Kosh

I'm I'll be sorry I asked but...where do you
get this stuff?

Amos

It is the deep structure theme of the bible.

The shepherds were the eidetic images of Joseph. The shepherds become the apostles during the purgation period (gospels) to tie all of their sheep (creations) into the subconscious mind (faith seeking understanding). When this is completed the ego can be forsaken (Gethsemany) to prepare for complete annihilation of the ego awareness (crucifixion). The apostles (eiditic images) are later recalled into the subconscious mind (upper room) to become the driving force of the new United State (Free Will as opposed to "I, we four" in Zamjatin's "WE").

Note, never will I argue that our ego is wrong because it is our ego that first must create our own four different gospel accounts. This now means that the gospels must be prior to us by nature and second to us from the bible.

Amos

boneyard bill

Turtonm writes:

I don't really mean to claim that Mark had Paul's writings in front of him. But Paul is clearly expressing a tradtion about Christ. He quotes various hymns and sayings. So I'm suggesting that Mark is familiar with the same tradition that Paul is preaching. And that tradition claims that all of this happened "according to scripture." And that would make the Pauline tradition as good as scripture itself.

But Prince John was inseparable from Richard the Lionhearted and the need to raise money for his ransom which completely ties into the whole story-line of the Robin Hood legend. And all of that is historically accurate. John was the regent. Richard was kidnapped and held for ransom, and Eleanor of Acquitaine was his wife. There's much more accurate historical detail surrounding the Robin Hood legend than there is the gospels so I don't think that's a very good example.

What I find most compelling about the idea of an oral tradition is the claims of Michael Goulder. Goulder points out that many of the details of the passover celebration are not consistent with what we know about it. Especially the part about palm branches. The palm trees in Israel do not produce leaves in the spring. However, these details are consistent with the feast of tabernacles which is held in the fall. This feast is 8 days long. The same as Holy Week. And people should "hosannas" and "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." All of which are described in the Bible. So it appears that passover was conflated with tabernacles. And I cannot see how that would happen unless there was an actual event that happened at tabernacles.

But aside from that, most of the gospel is details that are mentioned in the old testament. So if you have this oral tradition, and you're trying to reconstruct the story, you have to say how it happened and you have to have it happening according to scripture.

For example, some scholars have suggested that "Iscariot" is a bastardization of "sicarii" - assassin. So perhaps Judas was a follower who assassinated Jesus (oral tradition). But Pauline tradition says he was "handed over." So Judas must be transformed into a betrayer of a somewhat different order. The oral tradition would have to give way to the "scriptural" one.

When you get to the end of the gospel, it is only necessary to have an empty tomb to show that Jesus was "raised from the dead." That, and a reference to a Galilean appearance, would suffice to reconcile the oral tradition with the Pauline tradition. It wouldn't be necessary to go further than that and depict an actual resurrection appearance that might, after all, contradict scripture. How do you get Jesus to appear before "the twelve" (Pauline tradition), for example, when Judas had betrayed Christ and had already committed suicide (oral tradition?).

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: boneyard bill ]

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: boneyard bill ]</p>