The Jesus Dynasty / James Tabor

There is an interesting discussion on James Crossley’s Blog, Earliest Christian History that picks up on some of the issues related to the ending of Mark and what evidence it might offer for alternative traditions regarding the empty tomb and resurrection appearances (see my Dec 17th post “The Priority of Mark: Some Important Implications“). I want to take up some of these in future posts, particularly regarding the notion that Paul’s account in 1 Corinthians 15 of the various “resurrection appearances” is “earlier” than Mark, and thus somehow more reliable or historical, as well as what we might imagine to be the case within Mark’s community regarding the notion of the “resurrection” of Jesus–which Mark clearly affirms.

Crossley, in my view, is one of the most fascinating scholars of “Christian origins” around. His latest book, Why Christianity Happened: A Sociohistorical Account of Christian Origins (26-50 CE) [Note please the early dates!) is a “must read” for those of us ever fascinated with new approaches to understanding Jesus, Paul, and the “movement” or “movements” that emerged under their influences. Crossley teaches at the University of Sheffield and studied with Maurice Casey. There is an interesting interview with him by Jim West (featured as Biblioblogs.com “Blogger of the Month”). Crossley’s previous book, Date of Mark’s Gospel offers an alternative early date (40s AD) to the standard dating (65-70 AD), and has stirred a fascinating discussion as to Mark’s relationship to Jesus and Paul.