What is a 'Christ'?

[Cow Poke]

You forgot one,

Mark 8:27 Jesus went out, along with His disciples, to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way He questioned His disciples, saying to them, “Who do people say that I am?” 28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” 29 And He continued by questioning them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered and said to Him, “You are the Christ.” 30 And He warned them to tell no one about Him.

Yeah, and that's the one I WANTED!

[RhinestoneCowboy]

Its absence from a "document" that may well never have existed is suspicious?

Q is the "sayings material" of Jesus that is found in both Matthew and Luke. Whether any, some or all of that material is based on written sources or oral material or a bit of both is not absolutely clear. That at least some of the common material in gMatt and gLuke is based on (now lost) textual material is clear. I'd also say that analysis of it shows that it is from more than one lost textual source. There is also evidence of "Q material" in Paul's letters. So no, we don't have a "Q document" because there is probably no single "Q document" to be found. But it is very clear that most of the "Q" material was taken from a lost textual source or sources.

In any rate, IMO it's sort of speculative to imagine what someone 2,000 years ago must have wanted people to know.

If Jesus thought he was the Messiah then he probably wouldn't have failed to mention it. You think Mark would suppress such an important claim?

[One Bad Pig]

Q is the "sayings material" of Jesus that is found in both Matthew and Luke. Whether any, some or all of that material is based on written sources or oral material or a bit of both is not absolutely clear. That at least some of the common material in gMatt and gLuke is based on (now lost) textual material is clear. I'd also say that analysis of it shows that it is from more than one lost textual source. There is also evidence of "Q material" in Paul's letters. So no, we don't have a "Q document" because there is probably no single "Q document" to be found. But it is very clear that most of the "Q" material was taken from a lost textual source or sources.

No, it is not 'very clear.' Mark Goodacre, for example, disagrees with you. I find form criticism to be largely an exercise in speculation, limited only be the imagination of the scholar.

If Jesus thought he was the Messiah then he probably wouldn't have failed to mention it. You think Mark would suppress such an important claim?

Why do you think Mark "suppressed" it? Mark is surely aware of the claim (Mk 8:27-30).

[RhinestoneCowboy]

No, it is not 'very clear.' Mark Goodacre, for example, disagrees with you. I find form criticism to be largely an exercise in speculation, limited only be the imagination of the scholar.

If it's just "scholarly imagination" then why should we care what Goodacre thinks? In any case, he's in the minority when it comes to scholarship on Q.

Why do you think Mark "suppressed" it? Mark is surely aware of the claim (Mk 8:27-30).

Ever heard of Mark's "Messianic Secret"? Jesus never uses the term in reference to himself in Mark.

[Cow Poke]

Ever heard of Mark's "Messianic Secret"? Jesus never uses the term in reference to himself in Mark.

So why does He pat Peter on the back for calling Him the Christ?

[RhinestoneCowboy]

So why does He pat Peter on the back for calling Him the Christ?

You mean in Mark where that doesn't happen?

[Cow Poke]

You mean in Mark where that doesn't happen?

Look, if you're just here to be a snit, you can talk to somebody else. Jesus did not correct Peter for calling Him the Christ. He simply told Peter not to tell anybody. In the other Gospels, Jesus commends Peter for this.

Mark 8:
27 And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am?
28 And they answered, John the Baptist; but some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets.
29 And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
30 And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.

Do you REALLY believe Jesus would allow Peter to make that proclamation, then not correct him if it was not true?

[firstfloor]

That's even worse.

Who, in your opinion, is the best non-spooky history writer about this period?

[tabibito]

Nature can be manipulated of course but the rules are fixed.

But knowing the right way to manipulate and apply some rules, individually or in combination, can easily over-ride or modify the rule that would normally prevail. Drop (not throw) an object from a reasonable height, and it will fall more or less directly below the drop point. Shape that object properly and it won't, obviously ... but a sphere can go a long way to the side of straight down if you know the right rules and apply them correctly.

[tabibito]

Mark (the earliest gospel) only has seven occurrences of ‘Christ’ but not a single example of Jesus using the term with reference to himself. The word ‘Christ’ does not occur in ‘Q’ (material shared by Matthew/Luke) at all. This strongly suggests that Jesus did not call himself 'Messiah', but instead, the early church applied the title to him.

It would seem that your source might have a slight problem with reading comprehension of a passage that even a seven year old could be expected to parse without difficulty:
Mar 14:61 But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” 62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

[RhinestoneCowboy]

It would seem that your source might have a slight problem with reading comprehension of a passage that even a seven year old could be expected to parse without difficulty:
Mar 14:61 But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” 62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

Yeah, I meant Jesus using the term himself instead of someone else asking/saying it. In Mark 14:61, the title "Christ" is immediately modified by use of the "Son of Man". Oh, and did the Sanhedrin hire stenographers back then? None of the disciples were there so how did the author of Mark receive this information?

[RhinestoneCowboy]

Look, if you're just here to be a snit, you can talk to somebody else. Jesus did not correct Peter for calling Him the Christ. He simply told Peter not to tell anybody. In the other Gospels, Jesus commends Peter for this.

Mark 8:
27 And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am?
28 And they answered, John the Baptist; but some say, Elias; and others, One of the prophets.
29 And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
30 And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.

Do you REALLY believe Jesus would allow Peter to make that proclamation, then not correct him if it was not true?

Jesus doesn't say "yes" or "no". Moreover, he calls Peter "Satan" in 8:33. I'd hardly call that a pat on the back.

[Cow Poke]

Jesus doesn't say "yes" or "no".

In Mark's Gospel. But you REALLY think Jesus would allow Peter to suffer under a false delusion, when Jesus called him out on OTHER matters? That makes on sense whatsoever.

Jesus asks "who do you think I am"
Peter responds "you are the Christ"
Jesus apparently accepts that answer, OR, He allowed Peter to continue believing something that was not true, when Jesus was the one who asked the question.

That's not my Jesus.

[tabibito]

Yeah, I meant Jesus using the term himself instead of someone else asking/saying it. In Mark 14:61, the title "Christ" is immediately modified by use of the "Son of Man". Oh, and did the Sanhedrin hire stenographers back then? None of the disciples were there so how did the author of Mark receive this information?

The Bible records at least one member of the Sanhedrin being a disciple by name, and even if it did not, there would be no way to determine that no disciples were present - the claim either way is based on speculation, as would the claim that a post-resurrection change of heart by some members of the Sanhedrin is impossible. Given that Jesus was present, he certainly had opportunity to report on proceedings - that is not a matter of speculation.
When anyone is asked if he is a given person, the answer "I am" is a definitive claim to being that person. He was asked if he was the Christ, and said that he was. The argument that he did not use the word itself is void: Mark does in fact declare that Jesus claimed to be the messiah.

[Cow Poke]

The Bible records at least one member of the Sanhedrin being a disciple by name, and even if it did not, there would be no way to determine that no disciples were present - the claim either way is based on speculation, as would the claim that a post-resurrection change of heart by some members of the Sanhedrin is impossible. Given that Jesus was present, he certainly had opportunity to report on proceedings - that is not a matter of speculation.
When anyone is asked if he is a given person, the answer "I am" is a definitive claim to being that person. He was asked if he was the Christ, and said that he was. The argument that he did not use the word itself is void: Mark does in fact declare that Jesus claimed to be the messiah.

Yeah!