Toto

My bad. I neglected to warn Tommy about the futility of responding to Chili posts.

Chili

Pardon me. Don't you like it?

Bingo the Clown-O

The author of the Didache was also unaware of the “shedding of blood for the remission of Sins” motif.

angelo

Wasn't all this "shedding of blood" for the world an excuse, a cover up of the legend of why this dude was killed? There had to be a reason why the "messiah" was killed before he had the chance to liberate the Jews from the Roman yoke. The Jews expected god to intervene on their behalf like he did on numerous occasions in the O/T.
That they jumped on some legend or hearsay about someone killed by the Romans as their long awaited messiah is like starving hyenas fighting over a carcass.

aa5874

The Jews had nothing whatsoever do with the Jesus story in the short gMark and the Entire NT.

The Jesus story was a fabrication, an invention, that Non-Jews Believed sometime in the 2nd century.

An Anonymous story that the Jews killed the Son of God was circulated and Non-Jews accepted it as true.

Up to 150 CE or later the Jews did NOT acknowledge any character called Jesus who was a Messianic ruler and worshed as a Son of God.

The expectation of an actual Jewish Messianic ruler by the Jews was predicted to be c 70 CE but it never did happen. Vespasian was then believed to be the prophesied Messianic ruler found in Hebrew Scripture.

See Wars of the Jews 6.5.4, Tacitus' Histories 5 and Suetonius' Life of Vespasian.

aa5874

It is extremely easy to deduce that all books and Epistles in the Canon were composed AFTER the short gMark story of Jesus.

In the short gMark, not even the chosen disciples understood what Jesus taught.

Mark 4Mark 4 So, publicly, in gMark, the teachings of Jesus were NOT known to the Jews or the outsiders.

Jesus gave PRIVATE explanations for his teachings ONLY to his disciples when he was ALONE with them.

Now, when Jesus was ALONE with his disciples he explained that he did NOT want the outsiders to be converted but to REMAIN IN SIN--See Mark 4.12

It is clear that the author of the short gMark did NOT know of the Later Gospels and the Pauline letters.

The author of the short gMark did NOT know of a Jesus who was sacrificied for the Remission of Sins of the Jews and Gentiles.

In the Later gJohn, the Jesus character claimed he and God was One and that he would give his life for Remission of Sins.

John 10:30 KJV No such claim is in the short gMark. The Jesus of the short gMark is NOT described as the Logos or equal to God.

However, the Pauline writer would make a similar claim as the Later gJohn.

Philippians 2 The teaching in the Jesus cult that Jesus was God was a LATE invention, and based on Hippolytus was developed some time in the late 2nd century by Callistus.

Refutation of All Heresies 9 gJohn and the Pauline letters are Late inventions of the Jesus story.

Onias

This sounds very similar to the theory espoused by Joe Atwell in Caesar's Messiah at http://www.caesarsmessiah.com/
a theory that certainly has many insightful points.

aa5874

I am really interested in the writings of antiquity. It is the "witnesses" of antiquity that are most significant.

Now, the short gMark is extremely easy to understand after all it is claimed that many persons in antiquity were illiterate.

Jesus, the Son of God, could do miracles that NO man could do so it did NOT matter whether you could read or write once you can see or hear of them.

The short Markan Jesus Taught his disciples in Secret and commanded that None of them tell anyone he was Christ and revealed to his disciples that he DELIBERATELY confused the people because he did NOT want them to be converted.

And further, the short gMark Jesus NEVER authorised anyone to preach that he was sacrificied for Remission of Sins.

It is in the LATER Gospels that Jesus authorised the disciples AFTER he was Resurrected.

But, when does Paul get his revelation of and Commission by Jesus?? After the resurrection!!!

The Pauline writings are AFTER the short gMark--No-one was commissioned to preach about the resurrected Jesus in the short gMark which ends at Mark 16.8.

Galatians 2 The Pauline writer KNEW the Later stories of the commission of the Resurrected Jesus.

Tommy

This is an interesting verse and the subsequent parable of the sower doesn’t change the apparent unwillingness of Jesus to impart his message in a manner accessible to all recipients:
Mark 4: 10-12 – “When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that,
“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!” “

If there was no presumption of sacrafice for remission of sins, how then would you reconcile this with Mark 10:45? - "for even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

aa5874

Again, nowhere in the short gMark does the Jesus character state that he would gave his life for the Universal Remission of Sins of all mankind.

There are at least three passages in the short gMark where Jesus explains what will happen when he goes to Jerusalem.

Mark 8Mark 9Mark 10The short gMark story is that Jesus would be Delivered up by the Jews and be killed BUT he will RESURRECT.

The short gMark story was changed Later by other Gospel writers and the Pauine inventor.

Look at the Pauline inventions.

1 Corinthians 15:17 KJVRomans 10:9 KJV The Jesus in the short gMark NEVER said such things. The author of gMark never knew that if his Jesus did NOT RESURRECT that people would still be in Sin. The Markan Jesus did NOT abolish the Laws of Moses for Remission of Sins.

The Pauline inventors changed the early Jesus story.

The short gMark is the earliest writing of the Entire Canon.