PhilosopherJay

Hi Maryhelena,

Actually, I find the crucifixion closer to the last minute certain-seeming death escapes of ancient Romantic Novels of the time, than to dying and rising god myths.

In any case, I think it is also interesting that in 113 out of 114 sayings in the Gospel of Thomas, there are no individual disciples named. Only in the last do we get Simon-Peter asking a question. Mary gets mentioned in two sayings (21 and 114). In 18 of them the disciples are referenced in a group.

This suggests a layer where Jesus is simply a philosopher with wise sayings and unnamed disciples except perhaps for Mary and Simon-Peter. What is interesting is that this is what we get in the passion layer of the gospels. So what we have is a triangle with Mary, Simon-Peter and Jesus. Perhaps originallly the triangle was between Mary, Simon and Peter with the name Jesus being put in place of Simon and the name Simon being attached to Peter. If this is correct, then we may see three levels of material:

Primary Level - Simon level:
1) Simon sayings with his "disciples" just an undifferentiated mass, just to indicate that Simon is a teacher/philosopher
2) Simon, Mary, Peter and the disciples, with Peter as first disciple/rival for Mary
3) The crucifixion of Simon with Mary, Peter and the disciples. Peter betrays Simon

Secondary Level - John level
4) John the Baptist, Simon/Peter and other disciples material
5) Name "Jesus" replaces Simon as first disciple/rival of John the Baptist, John becomes a disciple along with other disciples, but retains his identity too.

Tertiary levels - Jesus level
6) Name "Jesus" replaces Simon in primary level material. The Name "Judas" replaces Peter in crucifixion story.
7) Levels 5 and 6 combined to create prototype of NT gospels

In this case, it seems more proper to say that stories with individual disciples (7) are being grafted onto an earlier crucifixion tale (3), which is an outgrowth of Simon sayings in which disciples are just an undifferentiated mass (1).

Based on the nature of the sayings, the original Simon could only have been a cynic philosopher. The only cynic philosopher who fits the description is Simon the Shoemaker, the compatriot of Socrates who lived in the late 5th century B.C.E. We may say that he is the real historical model for the Jesus character. Actually, there is some doubt as to the actual existence of Simon the Shoemaker, so to put it more simply: Jesus was a literary evolution from Simon, the Shoemaker.


Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

andrewcriddle

One problem with the story being sheer invention is that the scalp seems to have existed. Louisa Cody apparently recounts in her Memories
her shock at receiving by express post the bloody scalp.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

The story of receiving the bloody scalp by express post may indeed be an invention.

Within a short time of removal, the scalp will not be bloody. Any small amount of the blood would have dried or clotted in a few minutes and the scalp itself may tend to become hard or stiff. And depending on the time in the post before delivery, without any refrigeration, there would be some deterioration and an offensive odor.

A completely removed scalp is not likely to be bloody after a few hours.

andrewcriddle

The text from Memories of Buffalo Bill reads ie there was an odour and the scalp was red and raw rather than bleeding.

Andrew Criddle

PhilosopherJay

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the link. This is great stuff, but a couple of problems come up with this retelling of the story, which Buffalo Bill's wife, Louisa, recounts 43 years after the event in her 1919 memoir.

We can ignor that in the retelling, Bill borrows the horse of a dead soldier. This contradicts official reports that no soldiers were killed in the skirmish. Perhaps the official accounts are wrong.

We can ignor the fact that Bill says he rode 35 miles chasing Indians back to Red Cloud Indian Agency. This on top of the 80 miles he had just ridden in 30 hours with apparently only one meal and no sleep. We would expect nothing less from Superman Bill.

We can ignor the fact that Bill enters the Indian camp and out of thousands of Native Americans, who should come up to Bill, but the father of Yellow Hand, Cut Nose. Not knowing that the scalp belongs to his son, Cut Nose offers to buy the scalp from Buffalo Bill - a coincidence worthy of Sophocles.

What I can't ignor is that Bill Cody was released from active duty in mid-August. Accounts of the scalping appeared in newspapers in early August. Yet Louisa claims that she had no idea about the incident until Cody told her in person, presumably after being released from the army. It is hard to believe that she would not have read about the incident in the newspapers or that nobody she knew would have talked to her about the incident until the day Buffalo Bill comes back with his first hand account.

Also, according to history.net apparently Bill sent a letter when he mailed the package/s to Louisa, saying:

Louisa describes a "small square box." How did Bill fit a war bonnet, shield, bridle, whip, arms and a scalp" into a small square box?

Louisa describes just taking out the scalp and does not mention any of the other mementos sent by Bill. There is no mention of multiple boxes. Did only the magic scalp arrive and all the other items disappear on route?

There is also a question of why the letter did not arrive before the box. Not only did the box arrive before the letter, but apparently Buffalo Bill arrived before the letter too, meaning that the letter was more than a month in transit, while the box arrived several weeks earlier.

Overall, one can say that this fainting upon seeing the scalp is part of the fiction. Fainting is the role that Buffalo Bill has assigned to his wife. In retelling the story, Louisa is simply demonstrating her faithfulness to her dear husband.

Note from The Psychology of Ideal Body Image as an Oppressive Force in the Lives of Women by Barbara A. Cohen, Ph.D. 1984 (http://www.healingthehumanspirit.com/pages/body_img.htm):

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

aa5874

The story of the receiving the scalp seems like an invention. The use of the words "raw, red scalp" appears to be out of place. If there was an offensive odor, the scalp should appear to be rotten clumps of hair, possibly with maggots attached depending on the number days it took to arrive from the West.

It is very likely that the scalp would not look neither red, nor raw, but more likely a rotten mess of hair and maggots.

maryhelena

Yes, I would agree with that - that at the basic level the Jesus of Nazareth character is depicted not as an apocalyptic prophet but a philosopher of some kind, a wisdom teacher, a wise man. A humanitarian, almost. The apocalyptic prophet element being grafted on later as the character in the NT storyline was developed.

A 5th century model for the Jesus character? I find that date to be a bit late. My own take on someone who could be considered as a model for the philosopher/sage/wisdom teacher element in the Jesus character lived much closer to the gospel timeline. Philip the Tetrarch who died in 33/34 CE. A man who rebuilt Caesarea Philippi and Bethsaida Julias - both places which played a part in the gospel storyline. He ruled for 37 years - peacefully. Travelled the countryside with a few chosen friends - assisted and settled disputes. Probably, like other sons of Herod the Great, he would have been educated in Rome. And interestingly, in regard to your “ triangle” - there is a bit of a mystery regarding a woman in the life of Philip: Herodias. Was she, was she not, married to Philip? Josephus says it was the daughter of Herodias that was married to Philip. The Slavonic Josephus appears to say that it was Herodias that was married to Philip - a position that is upheld by Nikos Kokkinos. (which is quoted in the book “Herod Antipas in Galilee (or via: amazon.co.uk)” by Morten Jensen. I think the quote is from Kokkinos’s book “The Herodian Dynasty”.)

So, we have the arranged marriage of Herodias to her first husband, Herod Boethus. The scandal of her leaving that husband for her second husband, Philip the Tetrarch - the possible love affair. And her third, political, marriage to Herod Antipas. (Kokkinos sees a strategy on the part of Herodias - that Rome would let her keep her late husband’s territory if she married Antipas).

Herodias, the scandalous women who leaves her first husband while he is still alive - as a model for Mary Magdalene, the woman with 7 demons - the woman who Jesus loved - or so the storyline suggests.....

Lots going on, methinks, in the Herodian world, to provide a backdrop for creating a symbolic drama or a prophetic interpretation of that historical time period.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Maryhelena,

Interesting. I hadn't thought about Philip as a model. It would be great if we knew more about Philip outside of Josephus.

The fact that Simon the Shoemaker is a 5th century character would not stop him from being incorporated into fictional tales in the First century C.E.

Simon the Shoemaker is equivalent to Simon the Tanner. The 10th century Saint Simon was known as both Simon the Shoemaker and Simon the Tanner. Shoemaker and Tanner are interchangeable terms.

Simon the Shoemaker was an ideal cynic philosopher. Jesus was an ideal cynic philosopher. A Simon carries the cross of Jesus. Simon is the name that Jesus often calls Peter by and is Peter's original name. Simon Magus is the anti-Jesus who starts all heresies.

Peter stays at Simon the Tanner's house in Joppa, in Acts 10, but we may assume that in the earlier text, Simon and Peter are the same character, so Simon just gets a message from God that it is okay to eat all animals in his own house.

It occurs to me that the ideal cynic philosopher would eat all things on Earth. So here we have Peter turning into the cynic Simon (the Shoemaker)
by changing his diet to Simon's diet. This reverses the changing of the name Simon into the name Peter in the text. We unfortunately do not have any text by Simon the Shoemaker. My guess is that we would find in it that Simon the Shoemaker advocates an unrestricted diet in opposition to Socrates restricted diet.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

maryhelena

Perhaps the gospel Jesus of Nazareth is made up of so many elements that one can find almost whatever it is one is looking for within his character...

Cynic philosopher - or any mix of philosophies. Jesus of Nazareth can be all things to all people! However, there does seem to be some philosophical element, some wisdom sayings, some intellectual positions, that would argue for someone with some degree of education.

One philosopher that should not be ruled out as having some relevance to the NT storyline is Philo.

Philo

"Arguments have been put forth that Philo was actually the founder of Christianity by virtue of his combination of Jewish theological ideas and those present in the Greek mystery religions, a combination of which would appear much like Christianity. It is possible the followers of Jesus seized upon Philo's precepts and incorporated them into the letters that became the New Testament.[2]"

Michael Turton, in his "Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark", ch.15, references this story from Philo: (in connection to the mocking of Jesus of Nazareth). http://www.michaelturton.com/Mark/GMark_index.html

Philo's Flaccus, Book VI.

Philo's nephew, Markus, son of his brother Alexander the alabarch (chief tax official) was married for a time to Berenice, daughter of Agrippa 1 - thus there were close ties between the Herodian rulers and the family of Philo. Alexander at one time giving financial support to Agrippa 1. Either Philo's father or his grandfather were granted Roman citizenship.

Although Philo is silent on the gospel Jesus of Nazareth, he was living during the gospel story time period - and was thus a contemporary of Philip the Tetrarch. Philo dated to 20 BC to 50 CE. Philip the Tetrarch dated 22/21 BC to 33/34 CE.

Yes, its a pity that not much is known about the rule of Philip. Seemingly, there are quite a few coins. And interestingly, some or one, coin with his head depicted on it. He later removed his portrait and replaced it with a picture of a temple. The other side of the coins have an image of Augustus or Tiberius.

A big issue re the gospel storyline is the re-naming of Bethsaida as Bethsaida Julias in the 34th year of the rule of Philip the Tetrarch. Coins from that year refer to Philip as a 'founder' - a title only used for coins of that 34th year. The 34th year being 30/31 CE - the year in which Bethsaida was founded anew as Bethsaida Julias in honor of the wife of Augustus and mother of Tiberius who had died in 29 CE.

Since, according to the gospel storyline, the disciples Andrew, Peter and Philip came from the village of Bethsaida - at a time when this village had been re-named Bethsaida Julius - and the gospels make no mention of this place by this new name - provides some grounds for a re-think on the whole Bethsaida connection in the gospel storyline. The re-naming of this village/town in 30/31 CE by Philip the Tetrarch might well have involved Philip visiting the place. Those three disciples from Bethsaida (real people for the sake of argument) would have been very well aware of the life style of Philip - wandering around his territory to offer to mediate and assist his subjects - following Jesus, for them, would seem very like those 'few chosen friends' that were doing the rounds with Philip....