Roger, I found the article interesting, particularly in its reference to the use of Mark for the earliest Jesus followers. Just one question, what evidence is he relying on from the early christian period? (other than the text itself?)
We noted that the original story of Jesus' passion and death on the cross, as it was composed by Mark (14:17-15:49), was not a description of how Jesus died; it was rather a liturgical reliving of the meaning of his crucifixion. It was originally written to be used by the Christian community while they were still part of the synagogue and thus still observing the Passover. In that early Christian adaptation of Jewish worship Jesus was likened to the Paschal lamb of Passover who broke the power of death. That is why Mark's Passion narrative was written in eight three-hour segments. It was a liturgical piece designed to satisfy the demands of a twenty-four-hour vigil service. We also noted that Mark's gospel itself was originally written to be read on the Sabbaths of the liturgical year between Rosh Hashanah and Passover. That is why it suggests that Jesus' public ministry was one year in duration. That was the time span in which his life was liturgically remembered while the followers of Jesus were still involved in the life of the synagogue. The Christian church did not separate itself from the synagogue until at least 58 years after the crucifixion, by which time Mark's Gospel had been around for at least 17 years.
Mary
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov
Which is a critique of his book 'Liberating the Gospels'.
I like a lot of what Spong says, but I'm not sure that he is correct in his assumptions on the New Testament. Who knows at the end of the day... It's interesting none the less, and there might be some truth in it..
Mary
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov