I've read and re-read everyone's comments on the 'question of questions' and I thank all of you, especially Discovering Truth for very insightful input; it has helped me to better articulate what I've been experiencing and hopefully will lead me the heck out of it!
I realized, when reading Cleopatre's message to me that the only previous time I have ever felt like this was after doing that particularly nasty exorcism so many years ago. I was practically a shell of a person for about 6 months after. It was as though all my vital juices had been drained out of me; not necessarily physical energy, but psychic and mental energy.
So, that made me wonder if what I was doing in writing this book was something like an exorcism?
Those of you who have completed the book might recall me citing Joel Marcus on the topic of cosmic exorcism:
Werner has argued that Paul’s ‘Kardinaldogma’ is that Jesus’ death represented his triumph over the demonic powers that were responsible for crucifying him (1 Cor. 2:8). Marcus points out that there is no trace of this idea in Mark, since Mark’s story places the responsibility for his crucifixion on human enemies.
[1] However, that difference is not so clear. Mark’s portrayal of the human opposition to Jesus is simply an extension of the cosmic opposition, which is portrayed in the temptation narrative and the exorcisms, where demons are operative through human beings. Marcus notes:
This intertwined demonic/human opposition culminates in Jesus’ crucifixion. Mark probably means his readers to understand that the Jewish leaders’ conspiracy to liquidate Jesus (3:6; 11:18) reflects the demons’ fear that he will liquidate them (1:24); the [Greek verb translated as “to destroy”] is used in both cases and resurfaces in the description of a demon’s intention to destroy a human being in 9:22. Various features of the Markan passion narrative imply that the climax of this reciprocal hostility is Jesus’ death. Mark portrays the latter as a scene of cosmic darkness (15:33), and darkness suggests demonic powers elsewhere in the NT (e.g. Eph 6:12) and in Jewish sources ¼ Mark himself, moreover, links an apocalyptic darkening of the sun with the disturbance of cosmic (demonic?) powers in 13:24-25. And at the climax of the Passion Narrative Mark uses exactly the same phrase to describe Jesus’ death-scream (¼ 15:34, 37) as he has employed previously to describe the screams of demoniacs who are in the process of being exorcised (1:26; 5:7), thereby suggesting that Jesus’ death is equivalent to an exorcism.[2]
In short, for Mark, as for Paul, Jesus’ death is a defeat of the demonic forces, a vicarious sacrifice for the sins of humanity, the beginning of a new age, all accomplished in a scene of weakness, suffering and death, the significance of which is only apparent to those who have learned to see and think in a radically new manner.
[1] Marcus, ‘Mark – Interpreter,’ pp. 42–3.
[2] Marcus, ‘Mark – Interpreter,’ p. 43. In 1:26 the demon cries with a loud voice as it comes out of the demoniac; cf. 9:26.
Since it was actually Caesar's death that was accompanied by all the strange environmental phenomena, can we suppose that his death actually was a sort of exorcism as described by Marcus and Werner?
What about the writing of this book? I know that in no way did I come even close to smoking gun evidence, but I do think the accumulation of circumstantial evidence was more than compelling. Added to that were the many hidden clues left in Mark's gospel that are most reasonably interpreted in the way I have done so in this text. The evidence and hidden clues lead almost inexorably to the conclusions I finally drew, i.e. that Caesar actually was Paul's Christ.
For quite awhile during the collecting of evidence and writing, I was blaming Paul for imposing a Jewish Christ on the world. It was only as I laid out the evidence that I became more and more convinced that it was not Paul, but Mark who had done it. And then, it became evident probably why he had done it, and that he had incorporated clues into his text that could lead to the proper solution/interpretation.
It was the Jewish Christians who wished to retain a strong element of Judaism in Christianity who first manipulated the texts (Matthew, for example), and part of their who agenda included co-opting the Jewish scriptures (OT) into Christianity in order to impose their Jewish God, Yahwel/Jehovah/Yahu/whatever onto the entire structure.
Did Paul believe that the Jewish god was the ultimate 'father' of his Christ? It seems he did, but he also had theological explanations that completely eliminated the need to ever again refer to the OT or the OT version of Yahweh/Jehovah... the law was fulfilled and superseded.
But Matthew was having none of that; his version clung to the OT God of the law and adopted the entire Jewish scriptures as the birth matrix of Jesus and Christianity.
I'm realistic. I don't think my book is going to have any more of an impact than Paul's teachings did against the opposition of the Jewish Christians. But the truth is now out there and those with eyes and ears will get it.
And I think I will recover from standing against that mighty opponent and enunciating the words of truth.
