Jesus, Paul and Josephus

[Charles Wilson]

Pompey entered the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem temple in 63 b.c. and the Marc Antony executed a Jewish King and High Priest in 37 b.c.

Revelation 10: 1 - 10 (RSV):

[1] Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire.
[2] He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land,
[3] and called out with a loud voice, like a lion roaring; when he called out, the seven thunders sounded.
[4] And when the seven thunders had sounded, I was about to write, but I heard a voice from heaven saying, "Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and do not write it down."
[5] And the angel whom I saw standing on sea and land lifted up his right hand to heaven
[6] and swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there should be no more delay,
[7] but that in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God, as he announced to his servants the prophets, should be fulfilled.
[8] Then the voice which I had heard from heaven spoke to me again, saying, "Go, take the scroll which is open in the hand of the angel who is standing on the sea and on the land."
[9] So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little scroll; and he said to me, "Take it and eat; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth."
[10] And I took the little scroll from the hand of the angel and ate it; it was sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it my stomach was made bitter.

Hello maryhelena --

"We meet again" and although we have disagreements in Type and Detail, I agree with many of your conclusions.

Pompey is VERY important to the Judaic History and those who do NOT [Note: Ooops! Left out the "NOT"] study the HASMONEANS are doomed to the outer fringes of understanding. I have the above Revelation quote as being about Pompey and the poisoning of Aristobulus 2. Pompey's troops faced defeat at the hands of Mithridates with a poisoned honey made from rhododendron flowers.

Pompey learned from this. Aristobulus 2 paid the price.

John 2: 19 - 21 (RSV):

[19] Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
[20] The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?"
[21] But he spoke of the temple of his body.

Counting back from the Key 9 CE Passover and Feast Week, we arrive at 37 BCE. The "..temple of his body..." statement is Mis-Direction at its worst.

You haven't recognized these Time Markers but we both end up with something like:

These dates, 63 b.c. and 37 b.c. are pivotal dates in Hasmonean/Jewish history. The Josephan and the Lukan writer, writers, dating elements of their stories to dates that have anniversary or remembrance significance for earlier Hasmonean history.

YES! PLZ, people, listen and learn here. maryhelena is CORRECT!

The Hasmoneans lost Judaean sovereignty in 63 b.c. (albeit regained for around three years in 40 b.c. - but Rome also appointed their own Judaean King, Herod, in that year). The Hasmoneans had no need to wait until post the war of 70 c.e. to know that any hope of regaining sovereignty was futile against the power of Rome. Their alternative? Perhaps a kingdom with no end - a spiritual kingdom of neither Jew nor Greek. In other words: a philosophical approach to the situation they found themselves in. Necessity, they say, is the mother of invention. A new philosophy that even the power of Rome would capitulate to. (albeit with a vision of a cross in the sky rather than reason and logic....)

I lean towards the idea the Rome held the pen last (See: John listing the deaths of Galba (Soudarion), Otho (Piercing the side with blood and water flowing out) and Vitellius ( Vicious Satire on Vitellius' desires of Asiaticus and of finding him selling Posca at a bazaar.)) but the end result is the same.

Nonetheless, good research maryhelena. Well stated.

CW

[maryhelena]

Pompey entered the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem temple in 63 b.c. and the Marc Antony executed a Jewish King and High Priest in 37 b.c.

Revelation 10: 1 - 10 (RSV):

[1] Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire.
[2] He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land,
[3] and called out with a loud voice, like a lion roaring; when he called out, the seven thunders sounded.
[4] And when the seven thunders had sounded, I was about to write, but I heard a voice from heaven saying, "Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and do not write it down."
[5] And the angel whom I saw standing on sea and land lifted up his right hand to heaven
[6] and swore by him who lives for ever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there should be no more delay,
[7] but that in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God, as he announced to his servants the prophets, should be fulfilled.
[8] Then the voice which I had heard from heaven spoke to me again, saying, "Go, take the scroll which is open in the hand of the angel who is standing on the sea and on the land."
[9] So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little scroll; and he said to me, "Take it and eat; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth."
[10] And I took the little scroll from the hand of the angel and ate it; it was sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it my stomach was made bitter.

Hello maryhelena --

"We meet again" and although we have disagreements in Type and Detail, I agree with many of your conclusions.

Pompey is VERY important to the Judaic History and those who do study the HASMONEANS are doomed to the outer fringes of understanding. I have the above Revelation quote as being about Pompey and the poisoning of Aristobulus 2. Pompey's troops faced defeat at the hands of Mithridates with a poisoned honey made from rhododendron flowers.

Pompey learned from this. Aristobulus 2 paid the price.

John 2: 19 - 21 (RSV):

[19] Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
[20] The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?"
[21] But he spoke of the temple of his body.

Counting back from the Key 9 CE Passover and Feast Week, we arrive at 37 BCE. The "..temple of his body..." statement is Mis-Direction at its worst.

You haven't recognized these Time Markers but we both end up with something like:

These dates, 63 b.c. and 37 b.c. are pivotal dates in Hasmonean/Jewish history. The Josephan and the Lukan writer, writers, dating elements of their stories to dates that have anniversary or remembrance significance for earlier Hasmonean history.

YES! PLZ, people, listen and learn here. maryhelena is CORRECT!

The Hasmoneans lost Judaean sovereignty in 63 b.c. (albeit regained for around three years in 40 b.c. - but Rome also appointed their own Judaean King, Herod, in that year). The Hasmoneans had no need to wait until post the war of 70 c.e. to know that any hope of regaining sovereignty was futile against the power of Rome. Their alternative? Perhaps a kingdom with no end - a spiritual kingdom of neither Jew nor Greek. In other words: a philosophical approach to the situation they found themselves in. Necessity, they say, is the mother of invention. A new philosophy that even the power of Rome would capitulate to. (albeit with a vision of a cross in the sky rather than reason and logic....)

I lean towards the idea the Rome held the pen last (See: John listing the deaths of Galba (Soudarion), Otho (Piercing the side with blood and water flowing out) and Vitellius ( Vicious Satire on Vitellius' desires of Asiaticus and of finding him selling Posca at a bazaar.)) but the end result is the same.

Nonetheless, good research maryhelena. Well stated.

CW

Different approaches..... with Hasmonean history relevant to both. All the best...

[schillingklaus]

Revelation must be understood metaphysically as van den Bergh van Eysinga does, not historically as Wilson does.

[maryhelena]

Adding a link to this thread.

viewtopic.php?t=8132

Carrier, Aretas and Damascus

==========================

Dating the NT Paul usually tries to date the Aretas mentioned in 2 Cor.11.32.33

32 In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. 33 But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands.

Historical evidence puts Aretas III in control of Damascus in 63 b.c.
That is the only established date for an Aretas controlling Damascus - losing control to the Romans around 62 b.c. Wikipedia.

Historicists have problems with these dates. They attempt to have Aretas IV controlling Damascus at a time more suited to their NT Paul time frame.

Bottom line - it is only Aretas III that ruled Damascus (Aretas IV did not).

Obviously, Paul historicists have a big problem with this mention of Aretas and Damascus. However, once the NT figure of Paul is viewed as a literary construct (like JC) then a review of the Paul and Damascus story is allowed a far wider interpretation.

63 b.c. was the date on which Hasmonean sovereignty in Judaea was lost to the Romans. (Pompey entering the Holy of Holie of the Jerusalem temple.) Paul leaving Damascus in a basket over the wall is a story with echoes of the spies escaping over the wall of Jericho prior to the conquest of the Promised Land.

Seemingly, what is being referenced with a Paul link to Damascus and escaping over the wall - dated re Aretas III - is that it is this date 63 b.c. that the NT writers are viewing as the date in which Pauline theology/philosophy finds it's roots. Loss of Hasmonean sovereignty the ground zero from which a new world view was born. From tragedy sprung a new philosophical insight. A kingdom of neither Jew nor Greek.

Luke, as mentioned in an earlier post, with his Jesus birth story dated to around 6 c.e. - about 70 years from 63 b.c. is also highlighting this important date in Hasmonean history - hence indicating that it is also an important date for the gospel story. Josephus also, with his dating of his John the Baptizer figure to 36/37 c.e. is linking his story to 63 b.c. (100 years back).

One can just discard all of this as not relevant to a search for early christian origins. One can uphold a historical Jesus and a historical Paul.....but that assumption is a dead end - it leads nowhere. One can view the Josephan writings, with their mention of gospel figures, as a lottery win that allows one to dream big things about the gospel story. One can stay in ones comfort zone that such thinking allows. Or..............one can put
christian interpretations of the NT on the back seat and allow Hasmonean/Jewish history it's rightful place in searching for early christian origins.

[mlinssen]

Or one can ignore all the dumb and failed dating attempts and just read what the texts say instead.
Who gives a damn whether they used real stories as a basis to their invented stories? Esther serves as John B's beheading party, Judges and Isaiah to invent the virgin birth - there obviously are prior stories behind most of the NT stories, but none of them say anything about origins

[maryhelena]

Or one can ignore all the dumb and failed dating attempts and just read what the texts say instead.
Who gives a damn whether they used real stories as a basis to their invented stories? Esther serves as John B's beheading party, Judges and Isaiah to invent the virgin birth - there obviously are prior stories behind most of the NT stories, but none of them say anything about origins

Each to their own - carry on with what you find interesting - as I will do with what I find interesting.

[maryhelena]

In an earlier post in this thread I posted a chart on Jesus and Paul - taken from the Mystery of Acts: Richard I. Pervo, page 107. Table 6:1: Jesus and Paul:

Below is a simple chart detailing some similarities between Paul and Josephus.


[table]

Apostle Paul	Titus Flavius Josephus
Roman citizen	Roman citizen
Shipwreck on way to Rome	Shipwreck on way to Rome
Time in Rome	Time in Rome
Trade: tent maker	Trade: soldier and writer
An educated man	An educated man
thorn in the flesh' of own people	thorn in the flesh' of own people
A Pharisee	A Pharisee
Not an original apostle	Born after crucifixion of gospel JC
Original Name is Saul of Tarsus	Original Name is Joseph ben Matityahu
Tribe of Benjamin. The tribe designated to stay with the Aaronic Priesthood and the tribe of David after the nation split in two.	Decended from priests and royal Hasmonean blood.
A former persecutor of Christians	Josephus had been an enemy of Rome
The Pauline Timeline: Galations: 1:17,18, 2:1, Acts 24, Acts. 25, Acts 28:30. (2 Cor 11. Paul, Aretas and Damascus 63 b.c.)	The Josephan Timeline: Josephus: 37 c.e. to Post 93/94 c.e.
JC crucifixion story from 15th year of Tiberius to end of Pilate's rule of 37c.e. Saul conversion post 37 ce..becomes Paul....(2 Cor.11. Paul to Damascus. Aretas III 63/62 b.c.)	Birth date is 37 c.e. (1st year of Caius Caesar) 100 years since 63 b.c. The year Hasmonean's lost sovereignty to Rome.
Visits Arabia. Visits Jerusalem after 3 years. 40/41 c.e. Preaching in Corinth dated to Gallio around 52 c.e.	52 c.e. (14 years old and high priests and leading men from Jerusalem visit Josephus for his opinion.)
Visits Jerusalem again after 14 years. (17 years after conversion). 55 c.e.	53-56 c.e. (3 years study of Jewish sects and stays in the desert with Banus. 16 years to 19 years old).
Paul a prisoner for 2 years under Felix. Paul before Festus (60-62 c.e.) Shipwreck on way to Rome:	63 c.e. (26 years old. Shipwreck on way to Rome.)
Roman prisoner for 2 years under house arrest....64 c.e. ....26/27 year ministry…	67 c.e. (30 years) old taken prisoner at Jotapata - released in 69 c.e.) Goes to Rome after 70 c.e. Joseph ben Matityahu becomes Titus Flavius Josephus. 26/27 years until Antiquities in 93/94.

Richard Pervo detailed, in the earlier chart, a similarity between the figures of Paul and Jesus. The above chart seeks to highlight similarities between Paul and Josephus. In both cases there is no equation - each figure is, so to speak, his own man. However, the similarities do suggest that all three figures come, as it were, from the same stable. The same intellectual 'school'. The blueprint is simply reworked to suit different contexts. All three figures are connected to Hasmonean history - specifically the year 63 b.c. The bloodline given to Josephus is part Hasmonean.

From the Lukan birth narrative of it's Jesus figure around 6/7 c.e. - 70 years from 63 b.c.
From Paul connected with the Aretas III who controlled Damascus in 63 b.c.
To Josephus who is given a birthdate in 37 c.e. - 100 years from 63 b.c.

Roman control and occupation of Judaea; the end of Hasmonean sovereignty - that is the historical tragedy from which the gospel writers - and Josephus - have crafted their stories.

[Charles Wilson]

Or one can ignore all the dumb and failed dating attempts and just read what the texts say instead.

So what do the Texts tell us about the Mishmarot Priesthood? If you say, "Nothing of interest to anyone" then you've lost almost everything. There are two important things that happened to change the Trajectories of Judaic and Roman History.
1. The Texts that we have seem to imply that there was a Priestly Set of Stories that were dismembered and rewritten in favor of Rome. A Priest, now nameless, was renamed as a created "Jesus" character.
2. John 1 tells us that this created character was Pre-Existing and that nothing that exists now was created without the Agency of this "Jesus".

"The Jews", as named in John, had no idea as to what was happening to both the people and their Culture.
This isn't a "dumb and failed" but History. To argue otherwise is to continue the Destruction that began over 2000 years ago.
"Was the Historical History of Zakkai important?" Of course, and so is the History that precedes him.
"So it goes..."

Who gives a damn whether they used real stories as a basis to their invented stories? ...but none of them say anything about origins

mlinssen, you really surprise me here. If there were real stories used as a basis for *THEIR* invented stories, then that might be the most important Datum to know of all.

As I've said, "There are Atheists who believe that Jesus was the Son of God, who doesn't exist."

Revelation must be understood metaphysically as van den Bergh van Eysinga does, not historically as Wilson does.

History first, IF POSSIBLE, then maybe Metaphysics, IF HELPFUL.

Roman control and occupation of Judaea; the end of Hasmonean sovereignty - that is the historical tragedy from which the gospel writers - and Josephus - have crafted their stories.

QED.

CW

[maryhelena]

A long quote from Thomas Brodie on NT Paul: Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus.

A wonderful retelling of what can best be described as a light bulb moment, a star burst, realization, enlightenment. A moment in time from which there is no going back.

One day in 2008, one beautiful morning in May, as I was walking across the
library floor, I was struck out of the blue by the depth of the similarities
between the Pauline Epistles and Hebrew narrative. For over twenty-five
years I had periodically reread or perused Alter's Art of Biblical Narrative,
all the time trying to get a better sense of what kind of writing we are dealing
with in the Old Testament, and it was with Alter's analysis in mind that I had
first wondered if one feature of Old Testament narrative, the role of dialogue,
had contributed to what Mary T. Brien had said about Romans' use of
dialogue, about dialogical structures and thinking. And the answer seemed
to be 'Yes': on the question of dialogue, Romans is somewhat similar to Old
Testament narrative. The dialogue in Romans is adapted-it is updated to be
more like a philosophical dialogue-yet it is dialogue nonetheless.

But that May morning brought something else. The repeated perusals of
my well-marked copy of Alter meant that l knew his chapter headings and
some key sentences almost by heart. As l left my office I was not thinking
just of dialogue. In fact, I was not thinking of Alter at all. However, as I
walked between the rows of books, near where The Art of Biblical Narrative
was lodged, suddenly almost every chapter of Alter's book connected with
the epistles. I turned back, found the book on the shelf, and started checking
the table of contents. Yes, yes, yes. Like Hebrew narrative, the epistles are
reticent. And composite. And repetitive. And, standing out from the list: like
Hebrew narrative, the epistles are historicized fiction.

Historicized fiction.

A mass of data had suddenly fallen into place.

What hit me was that the entire narrative regarding Paul, everything the
thirteen epistles say about him or imply-about his life, his work and travels,
his character, his sending and receiving of letters, his readers and his
relationship to them-all of that was historicized fiction. It was fiction,
meaning that the figure of Paul was a work of imagination, but this figure had
been historicized-presented in a way that made it look like history, history like,
'fiction made to resemble the uncertainties of life in history' (Alter
\98\ : 27)
................

So-and this reality took time to sink in-the figure of Paul joined the
ranks of so many other figures from the older part of the Bible, figures who,
despite the historical details surrounding them, were literary, figures of the
imagination.
.....................

On that May morning in 2008 in the library the idea that the figure of Paul
is literary rather than historical hit me with a shock. It also hit me quite
simply as the truth.

.......................

Eventually, over a year later, on Saturday, 11 July 2009, I began to check
to see if the idea of Paul as a non-historical figure was new, and had to go no
further than an article in the Jerome Biblical Commentary ( 1 968: 4 1 :7)---a
John Kselman article I had read decades ago--to find that 'B[runo] Bauer
(1 809-1 882) removed what historical foundation (D.] Strauss had allowed
and left only myth, concluding that Jesus and Paul were non-historical
literary fictions'.

Searching further I found that Bauer's stance was largely followed by
'Dutch, German, French and Anglo-Saxon scholars at the end of the nineteenth
and the beginning of the twentieth century' (Kiimmel 1 972: 447), but
the methods used by these scholars were very undeveloped and their
proposals faded. When Bauer reached his conclusion he had nowhere to go;

he eventually abandoned academic life to become a farmer (in German, a
Bauer!); he died a confirmed skeptic, in the words of Albert Schweitzer, 'a
pure, modest, and lofty character' (Baird 1 992: 278).

More than a century later, at the beginning of 2008, the thesis that Paul was a
literary figure was not even an idea, at least for me. Despite Bauer, it had
never crossed my mind as a genuine possibility. ..............Yet by
2008 the situation had changed since the days of Bauer. The methods of
research had greatly improved, and evidence had been gathering slowly that
the epistles are not what they had seemed to be.

[schillingklaus]

No, metaphysics must come first, as opposed to the apologistic propaganda about the Mishmaroth or whatever.