Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
-
- Posts: 2308
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
A difference (apparently) between the Pete/Constantine proposal
and the Stephan Huller/Agrippa proposal
is that one of them has been abandoned.
and the Stephan Huller/Agrippa proposal
is that one of them has been abandoned.
- maryhelena
- Posts: 2878
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
- Location: England
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
I didn't get that from the Stephan Huller video. He said he did not want a fight with Josephus over the two historical Agrippa figures. Maybe I missed it - do you have the time stamp of the transcript where he says he has abandoned his Agrippa theory. That's the very issue at stake - is Stephan holding to Agrippa II being a messiah figure regardless of losing the chronology, of Josephus, for Agrippa I. It's all very well for Stephan to say his book is 'horrible' but that does not allow him to sidestep questions regarding the theory the book is presenting. Perhaps he should have just let sleeping dogs lie instead of doing the Youtube interview about the book; the book is being sold, it includes a link to his website where his one Agrippa theory is presented in more detail - and he has done the youtube video - which just brings up his whole Agrippa theory.StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 5:17 am A difference (apparently) between the Pete/Constantine proposal
and the Stephan Huller/Agrippa proposal
is that one of them has been abandoned.
So, lets hear it from Stephan - is he, like mountain/Pete with his Constantine proposal, still holding to his basic Agrippa theory about Agrippa being a messiah figure. Does Stephan view Agrippa II as being a/the messiah figure ?
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
I am twenty years older than I was when I wrote the book. I became a father. I took on two new citizenships. I had more life experience. I learned it's okay to be wrong sometimes. I'd rather be a man who admits to being wrong some of the time than an idiot who relentlessly argues for the infallibility of his intellect. I have been improved by time spent at forums like this. I have learned how to interpret data better. I have more familiarity with ancient source material and historical methodology. I don't know what more to say. I am ok with making mistakes. Do I think it is still possible that St Mark is Marcus Agrippa. Yes I would love to find more evidence supporting this proposition. As it is though it is one of many unproven theses. Like, maybe if I practiced a lot I could be the first Jew who was good at dancing.
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
Let me try it this way. If Marcus Agrippa was St Mark you'd be able to explain the Platonism at the heart of Alexandrian Christianity better. You'd be able to explain where Eusebius got the idea of a Mark who went around Egypt establishing monasteries for early Christianity. But as it is it's just a possibility. Not worthy of a book. Let alone an academic paper.
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
I always found it strange that Marcus Agrippa had no children. Don't know what it means. You'd think a king who lived a long time could have found someone to make babies for him.
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
Agrippa l is by and far away my personal favorite rogue/conman. I haven't read the book yet but in your current opinion, what would be the motivation for Agrippa l and or ll to have written "Mark"? Who is the audience/how was it produced?Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:31 am Let me try it this way. If Marcus Agrippa was St Mark you'd be able to explain the Platonism at the heart of Alexandrian Christianity better. You'd be able to explain where Eusebius got the idea of a Mark who went around Egypt establishing monasteries for early Christianity. But as it is it's just a possibility. Not worthy of a book. Let alone an academic paper.
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
What do we know about these people? I only feel confident about Marcus Julius Agrippa's relationship with Justus of Tiberias, a philosopher. Josephus mentions his interest in philosophy too.
- maryhelena
- Posts: 2878
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
- Location: England
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
So, lets hear it from Stephan - is he, like mountain/Pete with his Constantine proposal, still holding to his basic Agrippa theory about Agrippa being a messiah figure. Does Stephan view Agrippa II as being a/the messiah figure ?
That's not the answer to the question asked - which was a question regarding the historical Agrippa II. I'm not interested in whether or not you think Marcus Agrippa was 'St Mark' - I'm interested in, and asked, if you view Agrippa II as being a/the messiah figure. Making statements rather than answering questions is not a good look...Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:26 am Do I think it is still possible that St Mark is Marcus Agrippa. Yes I would love to find more evidence supporting this proposition...
It would also help, Stephan, if you would identify which Agrippa you are referencing when you write 'Marcus Agrippa'.
Herod Agrippa
Herod Agrippa (Roman name Marcus Julius Agrippa; c. 11 BC – c. AD 44), also known as Herod II or Agrippa I (Hebrew: אגריפס), was the last Jewish king of Judea. He was a grandson of Herod the Great and the father of Herod Agrippa II, the last known king from the Herodian dynasty.[Note 1] He was acquaintance or friend of Roman emperors and even played crucial roles in internal Roman politics.
Herod Agrippa (Roman name Marcus Julius Agrippa; c. 11 BC – c. AD 44), also known as Herod II or Agrippa I (Hebrew: אגריפס), was the last Jewish king of Judea. He was a grandson of Herod the Great and the father of Herod Agrippa II, the last known king from the Herodian dynasty.[Note 1] He was acquaintance or friend of Roman emperors and even played crucial roles in internal Roman politics.
Herod Agrippa II
Herod Agrippa II (Hebrew: אגריפס; AD 27/28[1] – c. 92 or 100[1][2]), officially named Marcus Julius Agrippa and sometimes shortened to Agrippa, was the last ruler from the Herodian dynasty, reigning over territories outside of Judea as a Roman client. Agrippa II fled Jerusalem in 66, fearing the Jewish uprising and supported the Roman side in the First Jewish–Roman War.
Herod Agrippa II (Hebrew: אגריפס; AD 27/28[1] – c. 92 or 100[1][2]), officially named Marcus Julius Agrippa and sometimes shortened to Agrippa, was the last ruler from the Herodian dynasty, reigning over territories outside of Judea as a Roman client. Agrippa II fled Jerusalem in 66, fearing the Jewish uprising and supported the Roman side in the First Jewish–Roman War.
- maryhelena
- Posts: 2878
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
- Location: England
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
Why the reluctance to name 'Marcus Agrippa' as Agrippa II ?Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue May 23, 2023 7:33 am I always found it strange that Marcus Agrippa had no children. Don't know what it means. You'd think a king who lived a long time could have found someone to make babies for him.
-
- Posts: 18362
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Stephan Huller's 'horrible' book
I am not particularly found of Acts or Josephus as source material. I don't have any better sources except Justus which I would prefer over all others. It is however no longer extant. Not sure what to do. I don't believe that Josephus knew Jesus. I am suspicious of Josephus's account of John the Baptist and James. Acts is a second century pseudepigraphon. I don't believe its account of the early Church. So I am in a little bit of a bind. All we have is coinage. Don't remember what it tells us.