Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
07-24-2011, 07:23 AM | #11 |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
|
07-24-2011, 07:49 AM | #12 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
|
|
07-24-2011, 09:22 AM | #13 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1 Quote:
What is ReMarkable here is that the Jordan River is either in the extreme north east corner of Judea or north of Judea. Note the following odd/strange/macabre geographical implications from "Mark's" presentation: 1) "baptized in the wilderness" The Jordan was the major river in the area and was a magnet for settlements. Having a Jordan River setting in the wilderness? Doesn't really work. 2) "went out unto him all the country of Judaea," "All" is an exaggeration of course and implies the setting was accessible and more likely central than peripheral. All Jordan River settings are more accessible to Perea and Samaria as a whole than Judea. Their omission also implies a location central to Judea. 3) "all they of Jerusalem" If you did not already know that Jerusalem was in Judea, this would imply that Jerusalem was not. I have never seen the above listed in an inventory of "Mark's" geographical errors but for the reasons above, I think the implications from "Mark's" presentation, that the Baptism setting was relatively central to Judea, would be a geographical error. Whether the author was aware of the geographical issues is a separate question. Here there is a reasonable explanation for the presentation. At the beginning of the story "Mark" has everyone go to the messenger and at the ending "Mark" has no one go to the messenger. This is Style. An ironic, contrasting balance. Fuel for my Legendary Thread: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction In The Original Gospel The thing to look for here is consistency. Does "Mark" consistently have an unreasonable geographical relationship combined with a reasonable stylistic explanation for the presentation. Joseph ErrancyWiki |
|
07-30-2011, 03:18 PM | #14 | ||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1 Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazareth#cite_note-24 Nazareth Quote:
"The Protevangelium of James" is an apologetic work that tries to reconcile the infancy narratives of "Matthew" and "Luke". "Nazareth" is never mentioned. Perhaps because the author was not aware of any Nazareth in Galilee. Quote:
http://christianbookshelf.org/africa..._but_as_up.htm Quote:
So first Patristic reference is Judea. Quote:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0805.htm Quote:
The text explicitly says that Nazareth was in Galilee so the above seems weak evidence that the author intended Joseph's home of Nazareth at the time to be within the walking distance of a sick old man to the Temple. "he rose up and went to Jerusalem" could just be a stylish way to say Joseph journeyed to the Temple. The Bible also says that some guy tied his ass to a tree and than walked 3 miles. On the other hand we have the, the, what was that evidence again that there was really a 1st century Nazareth in Galilee worth mentioning AA? It is hard, awfully hard, to try and demonstrate a negative, that there was no Nazareth in Galilee in the 1st century that would have been used as a reference, but there also does not seem to be much positive evidence. This one may be neutral. Joseph ErrancyWiki |
||||||
08-05-2011, 08:38 AM | #15 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
Let's call Justin Martyr to the witness stand regarding the question of whether there was a 1st century Nazareth in Galilee. Prosecuting Attorney: Your honor, Justin Martyr believes that God sacrificed himself to himself in order to conquer Death by dying and thereby end His own eternal Law. Therefore, he can not be used as an Expert Witness. Judge: Agreed. JW: Understood. Anyway, Super Skeptic Neil Godfree has created a useful summary of parallels between the writings of Justin and early Christian writings here: Justin Martyr's Gospel Narrative compared with the gospels of Matthew, Luke, Mark, John, James and Peter Don't leave homily without it. Justin's time period, post mid-second century, seems to be a harmonization time for orthodox Christianity. Justin's Nazareth related harmony is here: CHAPTER LXXVIII -- HE PROVES THAT THIS PROPHECY HARMONIZES WITH CHRIST ALONE, FROM WHAT IS AFTERWARDS WRITTEN. Quote:
[2] "from Nazareth, where he lived" - Justin explicitly says Joseph's home was Nazareth. [3] "return into Jud a" - The implication is that the return is specifically to Joseph's home Nazareth, which is in Judea. It could just refer though to the general return from Egypt to Israel which would start in Judea. I take Justin here as evidence against a 1st century Nazareth village in Galilee, weak evidence, but evidence. Joseph ErrancyWiki |
|
08-06-2011, 02:07 AM | #16 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
Quote:
Andrew Criddle |
|||
08-06-2011, 07:58 AM | #17 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
We are almost certain that there was NO CITY of Nazareth as stated by the unknown author of gMatthew and gLuke. There has been NO archaeological evidence of a CITY called Nazareth in the 1st century. Mt 2:23 - Quote:
Quote:
There was NO angel and No prophecy. |
|||
01-01-2012, 10:37 AM | #18 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
JW:
Moving along The Way(so to speak) our next potential geographical error in "Mark" is: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_4 Quote:
The potential error is whether or not "Mark" has presented the Sea of Galilee as a Sea. Per Wikipedia, the Sea of Galilee is actually a lake and not a sea. A number of ancient authors also refer to it as a sea so "Mark's" use of "Sea of Galilee" can be limited to identification of location based on name and not necessarily intended to be a physical description. The issue is whether "Mark's" attached narrative communicates that this is technically a "Sea" as opposed to just a lake. The evidence that "Mark" intended to show a Sea here is: 1) Language: Quote:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/...gs=G2949&t=KJV 2) Known physical characteristics of the Sea of Galilee: While there is no shortage of apologist claims of related threatening waves there also appears to be no physical documentation of threatening waves. There are Internet videos of storms on the Sea of Galilee but none that show significant waves. 3) Implication from name: On an overall basis "Mark" is writing for an audience not familiar with Israeli geography so use of the name "Sea" would create an implication that it was physically a Sea. 4) Ancient observation: Porphyry, as apparently preserved in the defenses of Christian critics, wrote: http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Adverse.html Quote:
Using Wallack's criteria to evaluate fiction: Impossible Impossible claims (in total) = The immediate point of the overall story is that Jesus has power over nature which is impossible. Contradictions (impossible in part) = No clear contradictions here. Improbable Implausibility (in general) = Unlikely that Jesus would be asleep during a storm. Contradictions (improbable in part) = No clear contradictions here. Contrived Parallels to non-historical sources = The Legendary Vorkosigan notes the parallels to the Jonah story = http://www.michaelturton.com/Mark/GMark04.html Thematic motivation = Fits "Mark's" primary theme that the disciples fail Jesus by always reacting with Fear instead of Faith and thereby never understand/recognize him properly. Necessity of tying to other stories = The Vorkmeister notes the repeating cycle of stories 4:35-6:34 verses 6:45-8:26. Contrivance (other types) = The storm story of the bad/evil spirit destroying the peace of the disciples by creating Fear parallels to the connecting Sower story of the bad/evil spirit Satan destroying the peace of the disciples by creating Fear. The resulting evidence of Fiction here is high so it is likely that all parts of "Mark's" story here are fiction and it is thereby a shorter distance to demonstrating it likely that "Mark" created a non-geographical description of the Sea of Galilee actually being a Sea. Joseph ErrancyWiki |
|||
01-01-2012, 11:30 AM | #19 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
|
But the Christians would likely have thought that the wind on the water was of supernatural origin. In other words, they don't think that the disciples happened to have been in a boat where a natural wind just happened to have made waves on the water but - according to the religious/spiritual mindset of that age and all ages - God made the waves in order to send a 'sign' to the disciples and the readers of the gospel (because of the evangelist setting the narrative down in words).
It's like meeting your best friend you haven't seen in years at the local Whole Foods just before your wedding which leads to you inviting him/her as your best man/maid of honor. According to the religious mindset God put that friend there in the store so that you could invite them to have a position of honor at the ceremony. The fact that the store is in Houston and the person lives in Hong Kong and had never been there before only strengthens the supernatural argument, not diminishes it. According to the religious mindset God arranges all things even the most mundane but he reveals himself to us by doing the impossible, the improbable etc. The argument you are laying forward does not advance the case that Mark didn't know Palestinian geography. It just shows that he believed that God was active in the events of the year of Jesus's ministry. |
02-04-2012, 09:29 AM | #20 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
Jewrassic Pork
JW:
Moving along The Way(so to speak) our next potential geographical error in "Mark" is: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_5 Quote:
The potential error is whether the known city of Gerasa ("Gerasenes") meets the physical requirements of the story. I have a detailed article on the subject at Mark 5:1 which I am finishing up which I think is already the best and most detailed article regarding the related question of geographical error. Determination of error is a two step process. The first step is Textual Criticism, determining if "Gerasenes" is likely original. My article notes that every standard category of external evidence, Manuscript, Patristic and Authority, supports "Gerasenes" as likely original to "Mark". Where I differ with Authority is that I think the internal evidence also supports "Gerasenes". Authority generally takes the issue in question, whether Gerasa fits the story, and because the answer is no, uses that as internal evidence that it is likely not original. The problem with this is that it assumes historical intent. I point out that the criteria for history score relatively low and the criteria for fiction score relatively high so there is no basis for assuming historical intent. Specifically the criteria for fiction score high enough to not only maintain "Gerasenes" as a candidate for original even though it does not fit, but to go beyond and support it as likely original in the internal category. The general fiction criteria are high in the Impossible and especially Contrived, such as Chiasm, Emotion and Theme. The specific criteria of Names has a match between "Gerasa" and "Jairus" including their presentation (start of stories and lone identifying name). The best potential defense is that "Mark" used "Gerasenes" in a directional sense (the Gerasene's side of the Sea). I look at this in the English and Greek and don't see this as much of a defense but I'll ask Dr. Carrier to look at the Greek. Everyone is welcome to comment except for Harvey Dubish (and I ask that Stephen Huller try not to connect it to Alexandria). Joseph ErrancyWiki |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|