Hello everyone,
Below are the links for the
May 7th Am-Eu Reading Workshop.
Video and
Audio and link to the
Folder
And a brief synopsis of what was discussed in this workshop.
Ch. 8 Christ Under Caesar:
The text author for the gospels had some creative agency and were less concerned with chronology and history then they were with a particular agenda. This was used to come to insightful albeit revisionist conclusions, such as Mathew's use of Mark. The titles given to Jesus (Messiah, King of the Jews, Son of God, etc.) in the gospel's were loaded with particular meaning and lent a particular meaning to the audience at the time. This was meant to separate the Jerusalem Christians from Gentile Christians in Marks narrative, while Matthew did the opposite (bringing them back together).
Mark presents Jesus as the powerful son of God and one who exhibits divine knowledge. The suffering saviour motif is missing from the first half of Mark's gospel, but it's foreshadowed to happen later on and that this is a repeating template – mentioned were Enoch, Zoroaster, Julius Caesar, that share a lot of things in common similar to the Christological focus as the Son of God. This includes Service to others, the incarnation of universal principles and values, sacrificing themselves for the sins of the world and how this is connected to earth changes, i.e. What happened after the death of Caesar
After the death of Nero in 68 A.D, Rome had 4 Emperors in one year, the last being Vespasian who had served in Galilee and Judea. His lower class origins did not sit well with the aristocracy but he had the backing of his legions, so launched a propaganda campaign to bolster his image, the biggest being his military victory against the Jewish rebels and destruction of the Jewish temple – and how victory in battle represented God's choice in ruler.
This included stories of him having the power to heal. i.e. Bringing back sight to a blind man as an indication of his divine right to rule and he claimed to be the long-awaited Messiah of the Jews. The title: 'Son of God' had a definite meaning in Greco-Roman context as rulers were identified as sons of gods, for example, Caesar was seen as the son of the Goddess Venus who took his spirit out of his body as he was or just after he was killed.
The Son of Man:
The Book of Daniel talks of an eschatological figure who will appear during the end times and so even though we aren't entirely sure how Mark's readers would have understood 'Son of Man', it was already understood that 'Son of Man' was synonymous with the Messiah. Whereas Adam introduced sin and separation, Christ killed the power of sin to reestablish a connection with the Divine. An analogy used was of the good witch letting Dorothy know she can always go home.
At the moment he dies is when the power of god is revealed, because he accepted the suffering in obedience to god and this was a demonstration of power over the flesh, i.e. Faith in the unseen. Jesus has the power to forgive sins on Earth and links that power to his identity as the Son of Man. The Disciples do not believe or have faith in Jesus even though he has healed thousands in the pericopes of Mark.
To heal a blind man, he puts spit in the man's eye ALA Vespasian, but requires a second laying of hands to cure. Most of Mark's audience would have recognized this intentional comparison, yet Jesus does more than Vespasian and is therefore the true Messiah of the world. Was Vespasian pulling from Caesar's religion for his propaganda campaign and Mark/Paul was trying to separate that distinction?
