Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13913
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by Giuseppe »


4. However, there was a certain man, of the Jewish nation, at Jerusalem, who appeared to be very accurate in the knowledge of the law. His name was Simon. This man got together an assembly, while the King was absent at Cesarea; and had the insolence to accuse him as not living holily: and that he might justly be excluded out of the temple, since it belonged only to native Jews. But the general of Agrippa’s army informed him, that Simon had made such a speech to the people. So the King sent for him; and as he was sitting in the theater, he bid him sit down by him: and said to him with a low and gentle voice, what is there done in this place that is contrary to the law? But he had nothing to say for himself, but begged his pardon. So the King was more easily reconciled to him than one could have imagined: as esteeming mildness a better quality in a King than anger: and knowing that moderation is more becoming in great men than passion. So he made Simon a small present, and dismissed him

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-19.html

Mark 8
Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, “Who do people say I am?”

28 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.”

29 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

Peter answered, “You are the Messiah.”

30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.

31 He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.

33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. “Get behind me, Satan!” he said. “You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13913
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by Giuseppe »

Curious that also our Simon Peter appears (and only appears) to know that Jesus is the Jewish Christ, when really Jesus is notoriously not the Jewish Christ.

Whereas the Josephian Simon "appeared" - and only appeared - "to be very accurate in the knowledge of the law".
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by John2 »

I think that is Simon Peter and that Acts 12 is based on that.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by John2 »

Ben and I discussed this on another thread awhile ago, in which I wrote:

I've always thought it was strange that this Simon ended up acquiescing to Agrippa and begged for his pardon, but now it reminds me of Peter, since Paul portrays him as being a waffler regarding ritual purity too in Galatians. And Josephus' Simon is also said to have made a speech, like Peter is said to have done. And as Ben notes in his comment below, both accounts are set in Caesarea. And his acquiescence to authority is also in keeping with 1 Peter 2:13-17:
Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.
To which Ben wrote:
Do you think that this Simon's brush with Agrippa could be what lies behind Peter's imprisonment by him in Acts 12? After Peter's escape it is mentioned (in verse 19) that Agrippa spent time in Caesarea, as Josephus mentions, too. Could the prison escape be a cover story for Peter's unseemly acquiescence to Agrippa? (Nooooo, he did not crumble under pressure; he was put in prison and an angel helped him to escape!)
And the word Josephus uses for Simon's "assembly" is the same for "church" (ecclesia). How many Simons from Jerusalem who were "very accurate in the knowledge of the law" and part of a "church" and acquiescent to authority and waffled on ritual purity and gave speeches and had a run in with Agrippa in Caesarea in the 40's CE do you suppose there were?
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13913
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by Giuseppe »

While I see midrash in action (or how you would call the copy-and-paste from Josephus), I am sure that the two Simons were distinct. To think otherwise meas to have little respect for Mark's creative genius and practice.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by John2 »

Curious that also our Simon Peter appears (and only appears) to know that Jesus is the Jewish Christ, when really Jesus is notoriously not the Jewish Christ.
I don't get the impression from Mark that Jesus is not the "Jewish Christ," but rather that Peter (at that time, considering that he "got it" later, to judge from 1 Peter, which I think is genuine) did not understand Jesus' idea that the "Jewish Christ" "must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again."

I think that since Jesus was Jewish and based his philosophy on the OT, his idea of the Messiah is no less "Jewish" than any other kind of Messiah.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13913
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by Giuseppe »

John2 wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:07 am
Curious that also our Simon Peter appears (and only appears) to know that Jesus is the Jewish Christ, when really Jesus is notoriously not the Jewish Christ.
I don't get the impression from Mark that Jesus is not the "Jewish Christ,"
I agree with you about our Mark. But I mean proto-Mark (the lost Gospel on which our Mark is based). Jesus is reproaching Peter as the latter identifies him as the Jewish Messiah when really Jesus is the Son of Father, where the Father is the higher god of the Satornilians, Simonians, Cerdonians, Marcionites etc.
Note that I doubt that in proto-Mark the crowd replied "you are John or Elijiah or one of prophets". I think that Peter was answering in the name of the crowd: you are the Christ.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13913
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by Giuseppe »

John2 wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:07 am I think that since Jesus was Jewish and based his philosophy on the OT, his idea of the Messiah is no less "Jewish" than any other kind of Messiah.
I don't think that the historicity of Jesus (assuming it only for sake of discussion with you) may affect the question about the real view of who was writing a story in the first half of second century. For the chronicle, I date proto-Mark from 115 CE as terminus post quem.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by John2 »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:22 am
John2 wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:07 am I think that since Jesus was Jewish and based his philosophy on the OT, his idea of the Messiah is no less "Jewish" than any other kind of Messiah.
I don't think that the historicity of Jesus (assuming it only for sake of discussion with you) may affect the question about the real view of who was writing a story in the first half of second century. For the chronicle, I date proto-Mark from 115 CE as terminus post quem.
My impression of Mark 8 wouldn't change no matter when you date it or if Jesus didn't exist.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Was Simon Peter based also on Simon of Ant. 19:7 ?

Post by John2 »

Jesus is reproaching Peter as the latter identifies him as the Jewish Messiah when really Jesus is the Son of Father, where the Father is the higher god of the Satornilians, Simonians, Cerdonians, Marcionites etc.
My impression remains that Jesus (according to Mark or "proto-Mark" and whether Jesus existed or not) is "really" the Messiah (aka "Son of Man") who "must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again."
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply