Re: Jesus poisoned
- Mark 16:17 says: "These are
>> the signs that will be associated with believers: . . . they will pick upJack said:
>> snakes in their hands, and be unharmed should they drink deadly poison."
I think there is a consensus that not only
>did Jesus NOT say these words, but neither did Mark record it. MkYour argument that Mark did not record the ending of GMark is certainly
>has 17 non-Markan words in that short space written in an obvious
>style and rhetorical tone. The juncture between 16:8 and 16:9 is very
>clumsy. This ending does NOT appear in the oldest mss. I mention the
>possibility that this ending was supplied by Ariston because of an
>mss that was copied from a more ancient version in 989 CE which adds
>the colphon "ariston eritsou." Arist(i)on was a contemporary of Papias
>in the Yohannine school.
reasonable. Still, even by your own accounting, the text is fairly early
(early 2d century).
I am not impressed by majority views as to what Iesu may or may not have
said. One generation's majority may be the next generation's minority. I am
more interested in the evidence than the majority view. If you have an
argument from evidence I am all ears.
As for the consensus, most scholar's are skeptical of anything they have not
experienced in their own limited world. Very few have had direct experience
with a holy man such as the one described in the Gospels. So the whole
thing is very mental for them.
By way of specific example, what percentage of NT scholars belonging to the
consensus group have direct experience with individuals who have an immunity
to poison? What percentage have performed studies on this question? Indeed,
what percentage of them are familiar with the practices of Shivite yogis who
have this experience? Given the fact that these scholars have no real life
knowledge on a matter directly bearing on the subject of their study, how
much weight should we give to their opinion?
>I don't read this passage to suggests a practice of tempting God by drinking
>Outside of internal and external critical reasons why this ending
>was supplied to an abruptly ended Mark (I believe simply because Mark
>died before completing it) there is the common sense that this
>gospeler would not suggest tempting God by drinking poison and
poison and handling snakes. What instead seems suggested is Iesu's
knowledge of yogic abilities, not a surprising thing from a world class
healer. What is suggested is that he knew what Shivite yogis also know (not
that he knew about them), what firewalkers also know, i.e., that with a
certain type of spiritual development and rustic lifestyle there comes an
immunity to certain things which are feared in the physical world.
It is true, of course, that certain Hindus do, as you put it (somewhat
negatively) tempt God by taking poison and handling snakes in order to be
bitten and enjoy a God intoxicated state. I say negatively because we
shouldn't judge the views of another culture with which we are not familiar.
From the outside, the idea of venerating or worshipping a man who died on a
cross probably seems pretty strange.
What Hindus do in connection with this matter, however, hardly suggests that
Iesu was suggesting a practice of taking poison. What is instead suggested
are words which are intended to give an elemental kind of strength. A
fearlessness of the physical world. An important matter given the task ahead
of them and the opposition they will face.
This does not mean the words are simply a metaphor. If the words are
literally true then it is good that they know this truth because it empowers
them with fearlessness.
"Handling a serpent" was an Aramaic idiom for
>"a bucket of worms" or a difficult and dangerous enterprise. IAgain you get side-tracked with this idea of passing around snakes in
>do not doubt that Jesus may have used that idiom on occasion
>but he didn't mean for a bunch of squirrely nuts to pass
>around rattlesnakes in church.
church. In addition, the passage does not seem to use "handling a serpent"
in an idiomatic sense. There is also a reference to being unharmed by poison.
With kind regards,
- Happy New Year All, I always figure that talk of snake handling and
drinking of poison was symbolic. Kind of Steering clear of the Serpent and
the poison of Temptation, you know the message behind the message.
>God, Please Help Me to Remember That I am Unique;
Everyone Else. Light Everlasting, Y'All......kc
> From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...>date
> To: joe baxter <joseph@...>
> Cc: Ian Hutchesson <mc2499@...>; crosstalk@...
> Subject: Re: Jesus poisoned
> Date: Friday, January 01, 1999 5:53 AM
> joe baxter wrote:
> > I have just been thrown off another
> > >list for complaining about a naff series of posts fantasizing over the
> > >of birth of Jesus.his
> > I must give you credit for being able to drink the poison.
> > So you must be able to understand the instructions that Iesu gave as
> > mark: you shall be immune to poison!
> Except that Y'shua didn't say that handling snakes and drinking poison
> nonsense. Probably a 3rd century North African named Ariston.
> taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon
> Jack Kilmon