1. Thanx for the article, PK. Detering is incorrect and makes a number of Categorical Errors - Type, "Existence-is-not-a-Predicate", exploring a mistaken aspect of Markan vs. Matthean Primacy, etc. It might be worthwhile to start a new Thread on this one.
2. I agree with Detering that Mark and Matthew have a "Source" in front of them but from the fact that Matthew and Mark tell stories of "Jesus", it does not follow that the Source Document talked of "Jesus".
3. Bernard states that the SynApoc cannot be about Bar Kochba and he is correct. Let's see why from a different direction:
Josephus,
Antiquities..., 13, 14, , as a starting point with a nod to the surrounding texts:
"SO Demetrius came with an army, and took those that invited him, and pitched his camp near the city Shechem..."
This is Demetrius Eucerus who has been invited in to destroy Alexander Jannaeus, a Hasmonean King and High Priest. Eucerus is a Greek General which immediately gives us a lead-in to understanding the cryptic references to the Book of Daniel. He camps near "Shechem".
What is near "Shechem"? That would be the Temple at Gerizim.
Matthew 15: 22 - 24 (RSV):
[22] And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and cried, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely possessed by a demon."
[23] But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, "Send her away, for she is crying after us."
[24] He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
This is from, I assert, the Jannaeus Source and it points to a major indirection from Josephus. Eucerus is camped very near the Temple at Gerizim. Jannaeus is not too concerned with what will be Rabbinical discussions on the proper Temple. Jannaeus supports the Hasmonean conquests throughout Galilee and surrounds because he is after the Rulership and reconstitution of ISRAEL. I appreciate the point made in this Thread that The Decapolis took pride in its identity at the end of the 1st Century. It makes sense and is consistent with the Line that runs through Jannaeus.
Please note the description from Josephus that follows. It is ABSURD (as I often say) and a senseless telling of a Tale that cannot be descriptive of what happened:
"...Demetrius trying to bring off the mercenaries that were with Alexander, because they were Greeks, and Alexander trying to bring off the Jews that were with Demetrius. However, when neither of them could persuade them so to do,
they came to a battle, and Demetrius was the conqueror; in which all Alexander's mercenaries were killed, when they had given demonstration of their fidelity and courage. A great number of Demetrius's soldiers were slain also.
"Now as Alexander fled to the mountains,
six thousand of the Jews hereupon came together [from Demetrius] to him out of pity at the change of his fortune; upon which Demetrius was afraid, and retired out of the country..."
This is beyond laughable. It is lightly commented on because it is about Jannaeus and not some savior/god. Yet, the Source for Josephus should be the source for Mark/Matthew if not a first rewrite. Mark 13 is simply the retreat of Jannaeus into the mountains and his takeover of Jerusalem after near death starvation in the mountains. It is in sequence and the Story is finessed in Josephus and in the Gospels and in Revelation.
It is finessed because Demetrius Eucerus committed the Appalling Abomination at Gerizim. Please see my other Posts on this or try to play Match'em Up yourself. One more time, to repeat myself, again, look at the Anchor Verse and Compare:
Mark 13: 17 (RSV):
[17] And alas for those who are with child and for those who give suck in those days!
"...when he had taken the city, and gotten the men into his power, he brought them to Jerusalem, and did one of the most barbarous actions in the world to them; for as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city,
he ordered about eight hundred of them to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes.
There may be references to Bar Kochba somewhere. I would welcome the insight. Here, however, is something of immense importance. 2 major pointers are looking directly at Alexander Jannaeus as the Source for Mark 13 and the SynApoc. Markan Priority vs. Matthean Priority may be important here as Detering says - or not. The arguments, however, should not obscure the point - Mark cannot be earlier than around 100 at the extreme earliest. Nothing in Mark 13 leads anywhere else. If Jay Raskin is true in his linkage of John and Mark and we have a dated fragment of John from circa 125, the Construction of Mark and the Gospels is pinpointed to a period of about 10 - 20 years.
CW