On Mark as a Conspirator who invented a Jewish Conspiracy

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

On Mark as a Conspirator who invented a Jewish Conspiracy

Post by Giuseppe »

Many people - atheists, too (see for example our Ben) - are reluctant to accept Mythicism because they can't accept a ''Mark'' (author) who invented deliberately an earthly Jesus, according to a genuine Conspiracy.

The Christian scholar Simon J. Joseph wrote an interesting article on the Gospels :

The Death of Jesus as a Political Conspiracy and Assassination

He recognizes indirectly what is (for me) a basic problem for many atheists in accepting Mythicism, even if he describes it as a problem (in the his view) for the same Christians in accepting the same ''historical'' truth of the Gospels. His logic is the following:

1) the people are inclined to reject conspirationistic theories.

2)
the Gospels claim really conspirationistic theories (describing a Jewish Conspiracy against Jesus)

3) therefore, the people are inclined to reject the historical truth of the Gospels.


Note the surprising similarity with Mythicism:

1) the people are inclined to reject conspirationistic theories.

2)
the Mythicists claim really conspirationistic theories (describing a Christian Conspiracy who invented an earthly Jesus by the Earliest Gospel)

3) therefore, the people are inclined to reject the claims of the Mythicists.


In the words of Simon J. Joseph:
A conspiracy theory, in other words, is often thought to be illegitimate knowledge.
How does Simon J. Joseph resolve this contradiction?

He describes the Jewish Conspiracy in the Gospels as a tragic collateral effect of a precise theological move by ''Mark'':
The Gospels portray the Jewish high priest – among other Jewish religious leaders – as secretly plotting Jesus’ death. Did the author of Mark invent this “conspiracy?” Or was Jesus’ death the result of an “institutional conspiracy” orchestrated in secret? The author of Mark presented Jesus’ death as part of a divine plan: the son of man must suffer and die at the hands of the religious leaders. This explained why Jesus died ("for our sins"), but did so by constructing a conspiratorial narrative that over-exaggerated a political conspiracy between the high priests into a full-blown drama involving all "The Jews" (Matt 27:25).
So there are two conspiracies in Mark:

1) a divine Conspiracy: the plan of God for the Son of Man

2) a Jewish Conspiracy: the plan of the Jews against the Son of God

The Mythicists would add a third Conspiracy:

3) a Christian Conspiracy: an earthly Jesus for the simple brothers of the Lord.

In other terms, the Mythicists think that the Christian ''Mark'' was a real conspirator who invented the two conspiracies described so well by Simon J. Joseph.

It is a fact that Josephus was a Conspirator just as the ''Mark'' of the Mythicists:

1) he invented a Jewish Conspiracy against the Pax Romana, based on 'an obscure prophecy about men coming from Judea''.

What transformed Josephus in a Conspirator who invented a Conspiracy was the tragic historical event called Destruction of Jerusalem, in 70 CE.

Hence, it is very probable that the same event - the destruction of Jerusalem - transformed also ''Mark'' in a Conspirator who invented a Conspiracy.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: On Mark as a Conspirator who invented a Jewish Conspiracy

Post by DCHindley »

Ya' know, Joe,

I think that what really should be looked into more closely is how human beings rationalize mental dissonance. As I have mentioned, one can:

1) Denigrate the importance of the new ideas that cause dissonance (mental anguish) by ridicule or pretense that it is not worthy of consideration.
2) Go on active attack against the new ideas using force (how many Protestants were burned at the stake by Catholics, and vice versa, on the middle ages and even the early modern period?).
3) Assimilate or otherwise incorporate the new ideas into the existing framework, making changes as needed to one's own world view to accommodate them. This is how new *solutions* are synthesized from a combination of the old "facts" and new "facts". Unlike matter and anti-matter annihilating each another upon contact, these alternate "facts" become the raw ingredients that chemistry and heat and pressure turn into delicious edibles. Ask Alton Brown, the "brainiac" chef from TV cooking shows, etc.

I plan shortly to look at some major *modern* religious movements to see how the human ability to rationalize adopted these different avenues to "explain" what "really" happened when historical events did not play out as predicted by the religious tenets or authority figures. I am thinking of 7th day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Church of Jesus Christ - Latter Day Saints, as they developed over time. I do not mean to denigrate them, or complain how estupido they are, or naïve (or "knave" as Archie Bunker used to say to Edith), or iggorant, but to concentrate on the solutions they developed as history stepped in to thwart their confident predictions.

Then, having a better appreciation for how human beings rationalize the significance of mental dissonance, we can apply that to the origins of Christianity, or the development of rabbinic Judaism, or the development of early Islam. I do not want to jump between what is nearby and recent and best documented to what is old and subject to speculation caused by a lack of information caused by the ravages of time, as that is not a very effective way to develop hypotheses.

DCH
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: On Mark as a Conspirator who invented a Jewish Conspiracy

Post by Giuseppe »

I don't know about other facts in the Antiquity caused by what you call "cognitive dissonance". It seems as a way to explain something of very simple, afterall (the Gospel as propaganda of a Conspiracy Theory: the Jews killed the Christ) by something very complex (the "cognitive dissonance").

Did the "cognitive dissonance" caused Josephus :

1) to invent the "obscure prophecy about men coming from East",
2) to invent a Conspiracy of Jews who did refer the prophecy to themselves,
3) to claim falsely that the prophecy did refer really to Vespasian.

?

I think that the answer is simply: no. Josephus did so not for "cognitive dissonance".
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply