Page 3 of 16

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 7:31 pm
by Ulan
outhouse wrote:
gmx wrote:The Nazareth synagogue wouldn't necessarily need to be a lavish building, would it?
Just a house would work. But if the went to the house next door a week after, or gathered by the well, was it really a synagogue?
Does it really matter? The text of this chapter doesn't mention the name of the town. The only "home" that is identified is Capernaum, and that's also where he has the run-in with his family in chapter 3.

This is not an attempt to derail the thread with yet another "meaning of Nazorean" discussion, I just wanted to point out that the text is vague here and does not really merit a discussion about how the synagogue may have looked like.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 8:45 pm
by Secret Alias
I know having a low IQ makes these intertextual discussions rather difficult for some but the answer to the question is rather obvious. Tertullian sums up the Marcionite narrative up until this point as:
From heaven straightway into the synagogue.
Notice that Mark chapter 6 occurs at the very start of the Marcionite gospel. https://sites.google.com/site/inglisonm ... reth-first As such this is a clear indication of Marcionite primacy and the canonical gospel of Mark and all that follows has been arranged in such a way to counter the implications of the Marcionite narrative - namely that he was a space alien who came into the synagogue as a stranger.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 9:03 pm
by Secret Alias
Further clues about the Marcionite reading from Ephrem:
After these things, he came to his town and was teaching them on the Sabbath in their synagogues. Was there not another people, or another land apart from that of the Jews? But in order that Marcion's lie be refuted, it said after this, He entered the synagogue as was his custom, on the Sabbath day. What was the custom of him who had come just now? He had come to Galilee, and had begun to teach, not outside of the synagogue, but within it, he [came] to talk to them about their God. Otherwise it would have been in order for him to proclaim to them outside of their synagogue. He therefore entered Bethsaida among the Jews. It does not indicate that they said anything to him other than, Physician, heal yourself. They seized him and brought him to the side of the mountain. It is not likely that the word [he] had spoken to them was leading them to anger. For, if he had been speaking to them concerning the Creator, and [if] this was why they had given the response, They seized him that they might cast him down, why then did it not record in other places that it was like this too? That the people of the town hated him, there is this testimony: A prophet is not accepted in his home town. For Anathoth did not receive Jeremiah,9 nor the Tishbites Elijah, nor Abelmeholah Elisha, nor Ramah Samuel,10 nor the Moses, nor Israel our Lord. Elijah accordingly despised their wives,11 and Elisha their men.12 They were called lacking in faith to their shame.13 But [the Lord] honoured the Arameans more than these.1 This is why they were filled with anger.2 The reason for this was as follows: Physican, heal yourself,3 that is, "Save yourself from us, instead of seeking to heal [us]!" Although they were in need of healing, he was not able to heal them because of their lack [of faith]. By reason of their freewill, they were casting him down* but because of his divinity he did not fall. Audacity was casting him down, but the submissive air received him on its wings, and he did not fall, so that through this he might perhaps procure faith for those who did not believe. Perhaps [it was] on this account that the Galileans received him.5 From the moment when they saw him passing through their midst,6 they did not dare do anything more to him. This was his first healing, that of the right hand which was ill.7 Consequently, through the influence of the Prince of the Left, the Nazarenes were murmuring against him, envious of the healing of this Right [hand], which was established in the solemn mystery, and released unto every divine use.[Ephrem Commentary 23]
Of course this is the exact point the 'super gospel' of Ephrem and others has the crowd pass through Jesus and he flies away or one or the other. These are all reports which are preserved only in whisps and fragments. But the point is clear that ALL the ur-gospels before our canonical ones began with a bang demonstrating Jesus (a) to have had no family and (b) to have been a supernatural being. This is why the subsequent gospels go to such a length to dice and rearrange the narrative into something which appears 'more natural' for a man of flesh and blood.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 9:22 pm
by Secret Alias
You see for students of Marcionism like Stuart the Ephrem reference is ignored in favor of the Tertullian reference even though both come from the same 'super gospel' tradition. As Andrew Criddle has noted along with me Tertullian's text has only been superficially rearranged to make it seem as if the original author 'knew Luke.' He did not. He, like Ephrem is arguing from a 'harmony' - or if you prefer, a super gospel - which had narratives which from our brainwashed perspective made it seem as if 'bits of Matthew, Mark, Luke' and perhaps John were rearranged into a new narrative (remember Irenaeus's cento discussion). The point here clearly is that the beginning of both the Marcionite gospel and that of the rival tradition the effect is the same. Jesus flew in order to give faith to those who disbelieved him in the synagogue. Baarda goes through countless other references to the same gospel in other traditions but the point is that Mark has these gospels in mind when it safely relocates this story to chapter 6 rather than at the very beginning of the narrative.

The original Marcionite gospel has the story occur at Bethsaida = Jerusalem.

Nazareth is not set on a mountain. A 'fishing village' by definition cannot be set on a precipice. Beth saida 'house of demons' is a well attested name of the temple and is echoed in the Nag Hammadi treatise the Testimony of Truth. Irenaeus interesting confirms the Marcionite gospel begins in Judea as does another fragment cited by Harnack. Jesus goes in the temple says something blasphemous and is pushed to the place where the scapegoats were traditionally killed and instead the Jews (in the Marcionite gospel) pass through him and die themselves; in the rival gospel of Ephrem the location is Nazareth but Jesus flies instead when the Jews try and push him off and lands safely somewhere else.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Wed May 11, 2016 10:06 pm
by Secret Alias
More from Ephrem:
After these things, he came to his town and was teaching them on the Sabbath in their synagogues. Was there not another people, or another land apart from that of the Jews? But in order that Marcion's lie be refuted, it said after this, He entered the synagogue as was his custom, on the Sabbath day. What was the custom of him who had come just now? He had come to Galilee, and had begun to teach, not outside of the synagogue, but within it, he [came] to talk to them about their God. Otherwise it would have been in order for him to proclaim to them outside of their synagogue. He therefore entered Bethsaida among the Jews. It does not indicate that they said anything to him other than, Physician, heal yourself. They seized him and brought him to the side of the mountain. It is not likely that the word [he] had spoken to them was leading them to anger. For, if he had been speaking to them concerning the Creator, and [if] this was why they had given the response, They seized him that they might cast him down, why then did it not record in other places that it was like this too? That the people of the town hated him, there is this testimony: A prophet is not accepted in his home town. For Anathoth did not receive Jeremiah,9 nor the Tishbites Elijah, nor Abelmeholah Elisha, nor Ramah Samuel,10 nor the Moses, nor Israel our Lord. Elijah accordingly despised their wives,11 and Elisha their men.12 They were called lacking in faith to their shame.13 But [the Lord] honoured the Arameans more than these.1 This is why they were filled with anger.2 The reason for this was as follows: Physican, heal yourself,3 that is, "Save yourself from us, instead of seeking to heal [us]!" Although they were in need of healing, he was not able to heal them because of their lack [of faith]. By reason of their freewill, they were casting him down* but because of his divinity he did not fall. Audacity was casting him down, but the submissive air received him on its wings, and he did not fall, so that through this he might perhaps procure faith for those who did not believe. Perhaps [it was] on this account that the Galileans received him.5 From the moment when they saw him passing through their midst,6 they did not dare do anything more to him. This was his first healing, that of the right hand which was ill.7 Consequently, through the influence of the Prince of the Left, the Nazarenes were murmuring against him, envious of the healing of this Right [hand], which was established in the solemn mystery, and released unto every divine use

A prophet is not received in his own town,8 that is, in his own people. Elijah was from Tishbi, and [Scripture] does not say that Elijah was not received in Tishbi, but in all Israel.9 If this is not so, let it be proved that the inhabitants of Tishbi persecuted him, and the Israelites received him. But who [received him], Gentiles?10 There were many widows, not at Tishbi, but in the house of Israel. But he was not sent to any of these. Likewise, in the case of lepers, not in the town of Elisha, but in the house of Israel. [The Lord] underlined thus that he was not able to reveal miracles, not only in Nazareth, but in the house of Israel. When the people of Nazareth saw that Jesus covered all the land of Israel with shame and disgrace while he carried the Gentiles instead into the heavens.
Compare this to the gospel of Tertullian's source:
It is quite wrong in fact, that Romulus should have had Proculus to vouch for his ascent into heaven,3 yet that Christ should not have provided himself with a reporter of his god's descent from heaven—though that one must have gone up by the same ladder of lies by which this one came down. Also what had he to do with Galilee, if he was not the Creator's Christ, for whom that province was predestined <as the place> for him to enter on his preaching? For Isaiah says: Drink this first, do it quickly, province of Zebulon and land of Naphtali, and ye others who <dwell between> the sea-coast and Jordan, Galilee of the gentiles, ye people who sit in darkness, behold a great light: ye who inhabit the land, sitting in the shadow of death, a light has arisen upon you.a It is indeed to the good that Marcion's god too should be cited as one who gives light to the gentiles, for so there was the greater need for him to come down from heaven—though, if so, he ought to have come down into Pontus rather than Galilee. Yet since both that locality and that function of enlightenment do according to the prophecy have their bearing upon Christ, we at once begin to discern that it was he of whom the prophecy was made, when he makes it clear on his first appearance that he is come not to destroy the law and the prophets, but rather to fulfil them.b For Marcion has blotted this out as an interpolation. But in vain will he deny that Christ said in words a thing which he at once partly accomplished in act. For in the meanwhile he fulfilled the prophecy in respect of place. From heaven straightway into the synagogue. As the saying goes, let us get down to it: to your task, Marcion: remove even this from the gospel, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and, It is not <meet> to take away the children's bread and give it to dogs:c for this gives the impression that Christ belongs to Israel. I have plenty of acts, if you take away his words. Take away Christ's sayings, and the facts will speak; See how he enters into the synagogue: surely to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. See how he offers the bread of his doctrine to the Israelites first: surely he is giving them preference as sons. See how as yet he gives others no share of it: surely he is passing them by, like dogs. Yet on whom would he have been more ready to bestow it than on strangers to the Creator, if he himself had not above all else belonged to the Creator? Yet again how can he have obtained admittance into the synagogue, appearing so suddenly, so unknown, no one as yet having certain knowledge of his tribe, of his nation, of his house, or even of Caesar's census, which the Roman registry still has in keeping, a most faithful witness to our Lord's nativity? They remembered, surely, that unless they knew he was circumcised he must not be admitted into the most holy places. Or again, even if there were unlimited access to the synagogue, there was no permission to teach, except for one excellently well known, and tried, and approved, and already either for this occasion or by commendation from elsewhere invested with that function. 'But they were all astonished at his doctrine.' Quite so
Coincidence? That both Tertullian's source and Ephrem make the same references in the same section even though the Syrophoenician woman only appears in Matthew?

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 12:22 am
by Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Ben C. Smith wrote:Luke 4.16-30 is much more complete here, and gives ample reason for the townspeople to resent Jesus.
It seems to me rather that Luke had pulled a boner. In Luke's version, it seems that an arrogant Jesus rejected the people and not the other way around.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 1:48 am
by Ulan
Secret Alias wrote:The original Marcionite gospel has the story occur at Bethsaida = Jerusalem.
There may still be an echo of this in the current text of gMark. The rejection scene clearly plays in a larger town. A town with villages around it, which are mentioned as contrast.

As an aside, I did not suggest that Capernaum was meant here (it simply does not identify the city). What I did say is that it was introduced as the town where Jesus had his home and where he met his family in chapter 3. Which, by the way, already duplicates some of the rejection theme, this time from Jesus' side.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 4:24 am
by Secret Alias
Thank you. Good point. I wish I had thought of that. But on a side note. Do you see how superior this approach is - ie going back to the actual debates about Marcion - than the approach of most of the other ants at the forum? Of course Mark and every other canonical gospel were reactions against the Marcionite gospel. They prefer of course to believe in the reality manufactured for them by Irenaeus and his henchmen. "But we have manuscripts of the gospel of Mark available to us today. Why should we have to consider a gospel with a flying Jesus and a Jesus passing through crowds like clouds. Too bad we don't actually have these 'super gospels' any more. But we can only limit our discussions to manuscripts that survived antiquity." Ants

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 4:34 am
by Secret Alias
And notice the action in John starts at the Jerusalem temple.

Re: Why was Jesus rejected in his hometown?

Posted: Thu May 12, 2016 5:18 am
by Ulan
Secret Alias wrote:Coincidence? That both Tertullian's source and Ephrem make the same references in the same section even though the Syrophoenician woman only appears in Matthew?
I guess you mean Mark:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... rsion=NRSV