From: muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah)
Subject: Re: _Jesus: A Life_ by A.N. Wilson
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 20:10:22 GMT

In article <adams.726078919@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah) writes:
>>That is the trouble (about believing even the account in Mark).  I don't think
>>it would have been difficult for Mark to get his hands on the official 
>>documents >(as per it related to the trial, the Roman treaties with the 
>>Sanhedrin etc).  The question is why doesn't he emphasize that he has checked 
>>his story with the documents ?  
>Luke claims to have done this...;-)  In any event, one wonders if John Mark

He doesn't say how :-).  Just one or two sentences at the beginning of his
account are all we can go by (can we infer that most of it was also heresay ?).

>was a Roman citizen, for if he wasn't, his access would have been less free
>than a Roman's would.  An example, too, of needing some pull to get
>documents from the govt is shown by Seutonius' histories in _The Twelve
>Ceasars_.  Once Seutonius fell out of favor with the emporer, his access to
>documents was highly limited, and his histories became very short.

Still I think there were enough Jews in high positions in Rome (some of whom
Mark must have known; what on earth was he doing in Rome anyway ?) for Mark
to authenticate the story with the documents.

>>I think he had some sort of contact through the wife of a
>>high ranking Roman official (can't remember my source :-().  Additionally,
>>I think there were means of petitioning the Roman courts to get any document
>>to be put on public display.  Remember that the Romans were big fans of 
>>playing by the rules.
>One wonders though, what kind of treatment a Christian would have had at
>this time.  Nero selected the Christians as his scapegoat for the fire,
>since they were a small, misunderstood sect, who were 'canibals'...

Come to think of it, the Romans had the tradition of displaying in public
places the trials of everyone accused of sedition.  No doubt they would have
done so in the case of Christ as well.  So probably Mark (and everyone else of
that time for that matter knew the Roman side of the story).  For them it
was far better to act as though there was no account of the trial and just
print their side of the story (the truth was too ugly).  When emperor Maximus
threatened to post the same trial on public display we have Eusebius verhemently
claiming this to be fake as well.

>>We agree then that it was more than (or really much less than :-) divine 
>>inspiration that drove these people to write their accounts.  They must have
>>been writing against or for someone or something.
>
>Well, not quite.  I don't yield on this point....I still hold that all of
>the texts, whatever the issues that surround them, are inspired...

And then when Paul thinks it is time for the Gentiles to be also allowed
access to the teachings, we have John writing his account with a more
universal appeal...
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.activism.d,misc.legal,alt.politics.bush,alt.president.clinton