Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus.

[Ben C. Smith]

Here are some hypotheses for Simon of Cyrene, Alexander, and Rufus involving deep symbolism:

Richard Carrier: On the Historicity of Jesus, pages 446-451:
Cyrenean = Cyrenaic hedonistic philosophy + Cyrenean Jewish rebellion = two things Mark hates.
Simon = substitute for Simon Peter = father of things that ought to be crucified in Christ.
Alexander = Alexander the Great = way of rebellion.
Rufus = Musonius Rufus = way of philosophy.

Peter Kirby: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1498.
Cyrenean = silphium = hyssop from the Day of Atonement ceremony.
Simon = father of Alexander (the Ram) = ram from the Day of Atonement ceremony.
Alexander = the Ram = ram from the Day of Atonement ceremony.
Rufus = "red" = scarlet cloth from the Day of Atonement ceremony.

Joe Wallack: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1489&start=330#p52243.
Cyrenean = Cyrenean Jewish rebellion = last revolt in the War.
Simon = Simon the son of Gioras = Jewish rebel leader in Jerusalem.
Alexander = Alexandria = a place where many Sicarii were slain.
Rufus = Terentius Rufus = Roman commander.

What others are there that I might add to the list?

Ben.

[MrMacSon]

What others are there that I might add to the list?

re Cyrene and a Jewish Revolt - http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... 955#p51955 -

The beginning of the end of [the] new prosperity period [in Roman Cyrene] came towards the last days of Emperor Trajan’s reign (r. 98-117 BCE), when a revolt led by the local Jewish community against the Romans took place. This was a major episode of social disorder which suggests that the local Jewish community increased significantly during the Ptolemaic period and early Roman occupation. The conflict lasted from 115 to 117 CE and it had a disastrous impact on the economy and demographics, in addition, causing serious damage to the city's buildings.

http://www.ancient.eu/cyrene/

[MrMacSon]

What others are there that I might add to the list?

"Tereutius Rufus, as Reland in part observes here, is the same person whom the Talmudists call Turnus Rufus; of whom they relate, that "he ploughed up Sion as a field, and made Jerusalem become as heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high Idaces of a forest;" which was long before foretold by the prophet Micah, ch. 3:12, and quoted from him in the prophecies of Jeremiah, ch. 26:18."

Endnote 2 of The War of the Jews, Bk VII - http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text ... e_War_7.2b

• Turnus Rufus is also the name of a Roman governor posted in Judea during first half of the second century C.E. who challenged & harangued the famous Talmudic scholar Rabbi Akiva about the mitzvah of bris milah, circumcision.
  
  http://arachimusa.org/ArticleDetail.asp?ArticleID=1529

[MrMacSon]

What others are there that I might add to the list?

Simon was also the name of Judas Iscariot's father; and the name of the Pharisee who hosted the Last Supper(?)

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

What others are there that I might add to the list?

Let's look at the way in which the forum has interpreted the Simon of Cyrene in GMark in an symbolic sense (Sorry if I forgot someone).

Sources

Maryhelena - posts 12345 / Joe Wallack - posts 1234 / steve43 posts 12 / Roger Parvus – post 1
Neil Godfrey
A Cyrenius-Cyrenian link between Josephus and Mark?
Simon of Cyrene & Simon Magus — revised (24th jan 07)
Simon of Cyrene & Golgotha (Tarazi)
Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Chapter 3
Recognizing the Triumphant Conqueror in Mark’s crucifixion scene
More Puns in the Gospel of Mark: People and Places
How the Faithful Destroy Biblical Stories to Stay Faithful (or the Ecumenical Method of Biblical Historiography)
The post 70 construction of Jesus’ tomb
without content, only dead links Best explanation I’ve read yet re Alexander and Rufus


two main ideas about Simon and his sons

- as victims of the Romans or rebells against Rome
- as an Outsider-Jew of Cyrene (or a Gentile of Cyrene), a Greek and a Roman


Cyrenian (Kyrenaios) – a few ideas

- a city where insurrection against Rome had taken place
- a city where Greeks, Jews and strangers live together
- a wordplay with Kyrios
- a wordplay with the Hebrew qeren meaning horn, connoting power and leadership, including that of a messiah
- a wordplay with “the place of the skull” — kraniou topos
- a wordplay with Quirinius (Greek: Kurenios)


Alexander – a few ideas

- Alexander the Great
- Alexander Jannai
- Alexander the son of Aristobulus II
- Tiberius Alexander
- as a stand in for the Greeks
?


Rufus – a few ideas

- Terentius Rufus (Roman Commander in Jerusalem 70 CE)
- Rufus, the commander of Herod‘s cavalry
- Annius Rufus
- Rufus the Egyptian (Wars B VII, 199)
- meaning red-blood
- as a stand in for the Romans
?


passer-by + coming in from the country – a few ideas

- reference to the Son coming into the world to get crucified
- Josephus links Alexander’s crucifixions of James and Simon, sons of Judas, with the time Quirinius (Kurenios) came into Judah (coming in from the country)
- a feature of the Roman triumphal processions: a country person carrying the sacrificial weapon in the procession that took the victim to the place of sacrifice


Why Mark told the little story? What function has that story?

a few (preliminary?) ideas by maryhelena, Neil Godfrey and Joe Wallack:

„The gMark story about Simon and his two sons, is, therefore, an indication, an inference, that the history of Aristobulus and his two sons is relevant to the pseudo-historical gospel crucifixion story. In Jewish history, it is Aristobulus who takes up the fight - takes up the cross - against Rome; a rebellion, an insurrection, that eventually leads to his second son being hung alive on a cross/stake, scourged and then beheaded. Simon's second son being named Rufus brings this symbolic gospel story into the realm of the OT sacrifice theology of the red heifer. The last such red heifer sacrifice being that of the High Priest Ishmael; a High Priest beheaded in Cyrene.“

„If so, this makes far more sense of the Roman dragooning of Simon from the countryside to carry the execution instrument to the scene of the crucifixion. A feature of the Roman triumphal processions was a country person carrying the sacrificial weapon in the procession that took the victim to the place of sacrifice. (A country person was selected presumably over a city person because the former were more likely well practiced in slaughtering animals.) Why look any further for the reason for this person’s inclusion in the narrative?“

„So 'Mark' has first shown his Jesus providing a figurative formula for disciple success of "taking up the cross" to his disciple Simon and after a major theme Ad Nazorean of the first being the last, the real family being those who are "with him" and the insiders being the outsiders and the outsiders being the insiders, shows another Simon who was the last to follow Jesus, who was not family but "with Jesus" and came from the outside and took up Jesus' cross.“

[Ben C. Smith]

What others are there that I might add to the list?

Let's look at the way in which the forum has interpreted the Simon of Cyrene in GMark in an symbolic sense (Sorry if I forgot someone).

Sources

Maryhelena - posts 12345 / Joe Wallack - posts 1234 / steve43 posts 12 / Roger Parvus – post 1
Neil Godfrey
A Cyrenius-Cyrenian link between Josephus and Mark?
Simon of Cyrene & Simon Magus — revised (24th jan 07)
Simon of Cyrene & Golgotha (Tarazi)
Bauckham’s Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. Chapter 3
Recognizing the Triumphant Conqueror in Mark’s crucifixion scene
More Puns in the Gospel of Mark: People and Places
How the Faithful Destroy Biblical Stories to Stay Faithful (or the Ecumenical Method of Biblical Historiography)
The post 70 construction of Jesus’ tomb
without content, only dead links Best explanation I’ve read yet re Alexander and Rufus


two main ideas about Simon and his sons

- as victims of the Romans or rebells against Rome
- as an Outsider-Jew of Cyrene (or a Gentile of Cyrene), a Greek and a Roman


Cyrenian (Kyrenaios) – a few ideas

- a city where insurrection against Rome had taken place
- a city where Greeks, Jews and strangers live together
- a wordplay with Kyrios
- a wordplay with the Hebrew qeren meaning horn, connoting power and leadership, including that of a messiah
- a wordplay with “the place of the skull” — kraniou topos
- a wordplay with Quirinius (Greek: Kurenios)


Alexander – a few ideas

- Alexander the Great
- Alexander Jannai
- Alexander the son of Aristobulus II
- Tiberius Alexander
- as a stand in for the Greeks
?


Rufus – a few ideas

- Terentius Rufus (Roman Commander in Jerusalem 70 CE)
- Rufus, the commander of Herod‘s cavalry
- Annius Rufus
- Rufus the Egyptian (Wars B VII, 199)
- meaning red-blood
- as a stand in for the Romans
?


passer-by + coming in from the country – a few ideas

- reference to the Son coming into the world to get crucified
- Josephus links Alexander’s crucifixions of James and Simon, sons of Judas, with the time Quirinius (Kurenios) came into Judah (coming in from the country)
- a feature of the Roman triumphal processions: a country person carrying the sacrificial weapon in the procession that took the victim to the place of sacrifice


Why Mark told the little story? What function has that story?

a few (preliminary?) ideas by maryhelena, Neil Godfrey and Joe Wallack:

„The gMark story about Simon and his two sons, is, therefore, an indication, an inference, that the history of Aristobulus and his two sons is relevant to the pseudo-historical gospel crucifixion story. In Jewish history, it is Aristobulus who takes up the fight - takes up the cross - against Rome; a rebellion, an insurrection, that eventually leads to his second son being hung alive on a cross/stake, scourged and then beheaded. Simon's second son being named Rufus brings this symbolic gospel story into the realm of the OT sacrifice theology of the red heifer. The last such red heifer sacrifice being that of the High Priest Ishmael; a High Priest beheaded in Cyrene.“

„If so, this makes far more sense of the Roman dragooning of Simon from the countryside to carry the execution instrument to the scene of the crucifixion. A feature of the Roman triumphal processions was a country person carrying the sacrificial weapon in the procession that took the victim to the place of sacrifice. (A country person was selected presumably over a city person because the former were more likely well practiced in slaughtering animals.) Why look any further for the reason for this person’s inclusion in the narrative?“

„So 'Mark' has first shown his Jesus providing a figurative formula for disciple success of "taking up the cross" to his disciple Simon and after a major theme Ad Nazorean of the first being the last, the real family being those who are "with him" and the insiders being the outsiders and the outsiders being the insiders, shows another Simon who was the last to follow Jesus, who was not family but "with Jesus" and came from the outside and took up Jesus' cross.“

Excellent. Thank you!

[DCHindley]

With all deference to Joe "Sherlock" W and others who have turned up the name Rufus in other accounts, and I had also gone a hunting for Rufus references (figuring there might be a who lot fewer with this name than folks named Alexander) but all I was coming up with was engagements related to the end of the first Judean war and the beginning of the Bar Kosiba revolt.

Alexander came up quite a bit, but was mainly Alexander the son of Aristobulus II, which predates the period in question by 60+ years or so.

And Simon bar Giora, really? He was not from Cyrene, except to those gifted with ingenious pun-detecting powers.

I had also hoped to see them show up in Christian apocryphal works, but this was confined to just one, where they are depicted as missionaries.

I just couldn't justify in my mind why the author of Mark would present them as sons of a specific man, Simon, who was made to carry Jesus' execution stake for him. If it was supposed to convey a deep sense of irony or something, I'd expect the author would spread that irony around the whole gospel, not just in one scene.

DCH

[maryhelena]

Chart from an earlier thread: Simon, from Cyrene.

http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=1274

The Simon, from Cyrene, story being a political allegory referencing Hasmonean history. Two sons executed by Rome. The father probably poisoned by those related to Pompey's army. Thus, Jesus, executed by Rome (with the sign above the cross - King of the Jews) takes his place alongside those of the Hasmonean royal house executed by Rome - symbolically or allegory represented by Simon and his sons Alexander and Rufus.

Simon from Cyrene, father of Alexander and Rufus. Simon is coming in from the country when Roman soldiers compelled him to carry the cross of Jesus. Mark 15:21-27.	Simon is defined as the father of his sons rather than the sons being defined as the sons of the father. i.e. the sons are more prominent than the father.	gMark story. Jesus is scourged and hung on a cross/stake; the charge being: King of the Jews.	The name of the second son, Rufus, being linked with the colour red, (blood, sacrifice) is a possible reflection of the OT red heifer sacrifice.
Aristobulus II, father of Alexander and Antigonus. 'Caesar.....Aristobulus he sent home to Palestine to accomplish something against Pompey'. Cassius Dio book 41. He was coming in to Judea when taken by those in Pompey's party and poisoned. - 49 b.c.e.	Alexander II 'In the year 49-48 B.C. Alexander, by direct command of Pompey, was beheaded at Antioch by Q. Metellus Scipio,'. Alexander being the grandson of Alexander Jannaeus - Hasmonean King reported to have crucified 800.	Antigonus II. Antigonus, was hung on a pole, scourged and throat cut by the Roman, Marc Antony in 37 b.c.e. (at Antioch). Cassius Dio. Book 49. Josephus Ant. Book 15.	The history of Antigonus becomes the 'model' for the gospel pseudo-historical Jesus crucifixion story. The red heifer OT sacrifice the medium, the justification, for turning the curse of the cross into a salvation theology. i.e. turning, transforming the unclean into the clean.

