What Alternatives Are There to Christianity Being an Ascetic Religion?

[Ben C. Smith]

Here's an OP I wrote about the odd nature of 2 Peter ---

And what does the author follow with directly to those who may not be adequately impressed with his magical Mystery-experience on the mountain? He said, "And we have the sure prophetic word, to which you do well to take heed as to a lamp bringing light in a dark place …." (2 Peter 1:19). The 2 Peter author falls back to the ultimate proof and knowledge of the mysteries of Jesus …… the scriptures.

The author continues his drama, extending the magical Mystery tour with a scene reminiscent of a night-long, mountaintop ritual continuing "…. until that day should dawn and the bringer of light should arise in your own hearts." (2 Peter 1:19). This poetic passage, dripping with flavor of the Mysteries, is an enticement of personal enlightenment. The audience is told they have the rock-solid scriptures that can for now, if heeded, provide a light in the darkness, until that day of their own enlightenment when they too can share in the divine nature ---- when they too become epoptai.

The Greek phosphoros (2 Peter 1:19), meaning light-bringer, was the Greek name for their god of the morning star. His mother was Eos, the dawn, and he was often depicted as a child flying before her carrying a torch. This is another 2 Peter term found nowhere else in the New Testament.

That's a good post. It reminded me of the the mysteries where they refer to Dionysus and the leader of the mysteries as "Morning star".

From Strabo's "Geography" 10. 3. 10:

Now most of the Greeks assigned to Dionysos, Apollon, Hekate (Hecate), the Mousai (Muses),
and above all to Demeter, everything of an orgiastic or Bacchic or choral nature, as well as the mystic element in initiations; and they give the name Iakkhos (Iacchus) not only to Dionysus but also to the leader-in-chief of the mysteries, who is the Daimon of Demeter. And branch-bearing, choral dancing, and initiations are common elements in the worship of these gods.

From Aristophanes' "The Frogs" line 344:

Come, arise, from sleep awaking, come the fiery torches shaking,
O Iacchus! O Iacchus!
Morning Star that shinest nightly.

Which came first, the notion of historical witnesses to Jesus or the notion of mystical witnesses to Jesus? Did 2 Peter know of the "eyewitnesses," say, of Luke 1.1-4 and turn them into mystagogues for the benefit of Greco-Roman people interested in mystery cults? Or did the mystagogues come first and somebody later turned them into historical witnesses? I wrote some time ago (highlighting added):

It seems possible to me that the Transfiguration is a remembrance of Peter's visionary experience; at any rate, this event is associated with Peter in particular in 2 Peter 1.16-18 (along with an anonymous "we"), in the Apocalypse of Peter (along with the Twelve), and of course in the synoptic gospels (along with James and John). And the Transfiguration is sometimes suspected as a resurrection appearance backdated to the career of Jesus in the gospels. The Transfiguration story, along with the desire to turn the visionary Twelve into companions of the historical Jesus, may have been a visionary Peter's gateway into Jesus' life as Simon's alter ego. I think it may be one of a veritable flood of events which originally either postdated the resurrection or had nothing to do with either it or Jesus' life (the walking on water, calming the sea, the miraculous catch of fish, the adoption of Jesus as son of God) which have been pushed back into the ministry so as to fill it out with stories that are not about a band of misfits who tried and failed to instigate some kind of revolutionary Passover mischief. In the version in 2 Peter, the visionaries are called ἐπόπται, which was used in two principal ways, I think. First, it was an epithet for a deity as an overseer; second, however, it was a term for an initiate into various mysteries, as we find, for example, in Plutarch:

Plutarch, Life of Alexander 7.5: 5 It would appear, moreover, that Alexander not only received from his master his ethical and political doctrines, but also participated in those secret and more profound teachings which philosophers designate by the special terms "acroamatic" and "epoptic" ( ἀκροατικὰς καὶ ἐποπτικὰς), and do not impart to many.

