Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 857
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Jax » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:50 pm

Charles Wilson wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:56 pm
Jax wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:19 pm
Perhaps narrow the field and pick one aspect of your thesis and really cover it in depth
"Barkeep! Set up another pitcher or two. I might be here awhile..."

Thanx, Lane. Poster KK once suggested something similar if memory serves so you're in good company.
Rather than a subject picked by me, what specific part of what I write about would help you understand? You as well, Ben. What would help you?

CW
Thanks for the brew. :)

It's not about what I understand or not, but rather what you can articulate in an understandable way. Hey! I have an unconventional thesis that I am investigating now that has few followers, yet I proceed.
What I (personally) find lacking in your material is coherence. I'm just supposed to 'get it'. But I don't.

Take some time and make understandable.

User avatar
Jax
Posts: 857
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Jax » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:54 pm

^ it :p

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Charles Wilson » Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:37 pm

Note: If this should be written in a new Thread, let's do it. Plz see that the OP on Levi has material from 1 Chronicles 24 as well as:

Background:

1 Chronicles 24:

[1] The divisions of the sons of Aaron were these. The sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abi'hu, Elea'zar, and Ith'amar.
[2] But Nadab and Abi'hu died before their father, and had no children, so Elea'zar and Ith'amar became the priests.
[3] With the help of Zadok of the sons of Elea'zar, and Ahim'elech of the sons of Ith'amar, David organized them according to the appointed duties in their service.
[4] Since more chief men were found among the sons of Elea'zar than among the sons of Ith'amar, they organized them under sixteen heads of fathers' houses of the sons of Elea'zar, and eight of the sons of Ith'amar.
[5] They organized them by lot, all alike, for there were officers of the sanctuary and officers of God among both the sons of Elea'zar and the sons of Ith'amar.
[6] And the scribe Shemai'ah the son of Nethan'el, a Levite, recorded them in the presence of the king, and the princes, and Zadok the priest, and Ahim'elech the son of Abi'athar, and the heads of the fathers' houses of the priests and of the Levites; one father's house being chosen for Elea'zar and one chosen for Ith'amar.

[7] The first lot fell to Jehoi'arib, the second to Jedai'ah,
[8] the third to Harim, the fourth to Se-o'rim,
[9] the fifth to Malchi'jah, the sixth to Mij'amin,
[10] the seventh to Hakkoz, the eighth to Abi'jah,
[11] the ninth to Jeshua, the tenth to Shecani'ah,
[12] the eleventh to Eli'ashib, the twelfth to Jakim,
[13] the thirteenth to Huppah, the fourteenth to Jesheb'e-ab,
[14] the fifteenth to Bilgah, the sixteenth to Immer,
[15] the seventeenth to Hezir, the eighteenth to Hap'pizzez,
[16] the nineteenth to Pethahi'ah, the twentieth to Jehez'kel,
[17] the twenty-first to Jachin, the twenty-second to Gamul,
[18] the twenty-third to Delai'ah, the twenty-fourth to Ma-azi'ah.

[19] These had as their appointed duty in their service to come into the house of the LORD according to the procedure established for them by Aaron their father, as the LORD God of Israel had commanded him.

1. This is the establishment of the Mishmarot Priesthood. Note please the first Group, Jehoiarib. Jehoiarib has been given the Hasmonean Dynasty ( https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jehoiarib , in passing) and has the leading role in the Political Organization of Judea - until the Pharisees foment an Opposition to them (Eisenman and Wise, Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, Josephus, Antiquities..., 13, 10, 5). Jehoiarib has been assigned the Settlement at Meiron (Leibner, Settlements in Galilee...) on a high rocky mountain in Galilee (Neusner, personal E-Mail). The sixteenth Mishmarot Group - and last of the House of Eleazar! - is Immer, which is given the Settlement Jabnit, right next door to Meiron. Immer believes that the Hasmoneans are descended from them (Elizur, Leibner, supported by personal E-Mail from Elizur).

2. Acts 13: 25 (RSV):

[25] And as John was finishing his course, he said, `What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. No, but after me one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'

Therefore, John (Assuming continuity of the character named "John" at this point) is a Priest, a Mishmarot Priest unless "Course" means he was completing a Course in Psychiatry or something. The Plain Meaning is that he was a Priest of the Mishmarot Priesthood.

*NOTE*: The last half of the verse: "...after me one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie."

