Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Bernard Muller wrote: It is a gross exaggeration that Jesus replaced John in the eyes of many.


Cordially, Bernard

If it was only modern you would have a point.

But you do not, even Herod is said to have made that claim.

Again we already know the NT authors downplayed/embarrassed about John just baptizing Jesus.

I do not see evidence these Galileans were so "heated".

Try reading the NT text, it is full of the pains of agrarian peasants.

Antipas made these people into working slaves to grow the food required to feed Sepphoris and taxed them unmercifully to pay for his restorations.

The current socioeconomic models by my scholars and anthropologist paint Antipas as placing a very heavy burden on these people.


NOT ONLY that the cleansing of the temple by all rights was a failed attempt to overthrow it right then and there.

These Aramaic Galilean were all politically active with the zealous nature of their pious faith at their foundation, and fighting Antipas oppression was their main struggle.

It's amazing that outhouse believes he is adding value to the forum when he NEVER makes reference to any primary sources. What is the value of this pontificating? He must think he is an incredibly gifted thinker. Next he is going to shit in a pot and present it to us with the pride of a two year old.

to Adam,

"The Evangelist Mark correctly indicated that John's baptism of Jesus was most likely the key event in Jesus' life....'

Even if it is true, I do not see the consequences relative of Jesus being a long term student of John, being the leader of his alleged movement after John's death, both John & then Jesus being politicos, leader of "heated" Galileans, etc.
Furthermore the baptism by John was no more than for atonement of sins and performed on many Jews. Nothing really exceptional and certainly unique to Jesus. Rather a common and symbolic ritual in these days despite the mythological additions on the baptism of Jesus (the dove, the Holy Spirit, God's declaration, the angel, etc...).

Cordially, Bernard

to outhouse,

But you do not, even Herod is said to have made that claim.

As if "Mark" had spies in Antipas' court! Furthermore, in Mk 6:14, "Mark" had Herod making remarks about Jesus, not because of some political activities, but because of his alleged miracles. If Jesus was a political leader of "heated" Galileans, he would have arrested Jesus well before he went to Jerusalem.

Antipas made these people into working slaves to grow the food required to feed Sepphoris and taxed them unmercifully to pay for his restorations.
The current socioeconomic models by my scholars and anthropologist paint Antipas as placing a very heavy burden on these people.

But I do not see in the NT or Josephus' works that these Galileans were prone to revolt then because of taxation.
Oh, now you have your own scholars and anthropologist. Congratulation.

NOT ONLY that the cleansing of the temple by all rights was a failed attempt to overthrow it right then and there.

The temple of Jerusalem was not under the jurisdiction of Antipas. And I do not see why an attempt to cleanse the temple would be an attempt to overthrow it, but rather an act related to caring about it. Just like I keep my house clean because I care about it.

These Aramaic Galilean were all politically active with the zealous nature of their pious faith at their foundation, and fighting Antipas oppression was their main struggle.

You have a lot of imagination. Evidence please, from 1st cent. writers.

Zealot was a description of Aramaic Galileans, by Hellenist more so then a political movement.

Are you saying that all Aramaic Galileans were considered Zealots in Jesus' times?
From where would you get that?

Cordially, Bernard

Bernard Muller wrote:As if "Mark" had spies in Antipas' court!



Cordially, Bernard

Don't start. It is desperate on your part.

I qualified my statement very clearly with

is said to have made that claim.

Bernard Muller wrote: now you have your own scholars and anthropologist.


Cordially, Bernard

Yes I do. There are apologist debating the socioeconomics, and mine carry credibility.

But I do not see in the NT or Josephus' works that these Galileans were prone to revolt then because of taxation.

You have to read the text.

In Luke Jesus is described as a tax evader

In Josephus your getting a Roman flavored Hellenistic retelling of Zealotry with no details of the evils of Roman and or Herods oppression. Most scholars know this.

. And I do not see why an attempt to cleanse the temple would be an attempt to overthrow it

That is my problem with you.

Your always out of the context scholars see and report on. Most scholars know that Passover crowds were ready at any moment for war, waiting for that messiah to set them free from the heavily oppressed Roman and Herodian rule.

It only takes a spark to start a forest fire, and Pilates and Caiaphas life were on the line to keep the temple spark free. If there was so much as a hiccup in the money flow to Rome that temple was doomed. Galileans knew this. They wanted to stop the money flow to Rome, you know the required silver currency with a damned pagan god Melqarts face on them in gods own house!

When the eagle was removed 40 peasants were burned alive at the stake, I'm sure no Jew really cared gods house was only being used to raise money for Rome !

Secret Alias wrote:. What is the value of this pontificating? .

9 books for 1 cent, you have no right to criticize anyone for methodology over your head.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/ ... 850&sr=1-1

Bargain book or not, The Real Messiah (as I said, apparently NOT by Secret Alias, but by a former poster known as Stephan Huller), I'm proud to own The Real Messiah:....the True Origins of Christianity, 2011 (2nd UK printing).

to outhouse,

Yes I do. There are apologist debating the socioeconomics, and mine carry credibility.

Can you name them? Any scholar who agrees with you would carry credibility: circular argument which does not prove anything. Again the socioeconomics have nothing to do about guessing these so-called "heated" agrarian Galileans were close to revolt against Antipas and looking for a leader in the person of Jesus.

But I do not see in the NT or Josephus' works that these Galileans were prone to revolt then because of taxation.

You have to read the text.

What text? provide names, chapters and verses.

In Luke Jesus is described as a tax evader

And where would that be? Provide textual evidence.

In Josephus your getting a Roman flavored Hellenistic retelling of Zealotry with no details of the evils of Roman and or Herods oppression. Most scholars know this.

What do you mean by that? where do you see Zealotry during John & Jesus' public lives? How this Zealotry would be connected to Jesus & John?

Cordially, Bernard

Bernard Muller wrote:Furthermore the baptism by John was no more than for atonement of sins and performed on many Jews. Nothing really exceptional and certainly unique to Jesus. Rather a common and symbolic ritual in these days despite the mythological additions on the baptism of Jesus (the dove, the Holy Spirit, God's declaration, the angel, etc...).



Cordially, Bernard

It is far from that simple.

You had rich Hellenistic Jews in cities with ritual mikvas, yet no poor Galilean could use or partake of such rituals.

Down to the creek or river, for your ritual emersion.

By your methodology if it was so simple, he should have been baptized a long time ago with this simple wiping away of ones sins. No need to EVEN mention John.

But they did. Your explanation fails at that point