What can we say about the Ophites?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:55 am

If the messiah brings a new law he too makes mankind aware of a new good and evil. The messiah is like the serpent.

http://www.13petals.org/twosnakes/
“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: 4357
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:58 am

Secret Alias wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:55 am
If the messiah brings a new law he too makes mankind aware of a new good and evil. The messiah is like the serpent.
Sure that you are not denying the presence of the 'elephant in the room'? The brute fact that the Serpent was enemy of the Creator.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:01 am

To understand Judaism is to admit that it is a mathematical religion.

till Shiloh come [Gen 49.10] = 358 = Yibo Shiloh

winepress = 358 = ληνός

even if Ezra didn't intend it the religion would over time bend toward the dictates of mathematical equivalency
“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

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:08 am

Every early Church Father seized upon ληνός in Isaiah as a messianic "Passion" reference

Who is this that cometh from Edom? in red garments from Bosor? This that is beautiful in apparel, going up with great strength? I speak righteousness, and the judgment of salvation. Why are Thy garments red, and Thine apparel as from the trodden ληνός? Thou art full of the trodden grape. I have trodden the ληνός all alone, and of the people there is no man with Me; and I have trampled them in fury, and crushed them to the ground, and spilled their blood on the earth. For the day of retribution has come upon them, and the year of redemption is present. And I looked, and there was none to help; and I considered, and none assisted: and My arm delivered; and My fury came on them, and I trampled them in My fury, and spilled their blood on the earth.'"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_in_the_winepress
“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

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:13 am

in case I have to spell it out for the retarded, the early Christian interest in the "wine-press" was the same as (presumably) the early Jewish (Christian) interest in the serpent.
“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

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:15 am

I think the difficulty with identifying 'the messiah' with the 'serpent' is paralleled by other difficulties equating the messiah (= 358) with other words that = 358. The winepress for instance. Jesus is the clearly likened to Dionysus the god of the grape and wine. But Christ is the winepress the one who initiates the 'crushing' or 'bleeding' of Jesus. Of course the distinction between 'Jesus' and 'Christ' was smoothed over in the third century. Jesus became the Christ. But as Irenaeus famously noted the Gospel of Mark was read in a manner in which Christ and Jesus were not only two different figures but - tellingly - the gospel was understood to conclude with Christ watching Jesus suffer 'impassably' - "Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified."

To this end it makes perfect sense to see Jesus as the wine but Christ (= 358) as the winepress (= 358) as we see in Tertullian:
In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, "Who is this that cometh from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are thy garments red, and thy raiment as his who cometh from the treading of the full winepress?" The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, "He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes"--in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood.
By the time of Augustine, who wrote in Latin, the gematria was lost perhaps and the 'spiritual meaning' of the winepress was transferred to the 'church.' But I think we can still see the strangeness inherent in likening Christ to a winepress:
let us recall to mind what takes place in these visible winepresses, and see how this takes place spiritually in the Church. The grape hangs on the vines, and the olive on its trees. For it is for these two fruits that presses are usually made ready; and as long as they hang on their boughs, they seem to enjoy free air; and neither is the grape wine, nor the olive oil, before they are pressed. Thus it is with men whom God predestined before the world to be conformed to the image of His only-begotten Son, Romans 8:29 who has been first and especially pressed in His Passion, as the great Cluster. Men of this kind, therefore, before they draw near to the service of God, enjoy in the world a kind of delicious liberty, like hanging grapes or olives: but as it is said, My son, when you draw near to the service of God, stand in judgment and fear, and make your soul ready for temptation: Sirach 2:1 so each, as he draws near to the service of God, finds that he has come to the winepress; he shall undergo tribulation, shall be crushed, shall be pressed, not that he may perish in this world, but that he may flow down into the storehouses of God. He has the coverings of carnal desires stripped off from him, like grape-skins: for this has taken place in him in carnal desires, of which the Apostle speaks, Put ye off the old man, and put on the new man. All this is not done but by pressure: therefore the Churches of God of this time are called winepresses.
What I am suggesting is that in the same way as snake = 358 = messiah leads to strangeness (i.e. likening Christ to the snake) likening Christ to the winepress (against winepress = 358 = messiah) essentially puts Christ in the role of killing Jesus, trampling him into wine, and indeed all of the martyrs that followed him.

But clearly 'the winepress' and the serpent likely made Christ seem a 'hostile' figure in the sense that he caused torment for mankind. Note the art:
The symbolism of grapes-wine-blood is frequently found in early Christian and medieval art ; the Mystic Wine Press further develops the symbolism by depicting Christ treading on grapes or being crushed in a winepress out of which his blood flows. The image is often found in illustrated manuscripts of the *Apocalypse and became very popular in late medieval stained glass. Christ may be shown kneeling before the wine press or standing in it and treading on grapes (the machinery of the press may be shown as an upright *cross behind Christ), or Christ may be shown horizontally, actually squeezed in the press. Vats of his blood may be collected by kneeling and praying figures.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Note Christ is the winepress crushing the grapes which are - paradoxically Jesus or the martyrs that followed him. The paradox that not Jesus is both the Christ who treads and the Jesus who suffers was not there for the first readers of the Gospel of Mark (according to Irenaeus). Jesus suffers while Christ watches impassably and possibly approvingly. Christ wants Jesus to suffer. Thus in a sense his role is perhaps likened to that of the serpent in the garden of Eden.
“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

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:53 am

This is close to the original conception of Christ killing Jesus on the cross:

Gaudentius of Brescia, " The wine of his blood, gathered from the many grapes of the vine planted in him, is pressed out of the winepress of the cross, and of its own power it begins to ferment in the capacious vessels so of those who receive it with faithful heart. "

Perhaps the Greek equation of winepress = 358 = messiah was influenced by the original Hebrew gematria גת winepress = 403 המשחים 'the anointed' (pl) which makes much more sense in the context given the metaphor involves many grapes (so many anointed). It is worth noting that המשחים can also apply to many who were anointed (i.e. the verb 'to anoint' in the plural). So Numbers 3:3 so there is a lot of possibilities here as the backstory. But by the time of Greek speaking Christianity the Greek word for 'winepress' was likened to or equated with Christ, where as originally in the Hebrew the winepress in Isaiah was probably equated with the martyrs or martyrdom of holy prophets or vessels.
Last edited by Secret Alias on Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
“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: 4357
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:05 am


Jesus suffers while Christ watches impassably and possibly approvingly. Christ wants Jesus to suffer. Thus in a sense his role is perhaps likened to that of the serpent in the garden of Eden.

A) The fact that ''Christ wants Jesus to suffer'' doesn't confute the fact that according to the readers of Mark (as per the passage of Irenaeus) the man Jesus was ''a wise man'', the same fact that is explicitly denied by the Ophites, according to Origen in Contra Celsum 6:11.

It is just in virtue of the narrative in Mark (the fact that the man Jesus is a ''wise man'' in Mark, and according to Cerinthus, too) that Ireneus hopes in a future conversion of the separationist Christians to catholicism.

B) the serpent in the garden of Eden wants that Adam will become like God, not that he will suffer. The role of Prometheus for the Serpent is recognized even by Origen.
because he gave good advice to the first human beings, and who go far beyond the Titans and Giants of fable

Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4357
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:08 am

Jesus is a ''wise man'' in Mark:

Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?" Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.

(Mark 10:18)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What can we say about the Ophites?

Post by Secret Alias » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:14 am

I've said this time and time again Giuseppe. Owing to your mental limitations perhaps you can't deal with the reality of the situation you are examining. All your research is just a confused exercise in confirmation bias. There were dozens if not hundreds of these 'interpretations.' You always act as if on the bottom there was one reality which was a mythicist reality - but not only 'mythicism' but your own peculiar (and some would say retarded) brand of mythicism. You act like you've found the proverbial needle in the haystack - over and over again - and all things go back to this mythicist 'needle' at the heart of the proverbial haystack.

There is no 'fact' that Christ wanted anything from Jesus or vice versa. These are all mere 'ideas' or thoughts that came into people's heads. Some might be classified as 'mythicist' some might have been classified as historicist or whatever other distinction you want to make. But what infuriates me with your approach is that you think that you can pull up a text and merely find the part which agrees with your assertion or prejudice and 'that's the truth' - the fact it agrees with your prejudice 'proves' it's the oldest, truest whatever.

But the reality again is that snake or serpent might have been used in many different ways and often not agreeing with other interpretations and vice versa. You can't just make your conclusion from this trash can from antiquity that we've inherited 'whatever agrees with my prejudices is true and I ignore everything else.' This is a stupid - Trumpian - way of proceeding.

The reason that I chosen to focus on gematria is that Irenaeus confirms that this is how the Marcosians proceeded, this actually occurred in ancient Christianity. We know that it occurred in contemporary Judaism, Samaritanism and paganism. The fact that Irenaeus goes out of his way to condemn (the Marcosians?) for changing or flipping back and forth from Hebrew and Greek whenever it suited their desired outcomes (ancient precursors to Giuseppe) means that we can feel confident that this is a good line of research. It might yield results.

But what you never find that your approach had an ancient precursor like this. Sure you plunder and rape ancient texts trying to find something for you to further your prejudices but your actual methodology finds no ancient precursor. That's the limitation.
“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