Mark also draws a comparison of the Jewish war with the Roman civil war of 69 AD.
In Rome, the new emperor Vespasian, the Roman commander at the beginning of the war in Judea, had quickly established order by following the great emperor Augustus.
Vespasian, however, no longer saw himself as a god like his predecessors from the noble family of Augustus, but as a human being who ordered the commonwealth with human energy and with reverence for the real gods.
Mark based his Gospel on the Iliad by the Greek poet Homer:
The death of Jesus, in Mark’s judgment the greatest Jew of his time, in the Gospel refers to the later fall of Jerusalem. The death of Hector, the greatest Trojan hero, also refers in Homer to the later fall of Troy.
The Gospel concludes with the activities that belong to the burial of Jesus, as the Iliad concludes with the ceremonies of Hector’s burial.
The resurrection of Jesus cannot be told in the Gospel, because the literary model, Homer’s Iliad, also ends with the burial and the further events were already indicated before.
he, too, sees a connection between the work of the Christians and the disastrous uprising against Rome.
But Mark finds comfort in Greek poetry, in Homer, whose Iliad was well known to him as school reading at that time.
Thus he can compare the downfall of Jerusalem with the downfall of Troy in Homer and understand it as a fate assigned by God. Just as the defeat of the Trojans in the Iliad was decided by Zeus despite all human struggle, so the defeat of the Jews followed the counsel of God, which is to be accepted by humans as fate.
The author of the Gospel of Mark writes after the catastrophe of the Jewish war,
the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. He asks: How could this tragedy have happened?
Why could God allow the Gentiles to destroy the holy city and the temple that had been completed a few years earlier?
Was Josephus, the conservative Jewish historian, right in blaming the insurgents, who included Christians?
Were the Christians in Palestine to blame for the burning of Jerusalem under Titus, the son and successor of Vespasian, as the Roman Christians allegedly were for the burning of Rome under Emperor Nero?
The German text is printed in: Neumann, Johannes: War Jesus Statthalter von Galiläa? Radebeul 2009, p. 43-92. The book can be obtained from bookstores. More books can be found on my homepage www.johannesneumann.com
(Continued) 3. We owe to Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann the insight that reality is always
“socially constructed”, in other words, embedded in society. This also applies to the Bible’s authors, of course. The religious reality they describe follows contemporary social conventions that we are no longer familiar with, so we need to research them.
The difference between oral and written tradition must also be taken into account. As long as traditions are passed on orally, the wording can change. As soon as they are written down, a change of meaning can only take place through an interpretation of the tradition.
Because the written versions of the Gospels and Acts were preceded by a long period of oral tradition, we must assume that they were adapted to the changing early Christian consciousness before being written down.
The dominant master narrative about the origins of the New Testament canon states that in the first half of the 2nd century AD,
there were so many Gospels and Apostolic letters circulating among the communities that the churches had to separate the wheat from the chaff.
The only texts they adopted into the canon of significant texts for the Christian religion were those that they considered were written by one of the twelve Apostles or the Apostle Paul, or that were authorised by one of the Apostles; e.g. Luke’s Gospel, written by Paul’s companion Luke (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim 4:11; Philemon 24), was authorised by Paul.
The new theses about the origin of the New Testament canon:
The New Testament canon was formed from writings from the three Palestinian Apostolic churches of James, John and Peter and the Gentile Christian church of Paul.
The criterion for the acceptance into the canon was the balance between the origins in the individual churches and the extent to which the writings supported the church’s unity.
The Marys in the New Testament are prosperous women, in particular merchants, who had the reputation
of possessing skills in alchemy and who supported the Christians materially and financially.
The Messiah’s conception was understood as an (alchemical) act of creation, and only an entirely upright, i.e. pure alchemist could achieve the conception of the Messiah with God’s help (God’s Spirit).
This is why the Messiah’s mother was named after the famous alchemist Mary. She is called a virgin to indicate her purity; therefore in the legend, Jesus must be her first-born son.
The resurrection was also viewed as an alchemical act of creation. It was prepared by the women called Mary.
When the women arrived at the grave to prepare Jesus’ body for the resurrection, the Creator God, Lord of alchemical powers and mysteries, had already carried out the act of new creation and had raised Jesus from the dead.
The dominant master narrative about Jesus’ parents states
that Mary, a housewife, and Joseph, a building worker, were Jesus’ biological parents.
The new basic narrative about Jesus’ parents states:
Mary was not the name of Jesus’ mother. His mother’s name, like her virginity, are part of the Christian legend about the Messiah’s origin.
Mary was not the name of the women called Mary in the New Testament; at most it was their nickname.
Mary was a well-known Jewish alchemist in classical times.
Literature: Patai, Raphael: The Jewish Alchemists. A History and Source Book, Princeton, New Jersey 1994, p. 60-91; Schütt, Hans-Werner: Auf der Suche nach dem Stein der Weisen. Die Geschichte der Alchemie, Munich 2000, p. 117-126,
Cephas, the later leader of Peter’s church, is not identical with Simon Peter. It was Cephas, not Peter,
who attended the Apostolic Council. Paul never met Peter personally; he only met Cephas. Paul differentiates in Gal. 1f precisely between the Jewish Apostle Peter and Cephas, one of the three pillars (Gal. 2:9) whom he personally met.
The international language of astrology: a legend quoted by Luke in Acts states that when the Holy Spirit was
poured out at Pentecost, all Jews from the diaspora could understand the Apostles speaking in their various languages.
Nowadays the phrase “international language” makes us think of art or music. In classical times, we should first think of astrology, a “language” that was understood by all nations.
The Gnostic’s statements about the astrological Age of Aries that was ending and the new Age of Pisces that had just begun were statements that everyone understood in their mother tongue.
The linguistic miracle at Pentecost, a sign of the last days, was interpreted according to contemporary understanding as annulling the Babylonian confusion of languages from the ancient Biblical story in Gen. 11:7f.