Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
steve43
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by steve43 »

Charles Wilson wrote:
steve43 wrote:
Charles Wilson wrote:Remember that there is a Second Passover, one month after the first, for those who find themselves Unclean by touching a dead body just before the start of the Passover.
Where the heck did you get that?
Not the Talmud, I hope.
A slightly higher Authority than the Talmud...

Numbers 9: 9 - 12 (RSV):

[9] The LORD said to Moses,
[10] "Say to the people of Israel, If any man of you or of your descendants is unclean through touching a dead body, or is afar off on a journey, he shall still keep the passover to the LORD.
[11] In the second month on the fourteenth day in the evening they shall keep it; they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.
[12] They shall leave none of it until the morning, nor break a bone of it; according to all the statute for the passover they shall keep it.

There are a coupla' Posts recently that look at John 11 and John 1 - 2. "Lazarus was dead...". Now, if "Jesus" is a Sojourner between Bethany and his hideout and has Lazarus for supper (Hi Joe!), and it is within a week of Passover, then Jesus is unclean or might need to be at this Second Passover. Joseph takes down the body before night and is NECESSARILY unclean as a result. He would be able to be at the Second Passover and not be cutoff from the People. This is another unanalyzed Story that is lost after after the Symbolism of a savior/god has been Transvalued for the New Religion. *IF* all the loose ends are cleaned up, how is this mess resolved? It makes no difference to the Transvalue Crowd since the Jews and their Culture have been Done-Away-With.

It makes a difference.

CW
Interesting.

Josephus doesn't mention it, FWIW.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2107
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by Charles Wilson »

Thank you, steve43-

1. Dead Sea Scrolls have at least one mention of the Second Passover, details and quote on request (It's a simple mention that the "Second Passover is on this date and...")

2.John 11: 14 and John 12: 1 and 2 (RSV):

[14] Then Jesus told them plainly, "Laz'arus is dead;
...
[1] Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Laz'arus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead.
[2] There they made him a supper; Martha served, and Laz'arus was one of those at table with him.

Numbers 19: 11 - 16 (RSV):

[11] "He who touches the dead body of any person shall be unclean seven days;
[12] he shall cleanse himself with the water on the third day and on the seventh day, and so be clean; but if he does not cleanse himself on the third day and on the seventh day, he will not become clean.
[13] Whoever touches a dead person, the body of any man who has died, and does not cleanse himself, defiles the tabernacle of the LORD, and that person shall be cut off from Israel; because the water for impurity was not thrown upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is still on him.
[14] "This is the law when a man dies in a tent: every one who comes into the tent, and every one who is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days.
[15] And every open vessel, which has no cover fastened upon it, is unclean.
[16] Whoever in the open field touches one who is slain with a sword, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.

LAZARUS WAS DEAD. There must be another story here -Symbolic or otherwise - unless you believe that a "Jesus" actually did raise a "Lazarus" from the dead. It's six days before Passover and Lazarus was at table with Jesus. Therefore, JESUS could not have gone to Jerusalem for Passover. He would have been unclean. Period. End. Stop.

It doesn't matter to the Johanine Hate the Jews Crowd but it matters to the Real Story, whatever that Story was. If Joseph of Arimathea took Jesus down from the cross before sundown and Passover, then HE WAS UNCLEAN and could not participate in Passover.

There must be an explanation to this within the Jewish History and Scripture but it has been suppressed.

"Does a "Second Passover" have meaning"? You bet yer booties it does...

CW
steve43
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by steve43 »

This reminds me of Hugh Schonfeld's "Passover Plot. Schonfeld argues that raising Lazarus from the dead was a dry run for Jesus' plot to fake his own death. He speculates that there was a drug used on Lazarus that Jesus also took when he was on the cross. This would have been the "vinegar" that was given to Jesus on that final day.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2107
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by Charles Wilson »

steve43 wrote:This reminds me of Hugh Schonfeld's "Passover Plot. Schonfeld argues that raising Lazarus from the dead was a dry run for Jesus' plot to fake his own death. He speculates that there was a drug used on Lazarus that Jesus also took when he was on the cross. This would have been the "vinegar" that was given to Jesus on that final day.
Of course, we all know that the "vinegar on a sponge on a hyssop stick" refers to Vitellius and his lover Asiaticus, so that blows that plot line to pieces, right?
steve43
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by steve43 »

Sure. If it's in the Talmud.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by Ulan »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Sorry. I organized during June a children's festival and then I was a bit tired.
Sounds like fun, and no worries. I had left a comment on your blog.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:A possible literary reason would be, for example, 1. Cor 5:7 "Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover (lamb), has been sacrificed."
That makes, indeed, quite a bit of sense and would stay in the imagery of Passover. The "renewal of the bond" part is also clear. I'm just not sure on the "atonement for our sins" part.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by Ulan »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Ulan wrote:A short side question: Would there be any particular reason to have the grand finale play out on Passover instead of Yom Kippur, if it's some kind of atonement thing? Except for the obvious reason that there might be a historical kernel to the whole story.
A possible literary reason would be, for example, 1. Cor 5:7 "Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover (lamb), has been sacrificed."
By the way, the siege of Jerusalem was also over Passover. Which may explain the high number of victims.
steve43
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by steve43 »

Which siege?

In A.D. 70, it started during the Passover (trapping many worshipers in the city) but it lasted for months longer.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by neilgodfrey »

This reminds me of Hugh Schonfeld's "Passover Plot. Schonfeld argues that raising Lazarus from the dead was a dry run for Jesus' plot to fake his own death. He speculates that there was a drug used on Lazarus that Jesus also took when he was on the cross. This would have been the "vinegar" that was given to Jesus on that final day.
This reminds me of the way everybody was finding such sound evidence and clues in the lyrics, the photographs, the bios, that Beatle Paul was dead.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
steve43
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:36 pm

Re: Mark, the Jews and the destruction of the temple

Post by steve43 »

But....John deliberately planted it. :)
Post Reply