Marcion and the Man

[Clive]

I am the alpha and omega. How many fishes were there in a net? 666

[outhouse]

[2] The idea that some "Christians" (or whatever) were interpreting the Bible very selectively (without an attempt to save the whole).

This also needs no elaborate proof

.

I think the fact these Hellenist were already perverting Jewish laws and customs is evidence they were divorcing cultural Judaism.

The fact they created new text that teaches different theology shows they had little concern of saving the Jewish text.

Maybe I misunderstand the exact context your after here.

[outhouse]

[3] The idea that Exodus 15 in particular could be read as an indication of a different god, a man of war.

.

Some tough exegesis here.

Fact is, ancient Israelites viewed yahweh as a human form, and a god of war. But your trying to hit a moving target IMHO as the concept of god changed dramatically through the book. BUT 15 on was created at the later dates in all this under Yahweh and monotheism, but it had not stuck in all the communities yet. This text was still fighting polytheism.


The tough part is in this book, you have two gods El the father, and Yahweh the warrior, compiled and redacted into one god over 500 years of traditions that were collected and compiled and redacted involving multiple communities with different beliefs.

Did some view Yahweh as "man of war" yes and no. And context may be lost because it all depended on who you asked. Multiple cultures involved had different definitions here. Just because the ruling class wrote "one way" DOES not mean it even reflects any of the peasants cultures beliefs. Just the ruling class that forced Monotheism on the people.

WE have evidence yahweh was viewed as a human male around 800 BC with is Asherah and a warrior. But again, this represents a Yahwist interpretation.

While in exile these people thought they made a mistake with their polytheistic ways and the yahwist cult grew dramatically. Were talking about a fluid belief.

[Stephan Huller]

Outhouse

you really should read some fucking books by Jews in antiquity before you make your usual 11th grade pronouncements. Read the Mekhilta of R Ishmael on Exodus 15:3 and 20:2. I would post it here but I don't have the time

[Peter Kirby]

On the whole matter of 6 being left out, this has pre-Christian origins in Greek:

The sixth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is the "waw":

Waw (wāw, also vau or vav) is the sixth letter of the Northwest Semitic family of scripts, including Phoenician, Aramaic, Hebrew, Syriac, and Arabic

This is also the third letter of the tetragrammaton (the "W" in "YHWH").

Greek writers (copyists of the LXX) sometimes represented the tetragrammaton as "IΠIΠ" based on the resemblance (iota - pi - iota - pi).

All of this is just a little more substantiation of the idea that "I," iota (the first letter of the sacred name of the Christian god) could have come from the Greek representation of the first and third letter of the sacred name of the Hebrew god.

This name of the Christian god is the "episemon," the one left out or missing, with a value of 6, not just because the name "IHSOUS" has six letters (indeed, this could be reversing cause and effect), and not just because the 6th letter drops out of the Greek alphabet, and not just because the sixth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is the waw, which appears in the tetragrammaton (Greek "IΠIΠ" or "IAW"), and which is represented in Greek with the iota (which is also used for the yod, the first letter of the tetragrammaton). One thinks that there is more than one factor at play, and that the cumulative piling up of the coincidences created a forceful impression on those speculating about these matters.

[Peter Kirby]

800 BC

For whatever reason, you and Bingo are talking about things that are 1000 years distant from the relevant time period here.

[Peter Kirby]

How many fishes were there in a net?

I thought it was 153 (John 21:11).

This is interesting, especially after we've already seen that early Christians were summing from 1 to 8 (minus the 6) and from 1 to 30 (minus the 6 and proceeding by 10s). In other words, we already know that adding up these kinds of sums was important for some early Christians.

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 = 153

That this is a coincidence is not just to be assumed. Of the numbers from 1 to 153, only 17/153 = 11.1% of them represent this kind of sum. More relevantly, given that the large figure, more than a hundred, is given quite precisely, this should most naturally be taken as some level of an indication of numerical significance. Of the numbers from 101 to 200, only 6/100 = 6% of them represent this kind of sum.

http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q ... f-153-fish

Emerton notes that the streams of living water flowing from the temple in Ez 47:9-10, will have fishermen standing along the shore, from En Gedi to En Eglaim. "Gedi" has the numerical value 17, and "Eglaim" has the numerical value 153, and 153 = 1+2+3+4+.....+17. Thus the number represents all the fishermen.

Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so where the river flows everything will live. Fishermen will stand along the shore; from En Gedi to En Eglaim there will be places for spreading nets. The fish will be of many kinds—like the fish of the Mediterranean Sea.

I have verified this. "Gedi" (GDI) is indeed 17, and "Eglaim" (OGLIM) is indeed 153.

Eglaim = Ayin (70) + Gimel (3) + Lamed (30) + Yod (10) + Mem (40)

You can use the calculator here to do your own verifications: https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/Isopsephia.html

The only trouble with using this to identify the background of John 21 is that numerological speculation about 17 & 153 could be independently found in both Ezekiel and John (as Ezekiel's author possibly knew what he was doing here, numerologically). However, the shared context of "fish" and "fishermen" does reduce this possibility to being, practically, nitpicking, and it seems likely that this John 21 passage has been influenced by Ezekiel.

[outhouse]

Outhouse

you really should read some fucking books by Jews in antiquity before you make your usual 11th grade pronouncements. Read the Mekhilta of R Ishmael on Exodus 15:3 and 20:2. I would post it here but I don't have the time

You can take your broken compass arrow and place it up your

Why would I take your worthless LATE biased Mekhilta? And if I wanted credible advise, I would take it from a professor I can trust, not some wayward author who holds a fringe wayward and often unsubstantiated opinion.


Your no one to talk down to me.

[Stephan Huller]

you are such a fucking imbecile. The Mekhilta is LATE? Late compared to what? Dinosaurs?

[Stephan Huller]

Here you go you know nothing imbecile. Here is your 'late text.' I suppose all Christian literature can be discounted because it too is 'late.'

The majority of the traditions it preserves were created during the tannaitic period of early Rabbinic Judaism (approximately 70–200 C.E.), https://books.google.com/books?id=WGxcj ... CE&f=false

The Mekhilta of R Ishmael is even earlier though I think the Mekhilta of R Simon b Yohai is probably not directly from the period.