Time Shift scenarios and the New Testament texts

[maryhelena]

<snip>
11. And many from the folk followed him and received his teachings. 12. And many souls became wavering, supposing that thereby the Jewish tribes would set themselves free from the Roman hands.

13. Now it was his custom often to stop on the Mount of Olives facing the city. 14. And there also he avouched his cures p. 107 to the people. 15. And there gathered themselves to him of servants (Knechten) a hundred and fifty, but of the folk a multitude.

16. But when they saw his power, that he accomplished everything that he would by word, they urged him that he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us. 17. But that one scorned it.

The point being made in this Slavonic Josephus story is that the 'wonder-doer' figure is not a revolutionary, not a zealot type figure. This is miles away from the Josephan figure of the Egyptian. Yes, many people wanted the 'wonder-doer' figure to defeat the Romans - but the Slavonic Josephus figure 'scorned it'. A similar view is expressed in Luke's Emmaus story. ''But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.''

While there is undoubtedly an element of zealot type activity surrounding the Jesus of the gospel story - there is also a pacifist type element to the Jesus figure. Which element is primary? Must one choose, must one opt for either the revolutionary or pacifist. One could seek to combine these contradictory elements within one individual. Or one could opt for a composite gospel Jesus figure. A composite Jesus figure reflecting two very different historical figures. A man of war and a man of peace. That way one escapes the Jekyll and Hyde personality type while remaining true to the gospel story and it's dual stories of anti-Roman activity and peace. Josephus indicating that the anti-Roman activity took place prior to and post Pilate. That leaves the Pilate years as years of relative peace in Judea - or as Tacitus would have it - ''Under Tiberius all was quiet.”

[Lena Einhorn]

maryhelena wrote:

The point being made in this Slavonic Josephus story is that the 'wonder-doer' figure is not a revolutionary, not a zealot type figure. This is miles away from the Josephan figure of the Egyptian. Yes, many people wanted the 'wonder-doer' figure to defeat the Romans - but the Slavonic Josephus figure 'scorned it'

The Slavonic Testimonium is a pro-Christian text, just like the "original" Testimonium Flavianum. It shares many elements with that: "if even it is fitting to call him a man", "His works, that is to say, were godly, and he wrought wonder-deeds amazing and full of power," etc. It also places Jesus in the times of Pilate.
The remarkable thing is that the Slavonic Testimonium, DESPITE THIS, brings out elements not present in that other Testimonium, or in the Gospels, elements which adhere closely to Josephus's description of the battle against "the Egyptian" on the Mount of Olives:

1. It speaks of the miracle-worker gathering the multitude on the Mount of Olives.

2. It speaks of an idea presented (which he scorns) that "he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us."
cf. Josephus's description of "the Egyptian in War:

"these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives, and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to domineer over them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him.

"

3. It speaks of the Roman Governor being informed of a potential sedition, and sending out soldiers.
cf. Josephus's description of "the Egyptian" in Antiquities:

"Now when Felix was informed of these things, he ordered his soldiers to take their weapons, and came against them with a great number of horsemen and footmen from Jerusalem, and attacked the Egyptian and the people that were with him."

3. It speaks of many people subsequently being killed by the Roman soldiers, on the Mount of Olives.

4. It speaks of the miracle-worker being set free, after the events of the Mount of Olives.

If the Slavonic Testimonium on top of this right out would have stated that Jesus was a Zealot warrior, it would not have been a pro-Christian text.

[maryhelena]

maryhelena wrote:

The point being made in this Slavonic Josephus story is that the 'wonder-doer' figure is not a revolutionary, not a zealot type figure. This is miles away from the Josephan figure of the Egyptian. Yes, many people wanted the 'wonder-doer' figure to defeat the Romans - but the Slavonic Josephus figure 'scorned it'

The Slavonic Testimonium is a pro-Christian text, just like the "original" Testimonium Flavianum. It shares many elements with that: "if even it is fitting to call him a man", "His works, that is to say, were godly, and he wrought wonder-deeds amazing and full of power," etc. It also places Jesus in the times of Pilate.
The remarkable thing is that the Slavonic Testimonium, DESPITE THIS, brings out elements not present in that other Testimonium, or in the Gospels, elements which adhere closely to Josephus's description of the battle against "the Egyptian" on the Mount of Olives:

1. It speaks of the miracle-worker gathering the multitude on the Mount of Olives.

2. It speaks of an idea presented (which he scorns) that "he should enter the city and cut down the Roman soldiers and Pilate and rule over us."
cf. Josephus's description of "the Egyptian in War:

"these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives, and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to domineer over them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him.

"

3. It speaks of the Roman Governor being informed of a potential sedition, and sending out soldiers.
cf. Josephus's description of "the Egyptian" in Antiquities:

"Now when Felix was informed of these things, he ordered his soldiers to take their weapons, and came against them with a great number of horsemen and footmen from Jerusalem, and attacked the Egyptian and the people that were with him."

3. It speaks of many people subsequently being killed by the Roman soldiers, on the Mount of Olives.

4. It speaks of the miracle-worker being set free, after the events of the Mount of Olives.

If the Slavonic Testimonium on top of this right out would have stated that Jesus was a Zealot warrior, it would not have been a pro-Christian text.

The 'wonder-doer' in Slavonic Josephus is not a ''revolutionary''.

• ''And he had that wonder-doer brought up. And when he had instituted a trial concerning him, he perceived that he is a doer of good, but not an evildoer, nor a revolutionary, nor one who aimed at power, and set him free.''
  
  24. And he went to his accustomed place and wrought his accustomed works. 25. And as again more folk gathered themselves together round him, then did he win glory through his works more than all.
  
  26. The teachers of the Law were [therefore] envenomed with envy and gave thirty talents to Pilate, in order that he should put him to death. 27. And he, after he had taken [the money], gave them consent that they should themselves carry out their purpose.
  
  28. And they took him and crucified him according to the ancestral law.

Re the story - it is the 'teachers of the Law' that want the 'wonder-doer' put to death - not the Roman governor, Pilate.

That is the Slavonic Josephus story. Reading the Egyptian story into the Slavonic Josephus story changes the whole thrust of the Slavonic story. The Slavonic Josephus 'wonder-doer' is not a revolutionary.

[TedM]

The point being made in this Slavonic Josephus story is that the 'wonder-doer' figure is not a revolutionary, not a zealot type figure. This is miles away from the Josephan figure of the Egyptian. Yes, many people wanted the 'wonder-doer' figure to defeat the Romans - but the Slavonic Josephus figure 'scorned it'. A similar view is expressed in Luke's Emmaus story. ''But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.''

Yes, but what I find most interesting is that the Slavonic account shows a revolutionary movement - there is an actual battle where people died!

I would ask - why did the author of the Slavonic Josephus do that? Why didn't he name him in this passage? Why did he have the man released initially?

[maryhelena]

The point being made in this Slavonic Josephus story is that the 'wonder-doer' figure is not a revolutionary, not a zealot type figure. This is miles away from the Josephan figure of the Egyptian. Yes, many people wanted the 'wonder-doer' figure to defeat the Romans - but the Slavonic Josephus figure 'scorned it'. A similar view is expressed in Luke's Emmaus story. ''But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel.''

Yes, but what I find most interesting is that the Slavonic account shows a revolutionary movement - there is an actual battle where people died!

I would ask - why did the author of the Slavonic Josephus do that? Why didn't he name him in this passage? Why did he have the man released initially?

Perhaps two accounts, two stories, are being combined. The lives of two historical men fused into the literary composite figure of the gospel Jesus - or 'wonder-doer'. i.e. the gospel Jesus story combines a revolutionary 'Jesus' with a pacifist 'Jesus'. Or to put it in more biblical terms - a Davidic type man of War and a Joseph type man, Prince of Peace. A composite gospel Jesus scenario can accommodate diverse historical elements.

[Lena Einhorn]

TedM wrote:
I would ask - why did the author of the Slavonic Josephus do that? Why didn't he name him in this passage? Why did he have the man released initially?

And where the heck did the author of the Slavonic Testimonium get his/her information?!

[maryhelena]

TedM wrote:
I would ask - why did the author of the Slavonic Josephus do that? Why didn't he name him in this passage? Why did he have the man released initially?

And where the heck did the author of the Slavonic Testimonium get his/her information?!

Same place the OT writers got their stories - Jewish history viewed, interpreted, through a prophetic or messianic lens. Salvation history obtained by viewing history through the prism of revelation....

