Who is testing who about the crucified man in Mark and in Luke

[Giuseppe]

Luke 23:33-43

Mark 15:22-32

33 When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots. 35 The people stood watching, and the rulers even sneered at him. They said, “He saved others; let him save himself if he is God’s Messiah, the Chosen One.” 36 The soldiers also came up and mocked him. They offered him wine vinegar 37 and said, “If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.” 38 There was a written notice above him, which read: this is the king of the jews. 39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom. ” 43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

22 They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means “the place of the skull”). 23 Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it. 24 And they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get. 25 It was nine in the morning when they crucified him. 26 The written notice of the charge against him read: the king of the jews. 27 They crucified two rebels with him, one on his right and one on his left. 29 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, “So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 come down from the cross and save yourself!” 31 In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! 32 Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Note the difference between Luke and Mark about this point.

In Luke, again and again the accusation against Jesus takes the following form:

IF you are the Jewish Christ - i.e. the our Christ - , THEN save yourself, etc.

So a genuine test is taking place, and who is testing the identity of Jesus are the same his killers.

Also in Mark a test is taking place, but who has to test the identity of Jesus is Jesus himself:

IF you want to confirm that you are the Jewish Christ, THEN save yourself, etc.

This is for me an evidence that at least here Luke is more old than Mark, and therefore it can only be proto-Luke aka Mcn, the marcionite Gospel.

Because it confirms my basic suspicion: that in the Earliest Gospel Jesus is not the Jewish Christ.

[Giuseppe]

Matthew 27:32-44

32 As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. 33 They came to a place called Golgotha (which means “the place of the skull”). 34 There they offered Jesus wine to drink, mixed with gall; but after tasting it, he refused to drink it. 35 When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots. 36 And sitting down, they kept watch over him there. 37 Above his head they placed the written charge against him: this is jesus, the king of the jews.
38 Two rebels were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left. 39 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads 40 and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!” 41 In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him. 42 “He saved others,” they said, “but he can’t save himself! He’s the king of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” 44 In the same way the rebels who were crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

Note how Matthew, even more than Mark, makes the accusation against Jesus in the form :

IF you are who you say, then save yourself, etc.

Hence there is no doubt about what Jesus thinks about himself : he is the Jewish Messiah and the Jews don't believe in him as such.

Further evidence of this is the recognizable pattern of the accusations both in Mark and Matthew:

Mark:

“So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 come down from the cross and save yourself!”

“He saved others, but he can’t save himself! 32 Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.”

Matthew :

“You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! Come down from the cross, if you are the Son of God!”

“He saved others, but he can’t save himself! He’s the king of Israel! Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. 43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’”

The accusers in Mark and in Matthew have already as premise of their mockery the recognized fact of the (Jewish) Messianic claims made by Jesus.

But not so in Luke:

“He saved others; let him save himself if he is God’s Messiah, the Chosen One.”

“If you are the king of the Jews, save yourself.”

“Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”

In Luke the premise is never made, that Jesus proclaimed himself as the Jewish Christ. It's all in the mind of the his accusers.

[Giuseppe]

Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). 18 There they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.

19 Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: jesus of nazareth, the king of the jews. 20 Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek. 21 The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews.”

22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.”

(John 19:17-22)

According to Stuart, in John the Jews (really: Jewish Christians) don't recognize Jesus as their Jewish Messiah as themselves confirm that Jesus is an alien.

This is a possible reading but confuted by the answer of Pilate: velim nolim, Jesus is their Christ. So I think that the catholic interpolator invented the accusation:

Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews.

...in other to exorcize the suspicion (and also the my suspicion, after 2000 years!) that really Jesus didn't claim to be the Jewish Messiah ( while others - the same Jewish Christians - claimed this about him).


So, thanks to John , I can conclude that

this man claimed to be king of the Jews.

...was the recognized (and anti-marcionite) premise of the accusation in Mark, Matthew and John.

But not in Luke, where we have rather a test of Messianic identity applied by the killers on Jesus and evidently failed by him:

If this man dies crucified, then he is not our Christ.

...since really the marcionite Jesus was not their Christ.

[Giuseppe]

We are said by the highest criticism that to proclaim himself the Jewish Davidic Messiah was not a blasphemy in Judaism. So the real blasphemy of Jesus before the High Priest had to be necessarily a blasphemy related to the introduction of an alien deity, precisely the Father of which Jesus proclaims himself as Son and Messiah and who was not the same Jewish God.

This is surely a blasphemy according to the Judaism of any time.

But then did the scribes and pharisees know what Jesus said to be really? If they knew that Jesus proclaimed himself the son of an alien deity, then they would have killed him without the need of a test of messianic (davidic) identity, contra factum that this was just the case. From the other hand, if they did that test (and it is a fact that in the Earliest Gospel they did that test), that test could happen only if they were not so sure about what Jesus claimed really about himself.

But then which was the origin of their so great conviction that Jesus had committed blasphemy?

As said above, it was sufficient (for the accusation of blasphemy) only the mere suspicion of the introduction (by Jesus) of an alien deity, different from the Jewish god.

Hence the need of a real test that only could explain away any possible doubt: if Jesus died crucified, then he was definitely NOT the Jewish Christ. So it was a real test by the scribes and pharisees and not a mere mockery (as it is reduced in Mark, Matthew and John).

The crucifixion proved that Jesus was not the Jewish Christ. The resurrection proved that he was the Christ of an alien God.