mike_decock

There are many verses in the NT which imply that Jesus was to return within the lifetime of his contemporaries:

Mark 9:1
And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Mark 13:30
Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Etc., etc...

Wouldn't these kinds of statements go against the grain of someone creating the myth decades or generations after the supposed event? Why is it more likely that these verses were created whole cloth than actually tracing back to a historical figure?

-Mike...

Vinnie

I suppose one might try to counter with Crossan's explanation over that of those like Sander's but my major problem here for mythicists is that these sayings stem from the context of an earthly Jesus. Even if they were created, which I am in no way convinced they were, they are still attributed to a human Jesus by the early church.

This is of course one argument against dating Mark too late.

One cannot explain why anyone would knowingly attribute a false statement to Jesus. But on the flipside, was everyone who was standing there dead by ca 70 C.E. when Mark wrote?

This would seem to hurt your objection. But when the imminent return is placed in the context of other quotes it is easy to explain. Mark represents an apparent second stage in the process.

Here is how I see it:

1st stratum Sourse: Paul at Thessalonica. Followers are surprised some have died before Jesus has returned.

1 Thess 4.15-17 According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left untill the appearance of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a command, with the voice of an archangel and with a trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be snatched up with them in the clouds to greet the Lord in the air.

Matt. 24.27g. The sing of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming on clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a trumpet of great voice, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one side of heaven to the other.

Matt. 16.27f. The Son of man is about to come in the glory of his father with his []i]angels[/i], and then he will repay each according to his or here deeds. Truly I say unto you, there are some of those standing here who l not taste death, until the see the son of Man coming in his kingdom.

Sanders "Paul and Matthew have essentially the same component parts. If we delete from Paul's version of the saying his new concern about the dead in Christ, if we deleted from the synoptic saying the apparent modification that only some will still be alive, and if we equate 'the Son of man' in the synoptics with 'the Lord' in Paul, we have the same saying.”


2nd Stratum: Marcus: Some standing here will not taste death.

3rd Stratum: Johny: At least one will not taste death.

4th Stratum: Redaction of Johny: Hesus speaking: "If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?’"The author then explains, ‘So this rumor spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?”’ (John 21.21-3).

I think a clear progression is discernable here. As Sanders wrote: "The history of these adjustments to the view that God would do something dramatic while Jesus’ contemporaries were still alive is fairly easy to reconstruct. Jesus originally said that the Son of Man would come in the immediate future, while his hearers were alive. After his death and resurrection, his followers preached that he would return immediately - that is, they simply interpreted ‘the Son of Man’ as referring to Jesus himself. Then, when people started dying, they said that some would still be alive. When almost the entire first generation was dead, they maintained that one disciple would still be alive. Then he died, and it became necessary to claim that Jesus had not actually promised even this one disciple that he would live to see the great day. By the time we reach one of the latest books of the New Testament, II Peter [dated circa 130 Ad], the return of the Lord has been postponed even further: some people scoff and say, ‘Where is the promise of his coming?’ but remember, ‘with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day’ (II Peter 3.3-8). The Lord is not really slow, but rather keeps time by a different calendar."

Vinnie

Vinnie

Oh yeah, see my reconstruction here? This is a perfect example of why stratification is important for historical Jesus methodology contrary to what some skeptics here assert (see my HJ methodology Thread)!

Vinnie

sharon45

Yes, paul talks about jesus coming back so soon, that no one needs to even get married anymore. The writers wanted to instill hope, it was a very new religion in a very turbulent time period, they needed different reasons to gain converts.

Amaleq13

The recent event(s) that inspired the original imminent expectation described in Paul's letters are the resurrection experiences.

rlogan

Mike, I'm a "composite" school attendee. This is one of the reasons.

I conceded this to Vinnie some time ago - that it would be too embarrassing to keep this saying in here if the entire thing was a fabrication.

The "composite" approach seems more reasonable to me. That line was being preached by someone. In fact, I think it was common. John the Baptist was preaching of the "coming one". Nothing really new about a Messiah coming in the OT. Just seems more urgent and central to the Jesus crowd. Moreover, all the warnings about the "false" prophet/messiah too.

So I think it supports that there was a kernel of historicism in that Christianity is grounded in the "someone's coming" message. It pre-dates Jesus, and "jesus" or "jesus types" repeated/amplified it.

Even today, we have this urgent eschatology among the fundies, despite being a couple of thousand years tardy. It's a bogus sales pitch that's still working today.

Toto

Doherty would point out that these verses to not refer to a "return". They refer to something that will happen in the future - the Kingdom of God will come with power. It is only because you have the gospel story so firmly implanted in your mind that you read a "return" into this.

The word that Christians use to refer to the second coming is parousia - which means only "appearance", with no necessary implications of reappearance.

mike_decock

Thanks, Vinnie! You have nicely articulated and expanded my simple question. I agree that it's a strong argument against a very late dating of Mark. As far as I can see it, the best explanation for the evidence is that there is a historical root for those sayings. I just haven't seen the mythicists comment on this one yet.

-Mike...

BTW, I'm an agnostic on the HJ debate but I'm leaning more towards historicity today.

mike_decock

Even if it implies "appearance" rather than "reappearance", I still don't see how that helps the mythicist case.

-Mike...

Unleavened Jesus

Well holy shit, heya Mike!

Mark Hayenga