Toto

Nice misdirection. Obviously, I am responding to your confusion over the the term "Hasidic," referring to a first century branch of the Pharisees, not to be confused with the later European sect.

Jesus and the Hasidim (online article by Shmuel Safrai) contains references to primary sources:

Find "Father-Son Relationship" - the section is a little too long to copy and paste here. It distinguishes between most Rabbinic literature in which God is referred to as "our" father, but not in direct supplication, and Hasidic usage in the Seder Eliyahu:

Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels by Geza Vermes

The Jews in the Time of Jesus: An Introduction by Stephen M. Wylen

Evangelion

What a peculiarly nonsensical comment.

Of course there's no evidence that the Gospels were used as preaching tools while Mark was writing (and since his was the first, it would be impossible anyway!) But that is not what was claimed in the first place.

Dissemination of the Gospels (and epistles) didn't really kick off until (a) they were all finished and (b) the apostolic preaching campaign got into full swing. This took time to develop. So please, keep your pointless objections to yourself in future.

And yes, we do indeed have evidence that they were being disseminated as preaching tools.

Thus:

Steven Carr

Best to look at what you did claim in the first place.

So you claimed Mark wrote so that the texts could be used for preaching to a mixed audience, and now you claim that it was impossible for Mark's Gospel to have been used as a preaching tool....

As for your proof-texting, you seem to have totally forgotten to produce any evidence that the Gospels were used for preaching to non-Christians.


So I'll give you another chance of answering the question about why Mark translated 'Abba'.

If it was widely known by Christians what Abba meant, why did Mark bother translating it?

If you want to go the 'Mark was writing to a mixed audience' route, please produce evidence that Mark intended his Gospel to be read by non-Christians.

Layman

Toto, I appreciate the explanation about Hasidism, but you have provided no primary evidence that the use of "Abba" was common for them during the time of Jesus. Nor has anyone done anything other than tell me about Vermes book. I have tracked down some of his citations, apparently the more important ones, and find them inadequate to his task. Indeed, two of the three appear to support the idea that this kind of address was not common.

Toto

I suppose you argue that the Seder Eliyahu is too late? Do you think that the Hasidim suddenly started addressing YHWH as Abba in the third century, after not doing so in the first?

Layman

This is rich. From someone who is (at least) sympathetic to the Jesus Myth idea that Christians just "suddenly" started believing in a historical Jesus in the early second century when they didn't in the first century. Now you find it ridiculous that I do not equate third century sources with first century ones?

And judging from the article you cite, the author is arguing that the reference to God as "abba" was distinctive and even criticized by the broader Jewish community. Why you think this helps you is not so clear.

And just so you know, I generally do not scoure entire secondary sources to find the nuggets you think are important. If you have specific references, please point me to them.

Toto

Who thinks that 2nd century Christians suddenly started believing in a historic Jesus? I'm sure that there was an evolution, but we have lost the intermediate steps.

On the other hand, how do you explain references to Abba in the earliest surviving Hasidim literature? What would have prompted them to adopt this usage if they had not done it in previous centuries?

The article shows that the idea of God/YHWH as father was common in Judaism, with many references to God as "our father." The author says that references to God as "my" father was unique to the Hasidim. I do not see this as an unbridgeable gap

I did not find a reference in this article to criticism of the Haredim for being overly familiar in addressing God - I think there was a reference in another source, but it was a secondary source.

Always happy to.

Layman

Right, but there was no evolution for Hasidim? We must assume that everything written by/about them in the third century is exactly what they believed/did in the first? And just how widespread were they? What are their earlier writings? If there are none, why not?

Your reply to my response defeats your own initial contention.

If their earliest literature is the third century, why would I assume anything they did in the first century? So Luke must have written Luke/Acts because second-century Christians said he did? Afterall, they wouldn't have just suddenly invented that in the third century. It must be the same as if they wrote such claims in the first century!

Quite the hypocritical stance you are taking here. You'd never let a Christian get away with this.

As we've seen, you have not supplied any evidence that Hasidim did this in the first century. But even if it did, it highlights how uncommon such references were. Even if there is no "unbridgeable gap," the fact remains that the only evidence we've seen of that gap being bridged in the first centuryw as by Jesus or Christians imitating him.

I'm ready whenver you are. So far you've given me a third-century reference.

Toto

Jewish writings from the first century did not survive well, for various reasons (war, degradation, etc.) But the earliest references to Hasidim are the stories of Honi the circle drawer, first century B.C.E., who we know about from Josephus (whose works were preserved by Christians for their own reasons), and from the Mishnah. Honi's reported statements are consistent with someone who would address God as Abba. There is no particular reason to see this practice as having evolved from something else.

That's about as far as the evidence goes. As else is speculation, as is your idea that Paul's letters can be read as evidence that Jesus spoke the words "Abba, Father" or some variation thereof.

Steven Carr

That is not what Layman was claiming.

It is Layman's contention that Paul was claiming that Jesus , while on Earth, prayed, not merely spoke, 'Abba'.

Paul seems to me to claim that it was the Holy Spirit, not a physical Jesus, that enabled Christians to cry out 'Abba'.