Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I was going to place this in the Thread on Herodias, which had already wandered astray, when I realized that it would probably be best served in its own Thread. Our Poster Frans looks at all things 70 and this one serves to illuminate the background nicely. We find 3 mentions of "Thomas the Twin" in GJohn (7 "Thomas" mentions total):

John 11: 14 - 16 (RSV):

[14] Then Jesus told them plainly, "Laz'arus is dead;
[15] and for your sake I am glad that I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him."
[16] Thomas, called the Twin, said to his fellow disciples, "Let us also go, that we may die with him."

John 20: 24 - 28 (RSV):

[24] Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.
[25] So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe."
[26] Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you."
[27] Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing."
[28] Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

John 21: 2 (RSV):

[2] Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathan'a-el of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zeb'edee, and two others of his disciples were together.
[29] Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."
***

Why would someone say, "Let us also go, that we may die with him"? As I have pointed out, a child might say something of the sort. In awe of traveling with a Priest, he might think that going to Jerusalem to die might be just fine - "Shall we bring fire from the heavens and destroy them?" it states in Luke. Definitely child-like. There may be something else intended in John, however.

In the Herodias Post, I outline the idea that GJohn gives information that is not found in the Synoptics concerning the Crucifixion. The Markan Story is very smooth. GJohn gives the appearance of a rough, brawling type of editing process. Perhaps the Editors and Redactors did not have knowledge of what was in front of them. The outlandish gaffe concerning "Jesus" talking about the 46 years of the "Temple of his Body" being but one glaring example. Here, we are given important piece of data: Thomas is a "Twin". Do we look for other twins of Thomas or do look for other uses of the word "Twin" that were prevalent in Imperial Roman times?

"Legio VII Gemina: one of the Roman legions. Its name means "the twin legion".
"Legio X Gemina: one of the Roman legions. Its name means "the twin legion"."
"Legio tertia decima Geminia, in English the 13th Twin Legion, also known as Legio tertia decima Gemina, was a legion of the Imperial Roman army. It was one of Julius Caesar's key units in Gaul and in the civil war, and was the legion with which he famously crossed the Rubicon on January 10, 49 BC..."

Let us realize that "The Twin Legion" applied to several Legions, particularly Legions that were reconstituted from the remnants of other Legions. I believe that this is the "Joke" in GJohn. Especially Galba's Seventh. The Thread is found in Tacitus, Histories, Book 3. There are summaries available. You can't tell the players without a Program.

From http://www.livius.org/articles/legion/legio-vii-gemina/?

"...Servius Sulpicius Galba, the governor of Hispania Tarraconensis. He founded the seventh legion,note marched on Rome (October 68), and seized the throne that had become vacant after Nero's suicide.
Because the new ruler did not want to look like a military usurper, he sent away his legion to Pannonia, where it was to guard the river Danube at Carnuntum, east of Vindobona (modern Vienna). The legion that had been at Carnuntum, X Gemina, was sent to Spain...Galba was murdered and succeeded by Otho, who inherited the war against Vitellius and was defeated because the army of the Danube, which had sided with him, arrived too late. (The seventh legion had therefore sided with the murderer of its founder.)"

Tacitus, Histories, Book 3:

"Under happier auspices and in a more loyal spirit the Flavianist leaders were discussing the plans of the campaign. They had assembled at Petovio, the winter-quarters of the 13th legion. There they debated, whether they should blockade the passes of the Pannonian Alps till the whole strength of their party should be gathered in their rear, or whether it would be the more vigorous policy to close with the enemy, and to contend for the possession of Italy. Those who thought it advisable to wait for reinforcements, and to protract the campaign, dwelt on the strength and reputation of the German legions... if we occupy meanwhile the passes of the Alps, Mucianus will come up with the forces of the East. Vespasian has in addition the command of the sea, his fleets, and provinces loyal to his cause, in which he may collect the vast materials for what may be called another war. A salutary delay will bring us new forces, while we shall lose nothing of what we have."

" It was to cut off all passage at this point from the armies of Germany that they had barred this route. All this was done either without the knowledge, or against the commands of Vespasian. He gave orders that the army should halt at Aquileia and there await Mucianus; and these orders he supported by the argument, that as Aegypt, which commanded the corn supplies, and the revenues of the wealthiest provinces were in his hands, the army of Vitellius would be compelled to capitulate from the want of pay and provisions.

"The 7th legion, recently levied by Galba, was the hardest pressed. Six centurions of the first rank were killed, and some of the standards taken; but the eagle was saved by Atilius Verus, the centurion of the first company, who, after making a great slaughter among the enemy, at last fell..."

And so on...

It appears that we have a plausible candidate for "Thomas the Twin". It cetainly supports the Roman Thesis. This is the barest outline but it supports the Time Line of the Descent of Otho, Vitellius and the Rise of the Flavians.

CW

Charles Wilson wrote:
Why would someone say, "Let us also go, that we may die with him"? As I have pointed out, a child might say something of the sort. In awe of traveling with a Priest, he might think that going to Jerusalem to die might be just fine - "Shall we bring fire from the heavens and destroy them?" it states in Luke. Definitely child-like. There may be something else intended in John, however.

Thank you for mentioning me in your post.

In the quote above "fire from the heavens" seems to be a mythologizing translation for "fire from the sky", stemming from burning arrows. So this looks more war-like than child-like. The first quote ("that we may die with him") also sounds more belligerent to me than childish.

You learned me something new about ancient Rome's army, about legions called 'twins', and that these legions were active during and immediately after Nero's time. This is an interesting chronological connection.

But how do you make the link between 'twin' legions and a man on a boat nicknamed 'twin'? In John 21 Thomas the twin is present together with Nathanael from Cana. I believe that in both cases the person under consideration gets a supplementary depiction: one through the place where he came from, one from his 'twin' feature. I do not see any connection between this twin naming and the Roman twin legions. (It isn't even clear to me if you want to show this kind of connection.)

At this moment I am reading the novel 'De mensengenezer' (The Healer of People) from the Flemish author and anthropologist Koen Peeters. In this book he describes the life of a Flemish farmer's son who becomes a priest and later on a missionary in Congo. On page 261 the Congolese nun Espérance says: 'We can keep alive twins only seldom. (...) Frequently one of both dies.' (my translation) This fragment made me think of Thomas the twin, as the fate of twins might have been similar in ancient Palestine and in present-day Congo. Was Thomas the surviving half of a twin? Did he get his name to commemorate his deceased brother or sister? Or did his physiognomy tell something about his fate at birth? Maybe he was particularly small or thin?

FJV --

1. In a modern Novel form, Luke 9 would be the Beginning of the Story - maybe it was anyway:

Luke 9: 52 - 56 (RSV):

[52] And he sent messengers ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him;
[53] but the people would not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem.
[54] And when his disciples James and John saw it, they said, "Lord, do you want us to bid fire come down from heaven and consume them?"
[55] But he turned and rebuked them.
[56] And they went on to another village.

These are children talking. There is a reason for this and it has to do with the Priest and with Peter. The Priest was saved by Peter and Peter fell in the ditch surrounding Antonia. Peter was a child and it was this child who saved the Priest. It is 12 years later and this scene is "looking back" to the conflagration. Thus the scene. Children are integral to the Plot. Peter is 12 years older and is probably a Priest himself.

Mark 13: 27 (RSV):

[27] And then he will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.

2. On to "Thomas the Twin": As above, if I assert that "Event A is Symbolized by B", it helps if there are other background pieces of Relata that support the Symbolic Assertion. Now, if I assert that, in the first instance of the "Thomas the Twin" Passages, "Let us go and die with him..." is from a child, I can personally accept this. It fits right in with the Story of Peter. However, if this is a statement about the Legions, then I either Posit a "piggy-backed" Symbology or I admit a different Background.

For example, Atwill states that "He was possessed by Legion" shows that the Lunatic's Demons were the Insurrectionists who needed to be "Cleansed" by the Romans. I believe that "Legion" means what it says: Judea is possessed by the Romans. In the Original Story, it is the Roman Presence that gets eliminated. These 2 views are mutually contradictory unless the Original gets Transvalued, as it was.

Here, we have to set a Framework for "Thomas" that turns on the Word Play of "Twin". Thomas has to find a believable situation - Historical Record - that shows how the Character would be ready to "...go, that we may die with him". This Framework is provided with the Symbolism of the Legions identified as "Twins" being between the Germanic Tribes [defended against by the Legions loyal to Vitellius] and Rome. This occured. Further: "It was to cut off all passage at this point from the armies of Germany that they had barred this route. All this was done either without the knowledge, or against the commands of Vespasian. He gave orders that the army should halt at Aquileia and there await Mucianus..."

At this point, the Story of Otho comes into play. Otho is important in the NT, as a possible explanation of the Empty Tomb (at the least). He stabs himself in the side and the Symbolism is very rich,if intially opaque. The Legion founded by Galba (VII GEMINA) supports Otho, the murderer of the Founder of the Legion, Galba. This Legion is routed at Bedriacum. Vitellius Wins! Uhh...No. Antonius Primus will destroy Vitellius' forces and march on Rome in favor of Vespasian:

[25] So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe."

The Symbolism of "Jesus" (beyond Titus and Vespasian) takes over and Transvalues the rest of this.

3. This leaves the last appearance of Thomas the Twin and the third time "Jesus" shows himself after his death. This may be the end of the Signs Gospel, maybe with a little Interpolation at the end. Mebbe not. I believe it is Titus on the beach. This would be a listing of the Legions on Duty at...Jerusalem? The Danube? YMMV.

4. As you may see there are problems at the edges. The first instance of the Twin comes just before the end of the "Raising" of Lazarus. "Lazarus" is dead. If he had been real, "Jesus" would have been Ritually Unclean, unfit for a High Priest, even if Human Sacrifice had been reinstated, which it has not. If Lazarus was a Symbol, verse 16 is an awkward addition. The second appearance of Thomas is more reasonable to the Symbolic Structure but more opaque to the reading of the "Twins Legions". The last appearance, coming from the "Mysterious" John 21, may require a "Just So" understanding of the naming of the Legions.

5. There is a lot to recommend the Symbolism but it is easier to see the earlier Story of Peter and some of the Roman Question in the Synoptics. Nonetheless, GJohn reveals Structure where the Synoptics hide and the reason may be the awkward Redaction Procedure. I do believe that one or two of the Redactors of John simply did not have understanding of the Sources that they rewrote. The Transvaluation for the New Religion was all that mattered. This means that the rewriting of the Source into personalized passages could be accomplished with the Untransvalued Story lines still visible in places.

CW