Did GMark Intend Joseph of Arimathea to be Josephus?

[JoeWallack]

JW:
It's already been pointed out by a precious few that the Greek of "Mark's" (author) presentation of Joseph of Arimathea's identification is reMarkably similar to the Greek of the presentation of Josephus' identification:

"Mark's" Fourth Philosophy Source (After Imagination, Paul & Jewish Bible) = Josephus

4) "Mark's" Joseph apo Arimathias asks for and receives one of three crucified who recovers: Josephus' Josephus apo Matthias asks for and receives three crucified, one of which recovers.

Correspondent: Paul Tobin

Link: The Burial

Smoking gun excerpt:

The similarity in the names of the main protagonist is also considerable. In the same work, Josephus elucidated his distinguished ancestry. His grandfather, also named Joseph, begot Matthias his father in the tenth year of the reign of Archelaus (AD6). In the Greek text (the language Josephus wrote in) Joseph begot Matthias is rendered as Josepou Matthias. In Mark's gospel, Joseph of Arimathea is written in Greek as Joseph apo Arimathias, the similarity is curious. To quote Schonfield:

It is certainly curious that we have Josephus, himself a Josepou Matthias, begging the Roman commander for the bodies of three crucified friends, one of whom is brought back to life. [11]

Rarer though is anyone going beyond "Mark" only faking/contriving a name to yield a notorious historical name all the Way to "Mark" wanting/expecting/knowing the dear Reader will primarily think of the historical Josephus at this point in the narrative. And of course, as The Donald never says, the truth is usually in between (cut to ConAway saying "What is truth?")

So, the purpose of this Thread is to consider the evidence that "Mark" intentionally forged/contrived the identification "Joseph of Arimathea" so that the reader would identify and think of the historical Josephus at this point in the narrative. Fortunately for this Thread it starts out as a reasonable possibility considering that:

• 1) GMark looks like it was written in Rome by a Master late 1st or early 2nd century.
  
  2) For the original audience of 1), as Josephus would have been the premier historian for the setting of 1st century Israel, and the related events would have been hugely significant for Rome, the name connection would have been unmistakable.
  
  3) Most of GMark is impossible so the fiction claimed by this Thread falls well within the author's straukos zone.
  
  4) "Mark" has been demonstrated to have a literary technique of contrived names Ad Nazorean.

The case for Joseph of Arimathea = Josephus is more understated then the Republican plan to replace (really rename) Obamacare. What other evidence is there to move this Thread beyond a reasonable possibility?

As the unfaithful here know by now, the starting point for this type of investigation is Textual Criticism:

15:43

Strong's	Transliteration	Greek	English	Morphology
2064 [e]	elthōn	ἐλθὼν	having come	V-APA-NMS
2501 [e]	Iōsēph	Ἰωσὴφ	Joseph	N-NMS
3588 [e]	ho	ὁ	-	Art-NMS
575 [e]	apo	ἀπὸ	from	Prep
707 [e]	Harimathaias	Ἁριμαθαίας*,	Arimathaea,	N-GFS
2158 [e]	euschēmōn	εὐσχήμων	prominent	Adj-NMS
1010 [e]	bouleutēs	βουλευτής,	Council member,	N-NMS
3739 [e]	hos	ὃς	who	RelPro-NMS
2532 [e]	kai	καὶ	also	Conj
846 [e]	autos	αὐτὸς	himself	PPro-NM3S
1510 [e]	ēn	ἦν	was	V-IIA-3S
4327 [e]	prosdechomenos	προσδεχόμενος	waiting for	V-PPM/P-NMS
3588 [e]	tēn	τὴν	the	Art-AFS
932 [e]	basileian	βασιλείαν	kingdom	N-AFS
3588 [e]	tou	τοῦ	-	Art-GMS
2316 [e]	Theou	Θεοῦ,	of God.	N-GMS
5111 [e]	tolmēsas	τολμήσας	having boldness,	V-APA-NMS
1525 [e]	eisēlthen	εἰσῆλθεν	he went in	V-AIA-3S
4314 [e]	pros	πρὸς	to	Prep
3588 [e]	ton	τὸν	-	Art-AMS
4091 [e]	Pilaton	Πιλᾶτον*	Pilate	N-AMS
2532 [e]	kai	καὶ	and	Conj
154 [e]	ētēsato	ᾐτήσατο	asked for	V-AIM-3S
3588 [e]	to	τὸ	the	Art-ANS
4983 [e]	sōma	σῶμα	body	N-ANS
3588 [e]	tou	τοῦ	-	Art-GMS
2424 [e]	Iēsou	Ἰησοῦ.	of Jesus.	N-GMS

Bonus material for Solo = If Joseph of Arimathea was intended to be Josephus then who was The Young Man at the tomb (in proper attire for The Last Supper) who was the first to proclaim the risen christ?


Josephus

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

[Secret Alias]

Isn't 'Joseph' too old to have been Josephus? If Josephus was a youth or under 40 wouldn't there have been some reference to his young age. Another problem is that the early Jesus narratives might have set the story c 21 CE. But even if it was 30 CE you'd have to add 36 years to his age to make him a general in the uprising and another 30 years to be alive c 100 CE. I think if Josephus was 100 in 100 CE someone would have said 'wow' about his age. Let's suppose 60 - 70 at 100 CE and 30 - 40 at the capture making him not yet born in a gospel narrative set in 30 CE. The only wiggle room - maybe - is that Irenaeus forged the text in his gospel where Jesus was crucified during the reign of Claudius.

[Secret Alias]

Most people assume a lifespan for Josephus c. 37 - 100 CE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus.

[Giuseppe]

Joseph of Ar. was expecting the kingdom of God. From this point of view, the more similar figure would be John the Baptist. Maybe Mark is saying that the start and the end of Jesus's life were fulfilling these expectations and the way to remember this feature is to have respectively the best precursor and the best "follower"/disciple (note the irony of "Arimathea"="best Matthew's town") at the start and at the end of the story.

Said in other terms, "Joseph" as best disciple is the proof that "John" as best prophet was not disappointed in his expectation of the kingdom of God, but he was satisfied fully.

Since I think that John the Baptist never existed, then he was a late addition in Mark. And so also Joseph of Arimathea. They work better as anti-marcionite figures.

[JoeWallack]

Joseph of Ar. was expecting the kingdom of God. From this point of view, the more similar figure would be John the Baptist. Maybe Mark is saying that the start and the end of Jesus's life were fulfilling these expectations and the way to remember this feature is to have respectively the best precursor and the best "follower"/disciple (note the irony of "Arimathea"="best Matthew's town") at the start and at the end of the story.

Said in other terms, "Joseph" as best disciple is the proof that "John" as best prophet was not disappointed in his expectation of the kingdom of God, but he was satisfied fully.

Since I think that John the Baptist never existed, then he was a late addition in Mark. And so also Joseph of Arimathea. They work better as anti-marcionite figures.

JW:
"Arimathea"="best disciple's town". It's going to be hard to outdo the parallel between the Greek of "Joseph of Arimathea" and "Josephus of Matthias". One of the other quality parallels is the relative placements in Josephus' Autobiography verses GMark. Note that Josephus' crucifixion/recovery story comes at the end of his main narrative, The Jewish Physical War. It is followed by a brief post war summary. Likewise "Mark's" crucifixion/recovery story comes at the end of his main narrative, The Jewish Spiritual War. It is followed by a brief post war summary. In both, 3 men enter, 1 man leaves.


Josephus

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

[maryhelena]

Joseph of Ar. was expecting the kingdom of God. From this point of view, the more similar figure would be John the Baptist. Maybe Mark is saying that the start and the end of Jesus's life were fulfilling these expectations and the way to remember this feature is to have respectively the best precursor and the best "follower"/disciple (note the irony of "Arimathea"="best Matthew's town") at the start and at the end of the story.

Said in other terms, "Joseph" as best disciple is the proof that "John" as best prophet was not disappointed in his expectation of the kingdom of God, but he was satisfied fully.

Since I think that John the Baptist never existed, then he was a late addition in Mark. And so also Joseph of Arimathea. They work better as anti-marcionite figures.

JW:
"Arimathea"="best disciple's town". It's going to be hard to outdo the parallel between the Greek of "Joseph of Arimathea" and "Josephus of Matthias". One of the other quality parallels is the relative placements in Josephus' Autobiography verses GMark. Note that Josephus' crucifixion/recovery story comes at the end of his main narrative, The Jewish Physical War. It is followed by a brief post war summary. Likewise "Mark's" crucifixion/recovery story comes at the end of his main narrative, The Jewish Spiritual War. It is followed by a brief post war summary. In both, 3 men enter, 1 man leaves.


Josephus

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

Not forgetting Josephus claimed Hasmonean ancestry

[JoeWallack]

JW:
It goes without the Saying that The Legendary Vorkosigan's related commentary is required reading for this Thread:

Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark
Chapter 15

v43: The Greek for "respected" (euschemon), occurs in Acts 17, twice in 1 Corinthians, and then only in the LXX of Proverbs 11:25 (Brown 1994, p1213). v43: Here the writer shifts from using synedrion, a Jewish technical term for Sanhedrin rendered in Greek, to the more common bouleutes ("council member"), from the Greek word boule, which any Greek-speaker would recognize as a ruling council.
...
Some have also seen a similarity to the story of Josephus in his autobiography:

Life 76
"And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintances. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician's hands, while the third recovered."

Note that this narrative contains the skeleton of the Joseph of Arimathea story: a man named Joseph goes to beg the Roman commander for the bodies of three crucifixion victims, one of whom survives. Interestingly, Josephus' father was named Matthias. Is "Arimathea" a corruption of 'bar Matthias," son of Matthias? In a couple of manuscripts of Matthew it is "bar matthias," as in the medieval Gospel of Barnabas.

Josephus

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

[maryhelena]

JW:
It goes without the Saying that The Legendary Vorkosigan's related commentary is required reading for this Thread:

Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark
Chapter 15

v43: The Greek for "respected" (euschemon), occurs in Acts 17, twice in 1 Corinthians, and then only in the LXX of Proverbs 11:25 (Brown 1994, p1213). v43: Here the writer shifts from using synedrion, a Jewish technical term for Sanhedrin rendered in Greek, to the more common bouleutes ("council member"), from the Greek word boule, which any Greek-speaker would recognize as a ruling council.
...
Some have also seen a similarity to the story of Josephus in his autobiography:

Life 76
"And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintances. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician's hands, while the third recovered."

Note that this narrative contains the skeleton of the Joseph of Arimathea story: a man named Joseph goes to beg the Roman commander for the bodies of three crucifixion victims, one of whom survives. Interestingly, Josephus' father was named Matthias. Is "Arimathea" a corruption of 'bar Matthias," son of Matthias? In a couple of manuscripts of Matthew it is "bar matthias," as in the medieval Gospel of Barnabas.

Josephus

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

So....is Joseph ben Matityahu claiming, on his mother's side, descent from Antigonus II Mattathias/Matityahu ??

JC buried in a Hasmonean tomb?

Joseph of Arimathea depicting the Hasmoneans as secret disciples of JC - i.e. Hasmoneans as creators of the literary figure of the gospel Jesus....?? (John 19:38)

In other words: The work of Josephus is not supporting a historical Jesus - it is supporting the Jesus narrative, a literary narrative, in the gospel story....

[Charles Wilson]

Here the writer shifts from using synedrion, a Jewish technical term for Sanhedrin rendered in Greek, to the more common bouleutes ("council member"), from the Greek word boule, which any Greek-speaker would recognize as a ruling council.

John 3: 1 (RSV):

[1] Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicode'mus, a ruler of the Jews.

Progress! As pointed out:
http://www.michaelturton.com/Mark/GMark15.html

"Historically, the first use of the title "King of the Jews" was by the Hasmonean high priests when they established an independent Jewish state in Palestine a century or so before this time..."

Mark 5: 22 - 23 (RSV):

[22] Then came one of the rulers of the synagogue, Ja'irus by name; and seeing him, he fell at his feet,
[23] and besought him, saying, "My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live."

...and finally:

John 18: 15 (RSV):

[15] Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. As this disciple was known to the high priest, he entered the court of the high priest along with Jesus

There are clearly Political Overtones that, as Maccoby has pointed out, are hidden. Our Long Missed Friend Jay Raskin has made a point in examining some of this Hiding. I've attempted to do the same with Josephus and especially his hiding of the History of Jannaeus and the Hasmoneans. So has Maryhelena. I cannot read Mark 13 without thinking: "Someone is screaming across 2000 years about this."

Raskin examines the "Preparation Day" Crucifixion. This is contrasted with the "Passover Day Crucifixion". For 2000 years, the purpose of Apologetix has been to show how Somebody Got It All Wrong. "Somebody didn't get it all wrong". The Politics of 2 "Crucifixions" spread across 12 years must be hidden to hide the Real Story: The Original Story was concerned with the Hasmoneans and the Mishmarot Priesthood.

John 11 is giving the Program for all to see: " You don't understand that one man must die so that the Nation might live". This part of the Story is not from the Romans. They supervised (See: Nicodemus) but others - the experts - left what they could. One Key to understanding is to look at the Politics. (Hint: It's hidden).

CW

[JoeWallack]

JW:
That "Mark" (author) intended the historical Josephus to be "Joseph of Arimathea" (JoA) in the narrative goes all the Way to the end of the range that this Thread is exploring but there are two Textual Variants which support this. Since as far as we know the Legendary Vorkosigan has gone to wherever the hell Jesus went to from Jerusalem I fear that Jesus might actually return before anyone makes the connection between Joseph of Arimathea and Josephus regarding attitude towards Jesus.

Per "Mark" JoA:

15

• 1. Councillor
  
  2. Honorable
  
  3. Looking for the kingdom of God
  
  4. Acted boldly (not afraid)
  
  5. Asked for the body of Jesus
  
  6. Dressed Jesus properly
  
  7. Put Jesus in a tomb (not buried)

All positive descriptions in the Passion part of the Gospel where everyone else gets negative descriptions. In comparison what famous 1st century Jew likewise seems to have one paragraph out of place where they unexpectedly are all positive towards someone you otherwise thought they would have been negative towards?

For those who need points sharply explained the Joseph of Arimathea/Josephus parallel in GMark may have reflected/started Christian propaganda that the historical Josephus was sympathetic to/admired/believed the Gospel Jesus and contributed to the TF (forgery).

Bonus material for Solo = What other famous historical person towards the end of GMark was converted by Christianty from being ambiguous towards Jesus during his life to finally being a believer in Jesus hundreds of years later?


Joseph

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)