[Lena Einhorn]

maryhelena wrote:
Perhaps two accounts, two stories, are being combined. The lives of two historical men fused into the literary composite figure of the gospel Jesus - or 'wonder-doer'. i.e. the gospel Jesus story combines a revolutionary 'Jesus' with a pacifist 'Jesus'.

And where the heck did the author of the Slavonic Testimonium get his/her information?!

Same place the OT writers got their stories - Jewish history viewed, interpreted, through a prophetic or messianic lens. Salvation history obtained by viewing history through the prism of revelation.... Or to put it in more biblical terms - a Davidic type man of War and a Joseph type man, Prince of Peace. A composite gospel Jesus scenario can accommodate diverse historical elements.

Aristotle wrote that "We may assume the superiority ceteris paribus [other things being equal] of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates or hypotheses." And Ptolemy: "We consider it a good principle to explain the phenomena by the simplest hypothesis possible."

[maryhelena]

maryhelena wrote:
Perhaps two accounts, two stories, are being combined. The lives of two historical men fused into the literary composite figure of the gospel Jesus - or 'wonder-doer'. i.e. the gospel Jesus story combines a revolutionary 'Jesus' with a pacifist 'Jesus'.

And where the heck did the author of the Slavonic Testimonium get his/her information?!

Same place the OT writers got their stories - Jewish history viewed, interpreted, through a prophetic or messianic lens. Salvation history obtained by viewing history through the prism of revelation.... Or to put it in more biblical terms - a Davidic type man of War and a Joseph type man, Prince of Peace. A composite gospel Jesus scenario can accommodate diverse historical elements.

Aristotle wrote that "We may assume the superiority ceteris paribus [other things being equal] of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates or hypotheses." And Ptolemy: "We consider it a good principle to explain the phenomena by the simplest hypothesis possible."

The simplest explanation for the gospel Jesus story is that it reflects Hasmonean/Jewish history. The Jesus figure being a composite literary figure designed to reflect various elements of that history.

(it worked well for Ian Fleming in his composite figure of James Bond.......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond)

[Lena Einhorn]

For the sake of expediency (and promoting simplicity), I shall put the segment from the Slavonic Testimonium and Josephus's two segments on "the Egyptian" underneath each other (can't figure out how to do it side-by-side)

Slavonic Testimonium

But it was his habit rather to remain in front of the city on the Mount of Olives; and there he also [freely] gave cures to people. And there 150 servants and a multitude of people joined him, seeing his power [and] how by word he did everything he wished.

They bade him enter the city, kill the Roman troops and Pilate and reign over these. But he did not care [to do so].

Later, when news of this came to the Jewish leaders, they assembled to the chief priests and said, “We are powerless and [too] weak to oppose the Romans, like a slackened bow. Let us go and inform Pilate what we have heard; and we shall be free of anxiety; if at some time he shall hear [of this] from others, we shall be deprived of [our] property, ourselves slaughtered and [our] children exiled.”

And they went and informed Pilate. And he sent and killed many of the people and brought in that wonder-worker. After inquiring about him, Pilate understood that he was a doer of good, not of evil, [and] not a rebel nor one desirous of kingship, and he released him.

Antiquities 20.169-172

There came out of Egypt about this time to Jerusalem one that said he was a prophet, and advised the multitude of the common people to go along with him to the Mount of Olives, as it was called, which lay over against the city, and at the distance of five furlongs.

He said further, that he would show them from hence how, at his command, the walls of Jerusalem would fall down; and he promised them that he would procure them an entrance into the city through those walls, when they were fallen down.

Now when Felix was informed of these things, he ordered his soldiers to take their weapons, and came against them with a great number of horsemen and footmen from Jerusalem, and attacked the Egyptian and the people that were with him. He also slew four hundred of them, and took two hundred alive. But the Egyptian himself escaped out of the fight, but did not appear any more.

War of the Jews 2.261-263

But there was an Egyptian false prophet that did the Jews more mischief than the former; for he was a sorcerer, and pretended to be a prophet also, and got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him; these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives,

and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to domineer over them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him.

But Felix prevented his attempt, and met him with his Roman soldiers, while all the people assisted him in his attack upon them, insomuch that when it came to a battle, the Egyptian ran away, with a few others, while the greatest part of those that were with him were either destroyed or taken alive; but the rest of the multitude were dispersed every one to their own homes, and there concealed themselves