[maryhelena]

Since the above chart is a very simplified version of my position on Simon the Cyrenean and his two sons - here is a better outline:

maryhelena - posts 12345

maryhelena on Simon the Cyrenean and his sons Alexander and Rufus:

Mark 15:21. A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.

Cyrenean = Cyrene, in 74 BC, was created a Roman province; but, whereas under the Ptolemies the Jewish inhabitants had enjoyed equal rights, they now found themselves increasingly oppressed by the now autonomous and much larger Greek population. Tensions came to a head in the insurrection of the Jews of Cyrene under Vespasian (73 AD, the First Roman-Jewish War'')

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrene,_L ... man_period.....

Cyrene is relevant to the gospel Simon story for it being a place of Jewish insurrection and a Jewish High Priest was executed there.

ISHMAEL BEN PHABI (FIABI) II.

'Being one of the foremost ten citizens of Jerusalem sent on an embassy to Emperor Nero, he was detained by the empress at Rome as a hostage. He was beheaded in Cyrene after the destruction of Jerusalem, and is glorified by the Mishnah teachers (Parah iii. 5; Soṭah ix. 15; Pes. 57a; Yoma 35b).'

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... i-fiabi-ii

''Ishmael ben Fabus also known as Ishmael ben Phiabi was a High Priest of Israel in the 1st centur
He was a descendant of John Hyrcanus Maccabee Prince of Judea.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael_ben_Fabus

Last High Priest to make the Red Heifer sacrifice.

Ishmael ben Fabus

'The first Moses made, the second Ezra made, and five from Ezra and onward, according to Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: Seven [were made] from Ezra and onward; and who made them? Shimon the righteous and Yochanan the high priest made two each, Elyehoeinai ben Hakof and Chanamel the Egyptian and Yishmael ben Pi'avi made one each.'

http://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Parah.3. ... arLang=all

Josephus says that among those who went over to the Romans were '......... three of high priestly stock, sons of the Ishmael who was beheaded in Cyrene'. War: book 6 ch.2. These sons are not named. Consequently, although what happened in Cyrene is relevant to the gospel Simon story, the historicity and the fate of the sons of ISHMAEL BEN PHABI cannot be established. However, like Cyrene, the city of Jerusalem also experienced revolts and execution of its last High Priest and King. Josephus detail the fate of Aristobulus II and his sons Alexander of Judaea and Antigonus II Mattathias.

Simon = Aristobulus II. 'Caesar.....Aristobulus he sent home to Palestine to accomplish something against Pompey'. Cassius Dio book 41. He was coming in to Judea when taken by those in Pompey's party and poisoned. - 49 b.c.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristobulus_II

(of note re the use of the name *Simon* - Simon Maccabeus. He became the first prince of the Hebrew Hasmonean Dynasty. He reigned from 142 to 135 BCE.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Thassi

Alexander = Alexander of Judaea, son of Aristobulus II. 'Alexander,…was seized at the command of Pompey, and beheaded at Antioch.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_of_Judaea

(of note re the use of the name *Alexander* - Alexander Jannaeus, Hasmonean King reported to have crucified 800. Alexander of Judaea being his grandson.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Jannaeus

Rufus = colour red, blood, sacrifice = Red Heifer Sacrifice.This name/designation is given to the second son of Simon the Cyrenean. The second son of Aristobulus II was Antigonus II Mattathias.

'Josephus states that Marc Antony beheaded Antigonus (Antiquities, XV 1:2 (8–9). Roman historian Dio Cassius says he was crucified and records in his Roman History: "These people [the Jews] Antony entrusted to a certain Herod to govern; but Antigonus he bound to a cross and scourged, a punishment no other king had suffered at the hands of the Romans, and so slew him.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonus_II_Mattathias

(of note is that like the High Priest Ishmael ben Fabus, Antigonus was executed in a foreign country - Syrian Antioch. Note also that Ishmael ben Fabus was the last High Priest to make the Red Heifer sacrifice. )

The Red Heifer sacrifice:

'Even after it ceased entirely, however, the rabbis still regarded its regulations as of importance in teaching a profound lesson. With its contradictory "regulations" rendering the unclean clean and the clean unclean, it was regarded as a classic example of a ḥukkah (i.e., a statute for which no rational explanation can be adduced, but which must be observed because it is divinely commanded).'

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... 16546.html

'The early Jewish conception was that the sacrifice of the red heifer was an expiatory rite to atone for the sin of the golden calf. The color of the heifer, as well as the scarlet thrown upon the fire, represents sin (comp. "your sins be as scarlet"; Isa. i. 18).'

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... red-heifer

(note: The gospel story of Simon the Cyrenean and his two sons, is an allegory referencing a city that experienced Jewish revolts and the execution of a Jewish High Priest. The gospel story relates to the city of Jerusalem; a city that also experienced revolts against Rome and execution of its last High Priest and King . Thus, figures, historical figures relevant to Jewish history are implicated. Hasmonean/Jewish history, re Josephus, relates a Roman execution of the last King and High Priest of the Jews. This execution became, through the principle inherent in the Red Heifer sacrifice, something clean instead of being unclean, cursed as in under the Law. Note the vision of Peter (in Acts) regarding transforming the unclean into the clean via dictate from heaven. Not of course, declaring human blood sacrifice to be 'clean' - but of a change of context from physical reality to heavenly/philosophical/intellectual reality. The Jerusalem above mirroring the Jerusalem below with the exception that only in the Jerusalem above would 'blood' sacrifice have salvation value. Jewish tragedy was transformed into a victorious Christian theology/philosophy.

The gospel crucifixion story is not history. Neither the Jesus figure, nor the figures of Simon the Cyrenean and his two sons are historical figures. What the gospel writers have done is use Hasmonean/Jewish history in a political allegory for their Jesus crucifixion story.

[JoeWallack]

So every name used in 15:21 figures prominently in Josephus' wrap up Chapter 7 with a similar general setting of the destruction/predicted destruction of the Temple and themes of the Jews making the wrong choice.

Thanks, Joe. In your estimation, was this Mark's little in-joke, and he did not care whether his readers picked up on it or not? Or did he expect them to follow the line of inquiry you lay out above? Or did they already know it all in advance, and 15.21 was just a sly confirmation?

Ben.

JW:
Hi Ben. First of all, let me say that I don't think I've proved anything or indicated that anything is probable here. All I've done is identify parallels. Conclusions for such parallels become weaker to the extent you have to cherry-pick them. I do think that my conclusion is better than the other parallel ones here because mine has less cherry-picking. Everything is in the finale of Josephus' Wars.

To try and answer your question above I think the first related question is:

1) Was "Mark" (author) likely familiar with my proposed source?

I think he was as I think GMark was written after "Wars", they were both in Rome and were in the same upper class circle.

Next question:

2) Was "Wars" important to "Mark"?

I think so as "Mark" was writing about 1st century Israel and Josephus would have been the primary related historian.

Next question:

3) Would "Wars" have been useful to GMark?

I think so as "Wars" primary theme is the Jewish mistake of choosing war instead of peace and GMark has a similar theme of the Jewish mistake of not choosing the peaceful Jesus.

Regarding what "Mark" thought about his audience, I think he was just doing what Paul did. Paul used the Jewish Bible to create an outline of Jesus' story. "Mark" expanded this method to use the Jewish Bible and Jewish history to create the original Gospel narrative. Jesus' historical followers did not need Epistles or Gospels because they had real history to use. Paul was competing with real history so he had to create Epistles based on rhetoric and not history. Likewise "Mark" was competing with historical tradition so he had to create a Gospel. This is why Papias says he prefers oral tradition over written stories. He knows/it's known at the time that the stories are fiction.

As far as what "Mark" thought he had created I think it was a combination of art and religion. I'm not sure what he thought the relative importance of the two was. It may have just been an artistic presentation of Christianity. What I am sure of is to date Christian Bible scholarship has underestimated the artistic component of GMark.


Joseph

The New Porphyry