Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

The parallel is like this:

God is the form for Moses
Moses is the form for Joshua
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

Detering shouldn't wade into things he doesn't understand.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

Moses is Joshua's superior. And God is Moses's superior. So Joshua is three steps removed from perfection which is why lives to 110 not 120.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Giuseppe »

Secret Alias wrote: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:00 am No Joshua crossed a river not a sea.
this is fallacy of a false difference.

I agree that Moses is probably the archetype for who wrote (in the real History) Joshua 5:1. But did the Perati and Naasseni know this fact? I doubt it.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

So a river is the same thing as a sea? Remind me that next time when I chose between buying a pound of perch and a pound of sea bass.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

The point here is that there is nothing in the description of the Therapeutae that would suggest a contact with Jesus or Joshua. Any arguments to the contrary of this reality - or any argument which claims otherwise - are likely prompted by an overzealous scholar hoping to make that connection.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

Take the example of the Samaritans. Joshua isn't mentioned in the same breath as the Torah. It's just a book, not a holy book.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Giuseppe »

Secret Alias wrote: Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:43 pm The point here is that there is nothing in the description of the Therapeutae that would suggest a contact with Jesus or Joshua. Any arguments to the contrary of this reality - or any argument which claims otherwise - are likely prompted by an overzealous scholar hoping to make that connection.
Detering would agree with you (I think), since his point (I assume) is that just as the Terapeutae adored a biblical crosser (Moses) so the early pre-Christians adored a biblical crosser (Joshua).
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Giuseppe »

Secret Alias wrote: Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:50 pm So a river is the same thing as a sea? Remind me that next time when I chose between buying a pound of perch and a pound of sea bass.
Your fallacy of the false difference is so evident that I find that the same ''river'' becomes a great ''Ocean'' (!) according to the Naasseni:

For where, he says, did they come from:—
O'er ocean's streams they came, and Leuca's cliff,
And by the portals of the sun and land of dreams.
This, he says, is ocean, generation of gods and generation of men ever whirled round by the eddies of water, at one time upwards, at another time downwards. But he says there ensues a generation of men when the ocean flows downwards; but when upwards to the wall and fortress and the cliff of Luecas, a generation of gods takes place. This, he asserts, is that which has been written: I said, You are gods, and all children of the highest; If you hasten to fly out of Egypt, and repair beyond the Red Sea into the wilderness, that is, from earthly intercourse to the Jerusalem above, which is the mother of the living; Galatians 4:26 If, moreover, again you return into Egypt, that is, into earthly intercourse, you shall die as men. For mortal, he says, is every generation below, but immortal that which is begotten above, for it is born of water only, and of spirit, being spiritual, not carnal. But what (is born) below is carnal, that is, he says, what is written. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. John 3:6 This, according to them, is the spiritual generation. This, he says, is the great Jordan (Joshua 3:7-17) which, flowing on (here) below, and preventing the children of Israel from departing out of Egypt— I mean from terrestrial intercourse, for Egypt is with them the body — Jesus drove back, and made it flow upwards.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050105.htm

Note the same function of the ''Ocean'' (for Hermes/Logos), of the ''Red Sea'' (for Moses), of the ''Jordan'' (for Joshua): it separates the inferior (the matter) from the superior (the spiritual realities).


So it cannot be a coincidence: the biblical Joshua was adored just as the Pagan Hermes was adored just as Moses was adored.

Because they crossed the ''sea'' of the death.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Joshua 5:13-15 and Mark 16:8: midrash?

Post by Secret Alias »

Let me get this straight. Your citation proves there is no difference between an ocean and a river? Is that what you are arguing? Is that what level this debate has degenerated into?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply