Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:01 am

Irish1975 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 8:56 am
I have been reading Paul Nadim Tarazi, who sees Paul almost everywhere in gMark, almost to the point of absurdity.
Tarazi. I have not read him, but does he say in his book, possibly on page 168, that the name Joses (from Mark 6.3; 15.40, 47) does not actually exist as a name?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12516
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:06 am

It would make sense that Paul read Mark (even though this is not what is being proposed I think). Paul speaks in such supernatural terms that it is hard to believe he is referencing a historical source - a source which even he admits he never saw or witnessed. The only think that Paul could be an authority on would be a text (although not our text, something more like secret Mark) - one of many people claiming to understand the ambiguities of this elusive narrative.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8139
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Giuseppe » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:08 am

Irish1975 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 8:56 am
I have been reading Paul Nadim Tarazi, who sees Paul almost everywhere in gMark, almost to the point of absurdity.
very good reading, Irish1975. The spirit of Gustav Volkmar lives in Tarazi (and in Dykstra, and in Adamczewski), just as he lived in Hermann Raschke. Radical paulinist, "almost to the point of absurdity".

If Mark is not read in the way Tarazi read it, then only Marcion's proto-Luke is the only viable alternative to resolve the Synoptical enigma.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Irish1975 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:14 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:01 am
Tarazi. I have not read him, but does he say in his book, possibly on page 168, that the name Joses (from Mark 6.3; 15.40, 47) does not actually exist as a name?
Yep.
While the name Joses is not attested to even in the LXX, it is cast in a way that brings to mind the Greek noun ios meaning “poison/venom.” Mark’s intention may then be to allude to someone named Ioseph (Joseph) whom he wishes to suggest is poisonous. The fact that Matthew changes this name to Joseph lends credence to this suppostion.
footnote: Ioseph is undeclinable, whereas Ioses is declined into iosetos, which draws attention in the direction of a Greek word.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:19 am

Irish1975 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:14 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:01 am
Tarazi. I have not read him, but does he say in his book, possibly on page 168, that the name Joses (from Mark 6.3; 15.40, 47) does not actually exist as a name?
Yep.
While the name Joses is not attested to even in the LXX, it is cast in a way that brings to mind the Greek noun ios meaning “poison/venom.” Mark’s intention may then be to allude to someone named Ioseph (Joseph) whom he wishes to suggest is poisonous. The fact that Matthew changes this name to Joseph lends credence to this suppostion.
footnote: Ioseph is undeclinable, whereas Ioses is declined into iosetos, which draws attention in the direction of a Greek word.
Thanks for checking. He is mistaken, but I wanted to make sure he had not been misquoted.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Irish1975 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:28 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:08 am
Irish1975 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 8:56 am
I have been reading Paul Nadim Tarazi, who sees Paul almost everywhere in gMark, almost to the point of absurdity.
very good reading, Irish1975. The spirit of Gustav Volkmar lives in Tarazi (and in Dykstra, and in Adamczewski), just as he lived in Hermann Raschke. Radical paulinist, "almost to the point of absurdity".

If Mark is not read in the way Tarazi read it, then only Marcion's proto-Luke is the only viable alternative to resolve the Synoptical enigma.
I’ll have to look those guys up, thanks.

Dykstra was not only Tarazi’s student but also his editor for a number of Tarazi’s books. Tarazi is still alive and you can listen to him on the podcast The Bible as Literature, which I think is also hosted by his former students. He makes some of his fellow Eastern Orthodox ill with his attacks on Plato and Greek philosophy, not to mention his apparent Christ mythicism. There is a funny denunciation of his heresies somewhere.

I sometimes think it will be the “faithful” mythicists, the Catholic Brodie and the Orthodox Tarazi and maybe the Lutheran Trobisch, who will eventually turn the tide against the Enlightenment conceit of trying to find history behind the scriptures.

User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Irish1975 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:34 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:19 am
Thanks for checking. He is mistaken, but I wanted to make sure he had not been misquoted.
You’re not going to give us a text?? So out of character, lol.

User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Irish1975 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:45 am

Secret Alias wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:06 am
It would make sense that Paul read Mark (even though this is not what is being proposed I think). Paul speaks in such supernatural terms that it is hard to believe he is referencing a historical source - a source which even he admits he never saw or witnessed. The only think that Paul could be an authority on would be a text (although not our text, something more like secret Mark) - one of many people claiming to understand the ambiguities of this elusive narrative.
Do you discount the private revelations to “Paul,” 2 Corinthians 12 and so forth? Are they not his primary source?

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8009
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:58 am

Irish1975 wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:34 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:19 am
Thanks for checking. He is mistaken, but I wanted to make sure he had not been misquoted.
You’re not going to give us a text?? So out of character, lol.
For reference, the final sigma/ς in Greek is just the Greek nominative case ending:

יוסי = Jose/Joses = Ἰωσῆς
פַּרְסִי = Pharsi/Persian = Πέρσης

And here are some inscriptions:

CIIP 231 (page 260 of Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae & Palaestinae 1: Jerusalem 1, by Hannah M. Cotton):

260 Ossuary of Iouda and Ioses with Greek inscription, 1 c. BCE-1 c. CE

Ossuary with decorated façade (rosettes) and painted red hatch marks on other sides. Four-line Greek inscription covering nearly the entire back side. Both formal and cursive alpha; h-shaped eta, lunate sigma and w-shaped omega (ed. pr. and ph.).

ΛΕΤΟΥ
ΙΟΥΔΑΙΟΥΔΟΥΒΕΘΗ
ΙΩΣΗΣΙΟΥΔΟΥ
ΦΑΙΔΡΟΥ

Ἰούδα Ἰούδου Βεθη|λέτου | Ἰωσῆς Ἰούδου
| Φαίδρου

Iouda (son) of Ioudas of Bethel. Ioses (son) of Ioudas (son?) of Phaidros.

Comm.: The inscription records the names of two deceased males (second cousins?) whose fathers were both named Ioudas. The father is further identified in each case in order to distinguish the two. On the assumption (not unshakable) that the names of both deceased are in the nominative, then Ἰούδα is an infrequent form of Yehuda, as in no. 554, and Ἰωσῆς is hypocoristic of Ἰώσηπος, as in no. 583 this vol., CPJ II 428 and frequently in Rome, Noy, JIWE II 124, 282, 585, 325.

CIIP 583 (page 588 of Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae & Palaestinae 1: Jerusalem 1, by Hannah M. Cotton):

588 Ossuary with three names inscribed in Greek, 1 c. BCE-1 c. CE Limestone ossuary, façade ornamented with two six-petaled rosettes flanking paneled door, ashlar frame; surfaces smoothed; yellow wash. Three-line Greek inscriptions shallowly incised on right side (a), 3 cm from top rim, and left side (b), 4 cm from top rim. Inscriptions slant slightly down to the right. Lunate sigma and w-shaped omega. Meas.: h 31, w 52.5, d 25.5 cm; (a) l. 22 cm, letters 2-4 cm; (b) l. 10.5 cm, letters 1.5-3 cm. Pres. loc: Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem, IAA inv. no. 1934-7753. Autopsy: 7 November 2007.

(a) ΠΟΠΕΛΙ
ΙΩΣΗΣ
ΙΗΣΟΥΣ
(b) ΠΟΠΕΛΙ
ΙΩΣΗΣ
Σ/Ε

(a) Ποπελι | Ἰωσῆς | Ἰησοῦς
(b) Ποπελι | Ἰωσῆς | Σ/Ε

(a) Popeli(?), Ioses, Iesous.
(b) Popeli(?), Ioses.


JIWE II 124:

ἐνθάδε
κεῖνται ❦
Ἰούδας καὶ
Ἰωσῆς ἄρ-
χοντες ❦
καὶ ἱερεῖς
καὶ ἀδελφοί.

[Link.]

JIWE II 282:

ἐνθάδε κεῖται
Ἰωσῆς τὸ νήπιον
ἡδὺν ἐτ(ῶν) βʹ ἡ(μερῶν) ηʹ· Προ-
κόπις ὁ πατήρ, Κρισ-
πῖνα δὲ μήτ(ηρ)· προσ-
εύχοιο ἐν εἰρήνῃ
τὴν κύμησιν αὐτοῦ.

[Link.]

JIWE II 585:

Κλαύδιος
Ἰωσῆς ἄ<ρ>-
χων ἔζη-
σεν ἔτη
vacat λεʹ. vacat

[Link.]

JIWE II 325:

{ram's head facing right} {bull's head facing left}
Aurel(ius) ❦ Ioses,
Aurel(ia) ❦ Auguria
<f>ilio Agathopo
b(e)n(e) m(erenti) p(osuerunt), q(ui) v(ixit) an(nos) XV.


[Link.]

CPJ 428 (pages 215-216 of Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum 1: The Ptolemaic Period):

List of sitologoi for the 5th year of our lord Trajan Caesar. Kephalion son of Dorion. Joses [Ἰωσῇς], also called Teuphilos, descendant of (?) Dosthon. Anchorimphis son of Panther. Pakysis son of Pnepheros. Straton called Isakis. Eleazaros son of Ptolemaios. Dosion son of Zopyros. Heraklas son of Herakles. Aunes son of Heron. Onnophris son of Chairem... Phausas. Herakles son of Merses. Paaus, also called Sokonion, son of S.... Andro... Abramios... Amph... Zopyros son of Le... Presbous elder son of Akousilaos. Didas son of Phibion. Ptolemaios son of Dositheos. Akes son of Psenamounis.... son of Isakis. Neilon son of Ptollis. Sambathion son of Jakoubos. Stotoetis son of Satabous. Onnophris son of Sisois Demas... village scribe... poll tax....

Here are the NT references, for convenience:

Matthew 13.55: 55 "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph [Ιωσὴφ] and Simon and Judas?"

Matthew 27.56: 56 ...among whom was Mary Magdalene, along with Mary the mother of James and Joseph [Ιωσὴφ], and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

Mark 6.3: "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses [Ἰωσῆτος], and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him.

Mark 15.40: 40 And there were also some women looking on from a distance, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses [Ιωσῆτος], and Salome.

Mark 15.47: 47 And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses [Ἰωσῆτος] were looking on to see where He was laid.

What I lack are the instances (rather many, I believe) of this name in the Mishnah and the Talmud; quite a few of the rabbis bear the name יוסי. I do have this hypothetical usage of the name:

Mishnah, Sanhedrin 7.6: A blasphemer is not guilty, unless he mentioned the proper name of God. Said R. Jehoshua b. Karha: Through the entire trial the witnesses are examined pseudonymously -- i.e. (the blasphemer said): "Jose [יוסי] shall be beaten by Jose [יוסי]." When the examination was ended, the culprit was not executed on the testimony under the pseudonym; but all are told to leave the room except the witnesses, and the oldest of them is instructed: "Tell what you heard exactly." And he does so. The judges then arise, and rend their garments, and they are not to be mended. The second witness then says: "I heard exactly the same as he told." And so also says the third witness.

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Galatians 1 & Mark 1

Post by Irish1975 » Thu Oct 08, 2020 11:49 am

:cheers:

Post Reply