Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I don't think that comparison is a mere rethoric end to itself. Especially, I don't see no Antipas on the horizon, not even in background. Antipas is introduced by historicists who want to read a criticism against Herod to make Jesus share the same "social politics" of John against Herod. Antipas works here as a historicist "Trojan horse" in this case.

I see only that John is in question. He is exalted in the his human greatness to really exalt, at the his place, the spiritual Chtist who met him (by possessing him?). The voices that want him a reed or a sinner are exorcized to exalt the his being just according to the Law of the demiurge.

The demiurge lurks behind every rock and tree.

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:05 pm The demiurge lurks behind every rock and tree.

you can ignore him but the point remains: where do you see Antipas here? Only for a coin and the mention of a king? Why him and not Caesar Augustus, then?

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:16 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:05 pm The demiurge lurks behind every rock and tree.

you can ignore him but the point remains: where do you see Antipas here? Only for a coin and the mention of a king? Why him and not Caesar Augustus, then?

A reed coin and the mention of the king, yes. Of course. Those are two of the details which make Antipas loom larger here than any other figure of which I am familiar; another would be that John the Baptist lived in Antipas' domain. Why would Augustus Caesar be a better guess? He is less specific on the third reason and not a match at all on the first; the only thing he has going for him is the second, that he is a king.

Antipas is not an obvious lock; he is merely the best current explanation. Show me a better one, and I will reevaluate.

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:20 pm Antipas is not an obvious lock; he is merely the best current explanation. Show me a better one, and I will reevaluate.

my mention of Augustus is ironical. Seriously I want to do the point that the reed and the king are too much generic points to detect alone a (even only implicit) reference to a specific king. Hence my candidate is a generic king and a generic reed. Their generality contrasts the particular relevance of John. He is not a generic king or a generic reed. He is a great king and a man really spiritually strong.

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:27 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:20 pm Antipas is not an obvious lock; he is merely the best current explanation. Show me a better one, and I will reevaluate.

my mention of Augustus is ironical. Seriously I want to do the point that the reed and the king are too much generic points to detect alone a (even only implicit) reference to a specific king. Hence my candidate is a generic king and a generic reed. Their generality contrasts the particular relevance of John. He is not a generic king or a generic reed. He is a great king and a man really spiritually strong.

I do not know what you mean by a "generic" reed. The reed was a symbol on Antipas' first run of coinage. That is a legitimate connection which deserves to be considered. I do not see where you are trying to account for it; rather, you are ignoring it.

ETA: Also, Antipas appears several times by name (Herod) or (pseudo-)title (either Tetrarch or King) in other gospel traditions, so that his appearance here can hardly be deemed surprising. The same cannot be said for the demiurge... or for Augustus (who appears only in Luke 3.1 in the gospels).

And what is the point of mentioning Augustus "ironically," whatever that means in this context? Either he is a better candidate for the reference or he is not.

Incidentally, Stuart makes an interesting case somewhere (I forget where) that there is a reaction against the demiurge in the Marcan synoptic apocalypse:


This unnecessary addition to the sentiment of the verse may be affirming, against the Gnostics, that God is indeed the creator.

I like this interpretation. I do not know whether or not it is correct, but I like it. It makes sense to me. I am not against finding the shadow of the demiurge in the gospels; I am simply against bad arguments made in favor of the demiurge being present in the gospels.

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:51 pm Incidentally, Stuart makes an interesting case somewhere (I forget where) that there is a reaction against the demiurge in the Marcan synoptic apocalypse:

Mark 13.19: 19 For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will.

This unnecessary addition to the sentiment of the verse may be affirming, against the Gnostics, that God is indeed the creator.

I like this interpretation. I do not know whether or not it is correct, but I like it. It makes sense to me. I am not against finding the shadow of the demiurge in the gospels; I am simply against bad arguments made in favor of the demiurge being present in the gospels.

interesting, thanks.

Giuseppe another possible demiurge (TM 'The Gnostics') appearance in the NT could be the killing of the children by Herod
I believe many have questioned this because it's not in any other source, nor any other gospel and a little unbelievable
Could this represent the demiurge in guise of Herod attacking the 'children', ie the first church and be a story based on that persecution?
Representing this during Jesus's birth totally fits in with esoteric symbolism too

Not that I believe the demiurge is a Jewish God but was originally a person that got mythologised into the demiurge later so the origin for me needn't be Gnostic which would be awkward to explain how it got into Matthew.. there is one prime groups of suspects - the Apostle Phillips daughters were known to tell a lot of stories of this ilk according to, who was it, Papias or someone else early. He quotes one about Judas that's very fanciful
A similar account pops up in the infancy gospels of persecution involving children that obviously as day is long has another meaning
What else did Phillip's daughters tell those eager enquirers i wonder?