Was already Joshua a result of euhemerization?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Was already Joshua a result of euhemerization?

Post by Giuseppe »

It is a pure and simple fact that this is the only point in all the OT where you can read a crucifixion.
Joshua 10:5-27 - Then the five kings of the Amorites--the kings of Jerusalem, Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon--joined forces. They moved up with all their troops against Gibeon and attacked it...The Lord said to Joshua, "Do not be afraid of them; I have given them into your hand. None of them will be able to withstand you." After an all-night march from Gilgal, Joshua took them by surprise. The Lord threw the enemy into confusion, and defeated them in a great victory...

Now the five kings had fled and hidden in the cave at Makkedah. When Joshua was told that the five kings had been found hidden in the cave at Makkedah, he said, "Roll large rocks up to the mouth of the cave and post some men to guard it. But don't stop! Pursue your enemies and don't let them reach their cities, for the Lord your God has given them into your hand"...So Joshua and the Israelites destroyed them completely...

Then Joshua said, "Open the mouth of the cave and bring those five kings to me." When they had brought the kings to Joshua, he summoned all the men of Israel and said to the army commanders, "Come here and put your feet on the necks of these kings"...Joshua said to them, "...Be strong and courageous. This is what the Lord will do to all the enemies you are going to fight." Then Joshua killed the kings and hung them on five trees until evening. At sunset they took them down from the trees and threw them into the cave where they had been hiding. At the mouth of the cave they placed large rocks.
God sent Joshua in a sacred mission against wicked rulers.

The rulers were deceived by Joshua.

Joshua moved from a place named Gilgal.

There is a crucifixion of the rulers and a rock tomb.

The essential difference is that in the Christian myth Jesus Christ is the one crucified, and not the rulers his killers. And another essential difference is that Gilgal (Golgotha') is the final point and not the starting-point of the Gospel Jesus Christ.

Now, could the biblical author of the passage have cast a crucified-by-rulers Cananite Joshua in a Joshua who-crucified-rulers, in order to put him in the service of the holy cause of YHWH?

What may decide the case is the probability (or less) that Nun (in the name 'Joshua ben Nun') means really Fish, but a particular kind of fish: the Latin anguis (in Hebrew eel)

The god Jahveh says to the serpent, “Thou art cursed above all animals; upon thy belly shalt thou go and dust shalt thou eat”. One is reminded of the jest of Voltaire: “Before the curse, then, the serpent did not crawl! Did it previously have paws?” The embarrassed explanations of theologians well justified his sally. Before the curse the serpent did not crawl, neither did it have paws, because, being an eel or water-serpent, it swam.
(p. 84)


Image

The Naasseni or Serpentists adored Jesus as Serpent. Obviously, they interpreted the Serpent of the Genesis, in one of the most blasphemous reading of Gemesis, as the Gnostic Revealer of Gnosis. The Serpent of the Garden of Eden was a walking animal. God cursed him, we are told, but which was his fate? To become an earthly animal far from the his original habitat (the sea).
The eel (Nun) would now become a serpent (Nahash).
What is the reason for this curse? The water-serpent was cursed because the eel (Nun) was one of the ancient gods of Palestine, whose worship Jahvehism strove to suppress.
As we have seen, Jahveism had several methods for the suppression of rival gods. Sometimes it made them servants of Jahveh, sometimes it anathematized them. In the case of Ieshu, the eel, both methods were used. Ieshu became the patriarch Joshua; the water-serpent was cursed; and finally, to make the god-eating communion impossible, the animal was decreed impure.
(p. 85)

I am remembered about these words of prof Price about the comparison between Prometheus and the Serpent of Genesis:

https://books.google.it/books?id=5VlgCg ... us&f=false

And also Justin compared Jesus to the Serpent.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply