Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:59 pm
Charles Wilson wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:20 pm
GJohn CORRECTS the Synoptic Versions (Both GJohn and the Synoptics derive from the same Ur-Text
ok but the Ur-Text had to be similar to proto-John, since only there Jesus is called Son of Father (and we know
that Bar-Abbas is the his synoptical judaizing parody).
A little Progress here and that is good.
1. The Ur-Text IS similar to Proto-John since it was cut from the same Document as Mark (Raskin). A simplified and perhaps naive view of this is that the Original Document was shredded by Mark, who rearranged the Stories and Intent. The probably fictitious "Papias" gives a statement "for the record" that Mark caused a great amount of problems with his Chiastic Novel. This did not sit well with the Working Group and someone wanted us to know that there was great mischief at work in the "writing of all of the Stories" but not "writing them down in the correct Temporal Order", so to speak.
2. Almost Simultaneously
, there was a large amount of fragmented material left. The seed of the New Religion had been planted, however, and the "Ur-John" became Proto-John as the Redactor, Editor and Source (and others) molded the remaining material into a Hegelianized almost finished Project (See: Teeple). The New Religion Paradigm was accepted ("Ordered" is probably more like it...) and the Original Story was rewritten and Transvalued into a Second Mission of "Jesus" in the Proto-John.
3. There was, BTW, material left over as Luke uses several fragments:
Luke 19: 39 - 40 (RSV):
 And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples."
 He answered, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out."
This is from the floor of the Temple at a moment just before the soldiers are ordered in and 3000 are murdered. Passover is cancelled.
Luke and Matthew use some of the left-over material. "Are there only a few who are saved?" asks one. "You must turn as a child..." in order to "Enter through the Narrow Door" is the answer and it points to this Single Story with parts rearranged.
4. This gives us an entrance to understanding Josephus and his major Source, Nicholas of Damascus. There is enough material that points to its Semitic Roots to imply that the Original was also Semitic. However, Nicholas of Damascus was the Political Control Officer for Herod and he was Roman in his Loyalties. Nick could have been the Author of the Original. If not, then the Original had Priestly Origins - Zakkai, perhaps - since some of the Math of the Mishmarot Service is deeply embedded in the NT.
[Note: There are other combinations. It is possible that Nicholas of Damascus authored the Original with Zakkai and the Yavneh Group doing Contract Work, possibly even after Zakkai's death, adding Jannaeus and Mishmarot Math to pad the Transition from Titus worship to the new savior/god. Weitzman's posited Translation Community may have worked on this as well. The End Result of this Construction of the NT gets...complicated
Nick may be "Nicodemus", a "Ruler of the Jews" who does not understand a Semitic Idiom, "You must return to Mother" ("You must be Born Again").
5. The entrance of Josephus into the NT leads to our disagreements. Before going Metaphysical we must remove the Physical to see what is left. The Gnostic results must then be analyzed Historically as well before we can jump to Celestial Conclusions.
Thus, we must see if "Bar-Abbas" may be found in a Josephan Historical Setting and this is what we find. Those damn Parthians - Barbarians! - cannot find a suitable King. Enter Thermusa:
Josephus, Antiquities..., 18, 2, 4
Tacitus, Annals, 2
*Sigh*. The things people do for nookie.
You're going to have to write a book to get from this to a full-blown Gnosticism.
6. Nonetheless, a bit of Progress. Giuseppe, I don't believe you are on the right track with your use of "Judaizing" but you may be onto something with Ur-John and Proto-John.
Best to you here,