Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Giuseppe »

Then, according to Joseph Turmel, the following passage (in red) is a Judaizing anti-marcionite interpolation in the fourth Gospel (please attention to the original part in blue to understand better the reasons):




38 “What is truth?” retorted Pilate. With this he went out again to the Jews gathered there and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him.



39 But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?”

40 They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising.

Jesus Sentenced to Be Crucified
19 Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. 2 The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe 3 and went up to him again and again, saying, “Hail, king of the Jews!” And they slapped him in the face.

4 Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews gathered there, “Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him.” 5 When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, “Here is the man!”

6 As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, “Crucify! Crucify!”

But Pilate answered, “You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him.”


7 The Jewish leaders insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.”

8 When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, 9 and he went back inside the palace. “Where do you come from?” he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. 10 “Do you refuse to speak to me?” Pilate said. “Don’t you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?”

11 Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.”

12 From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jewish leaders kept shouting, “If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.”

13 When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge’s seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). 14 It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon.

“Here is your king,” Pilate said to the Jews.

15 But they shouted, “Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!”

“Shall I crucify your king?” Pilate asked.

“We have no king but Caesar,” the chief priests answered.

16 Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified.


The reason, in the Turmel's words:

Interpretation based on synoptics and adapted to the primitive version that, leaving the Jews outside the Praetorium, forced Pilate to go out every time he wanted to talk to them.

Hence you have the absence of Barabbas just in.... ....proto-John!
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Giuseppe »

Note that the original fear of Pilate was not the fact that the Jews had chosen the criminal Barabbas (so winning Pilate on his same field of game), but the fact that the Jews answered him so:

“We have a Law, and according to that Law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.”

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid,

Pilate feared the Law because he feared the god who gave the Law: the demiurge YHWH.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
lsayre
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by lsayre »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:20 am Note that the original fear of Pilate was not the fact that the Jews had chosen the criminal Barabbas (so winning Pilate on his same field of game), but the fact that the Jews answered him so:

“We have a Law, and according to that Law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.”

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid,

Pilate feared the Law because he feared the god who gave the Law: the demiurge YHWH.
Can anyone site this law? Didn't the Roman Procurator pretty much hand pick the Head Priests, so would not he have ready access to the validity or invalidity of said law? On what grounds (other than fantasy) would he have any need to fear it?
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Joseph D. L. »

lsayre wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:07 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:20 am Note that the original fear of Pilate was not the fact that the Jews had chosen the criminal Barabbas (so winning Pilate on his same field of game), but the fact that the Jews answered him so:

“We have a Law, and according to that Law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.”

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid,

Pilate feared the Law because he feared the god who gave the Law: the demiurge YHWH.
Can anyone site this law? Didn't the Roman Procurator pretty much hand pick the Head Priests, so would not he have ready access to the validity or invalidity of said law? On what grounds (other than fantasy) would he have any need to fear it?

“And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, 23 his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.

Paul also brings up this Law.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Giuseppe »

lsayre wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2020 9:07 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:20 am Note that the original fear of Pilate was not the fact that the Jews had chosen the criminal Barabbas (so winning Pilate on his same field of game), but the fact that the Jews answered him so:

“We have a Law, and according to that Law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.”

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid,

Pilate feared the Law because he feared the god who gave the Law: the demiurge YHWH.
Can anyone site this law? Didn't the Roman Procurator pretty much hand pick the Head Priests, so would not he have ready access to the validity or invalidity of said law? On what grounds (other than fantasy) would he have any need to fear it?


As Master of the world, the Devil is the source from whence emanates all political authority. To Pilate who boasts of the power of his will to put to death or to deliver him, the Johannine Christ replies (19:11) "You could have no power against me except it were given to you from above". Then he adds: "This is why the one who delivers me to you commits a greater sin". This answer contains two assertions. The first, we learn that Pilate holds his authority "from above", which is from a Being superior to men, from a Being to which he is a lieutenant and to whom he must do obedience. According to the second assertion it is this superior Being, this Being "above" who delivered the Christ to Pilate his lieutenant; and "this is why" the responsibility of Pilate in the death of Christ is mitigated. The great culprit is this Being "above", who placed his proxy Pilate in an inextricable situation. This Being "above" who is fierce against the Christ to the point of delivering him to Pilate, is "the Enemy", the Devil. He appears to us here as the sovereign holder of political authority of which he gave a parcel to the Roman governor. And it is in the logic of things, since "the whole world is in the power of Evil One" and that this Evil One is the prince of this world.



http://sgwau2cbeginnings.blogspot.com/p ... 5.html?m=0
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Giuseppe »

Note how in the interpolation Jesus comes out with Pilate:

When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, “Here is the man!”


then, after the interpolation, it is said that Pilate returns back inside,

When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, 9 and he went back inside the palace.

and he finds Jesus... ...inside!


“Where do you come from?” he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer.

Contra factum that it is never said, neither in the interpolation nor in the rest, that Jesus comes back inside the palace.

Hence the entire episode of Barabbas is interpolated in proto-John.

Hence this confirms beyond any doubt that Barabbas was exclusively a Judaizing invention to criminalize the Jesus "Son of the unknown Father" of proto-John.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Stuart »

Where did you get this from Turmel? I find this curious, as I am investigating gJohn at this time.
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Turmel's proof that Barabbas is absent in proto-John

Post by Giuseppe »

Stuart wrote: Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:02 pm Where did you get this from Turmel? I find this curious, as I am investigating gJohn at this time.
Hi Stuart,

Havind read in your site about Turmel, I have wanted to buy his little book to see more clearly, and I have found that the translation in English is not complete, since some chapters are missing, and missing is also the reconstruction with commentary of proto-John.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply