Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

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: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by Giuseppe »

Could the indifference of Paul about the "so-called Pillars" end allegorized in the late Gospels as the indifference of Jesus about the fate of the Temple,
in both the cases despite of the apparent greatness of the Pillars/Temple?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by Blood »

Ethan wrote: Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:54 pm Christians and Jews believe Phoenicians never existed.
There's a new book by Josephine Quinn called "In Search of the Phoenicians" (Princeton) in which it's argued that there was no nation as such called "Phoenicia." The author asserts that the concept of a Phoenician nation only emerged as a legitimization exercise long after some Levantine sailors had colonized Carthage. Sounds like it could be relevant to the idea of the Biblical authors' conception of ancient Israel.

"The Phoenicians traveled the Mediterranean long before the Greeks and Romans, trading, establishing settlements, and refining the art of navigation. But who these legendary sailors really were has long remained a mystery. In Search of the Phoenicians makes the startling claim that the “Phoenicians” never actually existed. Taking readers from the ancient world to today, this monumental book argues that the notion of these sailors as a coherent people with a shared identity, history, and culture is a product of modern nationalist ideologies―and a notion very much at odds with the ancient sources.

"Josephine Quinn shows how the belief in this historical mirage has blinded us to the compelling identities and communities these people really constructed for themselves in the ancient Mediterranean, based not on ethnicity or nationhood but on cities, family, colonial ties, and religious practices. She traces how the idea of “being Phoenician” first emerged in support of the imperial ambitions of Carthage and then Rome, and only crystallized as a component of modern national identities in contexts as far-flung as Ireland and Lebanon."
“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
Ethan
Posts: 976
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by Ethan »

Then maybe Josephine Quinn shouldn't write a book in a Phoenician derived alphabet.

The Old Testament is PHOENICIAN Literature.
https://vivliothikiagiasmatos.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/joseph-yahuda-hebrew-is-greek.pdf
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by Giuseppe »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:21 am Could the indifference of Paul about the "so-called Pillars" end allegorized in the late Gospels as the indifference of Jesus about the fate of the Temple,
in both the cases despite of the apparent greatness of the Pillars/Temple?
Compare Mark 13:1-4:

13 As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2 “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

Also John, James and Peter were reputed "massive stones" and "magnificent buildings" insofar they were called "the Pillars". So they represent still someway the old temple in opposition to the new Temple (pauline). Just as the Community of Jerusalem will be destroyed and only the communities founded by Paul will survive, so also the old temple will be destroyed and only the new celestial temple (the Body of Christ) will survive.

This raises the suspicion: was the name "The so-called Pillars" an interpolation in Gal 2 insofar who called them so had precisely in mind the Gospel analogy above?

Or vice versa, was the anti-Temple Gospel Jesus only a paulinized Jesus?
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: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by Giuseppe »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:57 am
Giuseppe wrote: Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:21 am Could the indifference of Paul about the "so-called Pillars" end allegorized in the late Gospels as the indifference of Jesus about the fate of the Temple,
in both the cases despite of the apparent greatness of the Pillars/Temple?
Compare Mark 13:1-4:

13 As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2 “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

Also John, James and Peter were reputed "massive stones" and "magnificent buildings" insofar they were called "the Pillars". So they represent still someway the old temple in opposition to the new Temple (pauline). Just as the Community of Jerusalem will be destroyed and only the communities founded by Paul will survive, so also the old temple will be destroyed and only the new celestial temple (the Body of Christ) will survive.

This raises the suspicion: was the name "The so-called Pillars" an interpolation in Gal 2 insofar who called them so had precisely in mind the Gospel analogy above?

Or vice versa, was the anti-Temple Gospel Jesus only a paulinized Jesus?
Was that also the reason why the Pillars had to die persecuted (to the point that even Mark assumes the martyrdom of the sons of Zebedee) ? As living allegories of the old temple (insofar they were called "so-called Pillars"), they had to die by a violent death.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by John2 »

Giuseppe wrote:
... James should have much more interest than a Hegesippus in proclaiming himself as "brother of Jesus" but he didn't so. This is for me evidence that something had changed in the concept of Jesus from the time of 1 Peter, James, Revelation to the time of Hegesippus.
I think James boasting of his relationship to Jesus would go against what he says in 4:10: "Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up," all the more so when you factor in (as I do) that Jesus was considered to be God (or "the Lord") from the get go, like in Revelation or Php. 2:6-11.

In Rev. 1:8 and 20:11-21 it is God who comes down to earth and is the Alpha and the Omega who will judge everyone at the end of time.
I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”
Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children. But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”


But in Rev. 1:12-20 and 22:12-18 it is Jesus (aka the Son of Man) who is and does these things (and who is clearly based on Daniel's divine "one like a son of man"):
I saw seven golden lampstands, and among the lampstands was someone like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.
“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”
So already by at least c. 95 CE (in my view) Jesus and God are one and the same, and I think it goes back to Paul and James as well. As Paul says in Php. 2:5-8:
... have the same mindset as Christ Jesus, who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross!


And I think the Son of Man motif is also in 1 Thess. 4:14-17:
For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

.
I take "the Lord" to be Jesus here, since Paul had just said in 4:2, "For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus," and I think this goes with what he says about the above being "according to the Lord's word."

And we already know from Php. 2 above and 1 Cor. 10:4 that Paul thinks that Jesus was God:
... they [the Israelites] drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
So I think "the Lord" means God and Jesus, so for James to say in 4:12, "There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy," or in 5:8-9 that "the Lord’s coming is near" and "the Judge is standing at the door," I see it as being just as applicable to Jesus as it is in Revelation. As Paul says in Rom. 10:9, "If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

And I not only think that this is the way it was from the beginning, I think this is similar to (if not what is actually being referred to in) the opening column of the Damascus Document, that God had visited Israel and started a messianic sect.
... He visited them, and He caused a root of planting to spring from Israel and Aaron to inherit His Land and to prosper on the good things of His earth. And they perceived their iniquity and recognized that they were guilty men, yet for twenty years they were like blind men groping for the way.


If nothing else, this at least shows that it wouldn't be unusual for pre-70 CE Jews to think that God had visited them. I also think this citation is similar to the motif in Mark of the disciples being like blind men, like in 4:13 and 8:14-21:
Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable?
The disciples had forgotten to bring bread, except for one loaf they had with them in the boat. “Be careful,” Jesus warned them. “Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.” They discussed this with one another and said, “It is because we have no bread.”

Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked them: “Why are you talking about having no bread? Do you still not see or understand? Are your hearts hardened? Do you have eyes but fail to see, and ears but fail to hear? And don’t you remember? When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?”

“Twelve,” they replied.

“And when I broke the seven loaves for the four thousand, how many basketfuls of pieces did you pick up?”

They answered, “Seven.”

He said to them, “Do you still not understand?”
Last edited by John2 on Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by John2 »

Giuseppe wrote:
... something had changed in the concept of Jesus from the time of 1 Peter, James, Revelation to the time of Hegesippus.
But what about Mark? In my view Mark was written by a follower of Peter (like Papias says) c. 70 CE, and while that isn't quite in the time of Peter and James, it is pretty close. And Mark says that Jesus had a brother named James in 6:3:
Isn't this Mary's son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon?
So nothing appears to have changed at least from c. 70 CE to Hegesippus. Jesus was known to have had a brother named James at least since c. 70 CE.
Last edited by John2 on Sat Jul 14, 2018 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by John2 »

Now I'm starting to think that 1 Thess. 4:14-17 could be based on Paul's knowledge of Jesus' sayings in Mk. 8:31-9:1:
He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him ...

"If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels." And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”
Cf. 1 Thess. 4:14-17:
For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.


I was thinking Paul's "according to the Lord's word" meant something Paul had heard in a revelation of the heavenly Jesus, but now I'm wondering if it could be based on a saying like the above by the earthly Jesus. Again, as Paul says prior to this in 1 Thess. 4:1-2:
As for other matters, brothers and sisters, we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by John2 »

This "word of the Lord" in 1 Thess. 4:15 is an interesting subject. According to pages 8 and 9 of Pahl's Discerning the "Word of the Lord": The 'Word of the Lord' in 1 Thessalonians 4:15, my old view was in Schweitzer's "stream" and my new one is in Jeremias' "stream":
... for [Jeremias] Paul viewed this as a saying of the earthly Jesus, quite likely genuine, though quite certainly paraphrased by Paul.

https://books.google.com/books?id=LOHeB ... rd&f=false
He goes on to say on page ten:
... other prominent scholars have demonstrated a more cautious approach. Rudolf Bultmann recognized the 'Palestinian-Jewish tradition' behind the substance of 4:15-17 in terms of the parousia and the resurrection, but stated that ultimately 'it is not certain whether Paul is here quoting a traditionally transmitted saying or whether he is appealing to a revelation accorded him by the exalted Lord.'
I'm comfortable with the idea that 1 Thess. 4:15-17 could be based on a genuine saying of Jesus (like in Mk. 8:31-9:1). While Paul claims to have gotten his gospel (which I take to mean his Torah-free version of the gospel that he preached to Gentiles) from revelations that he "received" from the heavenly Jesus, he appears to have also been aware of what Jewish Christians were preaching (and how could he not?) in 1 Cor. 15:3-11:
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born ... Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.


So I think if Mark (as a follower of Peter) was aware of Jesus' sayings regarding the coming of the Son of Man (and I presume he was), then so could Paul have been, since he claims to have met James and Cephas (who I take to be Peter) in Galatians, and they happen to be the only two Christians he names in 1 Cor. 15 above.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did the pillars claim to be "Brothers of the Lord"?

Post by John2 »

I was re-reading Wilken's The Christians as the Romans Saw Them and noticed something Pliny says at the end of his letter to Trajan about Christians:
For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.
Given that 1 Peter is addressed to Bithynia and Pontus (where Pliny was governor) and Revelation is addressed to churches in Asia and that Jewish Christians did not eat food sacrificed to idols (Rev. 2:14, 20; Acts 15:20, 29; Did. 6:3; I Cor. 8, 10), I think it's interesting that Pliny says "until now very few purchasers could be found" for sacrificial meat. I wonder if this could be proof that Jewish Christianity pre-dates Marcionism, since, if Paul was the original Christian apostle (according to Marcion), and he preached that it was okay to "eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience" (1 Cor. 10:25), then why were so many Christians not purchasing sacrificial meat in Bithynia and Pontus up to Pliny's time (c. 110 CE)? I think it could be because this is what Jewish Christians taught, like the ones Paul says ate "only vegetables" in Rom. 14.

Rev. 2:14 and 20:
There are some among you who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin so that they ate food sacrificed to idols ... You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols.
Did. 6:3:
But concerning meat, bear that which thou art able to do. But keep with care from things sacrificed to idols, for it is the worship of the infernal deities.
Acts 15:20 and 29:
Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols ... You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols ...
1 Cor. 8:1-18:
Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God.

So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.
Pliny:
... from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found.

https://books.google.com/books?id=TbFfh ... at&f=false

http://counterthought.org/food-sacrificed-to-idols/

Cheung writes in Idol Food in Corinth: Jewish Background and Pauline Legacy regarding the Pliny passage:
This passage is very significant in that it is one of the earliest pagan witnesses of the Christian observance of the prohibition of idol food. Moreover, it makes clear that idol food sold in markets -not just idol food in cultic banquets- was generally avoided by Christians in Bithynia and Pontus in Pliny's time, and indeed before Pliny's time, for Pliny was writing about a phenomenon that had existed for a long time (diu).

https://books.google.com/books?id=y22vA ... at&f=false
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply