Hierarchical Clustering of Early Christian Writings

[Peter Kirby]

I recently performed a heirarchical clustering analysis of extant early Christian writings using the data regarding christological titles and self-identifications, which was collected a few years ago:

http://peterkirby.com/a-table-of-christ ... itles.html
http://peterkirby.com/self-identifications.html

Although there are more self-identifications than christological titles in these tables, the christological titles were weighted more heavily, so that christological titles (specifically, the ones in the table) are more likely to split groups than self-identifications.

The christological titles in question are:

Jesus, Christ, Lord, Son, Son of God, Son of Man, Savior, God, Word

The self-identifications are listed in the table linked above.

Hierarchical clustering attempts to minimize the distance between the individual item and the cluster to which it is assigned; here, the distance measure is an average - it considers all the features with respect to all the other items in the cluster (averaging over the number of items already in the cluster). The result is that items very close to each other (few differences) tend to be linked near the bottom of the tree, and so on. A dendrogram illustrates.

(click to see)


If splitting it into three groups (because that seems practical to me), these are the three groups (once the number of groups, k=3, is selected, the assignment to the groups is done according to the dendrogram; this was done in R).

First Group ("Synoptic-Influenced"?)

Gospel of Mark
Gospel of Matthew
Gospel of Luke
Gospel of John
Acts of the Apostles
Epistula Apostolorum
Acts of Peter
Gospel of Philip
Letter of Peter to Philip
Treatise on the Resurrection
Odes of Solomon
Revelation
Acts of John
2 Peter
Polycarp
Ignatius of Antioch
Justin Martyr
Melito of Sardis
Hippolytus of Rome
Tertullian
Clement of Alexandria
Origen
Irenaeus of Lyons

Second Group ("Pauline-Influenced"?)

Paul - 1 Thessalonians
Paul - Galatians
Paul - 1 Corinthians
Paul - 2 Corinthians
Paul - Romans
Paul - Philippians
Paul - Philemon
Paul - 2 Thessalonians
Paul - Colossians
Paul - Ephesians
Paul - 1 Timothy
Paul - 2 Timothy
Paul - Titus
Hebrews
Didache
1 Peter
James
Jude
1 John
2 John
1 Clement
Epistle of Barnabas
2 Clement
Aristides
Martyrdom of Polycarp
Acts of Paul
Acts of Andrew
Apocryphon of James
Coptic Apocalypse of Peter
Acts of Peter and the Twelve
Apocryphon of John
Ascension of Isaiah
Gospel of Truth
Melchizedek
Sibylline Oracles Book VIII
Dialogue of the Savior
Sophia of Jesus Christ
Gospel of Mary
Gospel of Peter
Infancy Gospel of Thomas
Infancy Gospel of James

Third Group ("Independent"?)

Eugnostos the Blessed
Gospel of Thomas
Diognetus
Shepherd of Hermas
Athenagoras of Athens
Theophilus of Antioch
Tatian's Address to the Greeks
Book of Thomas the Contender
Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
First Apocalypse of James
Second Apocalypse of James
Authoritative Teaching
Trimorphic Protennoia
Coptic Apocalypse of Paul
Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs
3 John* (*Very Short*)

Because the data used is limited, one shouldn't be exercised too much over individual assignments of texts that might seem to be different than most of the rest. For example, Odes of Solomon or Revelation (first group) is different than most of the rest, and we can acknowledge that; it just happened to be closer to that group than the other two by the criteria. 3 John is very short and seems more likely to be from a similar setting as its kin, 2 John. Likewise, we might consider the apologists of the third group (Epistle to Diognetus, Athenagoras, Tatian, Theophilus) to be distinct from the rest (mainly a group of NHL documents). We're not looking for perfection or a complete account of things; overall, this division into groups is a relatively blunt tool, given the data used, but still a very useful tool for guiding us in a general fashion.

So, what can we say about these groups? Well, let's look at the in-group proportions for each term.

Group 1 ("Synoptic-Influenced"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
 0.9565217  1.0000000  0.9565217  1.0000000  0.8260870  0.7826087  0.8695652 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
 0.6086957  0.5217391  0.5217391  0.2608696  0.2173913  0.6956522  0.6956522 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
 0.9130435  0.9130435  0.8695652  0.5217391  0.7391304  0.3478261  0.6956522 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
 0.3913043  0.8260870  0.4347826

Group 2 ("Pauline-Influenced"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
0.95121951 0.90243902 0.80487805 0.73170732 0.36585366 0.12195122 0.43902439 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
0.02439024 0.00000000 0.17073171 0.02439024 0.00000000 0.56097561 0.58536585 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
0.63414634 0.51219512 0.80487805 0.48780488 0.36585366 0.32500000 0.51219512 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
0.02439024 0.31707317 0.02439024 

Group 3 ("Independent"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
    0.1875     0.0000     0.3125     0.3750     0.3125     0.1875     0.2500 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
    0.1250     0.1250     0.1875     0.0000     0.0000     0.1250     0.8125 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
    0.5000     0.2500     0.4375     0.1875     0.3125     0.2500     0.2500 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
    0.0625     0.3750     0.0000 

We can thus characterize the groups in this way (by what they have relatively in much greater or lesser proportion than the other two):

Group 1

++ Son of God, Son of Man, Savior, God, Word, Christian, Catholic, Gnostic (other), Believer, Kingdom, Elect, Synagogue, Way, Nazarene
(no --)

Group 2

-- God, Word
(no ++)

Group 3

++ Knowledge
-- Jesus, Christ, Lord, Son, Savior, Gospel, Kingdom, Brother, Saint, Spiritual, Church

We can also notice that, while Group 1 has the most terms, not all of them are with the same frequency. The words "God" and "Word" for example, as applied to Jesus, as well as "Gnostic" and "Catholic," have often been argued to be later developments than the earlier tradition (in the Synoptics themselves).

Traditional scholarly belief is that the development was essentially this:

Group 2 --> Group 1 --> Group 3

Although we'd probably be better off representing it as evolutionary branching (since they did not die):

Code: Select all

---- Group 2 ----------------------> (well, this group may have died out or just transitioned into 1...)
    \
     \-------- Group 1 ------------>
            \
             \------- Group 3------>

On this theory, group 3 has systematically purged itself of many elements of early Christian vocabulary:

Code: Select all

Jesus, Christ, Lord, Son, Savior, Gospel, Kingdom, Brother, Saint, Spiritual, Church

The question, then, which has never received a fully satisfactory and complete answer, is: why? Why these terms? What about them was held in disrepute? One-off attempts have been made to explain the suppression of individual terms ("Christ" for example), but the whole cluster doesn't present any obvious common thread. Nor is any of this commented on in the writings themselves, which are not hostile to the terms so much as they are simply silent on them. There is no need to struggle to provide an elaborate explanation, when the problem is more easily solved by postulating that Group 3 (or a large subset of it) wasn't dependent on Groups 1 & 2 but had their origins in something older.

Regarding Group 2, it's quite possible that they have been largely superseded by Group 1, which seems to have developed from the Synoptic tradition. Eventually Group 1 has elevated Jesus to be "God" and the "Word" and has styled themselves "Catholics," with their enemies the "Gnostics." It can be hypothesized that those who did not merge neatly into the "Catholic" stream (Group 1) got themselves lumped into the "Gnostic" opponents (Group 3).

What is the relationship of Group 3 to Group 2? Did Group 2 start later? There is at least one piece of evidence that Group 2 started later. The text Eugnostos the Blessed belongs to the third group, presenting its beliefs in relatively plain terms. The text Sophia of Jesus Christ has recast the original as a dialogue with "Jesus" the "Christ," and it belongs to the second group. Given this reuse of the document from group 3 in the document from group 2, as well as the greater pileup of terms present in group 2, we can suggest that group 2 was a development out of group 3 (although some elements of group 3 may also be later than some of the earlier texts of group 2).

The same argument that makes Group 3 prior to Group 1 is also in effect relative to Group 2, since Group 2 also has most of these terms frequently.

In summary, then:

Code: Select all

---- Group 3 ----------------------> (becomes the "Gnostic" group)
    \
     \-------- Group 2 ---------| (begins to decline in the mid-2nd century)
            \
             \------- Group 1------> (becomes the "Catholic" group)

This scheme is the most parsimonious way to explain the general development of the christological terms and self-identifications found in these texts, developing as they do in a general direction of few to many (rather than developing and then, again, un-developing). This development can be seen in the church fathers of the late second century (Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian, Origen, Hippolytus) who have accumulated practically all of the terms (yes, they are lengthy, but they do not spurn terms, generally).

That is not to say it's 100% certain -- it is, of course, possible to posit a less parsimonious hypothesis (this is the consensus today).

Individual assessments of the individual texts can help to ensure they are placed correctly in the general stream of tradition and perhaps clarify the picture further (we might find, for example, that some elements of groups 1&2 eventually get adopted by those who subscribed in general to the dominant ideas expressed in group 3, and, if so, this could be determined by further research into the contents of the texts themselves).

The reconstruction is also supported by the evident proximity of Paul to second century Gnostic interpreters, who (according to their opponents) valued the writings of Paul a great deal, apparently because (at least, as intepreted) they did not differ greatly in spirit from their own older traditions.

No doubt this is seen as controversial, but the real question is why the consensus isn't seen as also being something that is controversial. It should be.

[Ben C. Smith]

Very, very interesting.

[Ben C. Smith]

Eugnostos the Blessed ends thus:

But this much is enough. All I have just said to you, I said in the way that you might accept, until the one who need not be taught appears among you, and he will speak all these things to you joyously and in pure knowledge.

And then, as you say, many of the words and concepts of this text are placed on Jesus' lips in the Sophia of Jesus Christ. Expectations of a future revealer (the one who need not be taught) seem to have turned into the manifestation of a present or past revealer (Jesus), perhaps a clean parallel for expectations of a future savior (a messiah figure) seeming to have turned into the manifestation of a present or past savior (also Jesus, at least in Christianity).

[Peter Kirby]

Alternatively:

In summary, then:

Code: Select all

---- Group 3 ----------------------> (becomes the "Gnostic" sects)
    \
     \-------- Group 2 ------------> (becomes the "Marcionite" church)
            \
             \------- Group 1------> (becomes the "Catholic" church)

This helps explain the historical difficulty of placing the "Marcionite" church, which is neither quite like the other "Gnostics" (too liturgical, evangelistic, and church-y) nor quite the same as the "Catholics." Over time (beginning in the second century), all of these groups start to use a Gospel or Gospels, not just Group 1. The difference is that the second century Gnostics and Marcionites interpret the Gospel texts in a way that is compatible with older theology, while Group 1 develops the idea of the incarnation (the idea that "God became man"). Some of the Gnostics also create their own dialogues with "Jesus" that better represent their views.

The popularity of Paul and the Gospels, generally, seems to be reflected in the NHL texts that get classified with Paul or with the Synoptics.

FIgures like Polycarp and Justin, early scions of the Catholics, do seem to emerge out of conflict and rivalry with the Marcionites (a theme explored by Stephan Huller here on this forum on many occasions).

[Peter Kirby]

By the way, in terms of the "mythico-historical" hypothesis, I think "Nazarene" could be considered an element left over from the "historical" branch that merged into the tradition through the Synoptics, where the term first appears. This isn't a new observation, but the fact that the term is almost entirely limited to Group 1 (the "Synoptic"-influenced group) helps to confirm it.

[Peter Kirby]

Eugnostos the Blessed ends thus:

But this much is enough. All I have just said to you, I said in the way that you might accept, until the one who need not be taught appears among you, and he will speak all these things to you joyously and in pure knowledge.

And then, as you say, many of the words and concepts of this text are placed on Jesus' lips in the Sophia of Jesus Christ. Expectations of a future revealer (the one who need not be taught) seem to have turned into the manifestation of a present or past revealer (Jesus), perhaps a clean parallel for expectations of a future savior (a messiah figure) seeming to have turned into the manifestation of a present or past savior (also Jesus, at least in Christianity).

Good point. I would mention the heightened eschatological expectancy of the Pauline epistles. If the decisive arrival is believed to lie in the very near future (the "kingdom"), this could help belief along in terms of a special, limited revelation to the "elect"/"saints"/"brothers" (some of the "Pauline" terms), especially through the apostles (literally, those sent), to prepare the way. These can be read in just such a fashion:

1 Clement 42

The apostles have preached the gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus says the Scripture in a certain place, I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.

1 Corinthians 2:7-13

7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”—10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.

Galatians 1:12

For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 1:1-4, 2:1-4

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. ...

Hebrews 13:7-9

7 Remember your leaders who have spoken to you the word of God; and considering the issue of their conversation, imitate their faith.
8 Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to-day, and to the ages [to come].
9 Be not carried away with various and strange doctrines...

Colossians 1:24-27

24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints. 27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

Ephesians 3

For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles— 2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. 7 Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God's grace, which was given me by the working of his power. 8 To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, 9 and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things, 10 so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. 11 This was according to the eternal purpose that he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord, 12 in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through our faith in him. 13 So I ask you not to lose heart over what I am suffering for you, which is your glory.

Romans 16:25-27 (could be an addition)

Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

Revelation 1:1-2

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw.

1 Peter 1:3-6,10-12

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5 who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. ...
10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

[rakovsky]

Third Group ("Independent"?)

Eugnostos the Blessed
Gospel of Thomas
Diognetus
Shepherd of Hermas
Athenagoras of Athens
Theophilus of Antioch
Tatian's Address to the Greeks
Book of Thomas the Contender
Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
First Apocalypse of James
Second Apocalypse of James
Authoritative Teaching
Trimorphic Protennoia
Coptic Apocalypse of Paul
Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs
3 John* (*Very Short*)

Because the data used is limited, one shouldn't be exercised too much over individual assignments of texts that might seem to be different than most of the rest. For example, Odes of Solomon or Revelation (first group) is different than most of the rest, and we can acknowledge that; it just happened to be closer to that group than the other two by the criteria. 3 John is very short and seems more likely to be from a similar setting as its kin, 2 John. Likewise, we might consider the apologists of the third group (Epistle to Diognetus, Athenagoras, Tatian, Theophilus) to be distinct from the rest (mainly a group of NHL documents). We're not looking for perfection or a complete account of things; overall, this division into groups is a relatively blunt tool, given the data used, but still a very useful tool for guiding us in a general fashion.

So, what can we say about these groups? Well, let's look at the in-group proportions for each term.

Group 1 ("Synoptic-Influenced"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
 0.9565217  1.0000000  0.9565217  1.0000000  0.8260870  0.7826087  0.8695652 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
 0.6086957  0.5217391  0.5217391  0.2608696  0.2173913  0.6956522  0.6956522 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
 0.9130435  0.9130435  0.8695652  0.5217391  0.7391304  0.3478261  0.6956522 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
 0.3913043  0.8260870  0.4347826

Group 2 ("Pauline-Influenced"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
0.95121951 0.90243902 0.80487805 0.73170732 0.36585366 0.12195122 0.43902439 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
0.02439024 0.00000000 0.17073171 0.02439024 0.00000000 0.56097561 0.58536585 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
0.63414634 0.51219512 0.80487805 0.48780488 0.36585366 0.32500000 0.51219512 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
0.02439024 0.31707317 0.02439024 

Group 3 ("Independent"?)

Code: Select all

     Jesus     Christ       Lord        Son Son of God Son of Man     Savior 
    0.1875     0.0000     0.3125     0.3750     0.3125     0.1875     0.2500 
       God       Word  Christian   Catholic    Gnostic     Gospel  Knowledge 
    0.1250     0.1250     0.1875     0.0000     0.0000     0.1250     0.8125 
  Believer    Kingdom    Brother      Saint      Elect  Spiritual     Church 
    0.5000     0.2500     0.4375     0.1875     0.3125     0.2500     0.2500 
 Synagogue        Way   Nazarene 
    0.0625     0.3750     0.0000 

We can thus characterize the groups in this way (by what they have relatively in much greater or lesser proportion than the other two):

Group 1

++ Son of God, Son of Man, Savior, God, Word, Christian, Catholic, Gnostic (other), Believer, Kingdom, Elect, Synagogue, Way, Nazarene
(no --)

Group 2

-- God, Word
(no ++)

Group 3

++ Knowledge
-- Jesus, Christ, Lord, Son, Savior, Gospel, Kingdom, Brother, Saint, Spiritual, Church

We can also notice that, while Group 1 has the most terms, not all of them are with the same frequency. The words "God" and "Word" for example, as applied to Jesus, as well as "Gnostic" and "Catholic," have often been argued to be later developments than the earlier tradition (in the Synoptics themselves).

Traditional scholarly belief is that the development was essentially this:

Group 2 --> Group 1 --> Group 3

Although we'd probably be better off representing it as evolutionary branching (since they did not die):

Code: Select all

---- Group 2 ----------------------> (well, this group may have died out or just transitioned into 1...)
    \
     \-------- Group 1 ------------>
            \
             \------- Group 3------>

On this theory, group 3 has systematically purged itself of many elements of early Christian vocabulary:

Code: Select all

Jesus, Christ, Lord, Son, Savior, Gospel, Kingdom, Brother, Saint, Spiritual, Church

The question, then, which has never received a fully satisfactory and complete answer, is: why? Why these terms? What about them was held in disrepute?

Group 3 has a ton of Gnostic materials like the Cerinthian Apocryphon of James. They easily may have had a heretical idea of Jesus's role theologically.

[Peter Kirby]

The question, then, which has never received a fully satisfactory and complete answer, is: why? Why these terms? What about them was held in disrepute?

Group 3 has a ton of Gnostic materials like the Cerinthian Apocryphon of James. They easily may have had a heretical idea of Jesus's role theologically.

Oh, then perhaps we should all just go home. Irenaeus and his friends said so. Problem solved.

The question, then, which has never received a fully satisfactory and complete answer, is: why? Why these terms? What about them was held in disrepute?

Perhaps it isn't given a fully satisfactory and complete answer because it's too easy for most scholars to engage in reflexive thoughtcrime-stopping behavior, as above.

(In case it isn't clear, saying the totemic words "gnostic" and "heretical" explains nothing. Why is it so in these texts and not other "heretical" "gnostic" texts? Why these terms? What about them was held in disrepute?)

[Ben C. Smith]

By the way, in terms of the "mythico-historical" hypothesis, I think "Nazarene" could be considered an element left over from the "historical" branch that merged into the tradition through the Synoptics, where the term first appears. This isn't a new observation, but the fact that the term is almost entirely limited to Group 1 (the "Synoptic"-influenced group) helps to confirm it.

Yes, I definitely suspect it came in from the historicist side. My educated guess in my OP was that it was the name of a sect with which the historical Jesus was (rightly or wrongly) associated, leading to the retroactive connection with the village of Nazareth (as spin argues). Its virtual absence from your groups 2 and 3 would seem to limit its approach.

I regret not being able to go as far into the idea of pre-Christian gnosticism as I would have liked in that thread, but I suppose there is always time, and I am very glad you started this thread. Many of the ideas from the Nag Hammadi texts would, I think, basically fit as background in under my "mythical Jesus" category, where I wrote, "Wisdom is essentially a revealer (of truth, of the law, of knowledge), but Yahweh, too, could be known as a revealer...," as well as, "The emphasis can shift in the retelling between salvation and revelation (most of our canonical Christian texts seem to emphasize salvation, but an example of an emphasis on revelation may be found in the Shepherd of Hermas, which seems aware of the son of God's sufferings in Parable 5.6.2, but dwells far longer on the son of God revealing things)." Notably, the Shepherd falls into your group 3 (now affectionately dubbed "the heretical group"). The gospel of Thomas also falls into that group, and I wrote, "A text like the gospel of Thomas becomes a collection of sayings from various quarters (Hellenistic Galilean cynics, Christian prophets, possibly even some from the historical Jesus himself) attributed to a Jesus figure whose main attributes stem more from the 'revealer' than from the 'savior' aspect of the deity in the original Jesus cult." Revelation and gnosis can go hand in hand, of course, but there seems to be a multiplicity of revealer figures to choose from (including Adam, Seth, Enoch, and rather many others), not just Jesus.

I may have to adjust my terms a bit, however, to account for the fact that often, I think, revelation itself can be viewed as salvation. My main point was to distinguish what Lady Wisdom does (descend in order to reveal truths before ascending back) from what a dying and rising god(dess) does (descend in order to suffer a death which can be seen as salvific in some way, as when the storm fertility of Ba'al succumbs to drought before reviving and bringing rain, before ascending back).

[Peter Kirby]

By the way, in terms of the "mythico-historical" hypothesis, I think "Nazarene" could be considered an element left over from the "historical" branch that merged into the tradition through the Synoptics, where the term first appears. This isn't a new observation, but the fact that the term is almost entirely limited to Group 1 (the "Synoptic"-influenced group) helps to confirm it.

Yes, I definitely suspect it came in from the historicist side. My educated guess in my OP was that it was the name of a sect with which the historical Jesus was (rightly or wrongly) associated, leading to the retroactive connection with the village of Nazareth (as spin argues).

I have previously presented a kind of mythico-historical take on things. Lots of speculative (or wrong) details therein:

http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=1356

Key Idea:

But, particularly in the context of the world after the First Jewish Revolt and the new sense of danger attending any group speaking about a Christ, Jesus was invented in order to prove, once and for all, that the followers of the true Christ, who have no political aspirations, have nothing at all to do with the messianism of Judas the Galilean.

The OP essentially made "Judas the Galilean" into the original "HJ" on the "historicist" side (or rather, at least, the foil of the Gospel Jesus and the bad guy as "Judas" the betrayer), with his sons James and Simon his disciples (Antiquities 20.5.2 - "The names of those sons were James and Simon, whom Alexander commanded to be crucified"), who were all generally members of the "Nazarenes aka the Galileans aka the Zealots," but there are other possible configurations I am sure.

It becomes very difficult to say what the kernel was on the historical side, once we let go of the connection to Paul. The leeway for different dates and different teaching and even different names all become greater.

The most modest proposal is also possible -- you could have a relatively conventional historical Jesus whose tale just looked ripe for the telling.