Steven Carr

Josephus's 'Antiquities' records that Herod ordered many people to be killed when he died, so that there would be people who mourned that he was dead. Emil Schuerer's 'The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ', says that this may not be historically reliable, because it resembles a legend about Alexander Jannaeus.

Is it legitimate to discount the historicity of something which appears to be taken from a legendary source and applied to a contemporary?

Josephus describes Vespasian as though he were the prophesied Messiah.

Is it legitimate to discount the idea that, historically, Vespasian was indeed the Messiah?

Apparently, Philo equated Socrates with the father of Abraham.

Can we discount that as not being historically reliable?

In 2 Kings 4:27-37 a distraught parent of an only child comes to Elisha just as in Mark 5:22-24 (which continues in verses 35-43) a distraught parent of an only child comes to Jesus,pleading for help.

In both stories someone tries to discourage the parent from bothering Elisha and Jesus.
In both stories it is unclear to some people in the story whether the child is dead ,dying or asleep.
In both stories the child is in a house some distance away.
In both stories a second source comes from the house and confirms that the child is dead.
In both stories Jesus and Elisha continue anyway to the house.
In both stories the parent precedes Elisha or Jesus
In both stories Elisha and Jesus seek a high degree of privacy by turning people out of the house before their miracle .
The story in Mark is such an obvious rewrite of the story in Kings that if I remind you that Jairus in Mark 5 falls at Jesus's feet, you can guess what the parent in 2 Kings 4 did.

The name Jairus has 2 meanings. 1 is 'he enlightens'. The other is 'he awakens'. Is not 'he awakens' a remarkably apt name for someone in a resurrection story, where Jesus says that the child is not dead but sleeping?

As confirmation that Mark used 2 Kings 4 for his stories of the feeding of a crowd, and the raising of a dead child, Mark 5:42 says that after the miracle, the parents were 'amazed with great amazement' (exestesan ekstasei megale), while 2 Kings 4:13 we have 'amazed with all amazement' (exestesas... pasan ten ekstasin tauten) - a very similar phrase.

Are there any similar parallels by 1st century Jews, where they used the OT in such a way, to illuminate contemporary events, where we can be certain that the contemporary events actually happened?

DrJim

I don't know about 1st century, CE, but a little time before that, the Qumran Pesherim "Interpretations" of biblical books understood them as prophecies describing the Romans et. al.

One of the best known is the Pesher of Habakkuk, but there is a Nahum Pesher, one on some Psalms, I believe, and parts of Isaiah (I think). What is neat about them is that they quote the biblical book then say "the Pesher of this is that ...." then quote the next passage, then give the interpretation. Very fascinating. Any good book on the Dead Sea Scrolls will have a bit on them. Their interpretaations are pretty esoteric and disjointed, though, and so it is hard to understand just what events they are describing, but the writer at least saw his own world revealed somehow in scripture.

I'm away from my office, and I've got to run. Hope this helps.

DrJim

yummyfur

Tough questions, on the Herod the Great, Alexander Jannaeus issue though, I don't think one can have a solid answer. If Josephus is supposed to know of this story, then so probably did Herod, and maybe got his inspiration for his act from it. Therefore it resembles a supposed legendary event because it was consciously modeled after it.

Also I don't know if the two events are all that similar, except in that they are mass executions(or intended mass executions in Herod's case). Certainly there have been many mass executions throughout history, and there can only be so much variation on how they happen. I have read of no event where Alexander Jannaeus had people killed when he died. The only mass slaughter was in the middle of his reign, he didn't put them in a stadium in Jericho, but in front of his palace in Jerusalem, nor was the purpose to create morners for his funeral. I guess I fail to see how the stories are that similar, unless there is some other story of Jannaeus, I haven't read?

There is a similar problem in accounts of Ivan IV Tsar of Russia and Vlad III Voivode of Wallachia. Vlad’s sadistic exploits were the grist of various German and Hungarian propaganda writers, it's hard to know what’s true, exaggeration, or completely false in their accounts. Some very similar acts are ascribed to Ivan the IV, is this mere reuse of certain propaganda points?, or was Ivan IV inspired by what he read?

Patrick