Some reflections on this Good Friday, 2024 that might offer some insights into biblical puzzles. In the early 1960’s there were two terrible men in power in Wahington DC, President Kennedy and his cohort, Johnson. These men lead the country into military problem after problem. They attempted an invasion of Cuba, took actions that threatened to lead to war with the USSR and got the country mired in Vietnam, leading to terrible loss of American soldiers. But countering these two were two great men, men who promoted equal rights and were much beloved by many. These other two were known as John Fitzgerald from Massachusetts and Lyndon Baines from Texas. John Fitzgerald was killed by an assassin and the country plunged into mourning as Lyndon Baines took over his unfinished work and sought to continue the good works begun.
Now in the New Testament we have two people opposed to Jesus, the High Priest Caiaphas and his father-in-law Annus, who had been the High Priest for several years under Augustus, and reportedly had resisted Roman pressures in favor of the Jewish people. They sought to arrest Jesus and have him put to death by the Romes, applying what political pressure they could to get Pilate to condemn this righteous man. But we also hear about two secret followers of Jesus, Nicodemus, or Victory of the Comon People, and Joseph of Arimathea. In multiple gospels, Joseph is revealed to have great political power, as he is able to gain access to Pilate rapidly following the death of Jesus and gain permission to take the body of one condemned to die as a threat to Rome and bury it. He and his ally Nicodemus will do so, with one of them obtaining a high quality burial cloth, plausibly made from remnants of cloth used for priestly tunics, and Nicodemus being credited with obtaining massive amounts of burial spices. These two men probably very pious Jewish men then risked potential corpse contamination, and the potential for seven days of ritual uncleanliness on the eve of Passover, to place the body of Jesus in the tomb.
Thus, the question arises, just who were these two politically connected, wealthy and courageous individuals who risked so much. In addition to their political power and wealth, they must have had strong religious connections also, in order not to fear being found ritually unclean. But then, if Joseph and Victory were connected to J Caiaphas and his father-in-law, Annus, they would have political, monetary and religious power sufficient to deal with all the problems, including possible ritual uncleanliness as they would be the final arbiters for this question. But this would also imply that we are being intentionally misled by the gospel writers, especially John.
Thoughts?
Jesus' rise and fame is hard to understand as he rarely left Capernaum. His journeys were distinct and planned. That politics were involved is possible and reflected on Roman rule. We know the Temple authorities engaged strolling preachers to keep the Temple religion and Jewish culture alive and its possible Jesus was one.
I will point out that not everyone accepts your historical version, although it is as good as any other.
Stanley Wilkins, once one realizes that Paul's letter to the Ephesians self-dates, the Acts account gets exposed as a cover story. And then once Acts collapses, parts of the gospel accounts also begin to look like cover story. At that point, add in the archeological/numismatic evidence that Antipas supported the earliest Christian movement, and one's understanding of earliest Church history gets totally revised.
There is no clear evidence, aside from John's claim of Joseph of Arimathea being a high ranking member of the Sanhedrin, that there were any permanent members other than the high priest. Rather it appears to have been a council assembled at need consisting of well-respected leaders who were available at the time. If that is true, there was only one high ranking member of the Sanhedrin, and that would be the current high priest, so why conceal it?
Imo, holy books or sacred lierature are designed for instruction and to learn about wisdom, i.e. there is no intention to mislead people. However, I do not recommend letter belief, in terms of unreflected oral, written or legal traditions of peoples. In this sense, it makes sense to study the power structure in the land of Israel at that time, which was in favor of the Roman rulers and the collaborating clergy, i.e. a small group of Jewish priests in the ruling class, led by the high priest Caiaphas.
Thus, Jesus was killed because the masses of Jews loved, not hated, him.
Jesus’ devotion to Judaism is indisputable. According to the Greek Gospel, especially the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, his family, and virtually all of his followers and disciples at the time were Jews, as probably were the writers of three of the gospels.
William Mayor Conclusion: No, the New Testament gospels do not admit to intentionally misleading people.
Stephen I. Ternyik, then it would seem that you believe that the Jews of the 1st century were unusually accepting. In the early 1st century BCE when one of the rulers in Anatolia (now Turkey), who was known for attacking his neighbors and reprimanded by Rome for doing so, called for the assassination of all Romans and Latins within Anatolia on a single specific night, it seems that no Romans were warned. Rather an estimated 80-100,000 died that night, even within the kingdoms that had requested Rome's assistance. And the response in Greece was horror that they had not heard about the coming action, because they would have joined in. But after this single night's action, Greece still rebelled, and Rome had to reconquer Greece two years later. But you think some Jews actually liked Romans?
And I know what is recorded in the gospel accounts and in Josephus, and that the versions we have were all written post-73 CE when it was clear that Rome had won the Jewish rebellion. However, coins from Antipas suggest that even in the 30's, many looked forward to the defeat of Rome and the independence of Judah. But such is not presented in the gospel accounts for some reason. Rather Romans were cooperated with and treated nicely by at least some, or was that pro-Roman propaganda generated post-73?
Very important question William Mayor ; that would be a good topic for a doctoral dissertation.
Stephen I. Ternyik for me to consider that as a PhD thesis I would need to be much younger, find an institution brave enough to handle it and be ready to leave fat too many unanswered questions in its wake. It leads to Ephesians self-dating to the mid0late 50's, which implies Paul was arrested far earlier than Acts claims, and on a much different charge. That raises questions about his gospel message. etc., etc.
Theology and interdisciplinarity are research fields, where advanced age William Mayor can be helpful, due to life experience. The argument with the institution may be the main obstacle for such a PhD project !
Stephen I Ternyik, at present I have multiple PhD holders encouraging the writing I am doing, and a publisher willing to put it out when I have completed it. I find this an easier, and likely less expensive, approach to getting my studies into the academic community at present. I have completed studies at the "Male Bovine Fecal Matter" level as well as at the "More MBFM" level. I see no current advantage to formally Pile it Higher and Deeper. Instead I will use my hard-earned D.I.G. (Darn I'm Good) degree and publish instead.
But I will admit to going very cross-disciplinary in my work, covering Biblical Studies, Ancient History and modern Consciousness Studies (Including Near Death Studies) to rewrite Early Church History as well as understandings of divinity. I cannot justify my rewritten church history with adjusting the understanding of divinity to explain how some, non-political problems arose, even though they are linked to politics .
Wishing you success William Mayor MBFM, DIG, with your publication !
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude