I think Gnostic Informant misunderstands the Q theory (around 27:30). The theory is very much that it was a single physical text (though maybe it existed in different versions and has different layers) that the Gospel authors literally copied from - not that it was oral or a collection of scribbles, etc.
I'm of a more diverse opinion. I believe there were many sayings scrolls of a Yeshua who lived in the centuries B.C.E. as the Righteous Teacher to primarily his only two disciples Simon and Judas or James; the Gospel of Thomas being one of many, and the gospels barrow from all of them, but do not use every saying.
I think Mark G. Bilby decisively solved the Marcion/Q question you guys brought up... Marcion's gospel had two clear sources: (1) A source (which Bilby calls "new Q") that had more material than the current critical edition presupposes, and (2) an early, pre-canonical version of the Gospel according to Mark. Bilby reconstructs these early layers in his open access book, "Gospel of the Poor." The historical Jesus (Joshua) was an Aesop-like figure who led a revolutionary social movement for marginalized people groups and was killed for it.
@@FlaviusBrosephus Proto Mark and Q are still hypothetical sources with no evidence from any external witnesses which is why I’m not buying it. It’s simpler to say Proto Mark and Q are the same because both of them are Marcions Gospel. They are and always were the same text.
@@History-ValleyThat's a compelling thesis... So, would that mean Marcion simply wrote the first gospel, and Matthew and Luke just borrowed from it and made their own literary redactions?
@ In the Gospels, there sure are plenty of instances of Jesus being a preacher who advocated for marginalized social groups and was killed for it... Maybe it's more accurate to say MLK Jr. sounds suspiciously like Jesus?
@@History-Valley Perhaps you and Dr Bibly are both correct. Bilby doesn't distinguish between the voice of Marcion's gospel (Lk1) or Q, so I agree: Lk1 = Q + Mk1. However, Bilby claims certain Mk1 verses derive from Q/Lk1. This sounds rather circular. Lk1 is an early witness as to what the 'Markan' proto-gospel does not contain; for example, no baptism or temptation, neither a triumphal entry nor a cleansing of the temple. Note the only time Mark mentions baptism is in the longer ending (16.16) and in 10.38-39. Although Matthew recycles 90% of Mark, he does not include the latter verses. Moreover, the so-called 'great omission' in Luke (Mark 6.45-8.26) is explained by the presence of a Markan proto-gospel. Strip out the verses from Mark not attested by Matthew and Lk1, discard the passages Bilby flags as belonging to Q, and what are you left with? A collection of miracle stories beginning with the call of Simon and ending with the renamed Peter's recognition of Jesus as the Christ. The opening of this proto-gospel matches the order of Luke from chapter five: the call of the first disciples, the cleansing of the leper, the healing of the paralytic, the call of Levi, a question of fasting, matters of the Sabbath, and the healing of the man with the withered hand; culminating in the appointment of the twelve. This proto-gospel then recounts the calming of the storm, the demon exorcised, the healing of the bleeding woman, Herod's fear that Jesus has raised John the Baptist from the dead, and the feeding of the 5,000. Peter's recognition is the climax A story beginning and ending with Peter ... Does this add ballast to Papias's legend of 'Mark' being Peter's interpreter? Granted, I've left out 9.14-29, but Mark's version of healing the boy is much longer than Matthew or Luke's story, so this may be secondary. I don't have the space to elaborate here, but I paid attention to language to formulate the hypothesis above. The idea of Jesus as a miracle worker - a doer of marvellous deeds - is also recounted by Josephus. As you know, Morton Smith is good on this matter. Following Bilby's cascade model: Mk1 = a miracle story collection Lk1/Q = Mk1 + Lk Redaction 1 Mk2 = Lk1 (healing of the man with the unclean spirit, Jesus' family, the Beelzebub controversy, the parables, the rejection at Nazareth, the sending of the 12, the first passion prediction, the transfiguration, healing the boy with the unclean spirit, second passion prediction, let the children come to me, the rich young man, blind Bartimaeus, the authority of Jesus challenged, paying taxes to Caesar, whose son is the Christ?, the mini-apocalypse, and a short passion) + MkR2 Mt1 = Mk2 + Lk1 + MtR1 Jn1 = Mk2 + Lk1 + Mt1 + JnR1 [and etc ...] All meant in the spirit of good-natured debate. Keep up the good work, I enjoy your show!
@@notanemoprog loved it at the time but in retrospect, no book trying to define Jesus the person is worth the read. It's impossible to do. No point in trying. His book, "No God but God," is still a gem for anyone seeking an introduction for Islam. ❤
As a mythicist I believe there was possibly a “Q” mythical Source that proves earlier mythical Logos, but actually critical historiist scholars deny. Q
What I don't get about Josephus and the rebel theory is why would he say that Jesus won over many Jews and Greeks. The Jewish rebellion was nationalist and fundamentalist so what appeal would another messianic Jew be to them? How many other examples are there of messianic Jewish rebel leaders attracting Greeks to their cause?
A very wide ranging discussion, very deep in the weeds for a lot of it. I myself can only call into question the assertion that Jesus was educated because he was in close proximity to a city that could provide him with an education. I would ask where did the comparatively poor Jesus acquire the money to pay for this education?
That's a good point and sounds right. Perhaps Jesus's family wasn't as poor as the extant material suggests? Perhaps some form of education, particularly a religous Jewish education, was available for less than we might believe? There are a few hints that the Jesus movement had access to considerable resources during Jesus's lifetime. For example, the archaeological excavation at Capernaum suggests that "Simon Peter's house" is substantial, although that designation is obviously contestable. Jesus doesn't show any signs of having or needing a job. The wedding at Cana seems a fairly lavish affair and Jesus appears to have been accused a number of times of dining rather too well. Historically, most people who have had the chance to make numerous speeches over an extended period about the plight of the poor have not themselves been on the breadline.
@digitaurus I would think without some written witness that Jesus was exposed to extraordinary education opportunities afforded the typical Nazarene that it would amount to mere speculation.
No, Jesus was not educated - the gospel authors and redactors were. They were clever, elite Greco-Roman writers competing in a complex, rich story world.
@@CRWenger Agreed. He seems to have been deeply revered, but the sayings that come down don't seem particularly 'educated' either in the Graeco-Roman sense or in the sense of knowing the Torah deeply.
Jesus called the Greek woman a dog because that was the typical thing for a Jew to do...be mean af towards the uncircumcised. He was testing her steadfastness. Context shows us he didn't really think she was a dog but he loved her and did indeed show compassion upon her and her daughter.
Making up excuses for him, eh? He only changed his mind when she likened herself and her daughter to dogs. What's your poor excuse for him threatening to toss the rival preacher Jezebel onto a bed so her acolytes could have their way with her - and then he'd kill her children? (Revelation 20-23)
Geza Vermes argued that Jesus was a typical Jewish holyman, like Honi the Circle drawer... I think Neal should contest this to reinforce his view that Jesus was executed for claiming to be King
This was a great discussion- unfortunately, one cannot postulate Jesus was a great rabbi/philosopher who challenged the Jewish authorities based on the Gospels which are clearly creative, unsourced, late pieces of literature. This is apologetic and exactly what the Gospel writers want us to think.There is no evidence in Paul's letters to suggest the above either. There is no external corroboratory evidence of the same- especially if Josephus TF was forged. Finally, with this theory, one would expect him to be a Messiah-like figure, a hero, a martyr- but cannot explain a dying and rising God and early high Christology found in Paul's letters and the Gospels
It is the most secret of God. Two creatures . Two annoies. The one of them is from earth, and the other one from God. Then he takes the one from earth to his throne and he put down the other one to hell (but he is dearest son of God) , that is Jesus
Jesus was not a poltical but a Spiritual rebel against hypocritical theocracy. I wonder why his case Was not taken down in sanhedrin s archives, i.e. I think jewish history from that time is being suppressed, there should exist more detailed facts, when I was in Israel, I asked a jewish guide what jews think of jesus, and she said they think he is being in a shithole in hell. Why so much hatred?
Back to the Zimmer theory that the flavinium is completely authentic? A fringe theory from an elderly man with a goofy hat. Not even christian scholars believe that the flavinium is completely authentic. A huge step back after some great video's with Chrissy Hansen. Such a shame....
The canaanite woman was an Israelite. The goal was to bring in all of Israel, those who would believe in the messiah anyways. The reuniting of Israel from the nations.
Apparently the Church burnt all of Marcion's books because they had nothing to hide.
A lot of thought provoking stuff here. Good job.
I can hardly wait to watch this!
Sweet judism of Alexandria isn't happening in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem there's Vietnam. 53:03
I think Gnostic Informant misunderstands the Q theory (around 27:30). The theory is very much that it was a single physical text (though maybe it existed in different versions and has different layers) that the Gospel authors literally copied from - not that it was oral or a collection of scribbles, etc.
I'm of a more diverse opinion. I believe there were many sayings scrolls of a Yeshua who lived in the centuries B.C.E. as the Righteous Teacher to primarily his only two disciples Simon and Judas or James; the Gospel of Thomas being one of many, and the gospels barrow from all of them, but do not use every saying.
I think Mark G. Bilby decisively solved the Marcion/Q question you guys brought up... Marcion's gospel had two clear sources: (1) A source (which Bilby calls "new Q") that had more material than the current critical edition presupposes, and (2) an early, pre-canonical version of the Gospel according to Mark. Bilby reconstructs these early layers in his open access book, "Gospel of the Poor." The historical Jesus (Joshua) was an Aesop-like figure who led a revolutionary social movement for marginalized people groups and was killed for it.
@@FlaviusBrosephus Proto Mark and Q are still hypothetical sources with no evidence from any external witnesses which is why I’m not buying it. It’s simpler to say Proto Mark and Q are the same because both of them are Marcions Gospel. They are and always were the same text.
@@History-ValleyThat's a compelling thesis... So, would that mean Marcion simply wrote the first gospel, and Matthew and Luke just borrowed from it and made their own literary redactions?
Mark Bilby's historical Jesus sounds suspiciously like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 🤔
@ In the Gospels, there sure are plenty of instances of Jesus being a preacher who advocated for marginalized social groups and was killed for it... Maybe it's more accurate to say MLK Jr. sounds suspiciously like Jesus?
@@History-Valley Perhaps you and Dr Bibly are both correct. Bilby doesn't distinguish between the voice of Marcion's gospel (Lk1) or Q, so I agree: Lk1 = Q + Mk1. However, Bilby claims certain Mk1 verses derive from Q/Lk1. This sounds rather circular.
Lk1 is an early witness as to what the 'Markan' proto-gospel does not contain; for example, no baptism or temptation, neither a triumphal entry nor a cleansing of the temple. Note the only time Mark mentions baptism is in the longer ending (16.16) and in 10.38-39. Although Matthew recycles 90% of Mark, he does not include the latter verses.
Moreover, the so-called 'great omission' in Luke (Mark 6.45-8.26) is explained by the presence of a Markan proto-gospel.
Strip out the verses from Mark not attested by Matthew and Lk1, discard the passages Bilby flags as belonging to Q, and what are you left with? A collection of miracle stories beginning with the call of Simon and ending with the renamed Peter's recognition of Jesus as the Christ.
The opening of this proto-gospel matches the order of Luke from chapter five: the call of the first disciples, the cleansing of the leper, the healing of the paralytic, the call of Levi, a question of fasting, matters of the Sabbath, and the healing of the man with the withered hand; culminating in the appointment of the twelve.
This proto-gospel then recounts the calming of the storm, the demon exorcised, the healing of the bleeding woman, Herod's fear that Jesus has raised John the Baptist from the dead, and the feeding of the 5,000. Peter's recognition is the climax
A story beginning and ending with Peter ... Does this add ballast to Papias's legend of 'Mark' being Peter's interpreter?
Granted, I've left out 9.14-29, but Mark's version of healing the boy is much longer than Matthew or Luke's story, so this may be secondary.
I don't have the space to elaborate here, but I paid attention to language to formulate the hypothesis above.
The idea of Jesus as a miracle worker - a doer of marvellous deeds - is also recounted by Josephus. As you know, Morton Smith is good on this matter.
Following Bilby's cascade model:
Mk1 = a miracle story collection
Lk1/Q = Mk1 + Lk Redaction 1
Mk2 = Lk1 (healing of the man with the unclean spirit, Jesus' family, the Beelzebub controversy, the parables, the rejection at Nazareth, the sending of the 12, the first passion prediction, the transfiguration, healing the boy with the unclean spirit, second passion prediction, let the children come to me, the rich young man, blind Bartimaeus, the authority of Jesus challenged, paying taxes to Caesar, whose son is the Christ?, the mini-apocalypse, and a short passion) + MkR2
Mt1 = Mk2 + Lk1 + MtR1
Jn1 = Mk2 + Lk1 + Mt1 + JnR1
[and etc ...]
All meant in the spirit of good-natured debate.
Keep up the good work, I enjoy your show!
Very good points against mythcists raised here.
Glad to see Reza Aslan getting some love
His is a totally worthless book, but yeah, everyone deserves some love.
@@notanemoprog loved it at the time but in retrospect, no book trying to define Jesus the person is worth the read. It's impossible to do. No point in trying.
His book, "No God but God," is still a gem for anyone seeking an introduction for Islam. ❤
Is he the same guy that ate human brains?
@@nuggz4424 Raw.
As a mythicist I believe there was possibly a “Q” mythical Source that proves earlier mythical Logos, but actually critical historiist scholars deny. Q
❤
What I don't get about Josephus and the rebel theory is why would he say that Jesus won over many Jews and Greeks. The Jewish rebellion was nationalist and fundamentalist so what appeal would another messianic Jew be to them? How many other examples are there of messianic Jewish rebel leaders attracting Greeks to their cause?
It’s impossible to make any conclusions on who or what Jesus did or said period
A very wide ranging discussion, very deep in the weeds for a lot of it. I myself can only call into question the assertion that Jesus was educated because he was in close proximity to a city that could provide him with an education. I would ask where did the comparatively poor Jesus acquire the money to pay for this education?
That's a good point and sounds right. Perhaps Jesus's family wasn't as poor as the extant material suggests? Perhaps some form of education, particularly a religous Jewish education, was available for less than we might believe? There are a few hints that the Jesus movement had access to considerable resources during Jesus's lifetime. For example, the archaeological excavation at Capernaum suggests that "Simon Peter's house" is substantial, although that designation is obviously contestable. Jesus doesn't show any signs of having or needing a job. The wedding at Cana seems a fairly lavish affair and Jesus appears to have been accused a number of times of dining rather too well. Historically, most people who have had the chance to make numerous speeches over an extended period about the plight of the poor have not themselves been on the breadline.
@digitaurus I would think without some written witness that Jesus was exposed to extraordinary education opportunities afforded the typical Nazarene that it would amount to mere speculation.
No, Jesus was not educated - the gospel authors and redactors were. They were clever, elite Greco-Roman writers competing in a complex, rich story world.
@@JC-vq2cs I think you're probably right considering just how rare reading and writing skills were in the ancient world.
@@CRWenger Agreed. He seems to have been deeply revered, but the sayings that come down don't seem particularly 'educated' either in the Graeco-Roman sense or in the sense of knowing the Torah deeply.
Jesus called the Greek woman a dog because that was the typical thing for a Jew to do...be mean af towards the uncircumcised. He was testing her steadfastness. Context shows us he didn't really think she was a dog but he loved her and did indeed show compassion upon her and her daughter.
Making up excuses for him, eh? He only changed his mind when she likened herself and her daughter to dogs.
What's your poor excuse for him threatening to toss the rival preacher Jezebel onto a bed so her acolytes could have their way with her - and then he'd kill her children? (Revelation 20-23)
@@flaneur5560 She was a Greek, of the same lineage as Jesus and the disciples lol
Geza Vermes argued that Jesus was a typical Jewish holyman, like Honi the Circle drawer... I think Neal should contest this to reinforce his view that Jesus was executed for claiming to be King
This was a great discussion- unfortunately, one cannot postulate Jesus was a great rabbi/philosopher who challenged the Jewish authorities based on the Gospels which are clearly creative, unsourced, late pieces of literature. This is apologetic and exactly what the Gospel writers want us to think.There is no evidence in Paul's letters to suggest the above either. There is no external corroboratory evidence of the same- especially if Josephus TF was forged. Finally, with this theory, one would expect him to be a Messiah-like figure, a hero, a martyr- but cannot explain a dying and rising God and early high Christology found in Paul's letters and the Gospels
Antipas, comes to mind...
Herod killed all firstborn males...rh negs?
Romans eventually had to raze the Jerusalem temple... Thats War.
It is the most secret of God. Two creatures . Two annoies. The one of them is from earth, and the other one from God. Then he takes the one from earth to his throne and he put down the other one to hell (but he is dearest son of God) , that is Jesus
Katie let DAMION see his baby
Exactly Neil! Wtfk?
Jesus was not a poltical but a Spiritual rebel against hypocritical theocracy. I wonder why his case Was not taken down in sanhedrin s archives, i.e. I think jewish history from that time is being suppressed, there should exist more detailed facts, when I was in Israel, I asked a jewish guide what jews think of jesus, and she said they think he is being in a shithole in hell. Why so much hatred?
Jesus healed roman soldiers , he attacked jewish priest
It’s pretty clear that Josephus believed he was the Christ.
christianity's entire innovation was a non-militant, spiritual saviour
the historical jesus didnt exist, and if he did, he wasnt a zealot
Jews in gospels killed the jesus-god.
Back to the Zimmer theory that the flavinium is completely authentic?
A fringe theory from an elderly man with a goofy hat.
Not even christian scholars believe that the flavinium is completely authentic.
A huge step back after some great video's with Chrissy Hansen.
Such a shame....
The canaanite woman was an Israelite. The goal was to bring in all of Israel, those who would believe in the messiah anyways. The reuniting of Israel from the nations.
Don't waste my time with a count down.