Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 5791
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:33 am

Hi Stefan,
your views about Mark are very interesting. Can I know your opinion about the historicity of Jesus? Thank you.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by iskander » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:53 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:33 am
Hi Stefan,
your views about Mark are very interesting. Can I know your opinion about the historicity of Jesus? Thank you.

LOL !! Do you want to infect every thread with the same bubble?

The following link comprises 2120 pages of regurgitated wisdom and that should be enough.It is best left there.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chris ... l#p2599462

Stefan Kristensen
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 1:54 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Stefan Kristensen » Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:56 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:33 am
Hi Stefan,
your views about Mark are very interesting. Can I know your opinion about the historicity of Jesus? Thank you.
Hey Giuseppe. Thank you, of course you can. I feel 95% convinced that Jesus was historical. But I'm also convinced that all the content we know from the early Christian writings, including the gospels, is consituted by so many layers of tradition and interpreted tradition and plain fiction, that it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty. He is totally lost underneath all those layers, unfortunately. But if he never existed it is impossible to explain the traditions we have, imo. I have spent some time listening to the very knowledgable Richard Carrier, but in the end his argument hinges on what I believe are ridiculous and frivolous readings of a small handful of key passages in Paul's letters. Personally, I don't have any more time for that, but I love Carrier's general treatment of early Judaism and Christianity and he's very clear sighted. But I'm much more interested in a mystery which we can solve: What is the meaning of the NT texts themselves? These texts, especially the gospels, are literary masterpieces that are full of mystery and hidden meaning. It's awesome!

Giuseppe
Posts: 5791
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:14 am

Stefan Kristensen wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:56 am
Giuseppe wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:33 am
Hi Stefan,
your views about Mark are very interesting. Can I know your opinion about the historicity of Jesus? Thank you.
Hey Giuseppe. Thank you, of course you can. I feel 95% convinced that Jesus was historical. But I'm also convinced that all the content we know from the early Christian writings, including the gospels, is consituted by so many layers of tradition and interpreted tradition and plain fiction, that it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty. He is totally lost underneath all those layers, unfortunately. But if he never existed it is impossible to explain the traditions we have, imo. I have spent some time listening to the very knowledgable Richard Carrier, but in the end his argument hinges on what I believe are ridiculous and frivolous readings of a small handful of key passages in Paul's letters. Personally, I don't have any more time for that, but I love Carrier's general treatment of early Judaism and Christianity and he's very clear sighted. But I'm much more interested in a mystery which we can solve: What is the meaning of the NT texts themselves? These texts, especially the gospels, are literary masterpieces that are full of mystery and hidden meaning. It's awesome!
Thank you!
These texts, especially the gospels, are literary masterpieces that are full of mystery and hidden meaning. It's awesome!
I agree.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Bernard Muller » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:30 pm

to Stefan Kristensen,
But I'm also convinced that all the content we know from the early Christian writings, including the gospels, is constituted by so many layers of tradition and interpreted tradition and plain fiction, that it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty. He is totally lost underneath all those layers, unfortunately. But if he never existed it is impossible to explain the traditions we have, imo.
This is what I have done basically: removed Jesus as teacher, as itinerant, as miracle worker, as divine, etc. and after lot of work, this is what was left: a small Jesus who through a series of events, inadvertently starting the development of Christianities by others.
As explained briefly here: http://historical-jesus.info/digest.html
I wonder if you know about my website, where I explained everything: http://historical-jesus.info
But I'm much more interested in a mystery which we can solve: What is the meaning of the NT texts themselves? These texts, especially the gospels, are literary masterpieces that are full of mystery and hidden meaning. It's awesome!
Because of the nature of these religious texts, one can think there are lot of mysteries and hidden meanings (that has been done at profusion by many along the centuries). But I do not think these texts were meant for that (except for the uncanonical gospel of Thomas). Their authors had more urgent purposes, such as addressing the problems of the day (doubts, disbeliefs, concerns, disagreements, etc.) in their community.

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5930
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by MrMacSon » Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:56 pm

Stefan Kristensen wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:56 am

.. I feel 95% convinced that Jesus was historical. But I'm also convinced that all the content we know from the early Christian writings, including the gospels, is constituted by so many layers of tradition and interpreted tradition and plain fiction, that it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty.
.
I think that if "it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty", it is hard to be "95% convinced that Jesus was historical".

Stefan Kristensen wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:56 am

.. But if he never existed it is impossible to explain the traditions we have, imo.
.
I disagree. The development and acceptance of a salvation and saviour figure after both the fall of the Second Temple and the absolute inability to re-build the Temple after the second Roman-Jewish War (the Bar Kokhba revolt) is to be expected.

The development of the Mishnah and Tosefta and other texts after the fall of the Temple would have created many theological, philosophical and existential considerations.

In conjunction with the Jewish people seeing or engaging with many other religions growing in the region at the time eg. Mithracism, the Egyptian mystery religions such as the cult of Serapis who, by that time, had a central figure that was identical to how Jesus is depicted today.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3242
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Bernard Muller » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:58 pm

I think that if "it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty", it is hard to be "95% convinced that Jesus was historical".
Even if less convinced, it is not a reason to ignore any study about how a low-class Jew could have triggered the development of Christian beliefs after his death,
More so when the mythicist reconstructions (very different from each other) require a huge amount of trashing of early Christian texts (parts or total), while mentioning scanty, indirect, weak, remote, far-fetched, biased, controversial evidence in order to support them.
The development and acceptance of a salvation and saviour figure
That development did not require the non-existence of a historical Jesus.
Furthermore, salvation and expectation of a savior figure were always present in the Jewish beliefs. No need to wait for 135 CE or even 70 CE for this development.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 5930
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by MrMacSon » Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:48 pm

MrMacSon wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:56 pm
I think that if "it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty", it is hard to be "95% convinced that Jesus was historical".
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:58 pm
Even if less convinced, it is not a reason to ignore any study about how a low-class Jew could have triggered the development of Christian beliefs after his death.
I am not ignoring any such study. So your misrepresentation is a strawman fallacy.

Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:58 pm
More so when the mythicist reconstructions (very different from each other) require a huge amount of trashing of early Christian texts (parts or total), while mentioning scanty, indirect, weak, remote, far-fetched, biased, controversial evidence in order to support them.
That there might be 'mythicist reconstructions', or that they might be [very] different to each other is beside the point.

I am not aware of any that 'trash early Christian texts'.


MrMacSon wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:56 pm
The development and acceptance of a salvation and saviour figure
Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:58 pm
That development did not require the non-existence of a historical Jesus.
No, but your point is a non-sequitur (another type of fallacy).


Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:58 pm
Furthermore, salvation and expectation of a savior figure were always present in the Jewish beliefs. No need to wait for 135 CE or even 70 CE for this development.
= Another non-sequitur.

Stefan Kristensen
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 1:54 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Stefan Kristensen » Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:14 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 7:30 pm
to Stefan Kristensen,
But I'm also convinced that all the content we know from the early Christian writings, including the gospels, is constituted by so many layers of tradition and interpreted tradition and plain fiction, that it is impossible to say anything about the historical Jesus with any satisfactory degree of certainty. He is totally lost underneath all those layers, unfortunately. But if he never existed it is impossible to explain the traditions we have, imo.
This is what I have done basically: removed Jesus as teacher, as itinerant, as miracle worker, as divine, etc. and after lot of work, this is what was left: a small Jesus who through a series of events, inadvertently starting the development of Christianities by others.
As explained briefly here: http://historical-jesus.info/digest.html
I wonder if you know about my website, where I explained everything: http://historical-jesus.info
But I'm much more interested in a mystery which we can solve: What is the meaning of the NT texts themselves? These texts, especially the gospels, are literary masterpieces that are full of mystery and hidden meaning. It's awesome!
Because of the nature of these religious texts, one can think there are lot of mysteries and hidden meanings (that has been done at profusion by many along the centuries). But I do not think these texts were meant for that (except for the uncanonical gospel of Thomas). Their authors had more urgent purposes, such as addressing the problems of the day (doubts, disbeliefs, concerns, disagreements, etc.) in their community.

Cordially, Bernard
Hi Bernard. I have seen your website, and I find it very impressive and also very helpful for resources. I think your reconstructions are extremely interesting, although there are some of your arguments and reconstructions that I don't agree with. And this is basically because of my different way of approaching all the texts, not least gMark. I havn't researched your position in all the details, but I know that I have my own special way of approaching the gospel-texts, and that leads to some different conclusions.

The very question about the "nature of these" texts, including gMark, is a controversial question, and one of my favorite subjects. What is the nature of gMark?

Stefan Kristensen
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 1:54 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Stefan Kristensen » Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:43 am

Now, concerning the subject of this thread. This narrative, gMark, is a story that explicitly deals with the issue of descendance and actually redefines it. If Jesus is meant by Mark to be a descendant of David, then what is the answer to the question of the thread, when Jesus in Mark 3 rejects his family according to the flesh and speaks about his 'real' family, the Christians? Similarly, this must mean that the Christians, who are apparantly Jesus' family (3:35), are all one big family, a new family apart from their own families according to the flesh. And this is of course exactly what Mark also has Jesus explain in 10:29-30, that the Christians who have left their families instead have gained a new family, i.e. the big Christian family of the 'church'. But Jesus doesn't mention new 'fathers', and this must be because they all have the same, new father, God. They are all family, Jesus' family, and like Jesus they are all sons of God (and daughters). Indeed, God is their "father in the heavens", Mark 11:25.

Consider this then: Mark thinks the Christians are the sons of God, with Jesus as their divine king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, God.
At the Triumphal Entry, the crowd think they are the sons of David, with Jesus as their Davidic king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, David.
I believe that the reason for their very strange shout, "our father, David", is to be explained as Mark wishing to juxtapose these two realities, or use this 'historical' scene with the misunderstood messianic concept to reflect the spiritual truth about the real messianic concept. Just like the passion scene seems to be an absurd and macabre (or 'ironic') reflection of the kingship of Jesus. Son of David, son of God, sons of David, sons of god, kingdom of David, kingdom of God. Mark is trying to do something.

So being a Christian one has the fleshly descent and one has the new spiritual descent also. I think it makes perfect sense that Jesus is meant to be a descendant of David in this story, and in that way all the prophecies about the promised Davidic king, the "root of Jesse" (Is 11:10) etc. are not left unfulfilled. But Mark's story is about the humans not understanding that this Davidic messiah was meant to die and change into a new kind of messiah, one that is king of humanity, not king of the Jews, king of Israel. When Jesus dies, this is the Davidic king dying (cf. 15:26, 32), the covenant with Israel being cancelled. When Jesus is resurrected it is the new 'human' ruler being installed. And 'human' now meaning the new spiritual, immortal form of humanity. Because his death was the real victory of the Davidic messiah, i.e. not victory over Rome, the particular enemy of Israel, but over Satan, the universal enemy of humans. Mark is not just trying to explain this to his readers, he is trying to show how people didn't understand it at the time. The major theme is understanding/misunderstanding.

Post Reply