Let us collect from Mark and John relevant verses from this last last half of verse 25:

Mark 1: 7 (RSV):

[7] And he preached, saying, "After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.

The Course names have been listed and in the NT, Luke 1 carries a Birth Narrative with Abijah but in Jewish LIt there is Jehoiarib, Bilgah and Immer. No other Stories accrue, AFAIK.

John 1: 15, 25 - 27

[15] (John bore witness to him, and cried, "This was he of whom I said, `He who comes after me ranks before me, for he was before me.'")
***
[25] They asked him, "Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the prophet?"
[26] John answered them, "I baptize with water; but among you stands one whom you do not know,
[27] even he who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie."

This is great! What is special about Bilgah? http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3298-bilgah Here is a Play on Words! After John comes this "Jesus" character. What explanation can be given to "He who comes after me"? Does it necessarily mean, "After I am gone comes this guy?" No. John may be of a Mishmarot Group which has Temple duty before the Mishmarot Group of which this "Jesus" character was a member.

Further, Bilgah has committed an Offense against the Priesthood. The Priests even considered eliminating Bilgah but decided against it.

A. Immer comes after Bilgah. Bilgah has less stature because of the Offense Bilgah has committed.
B. Therefore, John/Bilgah is not worthy to untie the thong of Jesus' sandal.
C. So "Jesus" follows/comes after Bilgah but is ranked ahead of Bilgah in stature. That means that "Jesus" would be a part of Immer but the Priesthood is to be "Done Away With". This will soon point to seeing the Jesus Character as a "Created" Entity.

I believe there is a "Joke" tying the Temple Service and its animal (cattle) sacrifices with the "thong of the sandal" part but Jokes may be a personal thing here.

3. Maff is difficult.

Not so difficult that it cannot be mastered, in this case. We must ask," What does Mishmarot have to do with the NT and the answer is everything. It has been asserted that many of the New Testament Stories came from the descriptions (Mostly in Josephus) of the Temple Atrocity of 4 BCE. How do we get from Bilgah and Immer to the Temple in 4 BCE and "Jesus"?

A.It is possible to show by a rather mechanical Mathematical derivation that Bilgah and Immer were on Duty for the Passover Atrocity of 4 BCE.

There are 24 Mishmarot Groups which rotate into Jerusalem on each Sabbath. 7 x 24 = 168 days before the Cycle repeats. If Jehoiarib rotates into Jerusalem on a Sabbath, Jehoiarib will rotate into Jerusalem for the next rotation in 168 days.

Which is all well and good unless we have a Fixed Date for a Group to have been in Jerusalem. Otherwise, how do we know which Group is on duty for any given week? Eisenman and Wise assert that the Qumran Group tracked rival Calendars with alignments with the weekly Mishmarot Rotation. Do we have this "Fixed Date"?

Yes. Josephus tells us that Jehoiarib was on duty for the 10th of Ab, 70, when the Temple fell. It wasn't the first time Jehoiarib was on Duty for the Fall of the Temple either, if the Priestly survivors are to be believed.

B. Here is what we need for this "Mechanical" rendering of the dates: We need an "Objective Counter" for the days. There are Julian Day Calendars which can be accessed for this task.
Convert the date of the Fall of the Temple into a Julian Day Number. Remember, what matters is the repetition of the 7 day Cycle and the 168 Day Cycle. The calendar is the simple measure of these days. [Edit Note: The Julian Day Calendar is a purely Solar Calendar for the intent of the Qumran Group (Eisenman and Wise). They were to impose this calendar onto Judea when they "took over". There's a lot of History here...]

Find the "first day after the New Moon" for the calculation of Passover, 4 BCE. Use the Naval Observatory data for this task. Convert to a Julian Day number. Find the Sabbath that marks the beginning/end of the week that contains the Day of Preparation and the following days for the Week of the Feast (See Mark for a huge Blunder here - Mark 14:12).

Count back in groups of 168 until you get to that week of the Passover, 4 BCE, say, Tuesday/Wednesday on. Who was on Duty?
Bilgah and Immer.
***
My back is killing me after a LONG day at the keyboard. Thanx to Ben and Lane.

Next up: Tying the Mishmarot History we've found to the Stories in early Mark. Entering through the narrow door by turning as a child. Telling the Disciples to be quiet and having the stones shout.

CW

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8643
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:56 pm

I understand the rotations of the priestly courses, and I can stipulate for the sake of argument that the rabbinical literature (as well as one highly fragmentary inscription, which, however, your details did not overlap) gives us hints about the areas in which each course settled after the war with Rome; presumably those emails you received from certain scholars contained such details. (I may be mistaken on this matter, but I am willing to go with the flow for now.)

I am also willing to stipulate for the sake of argument that your math is fine, and that Bilgah and Immer were on duty during the fateful event.

So here is your first connection between the Passover massacre and the NT writings:
Charles Wilson wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:37 pm
Acts 13: 25 (RSV):

[25] And as John was finishing his course, he said, `What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. No, but after me one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'

Therefore, John (Assuming continuity of the character named "John" at this point) is a Priest, a Mishmarot Priest unless "Course" means he was completing a Course in Psychiatry or something. The Plain Meaning is that he was a Priest of the Mishmarot Priesthood.
I myself think the sense is that John is near the end of his career and life:

Acts 13.25: 25 "And as John was completing his course [ἐπλήρου Ἰωάννης τὸν δρόμον], he kept saying, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not He. But behold, one is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'"

Acts 20.24: 24 "But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course [τελειῶσαι τὸν δρόμον μου] and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God."

2 Timothy 4.7: 7 I have fought the good fight; I have finished the course [τὸν δρόμον τετέλεκα]; I have kept the faith.

But you seem to wish to take this image in a different direction, as representing the מִשְׁמֶרֶת (mishmaroth) or, as they are called in 1 Chronicles 24.1 itself, the מַחֲלֹקֶת (maḥlakoth). What about the word δρόμος or what about the text or context would lead you to connect it with the מִשְׁמֶרֶת or the מַחֲלֹקֶת?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Charles Wilson » Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:59 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:56 pm
I understand the rotations of the priestly courses, and I can stipulate for the sake of argument that the rabbinical literature (as well as one highly fragmentary inscription, which, however, your details did not overlap) gives us hints about the areas in which each course settled after the war with Rome
Be aware that I am at my limits of what I can see. Leibner's Settlements in Galilee... ( ISBN-13: 978-3161498718
ISBN-10: 3161498712) is simply great. There was a List that appeared in several places that gave the Settlement Assignments, appearing with some frequency in the 3rd century onwards. The List points to what may be a remembrance of Hasmonean Glory. The List with Immer (Jabnit) and Jehoiarib (Meiron) are mentioned. Do at least parts of that List go back to the NT authorships? I believe so but believe me I am the least able to make a qualified assertion.
presumably those emails you received from certain scholars contained such details. (I may be mistaken on this matter, but I am willing to go with the flow for now.)
Shulimit Elizur gives a translation of this Piyyutim (sixth Century, if memory is working):

Leibner, quoting Elizur, Settlements..., p. 417:

"Instead of a sound of weeping
a Devine [as given in the quote] voice was heard in Malchijah
"the youngsters gained a victory in Antioch"
The four heads of the tiger ( a symbol for the Greeks)
were shattered by the youngsters of Immer
in command of the guard (god)
To announce in the streets of Jabnit [Galilean Settlement given to the Mishmarot Group Immer]
that the spear has slashed
every Greek tongue"

Uzi Leibner, Settlement and History in Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine Galilee: An Archaeological Survey of the Eastern Galilee, ISBN-13: 978-3161498718, p. 417
I am also willing to stipulate for the sake of argument that your math is fine, and that Bilgah and Immer were on duty during the fateful event.
OK! :cheers:
So here is your first connection between the Passover massacre and the NT writings:
Charles Wilson wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:37 pm
Acts 13: 25 (RSV):

[25] And as John was finishing his course, he said, `What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. No, but after me one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'

Therefore, John (Assuming continuity of the character named "John" at this point) is a Priest, a Mishmarot Priest unless "Course" means he was completing a Course in Psychiatry or something. The Plain Meaning is that he was a Priest of the Mishmarot Priesthood.
I myself think the sense is that John is near the end of his career and life:

Acts 13.25: 25 "And as John was completing his course [ἐπλήρου Ἰωάννης τὸν δρόμον], he kept saying, 'What do you suppose that I am? I am not He. But behold, one is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie.'"

Acts 20.24: 24 "But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course [τελειῶσαι τὸν δρόμον μου] and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God."

2 Timothy 4.7: 7 I have fought the good fight; I have finished the course [τὸν δρόμον τετέλεκα]; I have kept the faith.

But you seem to wish to take this image in a different direction, as representing the מִשְׁמֶרֶת (mishmaroth) or, as they are called in 1 Chronicles 24.1 itself, the מַחֲלֹקֶת (maḥlakoth). What about the word δρόμος or what about the text or context would lead you to connect it with the מִשְׁמֶרֶת or the מַחֲלֹקֶת?
As usual, you are onto something. Is "Course" through the Greek or Hebrew/Aramaic? Acts is suspect in many places and I had overlooked this verse for a long time. I can show that John is of Bilgah in other ways, some of which I've published above. Also, as we shall see, I sometimes find "Traditional Interpretations" a bit of "Sleight of Hand" - "Now you see it and now you don't":

Luke 19: 39 - 40 (RSV):

[39] And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, "Teacher, rebuke [quiet] your disciples."
[40] He answered, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out."

This is obvious to me:

Josephus, Wars..., 2, 1, 3:

"Accordingly, he made trial to quiet the innovators by persuasion, rather than by force, and sent his general in a private way to them, and by him exhorted them to be quiet. But the seditious threw stones at him, and drove him away, as he came into the temple, and before he could say any thing to them..."

So if it offends you in re: Acts, I'll withdraw it. My job now is to convince you that there is a Really, Real connection between the Passover Slaughter of 4 BCE and the "Miracle Stories" of the NT, especially the early Stories of Mark. That's the course, anyway.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8643
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Aug 17, 2019 6:27 am

Charles Wilson wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:59 pm
As usual, you are onto something. Is "Course" through the Greek or Hebrew/Aramaic?
Not sure what you are asking, but "course" is a typical English translation of several different words and even concepts, both in Hebrew and in Greek.
I can show that John is of Bilgah in other ways, some of which I've published above. Also, as we shall see, I sometimes find "Traditional Interpretations" a bit of "Sleight of Hand" - "Now you see it and now you don't":

Luke 19: 39 - 40 (RSV):

[39] And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, "Teacher, rebuke [quiet] your disciples."
[40] He answered, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out."

This is obvious to me:

Josephus, Wars..., 2, 1, 3:

"Accordingly, he made trial to quiet the innovators by persuasion, rather than by force, and sent his general in a private way to them, and by him exhorted them to be quiet. But the seditious threw stones at him, and drove him away, as he came into the temple, and before he could say any thing to them..."
The stones in Josephus are for throwing or wielding as weapons, which he does elsewhere a number of times for various incidents, especially in connection with the war against Rome:

Wars 5.

...for he had such engines as threw darts, and javelins, and stones, and that in no small number, by which he did not only defend himself from such as fought against him, but slew moreover many of the priests, as they were about their sacred ministrations.

...and as they cried out after that manner, they threw stones at their own people, as though they would drive them away from the gates.

...the Jews ran out and encompassed them round, and fell upon them behind, while that multitude which stood upon the wall threw a heap of stones and darts of all kinds at them....

So they cast stones and arrows at those that were making the banks....

Now the stones that were cast were of the weight of a talent....

He also thereby repelled those that shot stones or darts from the towers....

Wars 6.

So when the Jews were retreated, the Romans brought their engines, although they had all the while stones thrown at them from the tower of Antonia....

But then, as they were beneath the other, and were sadly wounded by the stones thrown down upon them, some of them threw their shields over their bodies....

As for the rest of his partners, the Jews dashed three of them to pieces with stones....

Yet did the seditious still more and more contradict them; and while they cast loud and bitter reproaches upon these deserters, they also set their engines for throwing of darts, and javelins, and stones upon the sacred gates of the temple....

This is just a sample. Throwing stones is a very common motif. If an historical incident involving the throwing of stones is in mind, how would we know which one? There are so many.

But in Luke we get a different motif, I suggest, one related to the unfavorable comparison of humans being to inanimate objects (like stones):

Habakkuk 2.10-11: 10 “You have devised a shameful thing for your house by cutting off many peoples; so you are sinning against yourself. 11 Surely the stone [λίθος] will shout out from the wall, and the rafter will answer it from the framework.”

Luke 19.39-40: 39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Him, “Teacher, rebuke Your disciples.” 40 But Jesus answered, “I tell you, if these become silent, the stones [λίθοι] will cry out!”

