| Paul Knew Jesus? 2: 'Jesus' Period |
| Paul Knew Jesus? . |
|
(2) 'JESUS' RECOVERED PERIOD - How 'Jesus' Got Lost in the NT'S Second Generation In the previous pages, we discussed writings likely occurring during 'the Jerusalem' period, when apostolic direction was from Palestine. At the end of that period, James, and Paul 'disappeared' from view (James killed; Paul in prison). The book of Acts 'breaks off' with no further apostle accounts (sections lost?). I'm guessing the 'fall of Jerusalem' occurred at this point. But it is a guess, since there's nothing in the syntax-flow or simply 'reading' that clearly demonstrates its position. Here's my reasons: 1. The concept of 'Jesus' shifts to a confident, in-control leader, who predicted Jerusalem's demise (even being sad about it). 'Jesus was right!', being the point. 2. Multiple 'Jesus' accounts appear, all 'dating' about the same time, and all conflicting, as if there's no central 'control' anymore. 3. The apostles who previously were presented as 'not understanding' are now 'new and improved'. Simultaneously 'divisions' began to be discussed as a major problem. 4. Highly detailed Jerusalem destruction accounts appear, with Mark updated. I don't doubt the possibility of Jesus' 'prophesy' per se (see above) ... I just suspect his prediction later became a 'proof text' of his divinity. 5. Jerusalem loomed larged in the Jewish 'end-time' concept. With its destruction, 'scoffers' were inevitable (see my Jude discussion on the previous page). I also believe Jerusalem's fall and subsequent Christian diaspora from palestine precipitated the combining of 'Q', Mark, the birth accounts and the ascension accounts. Previously I've surmised that 'Q' was translated at this point, since its syntax-dating is between Mark (previous page) and Luke's additions (below). The birth and post-resurrection stories, however, remain a mystery due to variations between Mat. and Luk., and non-inclusion in Paul, Mark, James, Peter, and John's accounts. John wouldn't love to demonstrate Jesus' divinity?? Again, here's an explanation of the 'dating' measures. For each writing, I use a 'SE', 'SM' and 'SL'. Here's what they're derived from:
SE- 'Early' greek, combining 'Paul', Markian, and James syntax signatures. SM- 'Middle' greek, combining Matthew, Lukian, Johnine, Hebrews and Romans signatures. SL- 'Later' greek, combining petrine and pastoral syntax signatures. The number following each measure is the percent of verses. So, for example an SE41 means that the writing has 41% 'early' greek syntax. The writing segments below are sorted first by the 'SE' or early percent until it 'dies out', then sorting by the 'SL' or late percent. 'Jesus-driven' ratings range from a '5' (high) to a -5 (low). These are my own opinion, based on going through the verses, comparing commentaries, and categorizing the types of theology. NT SECTIONS IN LIKELY ORDER OF WRITING - THEIR THEOLOGY EVENT: JERUSALEM DESTROYED HERE(?) EVENT: JERU-CHRISTIAN DIASPORA(?) LUKE Additions (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE30 Discussion: Quite a number of commentaries compare Luk/Mat changes to the Markian account plus 'Q'; here we're strictly looking at verses not 'Q' and not Markian. The bulk, of course, represent birth accounts and the post-resurrection. Their absence in 'Q', Mark, and Paul is curious. The irreconcilable differences with Matthew are even odder, suggesting verbal account sources and late derivation. Most curious of all are Peter and pastoral warnings about fables and geneologies, which Peter specifically says he didn't include ... as if he just heard about Luk/Mat. Interestingly John 'agrees' with Mar/1Pe, with neither birth or ascension stories. Theology: Luke tends to highlight Jesus as a miraculous entry into the world at birth (with a LONG geneology), but presents Jesus' death as a means to encourage repentence and part of God's plan. Here, Jesus is much more confident, and not a 'secret', plus the Holy Spirit as a prominent entity. Luke corrects the 'end-time' as not Jerusalem's fall, and introduces two angels(?) at Jesus' ascension promising his return (Jesus forgot to mention?). Luke continues the theme of a Jesus vs Satan battle, expanding it by suggesting Judas was Satan's re-entry into the 'battle'. He also continues the Jesus theme of the last being first, and meeting the law's demands was not enough. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 REV ch1-7 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE29 Discussion: Revelation and its authorship were questioned early-on, having a very sloppy greek, dissimilar to the johnines. My review is quite interesting. Chaps 1-7 have syntax signatures about the time of Luke, and with a 'John' vocabulary mix. Chapters 8-20, in contrast, match the time of Matthew (a bit later), but still a 'John' vocabulary mix. Even more interesting is that the 'break' is where the 7th seal bad-events repeat the previous 6 seals. My 'guess' is there were two apocalyptic vision accounts, both from 'John' (whichever John). This would explain the 'repeating' of events, and avoids the present contortionist logic in conservative commentaries. It would also place 'John' as taking Paul's 'bishop' function in Ephesus, only to be imprisoned. It would also match Paul's frustrations with 'asia'. The vision is likely in response to the fall of Jerusalem, if the 'timing' here is correct. Theology: The early 'church' chapters take Christianity to its next level (beyond what most churches believe even today). Church angels/spirits are new, plus Jesus new function as a sacrifice (lambs, blood, etc). The writer interestingly defines 'works' as love, minstration and faith (in contrast to Paul). The 'hour of trial' is nigh, Jesus will 'come quickly' and the writer introduces a new 'second death'. 'Jesus' seems mainly in 'John's dreams. Jesus-Driven Rating:: -3 ROM (all chaps) Syntax-dating: SE29 Discussion: I've only included this to show where Romans, as a book, would be located in the syntax-sequence. If indeed it were a single authorship, and if Paul survived his Rome imprisonment, then it would precede the pastorals. I personally don't think 'Paul' survived 'Jerusalem' theologically, or Rome physically. Traditions have both him and Peter dieing with Nero. Theology: (discussed in separate sections) Jesus-Driven Rating:: na 1PE (all) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE28 Discussion: The syntax signatures for 1Pe and 2Pe ch1-2 are quite similar (timing). However the vocabulary mix (generally matching authorship) is completely different. 1Pe matches HEB almost exactly, especially chap 10-11. 2Pe is 'closest' to James, suggesting to me that 2PE is probably 'Peter'! Theology: 1PE contains all the 'latest' theological concepts ... foreknowledge, sprinkling of blood, God judges on works regardless of persons, newborn babes (with word = milk) and 'out of darkness into light'. There's more ... redeemed by the blood, searching prophets for the spirit of Christ coming, living stones, spiritual priesthood, christians offering sacrifices, and the word being preached to the dead so they can be judged (how convenient!). The writer does include loving fellow believers, hospitality, and everyone behaving (relative to authorities, wives, husbands and slaves). Special Note: Chap 5 is interesting, aluding to being a witness to Jesus suffering (John, Mary(s), the noisy chicken, guards,???), plus being 'a fellow elder'. Honestly the whole letter 'looks' like Hebrews, including the nice greek. Maybe Hebrews and 1Pe are both Barnabas or similar (absent the title verse). Jesus-Driven Rating:: -3 2PE ch1-2 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE28 Discussion: See 1PE above. If you read 2Pe, everything seems to 'fit like a glove' as 'Peter' (not OJ). The vocabulary is very James-ish, with heavy quoting from Jude (present leader, per syntax signatures). The theology is jewish, fitting closely between James and Jude. I vote 'Peter'! I also find it very 'telling' that the Mark additions (next section) 'also' matches 2PE. The 'only' thing going 'against' Peter as author is the early church writers who didn't trust it, and the modern critics who don't trust Jude (I suspect both groups decisions are linked to Jude). Peter says he's old; would fit location here (tradition = already dead). Theology: Doesn't introduce significant new theology. Emphasizes diligence, virtue, knowledge, self-control, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love, none of which are Jesus-specific (similar to Jude). Bad angels go to jail and bad people to be destroyed. Repeated use of 'knowledge' and control over interpretation of OT prophesy. Holy Spirit mentioned only relative to OT prophesies. Interestingly, Peter's OT quotes pattern is similar to Mark/Q and not Mat/Luke (doesn't go 'whole hog'). Jesus-Driven Rating:: +1 MAR Additions (ch12-15,16) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE26 Discussion: Chaps 12-15 'date' to almost the same 'time' as the additions next. Mathematically it's not entirely clear this is separate from ch1-11, since MAT contains so much of Mark (data echoing). But for whatever reason these chapters are different from chaps 1-11. Theology: Adds some additional stories plus love of neighbor next to love of God. Key 'give unto 'Caesar' story. Has Jesus play with hebrew as proof (odd), plus Baruch2/Enoch1 as background (marriage>angels). Roughness of passion with naked man curious, as if might be from 'original Mark'. Account closest to John. Multiple tearing down temple and rebuilding in 3 days. Rising similar to angels. Gathering chosen immediate future. Limited Holy Spirit. Special Notes: Mar 16 actually has a syntax mix matching ch 1-9 (early), suggesting to me the story might have been in the 'original Mark' and used by Luke. Seems to me an early syntax would be difficult to 'fake'. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 MAT Additions (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE25 Discussion: If the syntax-shift is a 'guide', the MAT additions are measurably later than the Lukian additions. Traditionally LUK/MAT were geographically independent, but interestingly add the same accounts, (very) separately told. MAT presents Jesus as strong and 'King of the Jews' (the arresting guards even bowing down). Indeed almost all the new participants (Herod, wise-men, etc) seem to intuitively know 'the King' has arrived. Theology: Matthew most heavily ties Jesus to OT prophesies, presenting him as the promised messiah. The 'full end of the age' has arrived, angels taking the bad, and the good remaining (sequence and vocabulary similar to the Hebrews writer). Jesus is presented as saving people from their sins (the devil sowing bad people). Like Luke, Matthew adds Jesus' geneology and birth story, again largely matching the OT. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 1JO (all chaps) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE26 Discussion: Text references an earlier writing and hints of the older syntax are observable. Theology: Heavy emphasis on loving breathren and physicality of Jesus. Jesus as atonement (propitiation) and to the works of the devil. Anti-Christs (Christians) in last hour. Annointing of Holy Spirit; should test spirits. Walking in the light. Ask God and receive. Refers to 'fathers' instead of 'elders'. Resurr manifesting 'like Jesus'. Odd 'sin toward death'. Praying impacts others sinning. Only hints of Jesus. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 JOH (all chaps) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE25 Discussion: The books is difficult to analyze. It appears to have a received a 'late' edit, with changes/insertions throughout. The initial 'word' section is 'late' syntax. Simply looking at the syntax signatures and vocabulary mix, ch21 was the 'added' version and looks very much like Mark's missing chapter(!). Ch22 matches the earlier JOH text. Interestingly, neither ending has Jesus ascension. Theology: Theme is God's love for man > eternal life. Emphasizes 'signs' as proof for Jesus (with inconsistencies). Doesn't deal with 'timing' of return. John account of Jesus is considerably more visceral and tends to follow Mar. Tries to explain jewish belief failure. Satan battle is back and began with Judas (similar to Luke). Humbleness and washing disciples' feet very instructive of John. Raise dead in last days; believers won't die. Jesus to return; apostles will see. Mentions being ejected from synogogues. Lighter rating below due to odd moving Jesus away from 'Q'; not sure why. Early church didn't trust John. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +1 HEB ch5-10 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE26 Discussion: Repeating the initial discussion on Hebrews, Heb. appears to have separate sections, but the distinctions here are simply clear shifts in the syntax signatures and thus 'time' (the objective being to monitor the theology). If you read the 2PE section above, I noted how 1PE matches HEB almost exactly on the vocabulary signature and very close (in time?) on the syntax signature ... same guy (not Peter)?. Looking at 'purpose', Heb 6:1 suggests at least a part of Hebrews was a 'catechism' or teaching sequence. Looking at timing, Heb 9:9 suggests actual sacrifices being made, and Heb 8:13 suggests Jerusalem is almost gone. But Heb 13:14 and the 'new Jerusalem' suggests Jerusalem is a memory. In theory, the 'fall of Jerusalem' would be after this section, and before the pastorals (where the last Heb section is located). As mentioned earlier, I don't have any clear 'Jerusalem-destroyed' positioning device (my theory based on the appearance of 'Jesus' books and loss of central control). Theology: This section is where the Heb. writer really gets busy. Jesus is connected with Melchizedek, and Abraham with Jesus. The author commends 'good works' similar to 1PE, but still references rightousness by faith. Jesus is presented as a priest offering 'himself' as a sacrifice through the Holy Spirit to God. The believers are still 'waiting' at this point (nearness no longer assured). Jesus' crying and tears suggests access to a Markian-type passion account. Overall, the Heb. writer is not even 'close' to the behavioral 'Jesus', being mainly concerned with dumping the Law. Jesus-Driven Rating:: -4 ACTS ch5, 7-12 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE25 Discussion: This an the next section likely formed the original 'Acts of the Apostles'. Both have the same syntax signatures; I've only separated them for theological analysis. The final section of Acts (journey to Rome) is just slightly later (below), where the sections are consolidated. Theology: Jesus purpose appears to be 'repent' plus savior of Israel. Shared wealth continues. There's no mention of waiting or an eminent event (thus the mystery of shared wealth). Notably there's also no resurrection of the believers. 'Both' men and women are emphasized. Baptism 'follows' HS in-dwelling. The Holy Spirit seems to be the equivalent of apostolic authority. Healing pattern is similar to Mark. Inclusion of gentiles is introduced by a Peter story; there's no indication it pre-exists or follows the Paul equivalent. Special Notes: Some commentaries have noted the odd parallels between Peter and Paul's ministries, both having raising-the-dead stories, amazing powers, prison-rescues, connection to gentiles, and very similar sermons (Luke?). I've compared the two with no apparent syntactical or vocabulary pattern to explain the pairing. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 ACTS ch 13-19 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE25 Discussion: As noted above, this section 'dates' similarly to chaps 7-12 and likely formed the original 'Acts of the Apostles'. Theology: Confirms the gentile decision with Barnabas and Paul's mission to the gentiles. Paul's travels are quite interesting, being 'historian'-ish, but uniformly present Peter (earlier) and Paul in a positive (and equal) light. Believer resurrection is still not discussed., along with emphasis on mixed gender participation. Unlike the Peter section, this section has little expectations of personal behavior. Special Notes: All of the Acts 'sermons' have a common syntax and vocabulary signature mix, confirming the obvious ... they're likely created by the Acts writer. The 'you' vs 'we' sections don't have any separately distinctive patterns. The equating of Peter and Paul is curious, completely leaving out the apostles (except hints of James and John), and the Jesus family. The more I read the Paul saga, the more I'm convinced Acts 'rescued' Paul from himself. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +1 2JO (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE23 Discussion: Appears to be a quick note concerning heretics, but provides a nice syntax-dating sample! Notice that a Johnine letter is quite similar to a Lukian history in terms of syntactical signatures (time). Theology: Warns concerning 'Jesus not in the flesh' and anti-Christs. Note the similarity to 1PE 5:13. Heretics are to be kicked out. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +1 ROM sermons #4,#5,#7,#10 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE24 Discussion: The 'bulk' of Romans is in the gospels/Johnines period (two Paul sermons were noted earlier; three additional sermons are later for a total of 10). By far, most commentators and the early church fathers attribute Romans to 'Paul'. I find it interesting, since the syntax signatures don't even closely match Paul. Only about a quarter of the vocabulary signatures match Paul (normally vocabulary has a high match to authorship). Given the absence of a 'match', you're left with 'tradition'. Show me the pastor that admits his sermons are based on 'tradition'. Most say 'the Holy Spirit'. I don't doubt 'the Holy Spirit' ... I very much doubt the veracity of church leaders. Romans is critical to 'the church', but has little to do with 'Jesus'. Theology: More law > more sin > more grace concept. No law > no sin allegory. Shouldn't sin since under grace, not law concept. Irony of gentiles saved and jews not. Confessing Jesus from dead = saved concept. Lords Day and eating/fasting don't matter concept. Be hospitable like Jesus concept (Jesus hospitable? Feeding thousands?). The sermons do however encourage endurance and not despising weak breathren. Jesus' purpose to save from God's wrath and reconciliation; no word about 'a sacrifice'. Special Notes: Sermon #4: 'Tribulations & Death' (Rom 5:3-6:11). Sermon #5: 'The Law versus Sin' (Rom 6:12-6:23). Sermon #7: 'Israel and Christ' (Rom 9:1-10:11). Sermon #10: 'Judging and Food' (Rom 14:1-15:7). Jesus-Driven Rating:: -3 ROM sermon #9 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE21 Discussion: This is Rom ch12-13, and 'dates' a little later than the above Romans sermons (here for convenience). The vocabulary signature (generally indicating authorship) closely matches 1Pe/Heb. Indeed, the only use of 'sacrifice' in Romans occurs here (interestingly commentators note 1Pe and Heb are like Romans; though Romans is later). Theology: Encourages affection for the breathren, honoring one before another, being humble, with no retribution. Does include the Cor. concept of members vs one body. Listed gifts now include prophesy, ministration, teaching, exhorting, sharing, leading (tongues/charisma gone). Unique to this section, the end-time is nearer 'than since believed', providing a way to 'date' the end-time (late 1st century). Additionally the armour of light is introduced ... quite johnine. Special Notes: Sermon #9: 'Gifts and Love' (Rom 12:3-13:14). Jesus-Driven Rating:: +3 2TH (all chaps) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE25 Discussion: This the first of the 'meanish' series of writings, more closely matching the pastorals, rather than 'Paul'. A first strong tribulation appears to be in full-force (since predicts 'the end'). Theology: There's only one mention of a Spirit ('sanctification of the Spirit'; only NT instance). Example to follow is 'us', not Jesus. Promises 'payback time' ... angels of power, flaming fire, vengeance, and eternal destruction. Notes the 'man of sin', the 'son of destruction', and the 'lawless one', who appears to be 'playing God'. Promises a 'falling away' and 'the kingdom not yet here'. No work = no eat. Demands dumping disorderly brothers (long-sufferering? nope), and paying apostles (the twelve?). A 'jesus follower' this writer is not. Special Notes: Take a look at 2TH 2.5: 'Do ye not remember that, being yet with you, these things I said to you?' (YLT) One thing I've noticed, is that whenever you see this type phrase, you're looking at 'late' writings. It's very uniform. Jesus-Driven Rating:: -4 REV ch8-22 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE23 Discussion: This is the second apocalyptic vision (the first being earlier this page). Repeating the above, the syntax signatures (timing) between this and the first vision are considerably different, but both have a similar author (matching 'John). I'd guess the first was a reaction to the fall of Jerusalem, and this the tribulation mentioned in 2TH. There being two visions explains the duplication between the events in seals 1-6 and seal 7. Theology: This vision is pretty divorced from 'Jesus' but quite OT oriented (indeed some commentators say the vision is the OT). 'Babylon' or Rome appears to be the target of hatred, with seven trumpets, seven bowls, the judgment of Babylon, and the coming of Christ with the consumation of history. Clearly they expected the end. Special Notes: Rev 22:12 appears to pick up from the first vision at the end of ch6, with the second vision inserted in-between. The end of the second vision portrays the apostles as 'long gone', so I'd assume Peter and John (and Paul?) are now dead. Tradition places Peter/Paul as dieing under Nero ... I'd suspect it was a little later approaching Domitian. Jesus-Driven Rating:: -4 3JO (all verses) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE21 Discussion: 3Jo matches 2Jo almost exactly, except with the syntax mix a little later. Again, it provides a good syntax sample for measurement. Theology: Encourages receiving fellow workers, and complements them for support without the help of gentiles. Writer appears upset he wasn't properly received. The curiousity of this short letter is the complete absent of Jesus or the Spirit (compare to 2Jo). Jesus-Driven Rating:: -3 2PE ch3 (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE17 Discussion: This is one of the first writings, having more 'late' syntax than 'early' syntax. Most commentaries suggest the 'second letter' in 2Pe 3:1 refers to 2Pe (vs 1Pe), but the syntax-signature mix for 2Pe 3 is much later than either 1Pe or 2Pe. This 'confirms' my believe that 1Pe is related to Heb; not 2Pe. Thus 2Pe 3 is itself the second letter relative to 2Pe ch1-2. The question then remains ... is Peter still alive at this point? I'd say 'no' ... the vocabulary syntax mix here matches James, not 2Pe (or even 1Pe). Someone has felt the need to explain the failure in the 'end-time'. Judging from the quick end, I'd suspect it's a fragment with the ending lost. Theology: Like 2Pe ch1-2, this letter uses some JDE text. 2PE ch3 is unique for several reasons. It moves the 'end-time' to 'a day is a thousand years with God' (so much for the rest of the NT predictions of the end-time). Plus it acknowledges the 'wisdom of Paul' but wiggles around on interpretation (I'm guessing people thought Paul expected the end-time?). At this point, the writer moves on to the need for steadfastness, with the letter breaking off unexpectedly. Special Notes: I really think 2Pe ch3 is the 'nail in the coffin' of the Pauline writings. For whatever reason, Paul 'grabbed' Jesus' resurrection and ran with it. But his prediction of the end-time was his un-doing ... a believer and a good preacher, absolutely. Inspired? Not possible. Jesus-Driven Rating:: -3 ACTS ch 6,20-28 (excl 22) (DETAILS) Syntax-dating: SE21 Discussion: This is Paul's trip to Rome and is odd relative to its length. Obviously Luke(?) appreciated Paul. Even though the syntax signatures (timing) are later, the vocabulary mix is still 'Luke'. Judging from the unexpected ending, I'd guess there was more, either in the original writing or Acts itself. Chap 6-7 is odd, having a lot of late-syntax (hellenists, Africans, Stephen story with a Lukian speech inserted). I assume it was a separate remembrance added. Theology: Jesus' resurrection as the proof of Paul's innocence is the primary theme. There's a heavy Holy Spirit and angel involvement, along with visions, (a typical Lukian touch). If you follow the progression of attacks on Paul by Jerusalem, Luke's appears to really want to 'turn the tide'. It's interesting this 'closure' matches 2PE.3's comments about Paul's 'wisdom' in syntactical timing. Jesus-Driven Rating:: +1 This section 'completes' Acts, the Johnines, and the Jesus stories as well. After this, the 'church' locks-down for a long 2,000 year 'winter'. Next page please .... the rise of 'the Bishops'. |
| Copyright ©, 2007, dmbarnhart |
| Prev Back Next |