schillingklaus wrote: ↑Fri Sep 23, 2022 5:21 am
Mk is excessively late, whence it is by absolutely no means responsible for linking Jesus to Pilate. Some lost source gospel must have done this earlier.
Sure. But I am more and more sure that Pilate was derived from a Samaritan source, i.e. from a rival Samaritan sect who was
historically connected with the Samaritan false prophet slain by Pilate.
Stuart has been very brilliant in recognizing that what he calls the 'heterodox' position (Simonians, Marcionites, etc) has used, "used" in the meaning of: 'exploited", the tradition of Jesus Son of Joseph as an astute expedient to deny that Jesus was davidic and by extension that Jesus was a Jew.
Stuart wrote: ↑Thu May 07, 2020 12:49 pm
Matthew is well aware of the Marcionite and Heterodox use of the messiah ben Joseph motif. He opposed that lineage and supported Davidic instead (σπέρματος Δαβίδ, per Romans 1:3, 2 Timothy 2:8 which no doubt reference Matthew). So how does he diminish Joseph, son o Jacob? He makes him the immediate father of Jesus, and Joseph's father Jacob instead of having Isaac has some Matthan (Matthew?) as his father, breaking the lineage (note, Luke would obscure it further swapping Heli for Jacob). Matthew takes a small dig at Joseph son of Jacob/Israel,by diminishing his prominence in saying "Jacob the father of Judah" then adding "and his brothers" who are not worthy of name mention, when even Ruth and Uriah get mentioned.
So it's in my view not Messiah ben Joseph morphing into Messiah ben David, but rather a convenient symbolism for competition between competing camps.
This was the old strategy called
'divide et impera': taking advantage of the fact that there was
already in Judea a rivarly between the davidic Messiah and the Josephite Messiah, the anti-demiurgists used the Josephite Jesus in opposition to the davidic Jesus, even if they denied that Jesus was human at all (and therefore not even a "Son of Joseph").
That was basically the reason why an
anti-demiurgist Simon Magus was labelled:
Samaritan.
Therefore, I start to wonder if my complessive view is correct even without the support of an Ignatius who, afterall,
docet the Catholic Jack Bull, is
entirely a late invention.