James Tabor: Paul Helped Write Some of the Gospel

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: James Tabor: Paul Helped Write Some of the Gospel

Post by Blood »

The only part that really interested me was this:
The technical term theophagy refers to “eating the body of ones god,” either literally or symbolically, and various researchers have noted examples of the idea in Greek religious traditions in which the deity was symbolically consumed. Although some scholars have tried to locate Paul’s version of the Eucharist within the wider tradition of “sacred banquets” common in Greco-Roman society, his specific language about participating in the spiritual efficacy of Jesus’ sacrificed body and blood by eating the bread and drinking the wine seems to take us into another arena entirely. The closest parallels we have to this kind of idea are found in Greek magical materials form this period. For example, in one of the magical papyri we read of a spell in which one drinks a cup of wine has been ritually consecrated to represent the blood of the god Osiris, in order to participate in the spiritual power of love he had for his consort Isis.[7]

7. See the discussion and references in Morton Smith, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), pp. 217-219. [_]
I'd like to know where specifically this reference to drinking the blood of Osiris is. The cheapest copy of Smith's book is $92.14 on Amazon, so I won't be picking up a copy soon. (I know that Stephan is a major advocate for Smith's theories. I just haven't gotten around to reading his stuff yet.)
Jesus lived as an observant Jew, keeping the Torah or Laws of Moses and teaching others to do the same. Jews were strictly forbidden to consume blood or even to eat meat that had not had the blood properly drained and removed (Lev. 7:26-27). The Jewish followers of Jesus, led by Jesus’ brother James, were quite stringent on this point ... Given this background I think we can conclude that it is inconceivable that Jesus would have had his followers drink a cup of wine, even symbolically, as a representation of his blood, or break bread to represent his body, sacrificed for their sins.
This whole modern conception of the historic Jesus as "an observant Jew, keeping the Torah" does not bode well for the future of Christianity. A Torah-observant Jew would have abhorred Christianity, with its wholesale rape of the Tanakh to make it mean the opposite of what it says. So modern Christians have a choice: either worship the Torah-observant Jewish rabbi and his Bible, which is Judaism, or worship the fake, Catholic/Protestant anti-Jewish Aryan Jesus invented by Gentiles. You can't have both.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp
User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: James Tabor: Paul Helped Write Some of the Gospel

Post by stephan happy huller »

I wholeheartedly agree. These people don't even know what Judaism is. But many Jews go along with it at least superficially because it serves the cause of supporting Israel. But Israelis are split on that approach because of the influence of Jews for Jesus believe it or not
Everyone loves the happy times
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: James Tabor: Paul Helped Write Some of the Gospel

Post by andrewcriddle »

I think this is the spell referred to magical papyri

It''s resemblance to Christian practice is IMO rather small.

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: James Tabor: Paul Helped Write Some of the Gospel

Post by Blood »

Thanks. It could be seen as a kind of crude form of transubstantiation.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp
Post Reply