Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by GakuseiDon »

Ulan wrote: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:46 amThe official German translation of the Catholic Church tries to translate Mark as "Then he exhaled the spirit".
Does the German version, just after that point, have the centurion say, "Gesundheit"? That would be a big clue about the original meaning of Mark 15:37. Given that the temple veil was torn in two, no wonder the centurion said "Truly this man was the Son of God"! :) It does recast Mark 15:37-9 in a new light.
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John T »

John2 wrote: Mon Jul 30, 2018 9:09 am
Offhand, I'm unaware of any Jewish Christian writing that castigates Paul for this particular belief. And my understanding from Church fathers is that Jewish Christians believed that Jesus (or the "Christ" spirit that entered into him at some point during his life) was a heavenly being.
To be more clear, the spirit/logos entered Jesus upon baptism.

"And when he came up out of the water, immediately he [John the Baptist] saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him [Jesus] like a dove." Mark 1:10


That infusion of the logos into Jesus gave him the ability to know and to communicate with heavenly beings.

"And he was in the wilderness forty days, bening tempted by Satan. And he was with the wild animals, and the angels were ministering to him." Mark 1:13

John Mark was a scribe of Paul.
Therefore, Paul is an adoptionist as well.

Sincerely,

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by Ulan »

GakuseiDon wrote: Mon Jul 30, 2018 4:20 pm
Ulan wrote: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:46 amThe official German translation of the Catholic Church tries to translate Mark as "Then he exhaled the spirit".
Does the German version, just after that point, have the centurion say, "Gesundheit"? That would be a big clue about the original meaning of Mark 15:37. Given that the temple veil was torn in two, no wonder the centurion said "Truly this man was the Son of God"! :) It does recast Mark 15:37-9 in a new light.
Heh, I guess I have to disappoint. The German is "Dann hauchte er den Geist aus." Which, unlike my English translation, always means something very gentle.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John2 »

Alright, so let's say that Jesus' "spirit" (or the Christ spirit) left him when he died on the cross in Mark. This brings up some questions. How does this idea fit with what Jesus says in Mk. 10:33-34?
They will condemn Him to death and hand Him over to the Gentiles, who will mock Him and spit on Him and flog Him and kill Him. And after three days He will rise again.
What, then, is the difference between Jesus' spirit leaving him and Jesus' resurrection after three days?

And how does it fit with what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:3-5?
... Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.
If Jesus' spirit had left him on the "first day," why did it/he wait until the third day to appear to people?

And who/what exactly is sitting at the right hand of God, Jesus' spirit that left him on the first day, or Jesus' physical body that was resurrected on the third day?

And why does 1 Peter not mention Jesus' physical body being resurrected in 3:18-19?
He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits ...


And what is the point of the empty tomb scene in Mark if Jesus' spirit was already in heaven? Why not end it there, then?

And I'm not sure I fully appreciate the significance of the Temple veil being torn and such at Jesus' crucifixion. I suppose these things are a "bookend' of sorts to the baptism, but the empty tomb scene also has an accompanying "bookend" in 16:4-7:
But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

“Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’ ”
This seems as (or more) significant to me than the Temple veil being torn and the centurion proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God (which I think pertain to Homer, as per MacDonald). This scene seems like the culmination of what Jesus had said in 10:33-34 rather than Jesus' spirit leaving him on the cross, and the dying part is only the first part of what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:3-4 ("died ... buried ...raised on the third day"). To see 15:37 as a "bookend" to the baptism seems to ignore the significance of the "bookend" of Jesus being resurrected "on the third day" (and which literally is the bookend of Mark).

What is the point of the resurrection if Jesus' spirit was already in heaven? Are there thus two "Jesuses" in heaven sitting at the right hand of God, the Christ spirit that left him when he died and Jesus' physical body that was resurrected three days later?
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John T »

@John2,

I'm sorry but you asked way too many complex questions to answer all at once.
So, I will answer one or two but from a Enochic Judaism perspective and let's see if that helps explain the other questions. If not, I will break them down one at a time.
Also, if you want, we can go over the Catholic or Protestant version to compare and contrast.
********************
The spirit and body are two different things that are separated at death.
The human spirit/soul has a duality of good and evil. Humans who have a larger proportion of good in their soul are called the sons of Light. Those who have a greater level of evil are the sons of Darkness.

"For God has established the spirits in equal measure until the final age, and has set everlasting hatred between their divisions."...The Community Rule 1QS IV-15.

At the final age the two camps will have a climatic battle. The Messiah will be able to resurrect the sons of Light who died in battle over and over again until the sons of Darkness are defeated. The War Scroll XIII-XIV.

So, when will the final age be and how will you know who is the true Messiah?
The awaited Messiah will be identified by his miracles. "For He will heal the wounded, and revive the dead and bring good news to the poor (Isa. 41:1)."...A Messianic Apocalypse (4Q521).
********************
Jesus had additional knowledge (Enoch Judaism) of the coming Messiah that has not yet been found at Qumran.
He openly states a tenant of Enoch Judaism that the Son of Man will rise from the dead after 3 days and 3 nights. Mark 8:31-33.
Jesus teaches the body and soul are two different things. He also teaches the Messiah has the ability to destroy both body and soul. Matthew 10:28.
This teaching that the soul can live on after death without a body and then be reunited is too radical for the Sadducees. The Sadducee's' did not believe in the resurrection, whereas the Pharisees did. Acts 23:8-10
******************

So, in summary according to both Jesus and Enochic Judaism, the soul and the body can be divided upon death and later reunited.

Sincerely,
John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:03 am Alright, so let's say that Jesus' "spirit" (or the Christ spirit) left him when he died on the cross in Mark. This brings up some questions. How does this idea fit with what Jesus says in Mk. 10:33-34?
They will condemn Him to death and hand Him over to the Gentiles, who will mock Him and spit on Him and flog Him and kill Him. And after three days He will rise again.
The possibility that I am considering is that all the bits about rising on the third day were added to a story line in which the spirit abandoned Jesus' body at his death, and which ended basically at Mark 15.39. I call this a "story line" because I do not know whether to call it proto-Mark or some other primitive gospel message.
What, then, is the difference between Jesus' spirit leaving him and Jesus' resurrection after three days?
The first marks a separationist theology, the second something more closely resembling orthodoxy.
And how does it fit with what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:3-5?
... Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.
It does not fit into this at all. Two separate theologies and stories are at play.
And who/what exactly is sitting at the right hand of God, Jesus' spirit that left him on the first day, or Jesus' physical body that was resurrected on the third day?
For a separationist, the former; for the orthodox, the latter.
And why does 1 Peter not mention Jesus' physical body being resurrected in 3:18-19?
Good question.
And what is the point of the empty tomb scene in Mark if Jesus' spirit was already in heaven? Why not end it there, then?
Indeed.
And I'm not sure I fully appreciate the significance of the Temple veil being torn and such at Jesus' crucifixion. I suppose these things are a "bookend' of sorts to the baptism, but the empty tomb scene also has an accompanying "bookend" in 16:4-7:
But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

“Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’ ”
This seems as (or more) significant to me than the Temple veil being torn and the centurion proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God (which I think pertain to Homer, as per MacDonald). This scene seems like the culmination of what Jesus had said in 10:33-34 rather than Jesus' spirit leaving him on the cross, and the dying part is only the first part of what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:3-4 ("died ... buried ...raised on the third day"). To see 15:37 as a "bookend" to the baptism seems to ignore the significance of the "bookend" of Jesus being resurrected "on the third day" (and which literally is the bookend of Mark).
I am not sure what you are saying about the "bookends" here. To what is the resurrection on the third day a bookend?

And of course you already know that I view MacDonald's Homeric connections as a distraction for understanding Mark.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John T »

John2 wrote: Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:03 am
And why does 1 Peter not mention Jesus' physical body being resurrected in 3:18-19?
He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits ...
The resurrection of the dead body of Jesus was already established in 1 Peter 1:3.
1 Peter 3:18-19 is taking about what the spirit of Jesus was doing during the 3 days and nights before the resurrection of the body.

Sincerely,
John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John2 »

Ben wrote:
I am not sure what you are saying about the "bookends" here. To what is the resurrection on the third day a bookend?
The baptism. I think of it this way. The baptism is in the first chapter and the resurrection is in the last chapter (at least as we have it).

And:
And of course you already know that I view MacDonald's Homeric connections as a distraction for understanding Mark.
Still works for me though. I'm thinking that Mark was aware of the parallels that MacDonald mentions and those you've pointed out in the LXX. I see Mark as being a Gentile follower of Peter who merged his old background (pagan, Homeric) with his new religion. In other words, I think you and MacDonald are both right.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:19 am Ben wrote:
I am not sure what you are saying about the "bookends" here. To what is the resurrection on the third day a bookend?
The baptism. I think of it this way. The baptism is in the first chapter and the resurrection is in the last chapter (at least as we have it).
I compare (following Ulansey) the baptism with the death point by point. When you say that the resurrection also creates a bookend with the baptism, do you have a similar comparison in mind? If so, what are the points?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Question on GMark's Adoptionism vs. the Empty Tomb

Post by John2 »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Wed Aug 01, 2018 12:39 pm
John2 wrote: Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:19 am Ben wrote:
I am not sure what you are saying about the "bookends" here. To what is the resurrection on the third day a bookend?
The baptism. I think of it this way. The baptism is in the first chapter and the resurrection is in the last chapter (at least as we have it).
I compare (following Ulansey) the baptism with the death point by point. When you say that the resurrection also creates a bookend with the baptism, do you have a similar comparison in mind? If so, what are the points?
Wow, that's a tall order. I'll give it some thought. I can only offer my "impression" right now, but I'll see how it holds up. Hm.
Last edited by John2 on Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply