The Problem
Such, in outline, are the flaws that I see in the evidence that is usually cited to claim that early first century Palestine was experiencing a wave of messianic fervour.
The evidence for such a social phenomenon at that time and place simply does not exist. The data that is said to be that evidence is, I submit, only testimony to such a movement if we read our preconceptions into Josephus and other writings.
Such, in outline, are the flaws that I see in the evidence that is usually cited to claim that early first century Palestine was experiencing a wave of messianic fervour.
The evidence for such a social phenomenon at that time and place simply does not exist. The data that is said to be that evidence is, I submit, only testimony to such a movement if we read our preconceptions into Josephus and other writings.
https://vridar.org/2017/02/03/myth-of-p ... -of-jesus/
Whst escapes to Neil is what matters is not what really happened in Judaea, since the fact is established that the Jews had a lot of different views about the Messiah. What matters is what the Romans thought that happened in Judea.
And Josephus was their only source of information (to judge from Tacitus and Suetonius's dependence on Josephus) about this Roman meme of the Messiah as only earthly conqueror.
Hence, "Mark" (author) had to conform himself to the Roman needs that Messiah had to be earthly.
In short:
