the origin of the name ''Pillars''

[Giuseppe]

According to Wenham and Moses, the three pillars of
Jerusalem were called pillars in the literal sense of “standing
ones,” an allusion to a tradition that introduces the story
of the transfiguration in all three synoptic gospel versions,
that is, the promise that some of those then standing there
would not die before the coming of the kingdom.22 Thus the
three Jerusalem leaders were called pillars on account of
their having witnessed the transfiguration.

http://robertmprice.mindvendor.com/JHC/ ... 1_2018.pdf

The note 3 says:

David Wenham and A. D. A. Moses, “‘There Are Some
Standing Here. . . .’ Did They Become the ‘Reputed Pillars’ of the
Jerusalem Church? Some Reflections on Mark 9:1, Galatians
2:9 and the Transfiguration,” Novum Testamentum 36/2 (1994):
pp. 146-163.

So we realize the mystical/revelatory/hallucinatory origins of the Cult, if just the Transfiguration Episode was the event that gave the title of ''Pillars'' to the three Founders of the sect.

They earned the title of Pillars because they saw Jesus in the his glory. This is just what minimal mythicism requires.

[Giuseppe]

But the Transfiguration Episode was originally a Post-Resurrection Event.

So Peter, John and James were called Pillars because they saw the Risen Jesus for the first time, among all the Christians.

But when ''Mark'' invented the first time an earthly Jesus, then the Original Post-Resurrection Event was carried before the death of the invented earthly Jesus, so that it had to become a Transfiguration Event in order to be seen by the Pillars before the crucifixion.

[Ben C. Smith]

To be considered:

1 Enoch 90.29: 29 And I saw till the Lord of the sheep brought a new house greater and loftier than that first, and set it up in the place of the first which had beer folded up; all its pillars were new, and its ornaments were new and larger than those of the first, the old one which He had taken away, and all the sheep were within it.

Roger David Aus, "Three Pillars and Three Patriarchs," in Barabbas and Esther, pages 115-116: Although rabbinic writings can at times speak of twelve pillars supporting the world, or of seven, or of one, they much more frequently speak of three. These in turn can at times also be thought of as three entities or virtues. Later traditions concerning three human beings can list the three sons of Korah; Daniel's three friends Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah; and Adam, Noah and Abraham as the three pillars of the earth. Yet by far the strongest and earliest tradition as far as three humans is concerned is that of the three Patriarchs, who are always mentioned before the above alternatives. / Rabbinic sources show that in a Jewish community there were always three judges for non-capital cases....

[Giuseppe]

the best explanation of the origin of the name ''Pillars'' for the our three John, Peter and James is surely that given above in the incipit of the thread. Since it explains perfectly:

1) the origin of the cult (read: hallucinations and apocalypticism)

2) the reason why the Transfiguration Episode was placed before the Crucifixion, (who was seen by the Pillars had to be, with Mark, the Earthly Jesus and not more only the Risen Jesus)

3) why the Generational Prophecy was placed just before the Transfiguration Episode (to explain the meaning of Pillars) .

[Ben C. Smith]

Whatever you say, Giuseppe. But this is the weak link:

the best explanation of the origin of the name ''Pillars'' for the our three John, Peter and James is surely that given above in the incipit of the thread. Since it explains perfectly:

1) the origin of the cult (read: hallucinations and apocalypticism)

2) the reason why the Transfiguration Episode was placed before the Crucifixion, (who was seen by the Pillars had to be, with Mark, the Earthly Jesus and not more only the Risen Jesus)

3) why the Generational Prophecy was placed just before the Transfiguration Episode (to explain the meaning of Pillars) .

[John2]

I see the term pillar as having to do with being a protector of Jerusalem and the Temple, like in Rev. 3:12:

The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name.

This is the same word Paul uses to describe James and company in Gal. 2:9, as Dunn notes here:

https://books.google.com/books?id=A_Ngb ... em&f=false

And Hag. 12b applies the term to a righteous one (which is another term used to describe James) in an interpretation of Prov. 10:25:

And the Rabbis say: The earth stands on twelve pillars, as it is stated: “He set the borders of the nations according to the number of the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 32:8). Just as the children of Israel, i.e., the sons of Jacob, are twelve in number, so does the world rest on twelve pillars. And some say: There are seven pillars, as it is stated: “She has hewn out her seven pillars” (Proverbs 9:1). Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua says: The earth rests on one pillar and a righteous person is its name, as it is stated: “But a righteous person is the foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25).

https://www.sefaria.org/Chagigah.12b.3?lang=bi

And Hegesippus uses a related term to describe James in EH 2.23:

Because of his exceeding great justice he was called ... Oblias, which signifies in Greek, ‘Bulwark of the people’ ...

Regarding the meaning of Oblias, Plumtree suggests it is derived from Ophel, which is what I am leaning towards as well:

The name Oblias, with the explanation which Hegesippus gives for it, represents the reverence felt by the population of Jerusalem for one who was to them the last surviving representative of the saintly life, and which shewed itself in their feeling that when he was murdered their defence was gone ...

[Footnote 2 re: the origin of the term Oblias]: The probable Hebrew form of the word Ophli-am (= stronghold of the people), the first half of the word being identical with Ophel, the tower on the south side of the Temple, which was the residence of the Levites (Neh. XI.21).

https://books.google.com/books?id=WWJbA ... el&f=false

This idea is echoed by Pixner in Paths of the Messiah and Sites of the Early Church from Galilee to Jerusalem:

https://books.google.com/books?id=bvhA6 ... as&f=false

The term Ophel is used five times in the OT and means "a fortified mound or hill in Jerusalem."

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/6077.htm

As Bauckham writes in James The Just and Christian Origins:

... the term Oblias and its interpretation should be seen in the context of the early church's understanding of itself as the eschatological Temple. Like the Qumran community, which also understood itself as a Temple, the first Christians could describe themselves and their leaders as various parts of the structure of the Temple building. Christians in general were the stones of which the Temple is constructed (1 Pet 2:5; Hermas Vis. 3; Sim. 9); the apostles and Christian prophets were the foundation (Eph 2:20); Peter was the rock on which the Temple was built (Matt 16:8); Jesus Christ was the foundation (1 Cor 3:11) or cornerstone/keystone (Eph 2:20; 1 Pet 2:4, 6-7). That this kind of imagery goes back to the early Jerusalem church can be seen from the designation of James, Peter and John as pillars (Gal 2:9), i.e., supports on which the messianic Temple building rests. We should note that in many cases specific references to these architectural facets of the eschatological Temple were found in scripture ...

https://books.google.com/books?id=5SHbj ... as&f=false

And Eusebius writes regarding this idea of James and company being protectors of Jerusalem in EH 3.7.9:

But it may be proper to mention also those events which exhibited the graciousness of that all-good Providence which held back their destruction full forty years after their crime against Christ — during which time many of the apostles and disciples, and James himself the first bishop there, the one who is called the brother of the Lord, were still alive, and dwelling in Jerusalem itself, remained the surest bulwark of the place.

Also see Dennis re: the definition of pillars in The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism: Second Edition:

https://books.google.com/books?id=WlDzC ... ld&f=false

[Ethan]

Pillar is an upright pole and up-right in Hebrew is יָשַׁר [Yasher] [Israelite] and צֶדֶק [Tsadeq] [Sadducee] and in Greek εὐθείᾳ [Jew] .

Psalms 143:10
Teach me to do thy will; for thou art my God: thy spirit is good; lead me into the land of uprightness[εὐθείᾳ > Judea] .

So being called Pillars implies they are up-right i.e Jew [εὐθείᾳ ]

[Giuseppe]

Whatever you say, Giuseppe. But this is the weak link:

3) why the Generational Prophecy was placed just before the Transfiguration Episode (to explain the meaning of Pillars) .

it requires only to realize that the Generational Prophecy was placed there to explain the Transfiguration Episode, and that the vice versa (that the Transfiguration Episode was placed there to apologize the - otherwise failed - Generational Prophecy ) is false.

In other terms, Mark is explaining for the his readers why the Pillars were considered "Pillars": they saw the first signs of the coming Kingdom.

Differently from others.

[Ben C. Smith]

Whatever you say, Giuseppe. But this is the weak link:

3) why the Generational Prophecy was placed just before the Transfiguration Episode (to explain the meaning of Pillars) .

it requires only to realize that the Generational Prophecy was placed there to explain the Transfiguration Episode, and that the vice versa (that the Transfiguration Episode was placed there to apologize the - otherwise failed - Generational Prophecy ) is false.

It seems clear to me that the "vice versa" scenario is more likely to be true. That is exactly how the Transfiguration scene functions, for example, for Origen: as an explanation and apology for "some standing here," which is just one of the multiple variants of the generational prophecy, one of them even being found in Paul, and therefore not likely to have been concocted solely for the purpose of interpreting the Transfiguration:

You: "standing" > pillars.
Aus: pillars > pillars.

Just because pillars stand does not mean that all things which stand are pillars.

[Giuseppe]

I am not saying that the term "Pillars" was invented by Mark. The Pillars were known as such before Mark.

Idem for the Generational Prophecy: Mark has not the copy-right on it. Any apocalypticist has the copy-right on it..

Where Mark has the exclusive copy-right is on the placement of the Transfiguration Episode immediately after the Generational Prophecy to explain the source of the presumed "authority" of the Pillars: to be the first witnesses of a Resurrection Event (shown/masked by Mark as an earthly Event that precedes the death and crucifixion).