How Much of the Gospel is Actual History

[toejam]

I am merely saying that we can be absolutely certain that all the legalistic discussion passages were literary creations and I notice you haven't approached that argument.

Absolutely certain? That's ridiculous.

If Jesus's followers were idiots and the people at the synagogue at the beginning of the gospel were surprised to see Jesus speak with authority the pattern is connected in early Christianity. Jesus wasn't supposed to be able to develop legal arguments. If he really was this simple Galilean.

Again, why are you assuming the historical Jesus could only have been a simple Galilean? Joseph Smith was just a simple farm boy too apparently. And since when was it impossible for simple Galileans and 19th C farm boys to engage in biblical debates?

If you accept the historical nature of these statements and that people from Nazareth and surrounding areas REALLY knew him and his family then you are boxed in. Sorry, this is really quite straightforward.

Actually, I think you're the one who has boxed himself in with claims that it is "absolutely certain" that a historical Jesus didn't engage in biblical debates. What I take to be historical from the gospels is that the historical Jesus probably engaged in biblical debates. But by no means do I claim that with absolute certainty. I don't know where you're getting your certainty from.

[Secret Alias]

So the only frame of reference that people keep going back to is ... the good ole U S of A! Howdee. Sure I gotcha. If it could happen here it could happen anywhere. Its up to you, New ... Something or other.

For God's sake people, the priestly culture of Israel WAS DIFFERENT that modern secular society. You get the juxtaposition of the ten commandments (which everyone could read and see) and the Torah which was hidden. Right?

[Secret Alias]

I would also say that if you go through Irenaeus's 'new Israel' there was no reference to openly promulgated texts either ... because this was the way it was in the old Israel. Irenaeus stresses uttering the creed, the hearing of the gospel because that's all that was known in antiquity and ancient Jewish culture too. Non-priests weren't studying the Torah ... or the gospel for that matter. Irenaeus's adversary Florinus was ... you guessed it, a Christian priest.

[Secret Alias]

And no we can't be 'absolutely certain' about anything in antiquity. But it is reasonably unlikely given the fact that EVERYONE READING THE GOSPEL in antiquity (every group we know of that is) thought that Jesus was God debating with the Pharisees.

[Secret Alias]

But this is what historicists do to mythicists. They say that it is 'more likely' that Jesus was a historical person because of this or that. They admit that we have to use probability in the big picture. But now when we are examining this obviously artificial textual debate within the big narrative - a debate where an apparent idiotes with idiotai for followers takes on the learned - 'the best explanation' is ... anything but the mythicist one.

[TedM]

And no we can't be 'absolutely certain' about anything in antiquity. But it is reasonably unlikely given the fact that EVERYONE READING THE GOSPEL in antiquity (every group we know of that is) thought that Jesus was God debating with the Pharisees.

I don't understand the point. They think that now too. connect the dots please. What is significant about that 'interpretation' to you as far as determining if it was a historical event? How does that interpretation have anything to do with historicity?

[TedM]

Non-priests weren't studying the Torah

How then would you explain Paul's vast usage of the entire Old Testament?

[Secret Alias]

It's not so clear in American evangelical circles. This idea that Jesus was fully God and fully human isn't as important in the circles that I hang around with (soccer buddies, parents of kids) as it was in earlier times. That Jesus was God debating with the Pharisees wasn't just a thing people 'confessed' or tacitly acknowledged. The way the evangelicals I know approach matters they vaguely accept some notion that Jesus was divine but they don't accept Justin and the rest of the Fathers point that Jesus gave the Ten Commandments to Moses or wrestled with Jacob etc.

And in case people don't get the earlier reference. In every synagogue in the early period there was usually a display of the ten commandments. Jews used to utter the ten commandments during the liturgy before people (= Christian sectarians) argued that only the ten commandments came from God/heaven (= historical context unknown). The idea here is that the ten commandments was all the people knew besides the Shema (and the Shema effectively replaced the ten in the liturgy). R Levi in the Talmud Yerushalmi proposes a kind of Midrash, namely that in the verses of the Shema` one can find the principles of the Ten Commandments.

[II.A] Why do they recite these two passages [Deut. 6:4-9 and Deut. 11:13-21] each day? R. Levi and R. Simon [disputed this question].

R. Simon said, "Because in them we find mention of lying down and rising up [in Deut. 6:7 and Deut. 11:19. These are allusions to the beginning and end of each day when the Shema` is recited]."

[C] R. Levi said. "Because the ten commandments are embodied in the [paragraphs of the Shema` as follows:]

[D] [1] "I am the Lord your God" [Exod. 20:2], [is implied by the phrase], "Hear, O Israel the Lord our God" [Deut. 6:4].

[E] [2] "You shall have no other Gods before me" [Exod. 20:3], [is implied by the phrase], "One Lord" [Deut. 6:4].

[F] [3] "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain" [Exod. 20:7], [is implied by the phrase], "And you shall love the Lord your God" [Deut. 6:5]. [How so?] One who loves the king does not swear falsely in his name.

[G] [4] "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" [Exod. 20:8], [is implied by the phrase], "So that you shall remember [and do all my commandments]" [Num. 15:40].

[H] [Rabbi teaches that the Sabbath is equivalent in importance to all the commandments as follows:] Rabbi says, "[The phrase, `All my commandments,' refers to the commandment [to keep] the Sabbath which is equivalent in weight to all the other commandments of the Torah. As it is written, "And you did make known to them thy holy Sabbath and command them commandments and statutes and laws by Moses thy servant" [Neh. 9:14]. This informs you that it [the Sabbath] is equal in weight to all of the commandments of the Torah."

[5] "Honor your father and your mother [that your days in the land may be long]" [Exod. 20:12], [is implied by the phrase], "That your days and the days of your children may be multiplied" [Deut. 11:21]. [The reference to a long life is an allusion to the reward for honoring one's parents.]

[J] [6] "You shall not murder" [Exod. 20:13], [is implied by the phrase], "And you [shall] perish quickly" [Deut. 11:17]. [This implies that] whoever murders, will be killed.

[K] [7] "You shall not commit adultery" [Exod. 20:14], [is implied by the phrase], "[And remember. . . ] not to follow after your own heart and your own eyes" [Num. 15:39].

[L] [This accords with the following teaching.] Said R. Levi. "The heart and the eyes are the two procurers of sin. As it is written, `My son, give me your heart, and let your eyes observe my ways' [Prov. 23:26. In the verses which follow, Prov. 23:27-35, the harlot is a metaphor for sin.]

[M] Said the Holy One, Blessed be He, "If you give me your heart and your eyes than I shall know that you are mine."

[N] [8] "You shall not steal" [Exod. 20:15], is implied by the phrase], "That you may gather in your grain [and your wine and oil]" [Deut. 11:14]. [Your grain implies that you may gather only yours] and not the grain of your fellow.

[O] [9] "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor" [Exod. 20:16], [is implied by the phrase] "I am the Lord your God" [Num. 15:41]. [This is followed in the liturgy of the blessings of the Shema` by the word "true." Just as God is true, so should a person tell the truth.]

[P] And [in further support of this teaching] it is written, "But the Lord is the true God" [Jer. 10:10].

[Q] What is [another interpretation of the word, `True']? Said R. Abun, "That means he is the living God and King of the Universe." [The word 'mt, true, is an acronym for the Hebrew 'lwhm mlk tmyd, God the everlasting king. [P.M.]]

[R] Said R. Levi, "Said the Holy One blessed be He, `If you bore false witness against your friend, I deem it as if you had borne witness against me, that I did not create the heavens and the earth.'"

[10] "You shall not covet your neighbor's house" [Exod. 20:17], [is implied by the phrase], "And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house" [Deut. 6:9]. [Write them on, "Your house" and not on those of your friend's house [Do not covet your neighbor's house].

But the underlying point dovetails with the ancient ban on uttering the ten commandments because it helped Christians. People recognize I hope that 'Torah' in the Pentateuch narrative (i.e. Moses writing out the Torah) originally referred to only the Ten Commandments. Deuteronomy 33 for instance is not referencing the five books which were only composed later by Ezra, right?

[Secret Alias]

How then would you explain Paul's vast usage of the entire Old Testament?

Well many of the references are obviously later additions. But I am not adverse to Paul being a priest. If legend has John as a priest, why not Paul or whoever or whatever he was originally named?

[Secret Alias]

And Romans 15:16 ἱερουργοῦντα confirms that he was a priest.