Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [GTh] The rule of the Shepherds

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    ... Well, JesusMysteries is certainly the place for folks who aren t blinded by ANY conceptual filters at all - including not only GMark, but a variety of
    Message 1 of 2 , May 26 11:11 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      [MG]:
      > In general, your series of three notes more properly belongs on the
      > JesusMysteries list, where data is routinely manipulated to fit a theory.
      [SP]:
      > I try and go where the data and logic leads me - and not be blinded by the
      > conceptual filters that are derived ultimately from the Gospel of Mark.

      Well, JesusMysteries is certainly the place for folks who aren't "blinded"
      by ANY "conceptual filters" at all - including not only GMark, but a variety
      of historical sources that run counter to the latest conspiracy theory. As
      an example, see below.

      [MG]:
      > > Although there's some interesting insights in your presentation, I
      believe
      > > that almost all of your conclusions are mistaken (including your
      favorite
      > > fantasy - that Simon Peter was a woman).
      [SP]:
      > You misrepresent me - I do not believe that there was any person called
      > Simon Peter. It is Mark who makes the equation of Peter with Simon,
      > probably because he is trying to place the original leader of the Jesus
      > movement, Cephas/Peter, into a list of the Twelve which does not include
      his
      > name. My identification of Cephas/Peter with the Magdalene is based on
      data
      > not fantasy - connections between the two in the gospels and connections
      > between the 'rock' and the 'tower' in multiple sources outside of the
      > gospels.

      OK, so your view isn't that "Simon Peter" was a woman, but that
      "Cephas/Peter" was. This from some "connections" that you've focussed on and
      mulled over and written about so often that they've become self-evident
      truths to you. As you know, of course, this view contradicts what Paul says
      about Cephas in 1 Cor, particularly 9:5, where he writes of Cephas having a
      wife. I haven't gone to your website, but I'm sure you have a ready
      explanation for this contradiction. Whatever it is, however, I hardly regard
      it as being led by "data and logic" to dismiss clear evidence in favor of
      some ambiguous textual "connections" which have to be tortured into saying
      what one wants them to say. Rather, I'd say this is being led by the X-Files
      view of Christian history.

      Of all the claims you make about the Parable of the Tenants, I believe the
      most important one you wish to make is that the death of the "Son" doesn't
      take place on earth. This is an important article of faith among some
      Jesus-mythers: that the supposed person Jesus is a totally-fictional Markan
      character derived from a myth. As you say, I'm vehemently opposed to this
      view, and quite certain that the "vineyard" in the parable cannot
      legitimately be regarded as being a mythical heavenly realm, nor that "the
      son" can legitmately be thought of as having been killed _outside_ the
      vineyard (hence, arguably, outside the world, as you lately suggest).

      Mike Grondin
      Mt. Clemens, MI
    • sarban
      ... From: Michael Grondin To: Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 7:11 AM Subject: Re: [GTh] The rule of the
      Message 2 of 2 , May 27 1:57 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Michael Grondin" <mwgrondin@...>
        To: <gthomas@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 7:11 AM
        Subject: Re: [GTh] The rule of the Shepherds


        <SNIP>
        >
        > Of all the claims you make about the Parable of the Tenants, I believe the
        > most important one you wish to make is that the death of the "Son" doesn't
        > take place on earth. This is an important article of faith among some
        > Jesus-mythers: that the supposed person Jesus is a totally-fictional
        Markan
        > character derived from a myth. As you say, I'm vehemently opposed to this
        > view, and quite certain that the "vineyard" in the parable cannot
        > legitimately be regarded as being a mythical heavenly realm, nor that "the
        > son" can legitmately be thought of as having been killed _outside_ the
        > vineyard (hence, arguably, outside the world, as you lately suggest).
        >
        > Mike Grondin
        > Mt. Clemens, MI
        >
        Hi Mike
        I fully share your rejection of Jesus-myth speculations.
        But I think it possible though unlikely that the Gospel
        of Thomas could have transferred things from earth
        to the heavenly realms.
        Something like this occurs in some versions of
        Manichaeanism (the Jesus patibilis the cosmically
        suffering Christ) and there are parallels in some forms
        of Catharism.
        I would be surprised if such ideas were around before
        the late 2nd century CE but on some dates of Thomas
        this would still permit Thomas to be influenced by them.

        Andrew Criddle
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.