Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fiction

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8020
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Jesus BarAbbas. Same Name Used For Contrasting Character For Ironic Effect.

Post by Peter Kirby »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:00 pm
JoeWallack wrote: Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:04 pmNota Ben = I have faith that GMark originally had "Jesus Barabbas" but even if it did not I also have faith that you would agree that "BarAbbas" is likely a contrived name intended to achieve a literary theme.
I imagine it is. That is my default position, at any rate. I would feel a lot better about it if I could tell more certainly what the achieved theme was truly supposed to be. The hypotheses so far feel like guesses to me. But I have also not given the topic my all yet, so I could well be wrong about one of them.
I thought this Barabbas was related to Leviticus 16:7-10 somehow.
16:7. Aaron shall take the two he-goats and let them stand before the LORD at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting;
16:8. and he shall place lots upon the two goats, one marked for the LORD and the other marked for Azazel.
16:9. Aaron shall bring forward the goat designated by lot for the LORD, which he is to offer as a sin offering;
16:10. while the goat designated by lot for Azazel shall be left standing alive before the LORD, to make expiation with it and to send it off to the wilderness for Azazel.
Barabbas would be the other "goat," left alive.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Jesus BarAbbas. Same Name Used For Contrasting Character For Ironic Effect.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Peter Kirby wrote: Sun Nov 01, 2020 10:21 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:00 pm
JoeWallack wrote: Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:04 pmNota Ben = I have faith that GMark originally had "Jesus Barabbas" but even if it did not I also have faith that you would agree that "BarAbbas" is likely a contrived name intended to achieve a literary theme.
I imagine it is. That is my default position, at any rate. I would feel a lot better about it if I could tell more certainly what the achieved theme was truly supposed to be. The hypotheses so far feel like guesses to me. But I have also not given the topic my all yet, so I could well be wrong about one of them.
I thought this Barabbas was related to Leviticus 16:7-10 somehow.
16:7. Aaron shall take the two he-goats and let them stand before the LORD at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting;
16:8. and he shall place lots upon the two goats, one marked for the LORD and the other marked for Azazel.
16:9. Aaron shall bring forward the goat designated by lot for the LORD, which he is to offer as a sin offering;
16:10. while the goat designated by lot for Azazel shall be left standing alive before the LORD, to make expiation with it and to send it off to the wilderness for Azazel.
Barabbas would be the other "goat," left alive.
I am pretty sure Barabbas is connected to the scapegoat somehow. What I am less sure about is whether his name is significant in that or in any other regard; it sure feels like it could be (whether "son of the father" or "son of the rabbi/master"), but the explanations I have seen for that feel forced to me. YMMV.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

The James Gang

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_qHU_6Ofc0

Markan Sandwich Verse Commentary
Outside 9
33 And they came to Capernaum: and when he was in the house he asked them, What were ye reasoning on the way?
34 But they held their peace: for they had disputed one with another on the way, who [was] the greatest.
The outside of the chiasms are narrative but give a historical commentary. The inside of the chiasm provides a lesson which transforms the specific commentary of the outside into a general commentary with the same theme. Here the Disciples are discussing who is the greatest (ironically after Jesus has just explained plainly and clearly and repeatedly why he is the greatest). The implication is that specifically they are discussing which one of them is the greatest and that in general they think Disciples of Jesus are greater than followers of Jesus that are not Disciples.
    • Inside
    • 35 And he sat down, and called the twelve; and he saith unto them, If any man would be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all.
      36 And he took a little child, and set him in the midst of them: and taking him in his arms, he said unto them,
      37 Whosoever shall receive one of such little children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever receiveth me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
Jesus' lesson is that what is important is following Jesus' teaching (spiritual) and what is not important is being a Disciple who literally followed Jesus (physically). Jesus' supports the point by presenting all small/least type physical words as good = servant, little, child, one, little, children.
Outside
38 John said unto him, Teacher, we saw one casting out demons in thy name; and we forbade him, because he followed not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man who shall do a mighty work in my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is for us.
Historical commentary on the narrative. Jesus explicitly indicates the standing of a follower of Jesus is based on what they do and not based on being a physical Disciple. Note that the named Disciple here is John. Note that a Chapter later John and James ask to be Jesus' right hand son of man. So the only two lines given to James and John are in the context of being the greatest Disciple.

This chiasm, which makes a primary point of GMark, that the Disciples had no special authority just because they were physical followers of Jesus and beyond that, could even cause them to be less successful Disciples by thinking the physical relationship made them special, also sets up a stylish ironic use of a related (so to speak) name later in GMark.


Joseph

DESTINY, n. A tyrant's authority for crime and fool's excuse for failure

Skeptical Textual Criticism
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Brother Where Art Thou?

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34abRUUeslw

Introduction Ironic Name Self-proclaimed Greatness Ironic Counter Commentary
1
19 And going on a little further, he saw James the [son] of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the boat mending the nets.
3
16 and Simon he surnamed Peter;
17 and James the [son] of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and them he surnamed Boanerges, which is, Sons of thunder:
10
35 And there come near unto him James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying unto him, Teacher, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall ask of thee.
36 And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you?
37 And they said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and one on [thy] left hand, in thy glory.
38 But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I drink? or to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
39 And they said unto him, We are able. And Jesus said unto them, The cup that I drink ye shall drink; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
40 but to sit on my right hand or on [my] left hand is not mine to give; but [it is for them] for whom it hath been prepared.
41 And when the ten heard it, they began to be moved with indignation concerning James and John.
42 And Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they who are accounted to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great ones exercise authority over them.
43 But it is not so among you: but whosoever would become
great among you, shall be your minister;
44 and whosoever would be first among you, shall be servant of all.
15
40 And there were also women beholding from afar: among whom [were] both Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;
1) If there was HJ it's generally thought that James was his brother and based on that became leader of the Jerusalem Jesus movement. Note the ever play(so to speak)ful language, "his brother". Historical commentary?
2) Note the funny, ironical, discrediting names are next to each other (for Simon and James and John). James is again identified in the context of a brother. I guess he wants to emphasize "brother". In GMark as a whole there is plenty of general discrediting of Disciples. Peter, the supposed lead Disciple and James, the brother disciple, receive extra special discrediting via the use of names.
3) James' fake name is "thunder" which is loud and pretty great.
4) James wants and asks Jesus to be his official authority in the context of brothers. Historical commentary?
5) After Jesus' Passion and James' failure to follow Jesus per Jesus' formula for Disciple success, the name James is changed to "James the Less". Let The Skeptical Reader understand.


Joseph

BIRTH, n. The first and direst of all disasters. As to the nature of it there appears to be no uniformity. Castor and Pollux were born from the egg. Pallas came out of a skull. Galatea was once a block of stone. Peresilis, who wrote in the tenth century, avers that he grew up out of the ground where a priest had spilled holy water. It is known that Arimaxus was derived from a hole in the earth, made by a stroke of lightning. Leucomedon was the son of a cavern in Mount Aetna, and I have myself seen a man come out of a wine cellar.

The New Porphyry
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

The James Gang

Post by JoeWallack »

Seems To Me, CBS Don't Wanna Talk About It

JW:
gryan has an interesting related post here about the possible relationship with Paul:

Galatians 1
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord`s brother.
and GMark.

I think Paul did mean that this James was the brother of Jesus. Traditionally CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) has had one sided interest in this, using it to try and connect Paul's teachings with James. I have faith though that Paul intended the opposite, to contrast his teachings with James. The identification of James as Jesus' physical brother was meant to discredit James, not credit, as Paul's primary theme was the superiority of the spiritual connection over the physical connection. The specific context of Galatians also supports this conclusion. "Mark" fleshed out this theme and one of the ways he did it was to contrive the connection between the name "James" and a physical brother in his Gospel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hiUuL5uTKc

Verse A James Identified As A Brother? How? What Group? Commentary
1
19 And going on a little further, he saw James the [son] of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the boat mending the nets.
Yes John is his brother Disciples -
1:29 And straightway, when they were come out of the synagogue, they came into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.
Indirectly Not by description but by narrative (with his brother) Disciples Indirectly identified as brother and in the house of brothers
3
17 and James the [son] of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and them he surnamed Boanerges, which is, Sons of thunder:
Yes John is his brother Apostles 1. Only one James named so far so no need to identify again as the brother of John.
2. Nicknamed as a brother (sons of thunder).
18 and Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the [son] of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean,
Indirectly Presumably the brother of Levi. Apostles You could say that there is no indication of any kind of a brother here, you could say that, but you'd be wrong:

2
14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the [son] of Alphaeus sitting at the place of toll, and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.
The only Alphaeus mentioned before and in the entire Gospel. Implication = brothers. It also suggests that the "Matthew" before may originally have been "Levi". "Levi" was actually the original name of GMatthew but orthodox Christianity decided "Levi" was too Jewish.
5
37 And he suffered no man to follow with him, save Peter, and James, and John the brother of James.
Yes John is his brother Followers of Jesus It would seem unnecessary to put the "brother" in at this point.
6
3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended in him.
Yes Brother of the Lord (Jesus) Jesus' brothers Interesting that like Galatians "Jesus" is not used as identifier.
9
2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them;
Indirectly The brother of John Disciples Interesting that in the entire Gospel no James is ever described as acting individually. If "brother" is not used as part of the identification for James, all his actions described are still in unison with his brother.
10
35 And there come near unto him James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying unto him, Teacher, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall ask of thee.
Yes Brother of John Disciples -
11
41 And when the ten heard it, they began to be moved with indignation concerning James and John.
Yes Brother of John Disciples -
13
Mark 13:3 And as he sat on the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
Indirectly The brother of John Disciples Note that the question is exclusively asked by brothers.
14
33 And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly amazed, and sore troubled.
Indirectly Brother of John Disciples -
15
40 And there were also women beholding from afar: among whom [were] both Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;
Yes The brother of Joses Sons of a follower of Jesus Sure sounds like a replacement theme. After Jesus' Passion Jesus' mother Mary is replaced by another Mary and Jesus' brothers James and Joses are replaced by James and Joses.
16
1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the [mother] of James, and Salome, bought spices, that they might come and anoint him.
Indirectly Presumably the previous James, son of Mary. Son of a follower. -


Joseph

"Paul is your real father. Search your feelings Christianity, you know it's true."

Jew Did The Crime, You Read The Times
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Your Barabbas Is Showing

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:

Character Name Substitution Function Substitution Commentary
Jesus 15
7 And there was one called Barabbas, [lying] bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder.
9 And Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
10 For he perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered him up.
11 But the chief priests stirred up the multitude, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.
12 And Pilate again answered and said unto them, What then shall I do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?
13 And they cried out again, Crucify him.
14 And Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude, released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
1. GMark is primarily an instruction manual on how not to follow Jesus (Hell for Dummies). The most important character is Jesus.
2. Note the literal name substitution here. "BarAbbas" is son of father in Aramaic. Presumably the historical language of the characters. The divinely revealed title of Jesus is "son of god". GMark indicates a few times that Jesus is THE son and god is THE father ("And he said, Abba, Father". - even added the Aramaic for Dummies).
3. Here the substitution is physical. The son of god is delivered for crucifixion instead of the BarAbbas.
4. Especially note the combination of the contrived. We have the characters with the substituted names substituted with each other. Multiplied together this exponentially increases evidence for fiction.
5. As usual with GMark, style is more important than anything else, here the style is irony. We have layers of irony as:
  • 1 - Barabbas is a substitute name for Jesus.
    2 - Barabbas was intended by Rome to be a sacrifice to the Jews (foregoing execution to receive forgiveness from the Jews).
    3 - Jesus is supposed to be a sacrifice for the Jews.
    4 - The Jews choose to have Barabbas released instead of Jesus.
    5 - The Temple is supposed to be the place of sacrifice for Jews.
    6 - By choosing Barabbas the Jews sacrifice the Temple.
They just don't write em like this any more. The literary skill of this author is the best evidence of anything divine in GMark but a long way from history.


Joseph

REPORTER, n. A writer who guesses his way to the truth and dispels it with a tempest of words.

Islamization of Jerusalem
yakovzutolmai
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 6:03 am

Irony And Factions

Post by yakovzutolmai »

Philo's theology says who Christ is, and he is compatible with Roman rule. The Jews picked "Barabbas" - that is, Barmaren. The historical Jesus instead of the philosophical. The pure and correct Christ of philosophy was sacrificed.

Everyone in Mark is a fool except for poor, innocent and perfect Christ. Even his disciples hardly know him.

Mark is mocking and lamenting the messianics for their crap theology. The author subscribes to Philo's interpretation of Jewish mysticism.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Judaism Is Like Chess. It's Against The Rules To Sacrifice Your King

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhiz1UHS6JU

JW:

Character Name Substitution Function Substitution Commentary
Jesus 15
7 And there was one called Barabbas, [lying] bound with them that had made insurrection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder.
9 And Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
10 For he perceived that for envy the chief priests had delivered him up.
11 But the chief priests stirred up the multitude, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.
12 And Pilate again answered and said unto them, What then shall I do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?
13 And they cried out again, Crucify him.
14 And Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 And Pilate, wishing to content the multitude, released unto them Barabbas, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
1. GMark is primarily an instruction manual on how not to follow Jesus (Hell for Dummies). The most important character is Jesus.
2. Note the literal name substitution here. "BarAbbas" is son of father in Aramaic. Presumably the historical language of the characters. The divinely revealed title of Jesus is "son of god". GMark indicates a few times that Jesus is THE son and god is THE father ("And he said, Abba, Father". - even added the Aramaic for Dummies).
3. Here the substitution is physical. The son of god is delivered for crucifixion instead of the BarAbbas.
4. Especially note the combination of the contrived. We have the characters with the substituted names substituted with each other. Multiplied together this exponentially increases evidence for fiction.
5. As usual with GMark, style is more important than anything else, here the style is irony. We have layers of irony as:
  • 1 - Barabbas is a substitute name for Jesus.
    2 - Barabbas was intended by Rome to be a sacrifice to the Jews (foregoing execution to receive forgiveness from the Jews).
    3 - Jesus is supposed to be a sacrifice for the Jews.
    4 - The Jews choose to have Barabbas released instead of Jesus.
    5 - The Temple is supposed to be the place of sacrifice for Jews.
    6 - By choosing Barabbas the Jews sacrifice the Temple.
They just don't write em like this any more. The literary skill of this author is the best evidence of anything divine in GMark but a long way from history.
Simon 3
16 and Simon he surnamed Peter;
8
33 But he turning about, and seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan; for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.
34 And he called unto him the multitude with his disciples, and said unto them, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Verses:

15
21 And they compel one passing by, Simon of Cyrene, coming from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to go [with them], that he might bear his cross.
1. For the most important character in How Not To Follow Jesus, Simon, likewise, a name change. This time a literal one.

2. Jesus addresses Simon by "Peter" until Jesus finally realizes Peter's (and therefore his) failure at Gethsemane = Peter is never going to follow Jesus.
Jesus then reverts the name back to "Simon".

3. Simon/Peter is also substituted by function, following Jesus, the dominant function in the Gospel. Peter is the cause of the follower's requirement to follow Jesus with a cross, but when Jesus is on The Way with the cross the cross bearing is done by a (literal) replacement Simon.

4. Thus for the two most important characters in the Gospel, the character name is substituted as is the primary function.


Joseph

REPORTER, n. A writer who guesses his way to the truth and dispels it with a tempest of words.

Islamization of Jerusalem
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Whosonfirst?

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=10156331011940746

JW:
The Gospel of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus: Textual and Reception-Historical Considerations Peter M. Head Cambridge University
43. IHSOUS[Jesus]: This is consistently deployed (with one interesting exception), using a two letter
form of the nomen sacrum: 1.1, 9, 14, 17, 24, 25; 2.5, 7, 15, 17, 19; 3.7; 5.6, 7, 15, 20, 21, 27, 30,
16
36; 6.4, 6, 30; 8.17, 27; 9.2, 4, 5, 8, 23, 25, 27, 39; 10.5, 14, 18, 21, 23, 24, 27, 29, 32, 38, 39, 42,
47 (2x), 49, 50, 51, 52; 11.6, 7, 22, 29, 33; 12.17, 24, 29, 34, 35; 13.2, 5; 14.6, 18, 27, 30, 48, 53,
55, 60, 61, 62, 67, 72; 15.1, 5, 15, 34, 37, 43. The exception to this rule is the last occurrence in
Mark, 16.6: ‘you seek Jesus of Nazareth’, where the word is written out in full.
26
...
26 This is the work of the scribe D who wrote the replacement leaf, from Mark 14.54 to the end
of Mark; but the full form in 16.6 follows twelve contracted ones from the same pen.
The offending verse:

16
6. And he saith unto them, Be not amazed: ye seek Jesus, the Nazarene, who hath been crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold, the place where they laid him!
For those who need points sharply explained it looks like GMark is the original Gospel narrative and is Separationist:

Who'sonfirst? GMark As Separationist

After The Spirit has left that man:
5:37 And Jesus uttered a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
There are two invocations of "Jesus" referring to dead Jesus. 16:6 then refers to live Jesus. I find it [understatement]interesting[/understatement] that Sinaiticus, as good a witness as we have to the original Gospel narrative, supports the possibility that Sinaiticus reflects original wording here and the author's intent was to indicate that live Jesus, without The Spirit, was no longer divine.

It's generally thought that the original Gospels did not have Nomina Sacra, they are a later invention, but God knows. Note that Sinaiticus also says Nazareth was in Judea which is supported by early Patristics.

Peter Head is an outstanding scholar for an Evangelical, thus his professional position is inversely related to his scholarship. Note in his article other interesting, not well known observations of Sinaiticus, especially the use of symbols for numbers (especially, especially, "12". MJ look out!).

Textual Criticism in the usual apparatus is exponentially understated. Case in point the above. Nomina Sacra variation. Assumed unimportant because it could not possibly be original because, because...

Everyone welcome to comment except for Harvey Dubish.

Bonus material for Solo: Note the related textual variation here: Laparola
16:6 (Münster)
τὸν Ναζαρηνὸν] Byz ς WH
omit[Nazareth]] ‭א*[Sinaiticus] D[Bezae] itd[Old latin]
Evidence that "Nazareth" is not original to 16:6. Based on:

Cumulative Weight of Early Witness for Difficult Readings

typical support for a possibly original difficult reading (also supports "Nazareth" as unoriginal in 1:9 (spin, look out!)).


Joseph

SCRIPTURES, n. The sacred books of our holy religion, as distinguished from the false and profane writings on which all other faiths are based.

The New Porphyry
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Whosonfirst?

Post by Giuseppe »

JoeWallack wrote: Sat Aug 13, 2022 5:19 pm
There are two invocations of "Jesus" referring to dead Jesus. 16:6 then refers to live Jesus.
The emphasis of the angel on the fact that the women searched for "Jesus the Nazarene" appears to be meant to identify the victim (=Jesus the man, i.e. the Nazarene) with the risen one. This is anti-separationism. My suspicion is founded even if 'the Nazarene' only was absent in 16:6 ("ye seek Jesus. He is not here").

ADDENDA:
your reading assumes that Jesus is yes the risen one, only he continues to not be the same spiritual (=ALIEN) entity who left him on the cross.
Post Reply