maryhelena

Oh, dear, aa - enjoy sitting on the fence...:wave:

outhouse

The only way some people can justify their own personal version not supported by scholarships of any kind, is simply just to dismiss credible and valid findings.

JtB has historicity despite one not accepting said evidence supporting such


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Baptist


Most biblical scholars agree that John baptized Jesus at "Bethany beyond the Jordan,"

aa5874

But, don't you have a personal version of Jesus???

Who was YOUR Jesus when he was supposedly Baptized by John???

Do most scholars agree with your version of Jesus??

Now, it is claimed when Jesus, the Water Walker and Transfigurer, was Baptized there was a Holy Ghost Bird and a voice from heaven.

The Baptism story is NOT credible.

JoeWallack

JW:
I believe that "Mark's" Jesus Passion is patterned after David of the Jewish Bible and note the parallels to David's "baptism" story:

[T2]
#|
"Mark"|
I Samuel|
Commentary||
1|
1:9 "And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan."|
16:12 "And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look upon. And Jehovah said, Arise, anoint him; for this is he. Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren"|
Both are baptized as part of a group and God chooses the one.||
2|
1:10 "And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens rent asunder, and the Spirit as a dove descending upon him"|
16:13 "Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of Jehovah came mightily upon David from that day forward"|
The Spirit comes upon David/Jesus||
3|
1:13 "And he was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan"|
17:16 "And the Philistine drew near morning and evening, and presented himself forty days."|
The hero is tempted for 40 days by Satan/Goliath
||
4|
1:13 "And he was with the wild beasts"|
17:34 "Thy servant was keeping his father`s sheep; and when there came a lion, or a bear"|
With the wild beasts
||
5|
1:23 "And straightway there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit"|
16:14 "Now the Spirit of Jehovah departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from Jehovah troubled him"|
The evil spirit presents a challenge
||
6|
1:26 "And the unclean spirit, tearing him and crying with a loud voice, came out of him."|
16:23 "David took the harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him"|
Exorcism of the evil spirit
||
[/T2]

In "Mark's" Theology/Theme the Passion is what's important so "Mark's" Jesus is baptized mainly for the Passion Ministry and not the Teaching/Healing Ministry.

Bonus material for Solo = "Matthew" "saw" the source for "Mark's" Jesus' baptism and included the setting for the Temptation and the fate of Jesus' competition. Can you flesh it out?



Joseph

ErrancyWiki

sotto voce

David was part of a group of monarchs, eh. Of the same country, or was this an economy package for Middle Eastern countries?

Duvduv

This is all extremely interesting Joe.
We just need to ask why the writer(s) of the epistles did not know about these and other Tanakh influences that come through even in the writings of "Justin" if the epistle writers came after Justin. I still think about the idea that the epistles are COMPOSITES that didn't have to have huge amounts of details emerging from the gospel stories in between the monotheistic tracts that were used to build upon.

On the other hand, the author of GMark doesn't explicitly even describe his Jesus as being the promised descendant of David (even when invoking Elijah in chapter 9) so one would wonder why he would go to this trouble unless the gospel or gospels could carry a story code that certain people would understand if the knew the Tanakh well enough. But then of what good would it or they be to gentiles even in a gospel ostensibly intended for gentiles such as Luke or John?

sotto voce

This is nonsensical, for even the numerate.

This is absurd, for those with a smattering of theology, or even history. Anointing was an honour, a unique one, in the case of David. John's water baptism, otoh, for everyone but Jesus, was confession of sin, and here was Jesus making himself 'of no reputation'. Ironically, the hypocritical Sanhedrin members were turned away.

So far, there is no evidence that the ministry of Jesus could have been patterned on the life of David.

In the case of David, the Spirit entered David, into his mind, though he was already, for God, 'a man after his own heart' (1 Sa 13:14). In the case of Jesus, the representation of the divine spirit alighted on him, because Jesus was already the embodiment or 'tabernacle' of that spirit. The dove descended because Jesus was that tabernacle. David was by no means unique in possessing the Holy Spirit in the OT, including all of the prophets and indeed Saul.

So there is absolutely nothing here for a pattern from David.

For much of this time, David was not even present, but tending his father's sheep at Bethlehem. It was the Israelite army that was involved, though not tempted with advantage; rather, threatened and taunted. Also, the forty day period was used as signification many times in the OT. Still no parallel with Jesus.

There is contrast here, at least physically. David was shepherding, and killed dangerous beasts who attacked his flock, and this gave him confidence against Goliath. Jesus, otoh, was protected from wild beasts by angelic forces. The author's intention may well have been to demonstrate a link with this:

"'I will make a covenant of peace with them and rid the land of wild beasts so that they may live in the desert and sleep in the forests in safety."' Eze 34:25 NIV

It was commonly believed that demons haunted deserts, so Jesus' survival despite the presence of wild animals was token that demons were no longer a necessary hazard. No connexion with David, other than victory against evil forces, a common enough theme in the OT.

In neither case is it said that an evil spirit presented a challenge. Neither was there much similarity of purpose, here. David's use of a harp was a natural means of calming the mind, just as an evening raga played on the sitar may calm; but in this case the demon was removed by God, not by music, in order to demonstrate to Saul that God was with David, and he had no excuse to hunt David, as he later did. There was no real exorcism presented here, and there is no precedent for the exorcism of Jesus, who was represented as using supernatural, not natural means.

There are indeed parallels between David and Jesus, but they are not the sort that many, if any, would have devised; and they are certainly not the ones listed here.

Vorkosigan

Excellent parallels Joe. Samuel lies behind quite a bit of Mark....

Diogenes the Cynic

Anointing and mikvahs are two distinctly different Jewish rituals, though, with totally different significance, and we know that the Essenes practiced extensive ritual bathing.

stephan huller

The thing I find interesting is that the gospel does not have a real 'anointing' narrative - strange for someone allegedly called 'the Christ.'