If humans should fail to do the right thing, then the stones are sure either at least to announce the fact or even to make up the deficiency.

There is a strong comparison of humans to stones in Josephus himself, should such be desired:

Josephus, Wars 5.9.4 §417: 417 “Against these would any man direct the flames? Is there any who wishes that these should be no more? What could be more worthy of preservation than these? Relentless creatures, more insensible than stones [λίθων ἀπαθέστεροι]!”

417 ἐπὶ ταῦτά τις ὁδηγεῖ φλόγα; ταῦτά τις μηκέτ᾽ εἶναι θέλει; καὶ τί σώζεσθαι τούτων ἀξιώτερον, ἄτεγκτοι καὶ λίθων ἀπαθέστεροι;
My job now is to convince you that there is a Really, Real connection between the Passover Slaughter of 4 BCE and the "Miracle Stories" of the NT, especially the early Stories of Mark. That's the course, anyway.
Okay.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1618
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Charles Wilson » Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:24 am

Thank you very much, Ben. You are taking time with this and I appreciate it greatly.
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 6:27 am
Charles Wilson wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:59 pm
As usual, you are onto something. Is "Course" through the Greek or Hebrew/Aramaic?
Not sure what you are asking, but "course" is a typical English translation of several different words and even concepts, both in Hebrew and in Greek.
Yes. BTW, I agree with what you say here and below. I have always found "Course" to be a bit of an odd usage so I've tried to minimize use of it except in "obvious" cases. Perhaps the Acts 13 use is not so obvious. Besides, as is realized by many, the character "John" has problems in presentation and even existence. Not as complex as figuring out Peter but complex enough. Later.
The stones in Josephus are for throwing or wielding as weapons, which he does elsewhere a number of times for various incidents, especially in connection with the war against Rome
What about Tacitus? When we get deep into the forest with this, we find that "Stoning" is Judaic and "Opening the Veins" is Roman. Stephen Martyr is stoned, Galerianus Piso has his veins opened. I believe that the Biblical and the Tacitus passage are describing the same event and that these two people are the same person. I don't doubt that Josephus sees the "Big Picture" with stones, emphasis on BIG. What of the stoning of a person?

As an experiment (I've mentioned this before), pick up a large stone and hold it under the nose of an agreeable accomplice and scream at him, "If I were to quiet my friends, the very stones would shout!!!" Has a different effect doesn't it? This goes beyond the data only slightly but reasonably fits the situation, as told in Luke.

Stephen Martyr "...went to sleep". Do you go to sleep when you are stoned? (It is said that you do when your veins are opened.) Here is evidence (To me) that the Construction of the NT was accomplished by people who knew Cross-Cultural differences and wrote the stories to take advantage of the "Arbitrage". Whether we agree on much of anything may turn on this Proposition.
Wars 5.

...for he had such engines as threw darts, and javelins, and stones, and that in no small number, by which he did not only defend himself from such as fought against him, but slew moreover many of the priests, as they were about their sacred ministrations.
As Titus sez, "Let's you and him fight!"
Wars 6.

As for the rest of his partners, the Jews dashed three of them to pieces with stones...
"...dashed...to pieces" doesn't sound like beddy-bye time. Stephen Martyr had something else done to him - opening his veins at the 40th mile marker perhaps.
Yet did the seditious still more and more contradict them; and while they cast loud and bitter reproaches upon these deserters, they also set their engines for throwing of darts, and javelins, and stones upon the sacred gates of the temple....
This is just a sample. Throwing stones is a very common motif. If an historical incident involving the throwing of stones is in mind, how would we know which one? There are so many.
You spent a lot of time on finding your examples. Thank you. Yes, throwing stones is a common motif - in describing Judean sensibilities. How do we know which event is being described?

Alfred North Whitehead, "Nature Alive":

"The extension of observation waits upon some dim apprehension of reasonable connection. For example, the observation of insects on flowers dimly suggests some congruity between the natures of insects and of flowers, and thus leads to a wealth of observation from which whole branches of science have developed. But a consistent positivist should be content with the observed facts, namely insects visiting flowers. It is a fact of charming simplicity. There is nothing further to be said upon the matter, according to the doctrine of a positivist."

As we move to the Main Body of the Analysis, whether we come to ANY agreement will depend on how far you are willing to go in taking charming stories and seeing them as inverted stories, often involving Death.

Is the "Vinegar on a sponge on a hyssop stick" motif actually a (Coded!) vicious satire of the homosexual Vitellius? How about:

Matthew 25: 1, 10 - 11, 13 (RSV):

[1] "Then the kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom.
***
[10] And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the marriage feast; and the door was shut.
[11] Afterward the other maidens came also, saying, `Lord, lord, open to us.'
***
[13] Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

Mark 13: 33 - 37 (RSV):

[33] Take heed, watch; for you do not know when the time will come.
[34] It is like a man going on a journey, when he leaves home and puts his servants in charge, each with his work, and commands the doorkeeper to be on the watch.
[35] Watch therefore -- for you do not know when the master of the house will come, in the evening, or at midnight, or at cockcrow, or in the morning --
[36] lest he come suddenly and find you asleep.
[37] And what I say to you I say to all: Watch."

Can you see these as parts of the same Story? If you cannot, if every instance offered is rejected, there is nothing more to say. Go your way and I'll go mine. I may in fact be wrong but it's not for lack of trying to be correct.
"The extension of observation waits upon some dim apprehension of reasonable connection".

'Zactly. "What's reasonable?"

Josephus, Antiquities..., 17, 9, 3:

"Now Archelaus thought there was no way to preserve the entire government but by cutting off those who made this attempt upon it; so he sent out the whole army upon them, and sent the horsemen to prevent those that had their tents without the temple from assisting those that were within the temple, and to kill such as ran away from the footmen when they thought themselves out of danger; which horsemen slew three thousand men, while the rest went to the neighboring mountains. Then did Archelaus order proclamation to be made to them all, that they should retire to their own homes; so they went away, and left the festival, out of fear of somewhat worse which would follow..."

So, Passover and the Feast are cancelled. This is not momentous? The assertion therefore is simple. There was a "Memorial Story" written and it was appropriated, rearranged ("Papias", whether he existed or not...) and rewritten by the Romans for the Glory of the Flavians. The Stories, originally in Hebrew/Aramaic, were rewritten to hide their Jewish Origins, especially the Stories of the Priesthood, as seen through the eyes of Peter. There are many tell-tales that made it through the rewrites that show the Priesthood is the original focus. It is cancelling the Transvaluation of the NT and seeing the Stories with a different Intentionality that allows the Thesis to appear.

Thank you, Ben.

CW

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1228
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by rakovsky » Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:04 am

One can theorize that manuscript D is right and Mark had Lebba as one of the 12 disciples, and that Matthew saw the story of Levi in Mark's gospel and switched it to be about himself, and then Luke switched it back again to be about Levi.

Or one can theorize that the publican Levi was the publican Matthew's name before he was called and hence the story of his calling uses his original name. And this explains why in the same story, Mark calls the person Levi, Matthew calls the person Matthew, and Luke calls him Levi in the story again. It would explain why Levi the publican is not listed in the lists of the apostles (unless they said Lebbaeus and this referred to Levi), and hardly anything else besides his calling when he was still a non-Christian is said in any early Christian writings. And it would help explain why we don't have any other stories about the calling of Matthew. He was quite literate as a gospel writer, so probably educated like a publican would tend to be. The story that Matthew was actually a publican sounds credible.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

John2
Posts: 3585
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by John2 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 4:59 pm

I hadn't thought about who Levi or Matthew were until now, but being someone who subscribes to the idea of Markan priority, I'm thinking that if Levi was also called Matthew then Mark would have said so. As the Wikipedia page for Matthew notes:
In passages parallel to Matthew 9:9, both Mark 2:14 and Luke 5:27 describe Jesus' calling of the tax collector Levi, the son of Alphaeus, but Mark and Luke never explicitly equate this Levi with the Matthew named as one of the twelve.

if it is the case that Levi is not Matthew, then the only question would be why did (in my view) whoever translated and combined Matthew with Mark change Levi to Matthew? I'm thinking this was not the case in the original Hebrew Matthew, since I suspect only the NT Matthew was combined with Mark.

In other words, in my view the change from Levi to Matthew would have been made second hand, by the translator/combiner, and not the Matthew that Papias says wrote the original Hebrew version. How everything else would shake out under this scenario is beyond me at the moment.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8643
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Levi, Matthew, & Matthias.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:13 pm

rakovsky wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 10:04 am
The story that Matthew was actually a publican sounds credible.
Sounding credible and being historical are two different things.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply