The Gospel of Mark

[SorryImPsychic]

Get it?

Galilee = the northern kingdom of Israel

If this is the case then politically Jesus (Tribe of Judah) is restoring the United Monarchy of the Northern Kingdom. This would certainly ruffle the feathers of some Benjaminites as historically Tribe of Judah competes against Tribe of Benjamin for right to throne.

Now Paul is the most prominent Benjaminite "character" presented in the NT and the mouthpiece for christian doctrinal invention - an invention that would attempt to destroy any earthly significance of Jesus as Messiah King....(of northern Israel/kingdom if you are right)

I have many ideas about the political role the fictitious character Paul (Benjaminite) plays in destroying historical political Jesus (Judah).

[StoneQuarry]

Ah the Bible, may favorite fairy tale.
Where else can you get dragons, murder, reincarnation, talking snakes and walking on water all in one book?

[Black_Knight]

If this is the case then politically Jesus (Tribe of Judah) is restoring the United Monarchy of the Northern Kingdom. This would certainly ruffle the feathers of some Benjaminites as historically Tribe of Judah competes against Tribe of Benjamin for right to throne.

Now Paul is the most prominent Benjaminite "character" presented in the NT and the mouthpiece for christian doctrinal invention - an invention that would attempt to destroy any earthly significance of Jesus as Messiah King....(of northern Israel/kingdom if you are right)

I have many ideas about the political role the fictitious character Paul (Benjaminite) plays in destroying historical political Jesus (Judah).

Hi,

An interesting take on things. My one comment would be that historically, Jesus was not the kingly Messiah, at least not in accordance with Judaic belief. Logically this results in one of two responses.

1. Jesus could not have united the Northern Kingdom politically.

2. The Jews got it wrong, Jesus was the Kingly Messiah, and Paul (ficticious or otherwise), a modern day Alistair Campbell, destroyed his chances of kingship by making him the Priestly Messiah.

[hilary shinclair]

Most of the Old Testament prohecies that predicted the coming of the Messiah were forfilled in Jesus; any idea that this was accidental or a massive coincidence can definately be ruled out simply by the law of probability!

[Croydon Bob]

Most of the Old Testament prohecies that predicted the coming of the Messiah were forfilled in Jesus; any idea that this was accidental or a massive coincidence can definately be ruled out simply by the law of probability!

How about the possibility that it was a post-death re-write to make the Jesus story match up with prophecy?

[DrS]

coincidence can definately be ruled out simply by the law of probability!

Could you run that by me again?

[Balloonbasket]

Black Knight: Set square and compass? You a brother?

Bob: Doesn't it seem rather obvious when you read Mathew that Jesus is actually going out of his way to do things to fulfill the phrophesies? I mean he says it repeatedly that he has to do this and that to fulfill what is written. Seems he went out of his way to be crusified.
Also I think to understand Jesus you need to find out what happened to him in his missing years? What did he actually learn in those years and from whom did he learn it?
Was he just taught just the Jewish beliefs? Seems obvious from what he did that that is not the case. Did he learn a secret history? Whatever he learned moulded him for the future.
It does seem in one sense that he was more of a political pawn.

[Croydon Bob]

Bob: Doesn't it seem rather obvious when you read Mathew that Jesus is actually going out of his way to do things to fulfill the phrophesies? I mean he says it repeatedly that he has to do this and that to fulfill what is written. Seems he went out of his way to be crusified.

It's quite a while since I read The New T and any gumph about it, but from memory:

The commonly accepted (by Christian biblical scholars) history of Matthew is that both Matthew and Luke were written by someone using Mark and a lost gospel "Q" as source material. Therefore if Matthew is written in a way that suggests certain motivations and behaviour in Jesus that are missing or different in Luke, and to a lesser extent Mark, then they can fairly safely be ignored as a later addition.

I'm certainly not in a position to argue about the wider assumptions of the existence of Q, etc. If you disagree with my logic because you disagree on the history of the writing of the gospels then I'm not qualified to comment.

[Balloonbasket]

I know what you mean, Bob, and I admit i'm not theologian, but Jesus in Mark does keep making references to 'fulfilling the scriptures'. Just an observation from a layman.

[davidrodway]

Actually, Jesus was a Welshman:
He lived at home until he was 30
He did the same job as his father
He liked to gather the sheep
He thought his mother was a virgin
And his mother thought he was God.
Welsh!