Biblical literacy - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 01:44 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Since some have been asking, I submit a sampling of where my interests lie re the intersection of: Bible and intertestamental lit, gnostic gospels and Hellenistic paganism/mystery religions.

This upcoming event presents several of my Biblical scholar heroes, Spong, Pagels, Armstrong, King and Borg.

(disclaimer: I object the the use of the term Judeo-Christian)


http://www.westarinstitute.org/Event...rograms04.html
DaryLLL is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 05:31 PM
 
tracymom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In your soon to be locked thread.
Posts: 3,611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thank you DaryLLL.
tracymom is offline  
#3 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 05:33 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So if anybody, like, has any questions or anything...
DaryLLL is offline  
#4 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 08:45 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
some reading suggestions from contemporary authors...

"Who Wrote the Bible?", Friedman (this is the J,E,P,D hypothesis, and there's a follow up coming later this year

"Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English", Geza Vermes

"Nag Hammadi Library in English", James Robinson

"Introduction To Early Judaism", James Vanderkam

"Judaism When Christianity Began", Jacob Neusner

"Lost Christianities", Bart Ehrman

that should be enough to get someone up to speed very quickly on current scholarship. for those interested in creating their own "spin" two of the most important original sources are Josephus and Origen. Josephus was a Jew who survived the destruction of the temple and wrote a great deal about the history of the region. Origen was a second-century figure, the first significant Christian scholar and philosopher whose writings laid the groundwork for the orthodoxy Constantine would establish a few generations later.
dado is offline  
#5 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 08:47 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
But watch out for the Dick Cheneys of their day, Tertullian and Eusebius.

Dado, have you read all those books?
DaryLLL is offline  
#6 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 08:58 PM
 
PaganScribe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Texas!
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm in the middle of Lost Christianities and really enjoying it.

DaryLLL, it looks like a conference that I would really enjoy as well.

I still have so, so much to learn. :sigh:

Carrie
Mama to Nate (11/02) and due 4/12/11
PaganScribe is offline  
#7 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 09:18 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by DaryLLL
But watch out for the Dick Cheneys of their day, Tertullian and Eusebius.
:LOL very clever! you think anybody is going to get that?

unfortunately, i haven't been able to get to all of them just yet...
dado is offline  
#8 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 09:50 PM
 
me&3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Coast
Posts: 463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I googled Nag Hammadi and found this: http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhlintro.html

It was a short intro on gnosticism - pretty interesting. Since I'm not knowledgable about this subject, I can't say if it's accurate. DaryLLL? Dado?

Wish I had the time to do more in-depth reading, since I find this subject fascinating. But I can't even get to my homework.. hehe, probably because I keep checking the boards. I think I may need to go cold-turkey for awhile...

:LOL
me&3 is offline  
#9 of 121 Old 02-19-2004, 11:59 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
observations stemming from a truncated discussion elsewhere. the thread title clearly delineates this as a discussion about the texts themselves and not about the inherent, personal value of the texts.

un-redacting the arrest/conviction of Jesus...

All from Mark 14, starting right after the arrest at Gethsemane, noting all the participants in the drama were Jews, in Jerusalem, living under Jewish law...

Quote:
53 They took Jesus to the high priest, and all the chief priests and teachers of the law came together...
Sanhedrin was not allowed to convene at night.

Sanhedrin did not convene on Shabbat(!).

Sanhedrin most assuredly did not convene on Pesach.

Quote:
61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?"
no Jew then or now would associate "messiah" with divinity. a clear Constantinization as the question has no basis in Judasim and jesus's divinity was not orthodoxed until Nicea.

Quote:
62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the son of man sitting at the right hand of the mighty one and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked.
it was not then nor is it now a Judaic crime to declare oneself the Messiah. there have been so many self-proclaimed messiahs rabbi ben Zakkai is famously quoted as saying "If you should happen to be holding a sapling in your hand when they tell you that the Messiah has arrived, first plant the sapling and then go out and greet the Messiah."

Quote:
64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death
in Judaism "blasphemy" has specific legal meaning related to defiling the ineffable name of G-d. what is recorded here is not blasphemy.

capital cases in particular were forbidden to be tried right before Shabbat or a holiday.

the sanhedrin was not allowed to return immediate guilty verdicts in capital cases: there was a mandatory 24 hour "cooling down" period.

Now in chapter 15...
Quote:
1 Very early in the morning, the chief priests, with the elders and the teachers of the law and the whole Sanhedrin reached a decision. They bound Jesus, led him away and turned him over to Pilate.
even assuming all the extreme irregularities actually took place and the reported verdict was accurate, there was no need to turn Jesus over to Pilate as Sanhedrin had the authority to execute people. Jesus would simply have been stoned - or possibly strangled - to death.

the story then proceeds to the Romans killing Jesus at the request of Jews.

whoever wrote this version/part of the story could not have had more than a passing familiarity with Judaism, that much is very clear. since all the apostles were Jewish, this part, at least, had to have been redacted at a later date.

but why?

we may never know for sure. the most compelling explanation for the redaction would be to flip the culpability: from "Jesus arrested by Jews for the Romans" - which is, indeed, something the Jewish leadership would quite possibly have done - to "Jesus executed by Romans for the Jews". this would have been necessitated by Constantine and Nicea. not coincidentally there are no surviving fragments corroborating the "accepted" version that predate Nicea.

ultimately this question won't be answered definitively until we find an older version of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
dado is offline  
#10 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 12:25 AM
 
tracymom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In your soon to be locked thread.
Posts: 3,611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
the story then proceeds to the Romans killing Jesus at the request of Jews.

whoever wrote this version/part of the story could not have had more than a passing familiarity with Judaism, that much is very clear. since all the apostles were Jewish, this part, at least, had to have been redacted at a later date.
I just finished Holy Blood, Holy Grail by Henry Lincoln, et al and in it he poses an interesting hypothesis that since the gospels were being written for a primarily Roman audience and in a Roman-dominated culture,they needed to be palatable to that culture so as not to be completely suppressed. Since the temple had just been destroyed in the war 66-70 AD, anti-Jewish sentiment was high and so the Jews became the scapegoat in the gospels, minimizing the Roman responsibility. He gives other thoughts along that line, but I can't look them up because I've loaned it out to my dad.
tracymom is offline  
#11 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 12:42 AM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
it certainly fits. putting Pilate in the story is just so completely unnecessary that it must have served a rather specific purpose. the Pilate described in the christian books doesn't sound anything like the Pilate described in works by historians of the time, with Josephus in particular showing ruthless, iron-fisted ruler who doesn't give a hoot about the religious sensitivities of his subjects. he even minted new coins for Judea bearing pagan symbols.

this is clearly not a "i wash my hands" kind of guy.
dado is offline  
#12 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 01:21 AM
 
thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the kitchen
Posts: 1,806
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dado
it certainly fits. putting Pilate in the story is just so completely unnecessary that it must have served a rather specific purpose. the Pilate described in the christian books doesn't sound anything like the Pilate described in works by historians of the time, with Josephus in particular showing ruthless, iron-fisted ruler who doesn't give a hoot about the religious sensitivities of his subjects. he even minted new coins for Judea bearing pagan symbols.

this is clearly not a "i wash my hands" kind of guy.
On the contrary, Josephus describes an account of Pilate stepping back after a demonstration from Jewish leaders.

2. Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea by Tiberius, sent by night those images of Caesar that are called ensigns into Jerusalem. This excited a very among great tumult among the Jews when it was day; for those that were near them were astonished at the sight of them, as indications that their laws were trodden under foot; for those laws do not permit any sort of image to be brought into the city. Nay, besides the indignation which the citizens had themselves at this procedure, a vast number of people came running out of the country. These came zealously to Pilate to Cesarea, and besought him to carry those ensigns out of Jerusalem, and to preserve them their ancient laws inviolable; but upon Pilate's denial of their request, they fell (9) down prostrate upon the ground, and continued immovable in that posture for five days and as many nights.

3. On the next day Pilate sat upon his tribunal, in the open market-place, and called to him the multitude, as desirous to give them an answer; and then gave a signal to the soldiers, that they should all by agreement at once encompass the Jews with their weapons; so the band of soldiers stood round about the Jews in three ranks. The Jews were under the utmost consternation at that unexpected sight. Pilate also said to them that they should be cut in pieces, unless they would admit of Caesar's images, and gave intimation to the soldiers to draw their naked swords. Hereupon the Jews, as it were at one signal, fell down in vast numbers together, and exposed their necks bare, and cried out that they were sooner ready to be slain, than that their law should be transgressed. Hereupon Pilate was greatly surprised at their prodigious superstition, and gave order that the ensigns should be presently carried out of Jerusalem.


From The Jewish War, Book 2, Chapter 9
thistle is offline  
#13 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 01:27 AM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
that describes Pilate "stepping back" from a full-fledged revolt, not from a beaten up prophet in bloody rags about to be executed. he ultimately lost his post over his heavy-handedness and committed suicide.
dado is offline  
#14 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 02:38 AM
 
cottonwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 7,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?"

no Jew then or now would associate "messiah" with divinity.[snip]

62 "I am," said Jesus. "And you will see the son of man sitting at the right hand of the mighty one and coming on the clouds of heaven."
63 The high priest tore his clothes. "Why do we need any more witnesses?" he asked.


it was not then nor is it now a Judaic crime to declare oneself the Messiah. [snip]

64 "You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?" They all condemned him as worthy of death

in Judaism "blasphemy" has specific legal meaning related to defiling the ineffable name of G-d. what is recorded here is not blasphemy.
I appreciate your comments, Dado. I spent some time in college with evangelists (my boyfriend was Southern Baptist) and I would love to hear what you have to say about their take on all this. Which is that previously to the above event Jesus had said things that implied that he was equating himself with God, or related to God, or some such thing, in other words redefining 'Messiah' in a special new way that assumed divinity. In Matthew the high priest asks more specifically if Jesus is the son of God, to which Jesus replies "I am." The Christian explanation for why this was considered blasphemous is that "I AM" is supposedly the name of God which must not be uttered under penalty of death, and also an equating oneself with God which is also blasphemous.

Comments?
cottonwood is offline  
#15 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 12:07 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by blueviolet
In Matthew the high priest asks more specifically if Jesus is the son of God, to which Jesus replies "I am."
all Israel, all humankind are "sons (and daughters) of G-d". it is a common phrase. it is also perfectly acceptable to use the term for an individual person rather than a group of people, especially for a strong leader. there's simply no crime there.

Quote:
The Christian explanation for why this was considered blasphemous is that "I AM" is supposedly the name of God
"I am" isn't the ineffable name. but there's a bigger problem: language. they weren't speaking Hebrew.

that aside, i think your friends first need to establish how such an event could happen at all at night, on Shabbat, during Passover.
dado is offline  
#16 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 02:22 PM
 
AnnaReilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Red Wing, MN
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have just started reading the Jesus Mysteries and am finding this subject very interesting. I'll have to add a few more of these books to my "to-read" list.



Quote:
Sanhedrin was not allowed to convene at night.
Sanhedrin did not convene on Shabbat(!).
Sanhedrin most assuredly did not convene on Pesach.
It's been awhile since I was ensconced in the Evangelical Christian world, but I remember once hearing a speaker talk about this. He actually brought up all of these things as proof of the under-handed way that Jesus died. He was saying that the Jewish leaders were aware of Jesus' charismatic following undermining their authority. So they convened a special meeting of the Sanhedrin and did not follow proper protocol. He suggested that the Sanhedrin that was convened was not even the full Sanhedrin, but just a few of the members who had it out for Jesus anyway. This is not my personal viewpoint so I can't be more specific about the finer points what this speaker said, but this was the general idea.
AnnaReilly is offline  
#17 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 02:30 PM
 
AnnaReilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Red Wing, MN
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
And this may be a dumb question, but where does one find works by Josephus and Origen - written in English?
AnnaReilly is offline  
#18 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 03:46 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by AnnaReilly
He was saying that the Jewish leaders were aware of Jesus' charismatic following undermining their authority.
that doesn't seem consistent with prior and later actions where the Jewish leadership backed others claiming to be the Mosiach in very open, public fashion.

the other problem is that the High Priest was specifically named as present and prosecuting - and the High Priest of the time was a puppet installed by Rome itself. Rome being worried about a charismatic leader and using a corrupted element of the Jewish leadership to find and arrest him for their own purposes...this i don't have any trouble believing. they killed many, many "charismatic" Jews.

Quote:
He suggested that the Sanhedrin that was convened was not even the full Sanhedrin, but just a few of the members who had it out for Jesus anyway.
i find it hard to reconcile "i know! let's have a secret lynching!" with "let's turn him over to the romans 12 hours later and have a giant public spectacle!". if they were that secretive and slimy they would have simply made him disappear Tony Soprano style.
dado is offline  
#19 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 03:55 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by AnnaReilly
but where does one find works by Josephus and Origen - written in English?
why, at MDC's sponsor, of course!

http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/bibli...2-0825429242-0
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/bibli...2-0809121980-0

i believe they are also available in free, electronic form from the Gutenberg Project.
dado is offline  
#20 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 06:44 PM
 
me&3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: East Coast
Posts: 463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Cool site - I haven't actually gone through what I can find on it yet... But here it is:
www.earlychristianwritings.com

AnnReilly - you can find Josephus online in English at www.earlyjewishwritings.com

Have fun!
me&3 is offline  
#21 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 07:23 PM
 
dado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
that's an awesome find, me&3!

note to self: the original Nicean Creed from 325.

We believe in one God, the Father All Governing, creator of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father as only begotten, that is, from the essense of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not created, of the same essence as the Father, through whom all things came into being, both in heaven and in earth; Who for us men and for our salvation, came down and was
incarnate, becoming human He suffered and
the third day he rose, and ascended into the heavens. And he will come to judge both the living and the dead. And [we believe] in the Holy Spirit.


then there's this bit basically slapping Euseubius and Arius on the wrist...

But, those who say, Once he was not, or he was not before his generation, or he came to be out of nothing, or who assert that he, the Son of God, is of a differen hypostatis or ousia,
or that he is a creature, or changeable, or mutable, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them.
dado is offline  
#22 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 07:54 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Rejoining my own thread... interesting discussion.

2 more thoughts on BarAbbas. Son of the Father. A gnostic docetic idea is, Jesus did not die on the cross. Being God he could not die in any way. How can God die? Instead, he died by proxy. In one gnostic gospel, John the Beloved, overcome with grief, leaves the cross and is joined by Christ a ways away. Christ laughs at the idea he could die.

So when BarAbbas is released, the Son of the Father is known to be alive and safe, and a human husk dies. (I thought I read this in The Jesus Mysteries, or Jesus and the Lost Goddess, but now I look and do not see BarAbbas in the index. Will keep looking.)

2nd idea, favored by Margaret Starbird of The Woman With the Alabaster Jar, BarAbbas was Jesus' son. They were both seditionists. (Jesus having a Zealot and a Sicarii [Iscariot]) in his group of followers. ) Perhaps the turning over of the Temple tables was part of the sedition that brought Jesus to trial, the true reason Rome wanted him dead. Makes more sense on a practical level. Jesus, being 30ish, could have had several children by this point. Even a grown son of 15 or more.
DaryLLL is offline  
#23 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 08:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by dado
Nicean Creed from 325.

We believe in one God, the Father All Governing, creator of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father as only begotten, that is, from the essense of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten not created, of the same essence as the Father, through whom all things came into being, both in heaven and in earth; Who for us men and for our salvation, came down and was
incarnate, becoming human He suffered and
the third day he rose, and ascended into the heavens. And he will come to judge both the living and the dead. And [we believe] in the Holy Spirit.

My, the Holy Spirit gets short shrift, doesn't She? about the Father and Son, 5 words for Mother Sophia, who appeared at the baptism in a form of a dove (goddess symbol of old) and whose voice was heard from heaven, "This is my son, who pleases me."

Jesus is baptised in Matthew, Mark and Luke but not in John. Perhaps the Beloved Disciple (Mary Magdalene?) thought it was inappropriate for a god to be baptised by a man in the high Christology of this gospels' POV.

Perhaps Ioannes could not baptise Ioesous because they were the same person, pre- and post- resurrection (in the Pauline sense).
DaryLLL is offline  
#24 of 121 Old 02-20-2004, 11:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ach, Spirituality is so boring on Shabbat (sound of crickets).
DaryLLL is offline  
#25 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 03:28 AM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
in Judaism "blasphemy" has specific legal meaning related to defiling the ineffable name of G-d. what is recorded here is not blasphemy.
Just out of curiosity, and not trying to be argumentitive on this thread that is obviously not intened for Christians, but could you answer this question in light of the quote above? In Judaism is it acceptable to call one's self G-d and to say that I and the father are one?
barbara is offline  
#26 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 08:44 AM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Barbara, this thread is not meant to exclude Christians, but is meant to view the Bible as literature, not as a tool for belief. If anyone wants to make that leap for the sake of this thread, they are welcome.)

Jesus also claimed to be the Temple itself. Tear this down and in 3 days I will build it back up. Oddly in Matt and Mark, he is not quoted as actually saying it, but just accused of saying it later.

Quote:
Matthew 26:61
and declared, "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and rebuild it in three days.' "

Matthew 27:40
and saying, "You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!"

Mark 14:58
"We heard him say, 'I will destroy this man_made temple and in three days will build another, not made by man.' "

Mark 15:29
Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, "So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, come down from the cross and save yourself.
(BTW, it is easy to see the synoptic view here, between Mark and Matt.)

In John he is made to actually say it to the disciples.

Quote:
John 2:19
Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."
Yet in a letter, written before the gospel of Mark, Paul had already stated we all are the Temple of God. Yet no "Jews" came after him to lynch him. Why is that?

Quote:
1 Corinthians 3:17
If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple.
If Christ is in me (Paul), if Christ and I are both the temple of God, if we are all God's sons (Jewish belief), is it a big leap to say the Father and I are one? When one says, the father and I are one, is one saying, I am God? We are always on the edge of pantheism here.

Of course the gospel of Thomas was thrown out because Jesus said in it, he could be found under a rock or in a split log, but that is echoed canonically here:

Quote:
Luke 19:40
"I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out."

If Jesus was talking about a spirtual philosophical concept, why did all the accusers think he meant a literal building of stone? This is word play between gnostics and literalists. This also makes the accusers seem stupid, IMO.

Stones crying out in the Greek scriptures seems to be an echo from a Hebrew prophet, Habukkuk, 2:11. The stones of the wall will cry out, and the beams of the woodwork will echo it.
DaryLLL is offline  
#27 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 10:24 AM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Over on the Yahool Group, JesusMysteries, I have heard good things about The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, by Robert M. Price. I want to read it.


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books


excerpt of amazon editorial review:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Author

Robert M. Price is a lecturer and a debater for the Council for Secular Humanism and the Campus Freethought Alliance, as well as a professor for the Center for Inquiry Institute, Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary, and Johnston Community College. His published works include: DECONSTRUCTING JESUS and THE WIDOW TRADITIONS IN LUKE-ACTS: A FEMINIST-CRITICAL SCRUTINY. Previously, Price taught New Testament courses at Drew University and mythology at Montclair State University.

Beginning with the assumption that Jesus indeed walked the earth, Price discovers that the Bible provides no paint with which to draw a historically accurate portrait of such an important religious figure....In his introduction, Price defines and defends higher criticism of the Bible, a tool he uses to reconcile history with Scripture.

[Price explores theories about] John the Baptist, proposing that the latter's role may not be historical ...

Miracle accounts, Price shows, have parallels in other Jewish and Hellenistic traditions, and each miracle story has a particular structure, which fits a general pattern...Price delves into the descriptions of the twelve disciples, analyzing each one, especially Simon Peter...

...a brief review of Buddhism. Finally, Price surveys the details of the accounts of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection, concluding that similarities in Christian and other religious traditions must mean a common origin--one with no room for a historical Jesus.

... scrutinizing the Gospels concisely and in astonishing detail. Price takes a consistent, thorough-going critical look at the gospel tradition,...delivering good reasons for every skeptical judgment of the Gospels' historical accuracy in depicting Jesus.

[and]

... Many experts today believe that the writings of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John cannot be taken as revelatory. A group of more than 100 scholars called the Jesus Seminar concluded that only about 18 percent of the Gospels is historically correct.
...Price analyzes sections of the Gospels, separating fact from fiction in all episodes of Jesus' life...critically explores whether Jesus preached his Messiahship or predicted his own death as a means to save souls.

from reader reviews:

The reader alternates between laughing at his wistful analogies -- Judas identifying Jesus is like the police needing someone to identify Elvis -- and being impressed by the wealth of his knowledge, seeming to relate every gospel passage to multiple Greek, Roman, Jewish, Egyptian and other ancient sources.


and:

Price isn't out to prove that Jesus never existed (like Wells or Doherty). He takes a more humble/realistic approach: Jesus may or may have not existed, we'll never know, but what we do know is that the new testament is clearly fiction/myth.
DaryLLL is offline  
#28 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 11:54 AM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's interesting DaryLLL, but it doesn't answer my question.
Quote:
this thread is not meant to exclude Christians, but is meant to view the Bible as literature, not as a tool for belief. If anyone wants to make that leap for the sake of this thread, they are welcome
I appreciate the clairfication. Being very holistic in everything, I do not easily separate my spiritual self from the physical. With that in mind, I'm thinking this is not the best thread for me, although I do find the historical aspects fascinating.

Thanks,
~b
barbara is offline  
#29 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 12:01 PM - Thread Starter
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by barbara
That's interesting DaryLLL, but it doesn't answer my question. I
Barbara, I made no attempt to answer your question. I am not a Jew.
DaryLLL is offline  
#30 of 121 Old 02-21-2004, 12:09 PM
 
barbara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,027
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry, my confusion. No disrespect ment, like I said I find this discussion fascinating.

barbara is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off