A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ram

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Peter Kirby wrote:Thank you for this, Ben.

I would like to come back to this, but first may I ask, what did you think of the other half of the proposal in the OP regarding Mark 15:20b-22 [and Numbers 19:2b-3]?

Does this elicit your "yes" or does it incline you towards "no"?
I can see where this might be seen as relevant, and I should have included this passage in particular in my post. I definitely incline toward yes here. And I think they look very much like the other parallels that I broke out into 3 steps, with Jesus is fulfilling the role of the sacrificial heifer as the climax.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

I don't see a connection with Simon Cyrene but rather with the context of the broader narrative.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

It might be relevant that Azazel (= scapegoat) becomes the name of demon. First the reference in Leviticus 16:8:
And Aaron shall place lots upon the two he goats: one lot "For the Lord," and the other lot, "For Azazel."
Now the forum seems to divided between those who believe our surviving gospels are 'original' and those who search for earlier (lost) material. As I classify myself among those who think our texts are late second century manipulated texts let's explore what might have been in the original. From Wikepedia:
In the Dead Sea Scrolls the name Azazel occurs in the line 6 of 4Q203, the Book of the Giants, which is a part of the Enochic literature found at Qumran[8]

According to the Book of Enoch, which brings Azazel into connection with the Biblical story of the fall of the angels, located on Mount Hermon, a gathering-place of demons from of old (Enoch xiii.; compare Brandt, "Mandäische Theologie," 1889, p. 38). Azazel is represented in the Book of Enoch as one of the leaders of the rebellious Watchers in the time preceding the flood; he taught men the art of warfare, of making swords, knives, shields, and coats of mail, and women the art of deception by ornamenting the body, dyeing the hair, and painting the face and the eyebrows, and also revealed to the people the secrets of witchcraft and corrupted their manners, leading them into wickedness and impurity; until at last he was, at the Lord's command, bound hand and foot by the archangel Raphael and chained to the rough and jagged rocks of [Ha] Duduael (= Beth Ḥadudo), where he is to abide in utter darkness until the great Day of Judgment, when he will be cast into the fire to be consumed forever (Enoch viii. 1, ix. 6, x. 4–6, liv. 5, lxxxviii. 1; see Geiger, "Jüd. Zeit." 1864, pp. 196–204).

In Greek Septuagint and later translations[edit]
The translators of the Greek Septuagint understood the Hebrew term as meaning the sent away, and read:"8and Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat (Greek apompaios dat.).

9And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord, and offer it as a sin offering; 10but the goat on which the lot of the sent away one fell shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away (Greek eis ten apompen acc.) into the wilderness."
Following the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate,[9] Martin Luther[10] and the King James Bible also give readings such as Young's Literal Translation: 'And Aaron hath given lots over the two goats, one lot for Jehovah, and one lot for a goat of departure;'

This is rendered Za-za-e'il (the strong one against/of God), according to the Syriac Peshitta Version, as in Qumran fragment 4Q180.
Could the original narrative have based the adaptation of the sacrifice of the scapegoat on - not the 'switch' with Barabbas but Jesus and Judas? The idea would be here that 'Judas = Jew.' On some level the choice is between Jesus and Judas where a 'Jew' survives and the representative of 'the Lord' offers himself up for the nation through this one individual. Something like that.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Ben C. Smith wrote:I am not committed to that order of steps; indeed, the order is pretty hard to get right. Rather, it is the number of steps that matters. I tried to write that without step #4, but I felt I could not take it out in good conscience.
I think I may have found a way to eliminate one step from the silphium process. And it also helps both with determining the order of the steps and with folding my hitherto invisible background step (search the scriptures) into the actual list. In what follows, I will rewrite two of my earlier processes, just by way of example, and add a process for Jesus being led out. (The term messianic scriptures below is not in any way meant to imply that the scriptures in question were originally intended as messianic.)

Barabbas and Jesus:

1. Read Mark 15.6-15a about Jesus being condemned and Barabbas being set free.
2. Search the messianic or sacrificial scriptures for two similar things with opposite fates.
3. Land upon Leviticus 16.3-11 in which one goat is sacrificed and the other is released into the desert.

The flogging:

1. Read Mark 15.15b about Jesus being flogged.
2. Search the messianic or sacrificial scriptures for something getting flogged.
3. Land upon Isaiah 50.6 about the prophet giving his back to scourges.

The leading out:

1. Read Mark 15.20b about Jesus being led out.
2. Search the messianic or sacrificial scriptures for something being led out.
3. Land upon Numbers 19.2b-3 about the sacrificial heifer being led out.

Okay, time to bring on the silphium:

1. Read Mark 15.21 about Simon Cyrenian.
2. Compare the Cyrenian coin in your pocket with the silphium stalk on its reverse. [Or think Cyrenian --> Cyrene --> silphium.]
3. Silphium is a plant which is apparently not found in the OT, even if one searches for reasonable synonyms; so search for other plants mentioned in sacrificial or messianic contexts.
4. Land upon Leviticus 19.6 about the hyssop.

That seems better to me, but the marked differences from the other processes are still a huge sticking point for me.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

I think that the act of sacrificing is somehow filtered through Deuteronomy 21:22-23 because of the frequent and earlier references:
“And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree; His body shall not remain all night up on the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed by God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.”
The idea is clearly then that the one who was sacrificed was rightly judged to be sinful. In our gospels the Jews - recognizing the curse - hurry to bury Jesus. But I wonder if something has been changed in the narrative. It would be a much better functioning narrative if the failure to bury the sinful one leads to the land being cursed (= thus the destruction was attributed to the non-burial of the hanged man). Of course one could argue that Jesus was NOT a sinful victim but that's whole purpose of the Yom Kippur sacrifice (Numbers 29:7 - 11).

Another confirmation of your analysis Peter is that Paul specifically identifies Jesus (or the one sacrificed) as a sin offering (Romans 8:3). But I think the original sin offering was Judas (= as the substitution myth still preserved in the Islamic pseudepigrapha). Some basics to the Yom Kippur sacrifice - repentance is done through Teshuva, which in its most basic form consists of regretting having committed the sin, resolving not to commit that sin in the future and to confess that sin before God. Confession in Judaism is called vidui (Hebrew וידוי). That Judas is so called from his public confession is confirmed Genesis 38. 26 - "Judah recognized them and said, "She is more righteous than I, since I wouldn't give her to my son Shelah." And he did not sleep with her again."

This 'confession' is understood by the rabbinic tradition to have been the reason he was so called (i.e. the one who confesses). This etymology was known to early Christians including Didymus the student of Origen - https://books.google.com/books?id=5n9z5 ... ah&f=false. On the traditional Jewish interpretation of Judah the confessor:
Judah confesses and declares: “She is more in the right than I” (v. 26). The Rabbis praise his courage for admitting to his acts and not fearing for his honor. The midrash says that by this act Judah publicly sanctified the Name of God and therefore merited having the Tetragrammaton included within his name (BT Sotah 10b). Another tradition relates that Judah was awarded the throne for having made this admission. He was not given the scepter because he was more heroic than his brothers, for others were just as valorous, but because he rendered true judgment and stated the truth; in consequence, God elevated him over his brothers (Ex. Rabbah 30:19; Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Masekhta Va-Yehi Be-Shalah 5). In yet another tradition a heavenly voice goes forth and proclaims: “You saved Tamar and her two children from the fire—by your life, by your merit I will save three of your children from the fire,” namely, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah (BT Sotah 10b). An additional midrashic exposition states that because Judah was not too ashamed to confess, he merited the life of the World to Come (BT Sotah 7b).

Judah’s behavior, exemplary already in his own time, served as a sterling example for future generations. The midrash tells that when Reuben saw Judah confess his sin, he immediately admitted that he had desecrated his father’s couch (Tanhuma [ed. Buber], Vayeshev 17; see Gen. 49:4). The Rabbis learned from Judah’s actions that if a person is shamed in this world, he will not be shamed before God in the World to Come (Ex. Rabbah 30:19).

In his blessings to his sons, Jacob blesses Judah (Gen. 49:8): “You, O Judah, your brothers shall praise,” which the rabbis view as an allusion to the episode with Tamar. Jacob is saying: Since you confessed, your brothers shall praise you in this and the next worlds. Jacob’s blessing was fulfilled, and thirty kings came forth from him: from David and Solomon to Jehoiachin and Zedekiah (the entire line of Judean kings). And so it will be in the World to Come, of which it is said (Ezek. 37:25): “with my servant David as their prince for all time” (Gen. Rabbah 97:8).

According to some exegeses, the statement “She is more in the right than I” was not uttered by Judah. In one tradition, God appears before the court of Shem. Judah said, “She is more in the right,” and God said: “than [or: from] I [or: Me]”—this is from Me (Gen. Rabbah 85:12). A similar tradition has a heavenly voice go forth and say: “These hidden secrets went forth from Me”: this entire episode was from God, because kings were destined to issue from Judah.

The midrash tells that Judah inherited the ability to recognize the other (le-hodot) from his mother Leah, who had said at his birth: “This time I will praise [odeh] the Lord” (Gen. 29:35). The Rabbis characterize Leah by saying that she “possessed the art” of such recognition, which she passed on to her children. Judah acknowledges: “She is more in the right than I"; David is similarly recognizant of God (Ps. 107:1): “Praise [hodu] the Lord, for He is good"; as is Daniel (a descendant of the Davidic line) in Dan. 2:23: “I acknowledge [mehode] and praise You” (Gen. Rabbah 71:5). This exegesis emphasizes the significant role of the mother in setting a positive example for her children, and her enduring influence on them.
If one takes matters to the next level one might argue that Judas's crucifixion 'foretold' the mass crucifixions of Jews by Titus during the War and moreover the future defilement of the land.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

The identification of Judas as 'the confessor of God' goes back beyond Didymus through the Alexandrian Christian back to Philo and ultimately the author of the Book of Revelations. Rev. 2: 9, " I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews, and are not" It is by many supposed that reference is here intended to the etymology of the name Judah and Jew, which is understood as meaning a praiser of God. So Philo (De Allegoriis, I. p. 55) says, 'Judah means one who confesses or praises;' and (De Plantatione, p. 233) he says, ' He is called Judah, which, interpreted, is confession to God." The idea then that Judas not Jesus was the Yom Kippur sacrifice - the 'confession' of the sins of the nation - might well have been original. If Jesus the Son of God was the one actually sacrificed it can't be a 'sin offering.'
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

Clearly Peter's argument here requires us to abandon any of the stupid 'white' suppositions about pagan myths and the like being at the heart of the gospel narrative (via allegory). I recommend all those unfamiliar with the depth of 'historical allegory' in tradition Judaism spend some time familiarizing themselves not only with Biblical narratives but also tradition Jewish exegesis of those narratives. For instance something as basic as Judah's confession of his whore-mongering. In other words, the idea that 'Judas' (remember the Greek, like 'Jesus' applies to both the Old and New Testament characters) could represent the sinful one who confesses. It fits perfectly.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Secret Alias »

There's a French book that I have that connects Judah's confession as a 'spiritual' confession even a 'perfect' one which I think connects to the description of the Gospel of Judas in Irenaeus.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Bernard Muller »

Most of my posts on that thread and on "Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus", with the replies from Peter Kirby and Secret Alias, have been transferred to viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1512, under "~~Nowhere in Particular~~" index, and "replies regarding a topic" thread.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: A Plausible Reading of Mark, Well-Done with a Side of Ra

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Secret Alias wrote:Clearly Peter's argument here requires us to abandon any of the stupid 'white' suppositions about pagan myths and the like being at the heart of the gospel narrative (via allegory).
What is a white supposition?

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply