Indigenous Cohens and the Temple of Doom. Does GMark Anoint the Temple for Death?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Indigenous Cohens and the Temple of Doom. Does GMark Anoint the Temple for Death?

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqJadT9o_Us

JW:
It's been generally observed Ad Nazorean that GMark anoints his Jesus for death. It's also been observed, but less generally,
that this is intentional contrast to the Jewish Bible's hero anointing for life/career. It's also been observed that GMark
parallels Jesus with The Temple. Not nearly as observed (I've never seen anyone else mention it but have faith that someone
has) is that GMark also appears to "anoint" the Temple for death.

Our starting point for research here is GMark's likely sources. Since GMark consists primarily of the impossible and implausible,
history is not a likely source (in general). Since GMark continuously references The Jewish Bible explicitly and implicitly, that
looks like the primary source. So what does the Jewish Bible say about anointing the original "Temple":

Exodus 40
1 And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,
2 On the first day of the first month shalt thou rear up the tabernacle of the tent of meeting.
3 And thou shalt put therein the ark of the testimony, and thou shalt screen the ark with the veil.
4 And thou shalt bring in the table, and set in order the things that are upon it; and thou shalt bring in the candlestick, and light the lamps thereof.
5 And thou shalt set the golden altar for incense before the ark of the testimony, and put the screen of the door to the tabernacle.
6 And thou shalt set the altar of burnt-offering before the door of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting.
7 And thou shalt set the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar, and shalt put water therein.
8 And thou shalt set up the court round about, and hang up the screen of the gate of the court.
9 And thou shalt take the anointing oil, and anoint the tabernacle, and all that is therein, and shalt hallow it, and all the furniture thereof: and it shall be holy.
10 And thou shalt anoint the altar of burnt-offering, and all its vessels, and sanctify the altar: and the altar shall be most holy.
11 And thou shalt anoint the laver and its base, and sanctify it.
12 And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the tent of meeting, and shalt wash them with water.
13 And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments; and thou shalt anoint him, and sanctify him, that he may minister unto me in the priest`s office.
14 And thou shalt bring his sons, and put coats upon them;
15 and thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest`s office: and their anointing shall be to them for an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.
16 Thus did Moses: according to all that Jehovah commanded him, so did he.
17 And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was reared up.
18 And Moses reared up the tabernacle, and laid its sockets, and set up the boards thereof, and put in the bars thereof, and reared up its pillars.
19 And he spread the tent over the tabernacle, and put the covering of the tent above upon it; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
20 And he took and put the testimony into the ark, and set the staves on the ark, and put the mercy-seat above upon the ark:
21 and he brought the ark into the tabernacle, and set up the veil of the screen, and screened the ark of the testimony; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
22 And he put the table in the tent of meeting, upon the side of the tabernacle northward, without the veil.
23 And he set the bread in order upon it before Jehovah; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
24 And he put the candlestick in the tent of meeting, over against the table, on the side of the tabernacle southward.
25 And he lighted the lamps before Jehovah; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
26 And he put the golden altar in the tent of meeting before the veil:
27 and he burnt thereon incense of sweet spices; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
28 And he put the screen of the door to the tabernacle.
29 And he set the altar of burnt-offering at the door of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting, and offered upon it the burnt-offering and the meal-offering; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
30 And he set the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar, and put water therein, wherewith to wash.
31 And Moses and Aaron and his sons washed their hands and their feet thereat;
32 when they went into the tent of meeting, and when they came near unto the altar, they washed; as Jehovah commanded Moses.
33 And he reared up the court round about the tabernacle and the altar, and set up the screen of the gate of the court. So Moses finished the work.
34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of Jehovah filled the tabernacle.
35 And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of meeting, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of Jehovah filled the tabernacle.
36 And when the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the children of Israel went onward, throughout all their journeys:
37 but if the cloud was not taken up, then they journeyed not till the day that it was taken up.
38 For the cloud of Jehovah was upon the tabernacle by day, and there was fire therein by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel, throughout all their journeys.
Quite a lot and then some. "Anoint" is by far the most common word used to describe preparing the Temple for sacrificial action.

So between the Jewish Bible and GMark what other significant Christian author may have influenced "Mark"?

Bonus material for KK = So how might GMark have indicated The Temple was anointed?


Joseph

ANOINT, v.t. To grease a king or other great functionary already sufficiently slippery.

Skeptical Textual Criticism
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Indigenous Cohens and the Temple of Doom. Does GMark Anoint the Temple for Death?

Post by Secret Alias »

The Torah doesn't mention a temple hence the Samaritans deny there ever was a temple on Gerizim (go to Holon talk to my friend Benny)
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Indigenous Cohens and the Temple of Doom. Does GMark Anoint the Temple for Death?

Post by Charles Wilson »

AHA! Thank you both! I have frequently used something like "...Temple at Gerizim". Demetrius Eucerus beats Jannaeus into the dirt at some place near Shechem (Gerizim). Demetrius, "standing where HE ought not" performs the Abomination of Desolation on the ALTAR. There is no TEMPLE at Gerizim but there is an ALTAR.

This changes the orientation of both religious Groups, yes?!??

Again, thank you both for this.

CW
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Stone Temple Pilates

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fdZWbIsrFk

I told you bout the Unholy See ya,
You know it's as corrupt as can be ya.
Well here's another clue for you allall,
The Walpurgis was Paul.


JW:

11
13 And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find anything thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for it was not the season of figs.
14 And he answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit from thee henceforward for ever. And his disciples heard it.
    • 15 And they come to Jerusalem: and he entered into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and them that bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves;
      16 and he would not suffer that any man should carry a vessel through the temple.
      17 And he taught, and said unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations? but ye have made it a den of robbers.
      18 And the chief priests and the scribes heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, for all the multitude was astonished at his teaching.
      19 And every evening he went forth out of the city.
20 And as they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree withered away from the roots.
21 And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Rabbi, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.
So "Mark's" Jesus gives his Temple a death curse. And does it through a chiasm. So it's going with style. So The Temple is going down with Jesus.

[Irony]The Temple Priests sentence Jesus to death while Jesus sentences the Temple priesthood to death[/Irony]. So in what stylish Way does GMark anoint the Temple for death? Someone, anyone, Bhurroughlers?


Joseph

"We will become a ‘big Israel’ with security becoming the highest priority issue for the next 10 years”

The New Porphyry
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Jerusalem, The Temple & "Mark's" Jesus

Post by JoeWallack »

What do they have in common?

JW:

11:1

Strong's Greek English Morphology Translation Commentary
2532 [e] Καὶ And Conj And -
3753 [e] ὅτε when Adv when -
1448 [e] ἐγγίζουσιν they drew near V-PIA-3P they came close 1. Note the Septuagint usage, "in the Sept. used especially of the priests entering the temple to offer sacrifices or to perform other ministrations there,"
1519 [e] εἰς to Prep to -
2414 [e] Ἱεροσόλυμα Jerusalem, N-ANP Jerusalem -
1519 [e] εἰςs to Prep to -
967 [e] Βηθφαγὴ Bethphage N-AFS Bethphage 1. "Bethphage" looks like a made up word/city. The Hebrew transliteration is "house of unripe figs". As the word draws near to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
2. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
2532 [e] καὶ and Conj - -
963 [e] Βηθανίαν Bethany, N-AFS - -
4314 [e] πρὸς near Prep - -
3588 [e] τὸ the Art-ANS - -
3735 [e] ὄρος Mount N-ANS - -
3588 [e] τῶν - Art-GFP - -
1636 [e] Ἐλαιῶν, of Olives, N-GFP - -


Joseph

"Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him [Jerusalem/Temple/Jews]; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, [and] shall be satisfied: by the knowledge of himself shall my righteous servant justify many; and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors: yet he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." - Isaiah

The New Porphyry
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1349
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Temple in Jerusalem

Post by billd89 »

So the Egyptian Jews knew (and favored the language of) a 'tabernacle of the tent of meeting'. A Temple substitute, presumably, or something very different? The Second Temple physically reappeared in Jerusalem 516 BC or 356 BC (depending on which sources you favor) - which is ignored in the Torah, for some reason - if the Torah dates from c.272 BC or even 200 years earlier. I can imagine Judeo-Egyptian scribes spitefully ignoring a Temple the Ptolemies didn't control, if the J. Temple did exist when the Pentateuch was composed.

It's highly politicized discourse - I suppose there were multiple "Temples" c.400 BC, although only two are definite here (a third, the Jewish Temple at Leontopolis, appeared later c.170 BC.)
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/wer ... -1.5411705

I'm uncertain, reading that: I've had better luck grasping the Anointing Formula (fwiw). Looks like a commodity business to me (cynically, admitted.)
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

You're Making Things Up Again Marcus

Post by JoeWallack »

Bethphage I Hear You Calling

JW:

11:1

Strong's Greek English Morphology Translation Commentary
2532 [e] Καὶ And Conj And -
3753 [e] ὅτε when Adv when -
1448 [e] ἐγγίζουσιν they drew near V-PIA-3P they came close 1. Note the Septuagint usage, "in the Sept. used especially of the priests entering the temple to offer sacrifices or to perform other ministrations there,"
1519 [e] εἰς to Prep to -
2414 [e] Ἱεροσόλυμα Jerusalem, N-ANP Jerusalem -
1519 [e] εἰςs to Prep to -
967 [e] Βηθφαγὴ Bethphage N-AFS Bethphage 1. "Bethphage" looks like a made up word/city. The Hebrew transliteration is "house of unripe figs". As the word draws near to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
2. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
2532 [e] καὶ and Conj and -
963 [e] Βηθανίαν Bethany, N-AFS Bethany 1. Another apparent made up word/city.
2. Here the Aramaic transliteration is "house of figs".
3. As the word draws nearer to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of figs" next to a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
4. The use of underlying Hebrew & Aramaic here is a style of GMark including Greek with Latin, Hebrew & Aramaic. Think Paul (there is no Greek or Jew).
6. Just like with Bethphage there's really no evidence before GMark that either existed/was historical.
7. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
8. The grammar doesn't work as you wouldn't arrive at two different cities.
9. Note that subsequent Gospellers all saw it as fiction:
"Matthew" - They only came to Bethphage.
"Luke" - Instead of coming close to Jerusalem he comes close to Bethphage and Bethany.
"John" - Exorcises "Bethphage and Bethany". By mid second century critics are pointing out that there were no such cities.
10. Not that it's needed but typical evidence that GMark is first. GMark has a clear historical problem and GMatthew and GLuke give different solutions.
4314 [e] πρὸς near Prep - -
3588 [e] τὸ the Art-ANS - -
3735 [e] ὄρος Mount N-ANS - -
3588 [e] τῶν - Art-GFP - -
1636 [e] Ἐλαιῶν, of Olives, N-GFP - -


Joseph

STORY, n. A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached.

The New Porphyry
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Lord of Lasonmancha

Post by JoeWallack »

Donkey's Quotes

JW:

11:1

Strong's Greek English Morphology Translation Commentary
2532 [e] Καὶ And Conj And -
3753 [e] ὅτε when Adv when -
1448 [e] ἐγγίζουσιν they drew near V-PIA-3P they came close 1. Note the Septuagint usage, "in the Sept. used especially of the priests entering the temple to offer sacrifices or to perform other ministrations there,"
1519 [e] εἰς to Prep to -
2414 [e] Ἱεροσόλυμα Jerusalem, N-ANP Jerusalem -
1519 [e] εἰςs to Prep to -
967 [e] Βηθφαγὴ Bethphage N-AFS Bethphage 1. "Bethphage" looks like a made up word/city. The Hebrew transliteration is "house of unripe figs". As the word draws near to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
2. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
2532 [e] καὶ and Conj and -
963 [e] Βηθανίαν Bethany, N-AFS Bethany 1. Another apparent made up word/city.
2. Here the Aramaic transliteration is "house of figs".
3. As the word draws nearer to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of figs" next to a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
4. The use of underlying Hebrew & Aramaic here is a style of GMark including Greek with Latin, Hebrew & Aramaic. Think Paul (there is no Greek or Jew).
6. Just like with Bethphage there's really no evidence before GMark that either existed/was historical.
7. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
8. The grammar doesn't work as you wouldn't arrive at two different cities.
9. Note that subsequent Gospellers all saw it as fiction:
"Matthew" - They only came to Bethphage.
"Luke" - Instead of coming close to Jerusalem he comes close to Bethphage and Bethany.
"John" - Exorcises "Bethphage and Bethany". By mid second century critics are pointing out that there were no such cities.
10. Not that it's needed but typical evidence that GMark is first. GMark has a clear historical problem and GMatthew and GLuke give different solutions.
4314 [e] πρὸς near Prep to Note that the correct translation is "to" and not "near". There is no apparent narrative reason why Jesus is at the Mount of Olives at this point. Sticking with the narrative, what follows becomes comical (is that what the author intended?) as specifically at this location Jesus instructs two disciples (probably the disciples of color) to go down the mountain, requisition a donkey that presumably no one had ever used, and bring the donkey back up the mountain to Jesus. Again, is this merely irony or outright comedy? For those who need points sharply explained, "Mark's" Jesus arrives simultaneously to two fictional cities, ascends a fictional Mountain and sends two schlubs down a mountain to steal a donkey that's never been ridden and bring it back up the mountain to Jesus so he can ride it in front of a crowd.
3588 [e] τὸ the Art-ANS - -
3735 [e] ὄρος Mount N-ANS - -
3588 [e] τῶν - Art-GFP - -
1636 [e] Ἐλαιῶν, of Olives, N-GFP - -


Joseph

SATAN, n. One of the Creator's lamentable mistakes, repented in sashcloth and axes. Being instated as an archangel, Satan made himself multifariously objectionable and was finally expelled from Heaven.

http://thenewporphyry.blogspot.com/
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Stranger Things - The Curse of Yeshcna

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIAtE6ywgwA

JW:

11:1

Strong's Greek English Morphology Translation Commentary
2532 [e] Καὶ And Conj And -
3753 [e] ὅτε when Adv when -
1448 [e] ἐγγίζουσιν they drew near V-PIA-3P they came close 1. Note the Septuagint usage, "in the Sept. used especially of the priests entering the temple to offer sacrifices or to perform other ministrations there,"
1519 [e] εἰς to Prep to -
2414 [e] Ἱεροσόλυμα Jerusalem, N-ANP Jerusalem -
1519 [e] εἰςs to Prep to -
967 [e] Βηθφαγὴ Bethphage N-AFS Bethphage 1. "Bethphage" looks like a made up word/city. The Hebrew transliteration is "house of unripe figs". As the word draws near to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
2. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
2532 [e] καὶ and Conj and -
963 [e] Βηθανίαν Bethany, N-AFS Bethany 1. Another apparent made up word/city.
2. Here the Aramaic transliteration is "house of figs".
3. As the word draws nearer to the fig/Temple story it seems likely a fictional name and a city named "house of figs" would be unlikely while a city named "house of figs" next to a city named "house of unripe figs" would be pretty pretty unlikely.
4. The use of underlying Hebrew & Aramaic here is a style of GMark including Greek with Latin, Hebrew & Aramaic. Think Paul (there is no Greek or Jew).
6. Just like with Bethphage there's really no evidence before GMark that either existed/was historical.
7. As always, note that once you have identified an unlikely part of the story it is evidence that other parts are also unlikely.
8. The grammar doesn't work as you wouldn't arrive at two different cities.
9. Note that subsequent Gospellers all saw it as fiction:
"Matthew" - They only came to Bethphage.
"Luke" - Instead of coming close to Jerusalem he comes close to Bethphage and Bethany.
"John" - Exorcises "Bethphage and Bethany". By mid second century critics are pointing out that there were no such cities.
10. Not that it's needed but typical evidence that GMark is first. GMark has a clear historical problem and GMatthew and GLuke give different solutions.
4314 [e] πρὸς near Prep to Note that the correct translation is "to" and not "near". There is no apparent narrative reason why Jesus is at the Mount of Olives at this point. Sticking with the narrative, what follows becomes comical (is that what the author intended?) as specifically at this location Jesus instructs two disciples (probably the disciples of color) to go down the mountain, requisition a donkey that presumably no one had ever used, and bring the donkey back up the mountain to Jesus. Again, is this merely irony or outright comedy? For those who need points sharply explained, "Mark's" Jesus arrives simultaneously to two fictional cities, ascends a fictional Mountain and sends two schlubs down a mountain to steal a donkey that's never been ridden and bring it back up the mountain to Jesus so he can ride it in front of a crowd.
3588 [e] τὸ the Art-ANS the -
3735 [e] ὄρος Mount N-ANS Mountain -
3588 [e] τῶν - Art-GFP of -
1636 [e] Ἐλαιῶν, of Olives, N-GFP Olives 1. So, Jesus and The Boys have arrived at The Mountain of Olives and using the same word used in the Septuagint for the Priests coming to the Temple to make sacrifices, have "come near" to Jerusalem.
2. Olives have a very specific usage in The Jewish Bible. Someone, anyone, Solo?
3. For those who need points sharply explained, Jesus is offering himself to Jerusalem as a sacrifice and is anointed by The Mountain of Olives.
4. Where else does "Mark" invoke the Mountain of Olives and what else might "Mark" predict is going to be sacrificed?
5. In any Greek case, as always with GMark, great irony. Jesus destroys himself to save himself by sacrificing himself to save himself and predicts the destruction of the sacrificial location and system of sacrifice designed by God to save the Jews in order to save the Jews. Not to mention the High Priests, Scribes and Elders whose job is to identify the Messiah in order to save Israel, instead sacrificing the Messiah thereby sacrificing themselves which ironically fulfills their job responsibility of recognizing the Messiah. They just don't write em like this any more.
6. Interesting that the sophisticated literary style of "Mark" was so far above Patristics that they ironically mistook it for simplicity.


Joseph

Irony -a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a character's words or actions are clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character.

http://thenewporphyry.blogspot.com/
Post Reply