pharaoh during the Exodus).
By 5:1-20 Mark both explains the ongoing presence of the Romans in Palestine after the Christ had come, and threatens those who reject Jesus as the Messiah.
In ch. 13 there is also a threat, this time not as a parable but straightforward, and aimed at Jerusalem and the temple hierarchy who has failed to accept and welcome Jesus as the Messiah.
Both stories have in common that Mark is threatening, but since the Romans were still occupying the country as Mark is aware, the threat to them is as unfulfilled as is the threat to Jerusalem when Mark writes ! The temple still stands, and the hierarchy is still in hold of the power.
So precisely the connection of the two passages is one clue that for Mark the fall of the temple will hopefully become reality only in the future.

MW

JW:
As the German spy from the classic Laugh-In used to say, "Vehhy interesting." But...

Hey I've got a radical idea, let's go to Josephus and take a look for ourselves:

http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/war-4.htm

"4. And now Vespasian sent Placidus against those that had fled from Gadara, with five hundred horsemen, and three thousand footmen, while he returned himself to Cesarea, with the rest of the army. But as soon as these fugitives saw the horsemen that pursued them just upon their backs, and before they came to a close fight, they ran together to a certain village, which was called Bethennabris, where finding a great multitude of young men, and arming them, partly by their own consent, partly by force, they rashly and suddenly assaulted Placidus and the troops that were with him. These horsemen at the first onset gave way a little, as contriving to entice them further off the wall; and when they had drawn them into a place fit for their purpose, they made their horse encompass them round, and threw their darts at them. So the horsemen cut off the flight of the fugitives, while the foot terribly destroyed those that fought against them; for those Jews did no more than show their courage, and then were destroyed; for as they fell upon the Romans when they were joined close together, and, as it were, walled about with their entire armor, they were not able to find any place where the darts could enter, nor were they any way able to break their ranks, while they were themselves run through by the Roman darts, and, like the wildest of wild beasts, rushed upon the point of others' swords; so some of them were destroyed, as cut with their enemies' swords upon their faces, and others were dispersed by the horsemen.

5. Now Placidus's concern was to exclude them in their flight from getting into the village; and causing his horse to march continually on that side of them, he then turned short upon them, and at the same time his men made use of their darts, and easily took their aim at those that were the nearest to them, as they made those that were further off turn back by the terror they were in, till at last the most courageous of them brake through those horsemen and fled to the wall of the village. And now those that guarded the wall were in great doubt what to do; for they could not bear the thoughts of excluding those that came from Gadara, because of their own people that were among them; and yet, if they should admit them, they expected to perish with them, which came to pass accordingly; for as they were crowding together at the wall, the Roman horsemen were just ready to fall in with them. However, the guards prevented them, and shut the gates, when Placidus made an assault upon them, and fighting courageously till it was dark, he got possession of the wall, and of the people that were in the city, when the useless multitude were destroyed; but those that were more potent ran away, and the soldiers plundered the houses, and set the village on fire. As for those that ran out of the village, they stirred up such as were in the country, and exaggerating their own calamities, and telling them that the whole army of the Romans were upon them, they put them into great fear on every side; so they got in great numbers together, and fled to Jericho, for they knew no other place that could afford them any hope of escaping, it being a city that had a strong wall, and a great multitude of inhabitants. But Placidus, relying much upon his horsemen, and his former good success, followed them, and slew all that he overtook, as far as Jordan; and when he had driven the whole multitude to the river-side, where they were stopped by the current, (for it had been augmented lately by rains, and was not fordable,) he put his soldiers in array over against them; so the necessity the others were in provoked them to hazard a battle, because there was no place whither they could flee. They then extended themselves a very great way along the banks of the river, and sustained the darts that were thrown at them, as well as the attacks of the horsemen, who beat many of them, and pushed them into the current. At which fight, hand to hand, fifteen thousand of them were slain, while the number of those that were unwillingly forced to leap into Jordan was prodigious. There were besides two thousand and two hundred taken prisoners. A mighty prey was taken also, consisting of asses, and sheep, and camels, and oxen."

JW:
Sow (pun intended), the 2,000 reference would appear to be from the 2,200 prisoners and not the rebels who rushed into the holy sea. Still, interesting parallels here. In the words of Arty Johnson, I find "vehhhy interesting" Mark 5: (KJV)

8 "For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit.
9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many.
10 And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.
11 Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding.
12 And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.
13 And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand and were choked in the sea.
14 And they that fed the swine fled, and told it in the city, and in the country. And they went out to see what it was that was done.
15 And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid."

"Legion" refers to the Roman soldiers? The Roman soldiers are the unclean pigs that the Messiah will cast out of the country?

It is easy for me to picture TNG Christians who knew who the author of "Mark" was and that the "Gospel" was in part based on this type of copying who had the following conversation:

Flavius Flounder:
When my descendents find out that "Mark" wasn't written by anyone who knew Jesus they'll kill me.

Senator Bluto:
Hey, we'll just tell em that we left the signed original outside the Church one night and when we woke up the next morning, it was gone. We'll report it to the Congregation as missing and insure that we know who the real author was from Church Tradition.

Falvius Flounder:
Do you think that'll work?

Senator Bluto:
Hey, it's got to work better than the truth.

JW:
Personally, I don't think even "Mark's" Jesus had the power to enable "Mark" to read Josephus here before it was written. That would require a Force even more powerful than Jesus, Stephen Spielberg, to send "Mark" back to the Future.

Now Mr. Wellenberg, I wonder if you would be so kind as to opine on the Key question of this Thread and one that could effect the entire future of Christianity in the Free World. Does "Mark" have an Implication as the young liberal Christian here, Ben Smith, thinks, that despite all the Negative press, in The End, as the German terrorist Hans said in the classic Die Hard, "This time John (Wayne) writes off into the Sonset with Grace (Kelly)." or in understandable language, are "Mark's" The Disciples reunited with and rehabilitated by Jesus? Or, as I think, are "Mark's" The Disciples, in the words of Lilly Von Schtupp, in the classic, Blazing Saddles, "Fehbludgoned, Fehrsmeckled, Fuhcocked!"

Joseph

PLAGIARIZE, v.
To take the thought or style of another writer whom one has never, never read.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

03-05-2006, 06:11 PM	#161
JoeWallack Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Nazareth Posts: 2,357	Mary Had A Little Lamb The More The Maryier JW: Now let's see how "Mark" honors Jesus' Mother: (NIV) 3: 30 "He said this because they were saying, "He has an evil spirit." 31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you." 33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. 34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." Matthew 12: "And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation." 46While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."[g] 48He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." Luke 8 18 "Therefore consider carefully how you listen. Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has will be taken from him." 19 Now Jesus' mother and brothers came to see him, but they were not able to get near him because of the crowd. 20Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to see you." 21 He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." JW: X-Uh-Jesus: "Mark" had just given a story of Jesus being accused of having an Evil spirit. In a continuous flow "Mark's" Jesus' Mother and Brothers come to Jesus as Outsiders and interrupt his teaching, presumably because they have a problem with it. This Jesus Explicitly identifies those listening to him as his Mother and Brothers (Replacement). "Matthew" tones this down by leading in with a universal comment (to avoid the Implication that Jesus own family thought he had an Evil spirit as well). "Luke" completely exorcises the Evil spirit lead in. The rhetorical question is dropped as is the identification of the listeners as the Mothers and Brothers. So we see the gradual lessening/removal of "Mark's" theme of Insiders replaced by Outsiders for the same Role (here Mother and Brothers). Understand Dear Reader? Mark: 6: "Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him. Footnotes: 1. Mark 6:3 Greek Joses, a variant of Joseph" Matthew: 53 "When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor." 58And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith." Luke: " " JW: X-Uh-Jesus: Here "Mary" is named and is identified as the mother of James and Joses (Joseph). "Matthew" makes "The Carpenter" Jesus' father instead of Jesus. He also changes the identification of the Family because in "Mark" they hadn't been properly introduced. "Luke" exorcises the entire story which is especially ridiculous when you have a Virgin Birth story and Bar Mitzvah story earlier in your Gospel. Mark: 15: 38 "The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and[d] saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son[e] of God!" 40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. 41In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there." Matthew 27: 54 "When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son[e] of God!" 55 Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons." Luke 23: 47 "The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, "Surely this was a righteous man." 48When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things." JW: X-Uh-Jesus: At Jesus' Death there is a Mary, Mother of James and Joses. Especially note that of the three woman identified, only this woman is identified as a Mother. And, so Mary, Mother of James and Joses, was there at Jesus' death just as Mary, Mother of James and Joses, was there at Jesus' birth. Note that this Mary, Mother of James and Joses, from Galilee, and presumably the Type of follower identifed in 3:34, cared for Jesus' needs, Same as the other Mary, Mother of James and Joses from Galilee. "Matthew" adds another mother to the descriptions. "Luke", true to Form, drops almost all of these connections. So in summary we have the following evidence that "Mark" Created a "Mary" at The End to illustrate his Replacement Theme: 1) In the previous post we saw good evidence that "Mark" did the same thing with Jesus' father. 2) "Mark's" Jesus Explicitly identifies by Narrative illustration the Replacement of Jesus' Mother with Followers. 3) The Mother at Death is Mary, Mother of James and Joses, just like Jesus' mother (we'll explain the other names in following posts). 4) This Mary is the only one Identified as a Mother at Jesus' Death. 5) This Mary was also from Galilee. 6) This Mary was a Follower of Jesus fitting the Narrative in 2) 7) This Mary is described as caring for Jesus' needs, just like his real Mother. Nexus, who are Jesus' Brothers? Joseph STORY, n. A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached. http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

03-07-2006, 08:09 AM	#166
JoeWallack Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Nazareth Posts: 2,357	The "Mark's" Brothers He Ain't The Heavy, He's My Brother JW: Continuing: Who were Jesus' Brothers?: (NIV) 6: "Where did this man get these things?" they asked. "What's this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn't this the carpenter? Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren't his sisters here with us?" And they took offense at him. Footnotes: 1. Mark 6:3 Greek Joses, a variant of Joseph" "6.3 τ�κτων, ὁ υἱός {A} All uncials, many minuscules, and important early versions read, “Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary …?” Objection was very early felt to this description of Jesus as carpenter,1 and several witnesses (including P45) assimilate the text to Mt 13.55 and read, “Is not this the son of the carpenter, the son of Mary …?” The Palestinian Syriac achieves the same result by omitting ὁ τ�κτων. 6.3 καὶ Ἰωσῆτος {B} The combination of Alexandrian and Western witnesses, along with Θ f 13 33 565 700 al, provides considerable support for the reading Ἰωσῆτος. Codex Sinaiticus and several other witnesses have assimilated the name to Ἰωσήφ in Mt 13.55. According to Lagrange (commentary in loc.), the name Ἰωσῆ (A C W f 1 al) is a transcription of יוסי‬, the Galilean form of יוסף‬." Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. 1994. A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) . United Bible Societies: London; New York Matthew: 13: 53 "When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55"Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor." 58And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith." "13.55 Ἰωσήφ {B} The name Ἰωσῆς (or Ἰωσῆ), which represents the Galilean pronunciation (יוֹסֵי‬) of the correct Hebrew (יוֹסֵף‬), appears to be an intrusion from Mk 6.3 into the text of Matthew. The substitution of Ἰωάννης is the result of scribal inadvertence, arising from the frequency elsewhere of references to James and John, the sons of Zebedee. The reading Ἰωάννης καὶ Ἰωσῆς is a manifest conflation, farthest removed from the original." Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. 1994. A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) . United Bible Societies: London; New York Luke: " " JW: X-Uh-Jesus: Per "Mark" Jesus had Four Brothers, James, Joseph, Judas and Simon. Considering potential Contrivance/Creation of Names here, other than Jesus, Simon and Judas probably are the two most important characters in "Mark", followed by James and John. So three of the Names match up. Regarding the lack of a Brother "John", if "Mark" contrived names here in part to diss known historical leaders of Christianity it makes sense to pick on Peter and James and not John since John was not a known Christian leader at the time. Regarding "Joseph" as a brother, this could be Contrived in placing "Joseph" everywhere except as Jesus' father and also be a reminder of the Jewish Bible Joseph and his Brothers. Especially keep in mind that "Judas" is the Hebrew "Judah" with the Possible Figurative significance of Jesus' fellow Jews and another link to the Joseph story. Now let's review "Mark's" Jesus' General comments about Brothers: 3: 30 "He said this because they were saying, "He has an evil spirit." 31 Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him. 32A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you." 33 "Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked. 34 Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! 35Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." 6: 14 "King Herod heard about this, for Jesus' name had become well known. Some were saying,[c] "John the Baptist has been raised from the dead, and that is why miraculous powers are at work in him." 15Others said, "He is Elijah." And still others claimed, "He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of long ago." 16 But when Herod heard this, he said, "John, the man I beheaded, has been raised from the dead!" 17 For Herod himself had given orders to have John arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, whom he had married. 18For John had been saying to Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But she was not able to, 20because Herod feared John and protected him, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled[d]; yet he liked to listen to him." 10: 29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first." 12: 18 "Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 19"Teacher," they said, "Moses wrote for us that if a man's brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. 20Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. 21The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. 22In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too. 23At the resurrection[c] whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?" 24Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 26Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'[d]? 27He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!" 13: 12 "Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 13All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." JW: Now let's look at specific names: 1) Simon - 1: 16 "As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. 17"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." Simon is the first Disciple named and identified as a Brother. Compare to: 10: 28 "Peter said to him, "We have left everything to follow you!" 29 "I tell you the truth," Jesus replied, "no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel 30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life. 31But many who are first will be last, and the last first." "many who are first will be last". And so "Simon" is the last brother of "Mark's" Jesus. Note that "Matthew" changed the order to "Judas" being the last brother. "Mark" was written to diss Simon and "Matthew" was written to diss "Judah". Note that the soul purpose of "Andrew" in "Mark" seems to be to be able to identify Simon" as a Brother. 3: 13 "Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. 14He appointed twelve—designating them apostles[b]—that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15and to have authority to drive out demons. 16These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter 17James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder 18Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot 19and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him." "Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter". Even "Simon's" name is Replaced. And right after the Real Mothers and Brothers story: 4: 16 "Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away." We all seem to agree here that this refers to Peter/Rocky. So if someone like Simon who is shown by Narrative as the First and is shown by Narrative to Fall away than they would need to be Replaced. A theme Jesus keeps Harping. 14: 3 "While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head." Jesus is once again in the Home of a Simon but this time it's Simon who is "sick" and Jesus doesn't/can't make any effort to heal him. And right before... 14: 37 "Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak." and so during Jesus' Grouching Jesus' Replaces Peter's name with "Simon". 15: 21 "A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross." And now, after Simon Peter Fails to keep Watch and Falls into Temptation, as prophesied, he is Replaced by Simon who, unlike Simon, is able to carry Jesus' cross and Follow him. Mark: 15: 38 "The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and[d] saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son[e] of God!" 40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome. 41In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there." Matthew 27: 54 "When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son[e] of God!" 55 Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons." Luke 23: 47 "The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, "Surely this was a righteous man." 48When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things." And now the Mother Mary is only the Mother of James and Joseph since Judas and Simon have been Lost ("It would have been better for that man if he had not been born"). Let he who has Ears See. So in summary we have the following evidence that "Mark" Created a "Simon" at The End to illustrate his Replacement Theme: 1) In the previous posts we saw good evidence that "Mark" did the same thing with Jesus' Father and Mother. 2) "Mark's" Jesus Explicitly identifies by Narrative illustration the Replacement of Jesus' Brothers with Followers. 3) "Mark" lists Simon as the last Brother of Jesus and has Jesus in Narrative respond to Simon's Cheekiness, who was the first Follower of Jesus, that the First shall be Last. 4) "Mark" has other Brother/Replacement stories with Herod and Levirite marriage. 5) "Mark's" Jesus gives an important teaching about leaving your Brothers for Jesus. 6) "Mark's" Jesus predicts that Brother will betray Brother. 7) Simon is the First Disciple and Identified as a Brother. 8) Jesus Replaces Simon's Name with "Peter". 9) Jesus uses Simon's Replacement name, Peter, to make a pun predicting Simon's failure (and need for Replacement). 10) Before The Passion a "Simon the leper" is referred to. 11) At Peter's hour of failure Jesus changes his name back to "Simon". 12) After Simon's Failure he is Replaced by Simon of Cyrene who carries Jesus' cross. 13) Witness Mother Mary at the crucifixion is no longer the Mother of Simon. A virtual Zeppelin of reasons. Nexus, the Replacement of Jesus other Brothers... Joseph STORY, n. A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached. http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.