Plutarch, Life of Alcibiades 22.3: 3 His impeachment is on record, and runs as follows: "Thessalus, son of Cimon, of the deme Laciadae, impeaches Alcibiades, son of Cleinias, of the deme Scambonidae, for committing crime against the goddesses of Eleusis, Demeter and Cora, by mimicking the mysteries and showing them forth to his companions in his own house, wearing a robe such as the High Priest wears when he shows forth the sacred secrets to the initiates, and calling himself High Priest, Pulytion Torch-bearer, and Theodorus, of the deme Phegaea, Herald, and hailing the rest of his companions as Mystae [μύστας] and Epoptae [ἐπόπτας], contrary to the laws and institutions of the Eumolpidae, Heralds, and Priests of Eleusis."

Now, maybe 2 Peter is taking a page from the gospels and mystifying it, deliberately removing or at least obscuring the notion of eyewitness testimony, which is better conveyed by αὐτόπτης, as we find in Luke and in Herodotus...:

Luke 1.1-4: 1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses [αὐτόπται] and servants of the word, 3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Herodotus, Histories 2.29.1: I was unable to learn anything from anyone else, but this much further I did learn by the most extensive investigation that I could make, going as far as the city of Elephantine as eyewitness [αὐτόπτης], and beyond that by question and hearsay.

...than by ἐπόπτης, and replacing it with mystic sight. Or maybe, just maybe, 2 Peter reflects the starting point for this line of tradition, the visionary imaginings of a mystery cult; and the mystic ἐπόπται were turned into literal αὐτόπται sometime after an historical Jesus came into the picture:

2 Peter 1.16-18: 16 For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses [ἐπόπται] of His majesty. 17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased”— 18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.

The mountain may be literal or it may be figurative. The quote from heaven is from Psalm 2.7. It is not my contention that 2 Peter predates the merging of the cultists with the former seditionists; rather, if I am right, it merely preserves something more original than either the synoptic version or the apocalyptic version of the tale.

[Giuseppe]

When Clement [of Alexandria] uses the word 'gnostic' he does so as a Platonist. He knows that Moses was a 'gnostic.' He knows that prophets can be 'gnostic.' Jesus was 'gnostic.' But he doesn't mean the term to denote a separate 'church' or a movement or a tradition where these gnostics weren't also part of a broader 'church' ...

Clement clearly states that for most of the people faith was all they could hope for ...

I generally agree with this. I think the NT letter 2 Peter provides an example. Forms of the Greek gnosis , in reference to spiritual knowledge, appear five times

robert_j, I should precise that the term "gnostic" I am using is the dualism between the creator/demiurge and a higher god, not merely mystical knowledge. The Catholic saints have mystical revelations all the time, but surely they revere the Creator. My point is that the Gnostic dualism was conceived as a separate Church and a mark of absolute separation from the common Jewish matrix. And it was not a doctrine of only elite.

[Secret Alias]

I should precise that the term "gnostic" I am using is the dualism between the creator/demiurge and a higher god, not merely mystical knowledge

I don't care if you use the term 'gnostic' to mean a mortadella sandwich. What evidence is there that the terminology was used that way in antiquity? Why are so obtuse? Surely it must have occurred to you that how a term was used in antiquity matters. Why is it enough for you to say - "I am going to use it to mean X" - and that's ok? Because some esoteric writer from the nineteenth century took the term 'gnostic' that way isn't good enough. Where is the evidence that a 'gnostic Church' existed? I can give you a good reason why 'gnostic' wasn't used in an exclusive manner. Irenaeus doesn't speak of 'gnostics' but 'false gnostics' implying - in essence - that there were 'orthodox true gnostics.' The Pastoral letter uses the term this way. The report on Carpocrates (preserved better in Epiphanius because he lazily cites directly from Hegesippus at times) speaks of the heretics 'being the first to call themselves (or style themselves) gnostics.' But again this is a reference to a heretic taking over the terminology or specifically identifying the first heretic to take over the Platonic terminology in this way. But again this is the reign of Anicetus. Hardly the basis to a 'gnostic' Church which was separate from the beginning.

[Secret Alias]

And what you fail to recognize (in your latent anti-Semitism) is that kabbalah is 'gnosticism' and the specific kabbalistic term for gnostic - הַמַּשְׂכִּלִים (from Daniel chapter 12) - is used by the Marcosians. What more proof can their be that Christian gnosis developed from Judaism?

[Secret Alias]

Rather than citing a 'bad' Jewish scholar here is FF Bruce:

From the emphasis on “knowledge” in several of the community documents it has been inferred by some students that the maskilim and their pupils pursued a form of gnosticism.

And a dirty Jew Wolfson:

The visual dimension of kabbalistic gnosis is captured by kabbalists' technical designation maskilim, the "enlightened ones," based on Dan. 12:3, "and the enlightened will shine like the splendor of the firmament." The term maskil, the active participle of the verb lehaskil, is applied to the kabbalists in a technical sense, for they have a vision of the divine realities.

And Irenaeus on the Marcosians:

They (the followers of Marcus) maintain that Daniel also set forth the same thing when he begged of the angels explanations of the parables, as being himself ignorant of them. But the angel, hiding from him the great mystery of Bythus, said unto him, "Go thy way quickly, Daniel, for these sayings are closed up until those who have understanding do understand them, and those who are white be made white." Moreover, they vaunt themselves as being the white and the men of good understanding (= ha-maskilim).

The Hebrew for this citation in Daniel:

And he said: 'Go thy way, Daniel; for the words are shut up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall purify themselves, and make themselves white, and be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but they that are wise (הַמַּשְׂכִּלִים = ha-maskilim) shall understand

And Irenaeus adds:

Moreover, they (the Marcosians) vaunt themselves as being the white and the men of good understanding

How can you be so obtuse that when an actual thread which connects Jewish mysticism to Christian mysticism and the concept of the 'gnostic' specifically that you push it to the side merely because you hate Jews and want to invent a 'truer' form of Christianity which has nothing to do with Judaism? You're a complete fucking idiot.

[Secret Alias]

And getting back to the OP the 'gnostic' leaders of the community - Christian or Jewish - follow the pattern established in Daniel 12:

The leaders of this group are the maskilim, "the wise," who impart wisdom to the rabbim, "the many" (umaskile 'am yabinu larabbim Dan 1 1:32-33 cf. hinneh yaskil 'abdi Isa 52:13). This term, "the many," appears to refer to the community or or sect from which the book of Daniel derives, comparable to the Qumran term for the full assembly (e.g. 1QS VI— VII) and perhaps also to usage in the New Testament (see Joachim in the New Testament (see Joachim Jeremias, 1968). (Blenkinsopp p 121)

Again the model is unassailable. Christianity is a Jewish mystical community with a strict structure which happens to have developed a strong interest in asceticism. There are no other models that work.

[Secret Alias]

More from Stone:

The wise teachers or maskilim (D'7">wn) at Qumran, including the Teacher of Righteousness, understand their role to be like 'the wise' in Dan 12:9f. Indeed, they may take as their paradigm Daniel himself, whose gifts of wisdom £yyD, nnan/oocpia) and knowledge enable him to understand sacred writings and interpret (nop/avyxptvetv) them, i.e. to reveal the mystery (NTT Roxb7 /&roxoa, to guavotov).

Obviously this model for 'gnosticism' - my argument connecting Irenaeus's Marcosians to ancient Judaism - has something your theory does not have - EVIDENCE that it existed, EVIDENCE that communities in antiquity functioned this way. The fact that Christian gnosticism understood there to be two gods hardly excludes it from being Jewish. It's only the later Church Fathers (and rabbis) who argued for monarchianistic absolutes as the only definition of orthodoxy. There clearly was an age where Christians and Jews and Samaritans read Deuteronomy/Exodus description of the theophany as necessarily arguing for two powers in heaven. How else could a voice be heard in heaven and a god be standing on the mountain!

[Secret Alias]

And Tal (from Ben Hayyim) notes that the verb שכל in Samaritan Aramaic means essentially "to bring into acquaintance' and thus is a close approximate https://books.google.com/books?id=6K-9C ... ic&f=false

[Secret Alias]

And look at Genesis 3:6 for the ultimate agreement with gnosticism:

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for being brought into wisdom (לְהַשְׂכִּ֔יל), she took some and ate it.

לְהַשְׂכִּ֔יל derives from the verb שכל the root of maskilim (= gnostics). No wonder the heretics championed the serpent in the garden. After all serpent = 358 = messiah.

If you are looking for a model which explains how Christ could be opposed to the Demiurge reread Genesis chapter 3 kabbalistically - that is gnostically. It all develops through gematria. You have an inferior Demiurge, a Christ who opposed him from the beginning. But you have to stop hating the Jews. Impossible for Giuseppe.

[nightshadetwine]

Which came first, the notion of historical witnesses to Jesus or the notion of mystical witnesses to Jesus? Did 2 Peter know of the "eyewitnesses," say, of Luke 1.1-4 and turn them into mystagogues for the benefit of Greco-Roman people interested in mystery cults? Or did the mystagogues come first and somebody later turned them into historical witnesses? I wrote some time ago (highlighting added):

It seems possible to me that the Transfiguration is a remembrance of Peter's visionary experience; at any rate, this event is associated with Peter in particular in 2 Peter 1.16-18 (along with an anonymous "we"), in the Apocalypse of Peter (along with the Twelve), and of course in the synoptic gospels (along with James and John). And the Transfiguration is sometimes suspected as a resurrection appearance backdated to the career of Jesus in the gospels. The Transfiguration story, along with the desire to turn the visionary Twelve into companions of the historical Jesus, may have been a visionary Peter's gateway into Jesus' life as Simon's alter ego. I think it may be one of a veritable flood of events which originally either postdated the resurrection or had nothing to do with either it or Jesus' life (the walking on water, calming the sea, the miraculous catch of fish, the adoption of Jesus as son of God) which have been pushed back into the ministry so as to fill it out with stories that are not about a band of misfits who tried and failed to instigate some kind of revolutionary Passover mischief. In the version in 2 Peter, the visionaries are called ἐπόπται, which was used in two principal ways, I think. First, it was an epithet for a deity as an overseer; second, however, it was a term for an initiate into various mysteries, as we find, for example, in Plutarch:

Plutarch, Life of Alexander 7.5: 5 It would appear, moreover, that Alexander not only received from his master his ethical and political doctrines, but also participated in those secret and more profound teachings which philosophers designate by the special terms "acroamatic" and "epoptic" ( ἀκροατικὰς καὶ ἐποπτικὰς), and do not impart to many.

Plutarch, Life of Alcibiades 22.3: 3 His impeachment is on record, and runs as follows: "Thessalus, son of Cimon, of the deme Laciadae, impeaches Alcibiades, son of Cleinias, of the deme Scambonidae, for committing crime against the goddesses of Eleusis, Demeter and Cora, by mimicking the mysteries and showing them forth to his companions in his own house, wearing a robe such as the High Priest wears when he shows forth the sacred secrets to the initiates, and calling himself High Priest, Pulytion Torch-bearer, and Theodorus, of the deme Phegaea, Herald, and hailing the rest of his companions as Mystae [μύστας] and Epoptae [ἐπόπτας], contrary to the laws and institutions of the Eumolpidae, Heralds, and Priests of Eleusis."

Now, maybe 2 Peter is taking a page from the gospels and mystifying it, deliberately removing or at least obscuring the notion of eyewitness testimony, which is better conveyed by αὐτόπτης, as we find in Luke and in Herodotus...:

Luke 1.1-4: 1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses [αὐτόπται] and servants of the word, 3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Herodotus, Histories 2.29.1: I was unable to learn anything from anyone else, but this much further I did learn by the most extensive investigation that I could make, going as far as the city of Elephantine as eyewitness [αὐτόπτης], and beyond that by question and hearsay.

...than by ἐπόπτης, and replacing it with mystic sight. Or maybe, just maybe, 2 Peter reflects the starting point for this line of tradition, the visionary imaginings of a mystery cult; and the mystic ἐπόπται were turned into literal αὐτόπται sometime after an historical Jesus came into the picture:

2 Peter 1.16-18: 16 For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses [ἐπόπται] of His majesty. 17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased”— 18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.

The mountain may be literal or it may be figurative. The quote from heaven is from Psalm 2.7. It is not my contention that 2 Peter predates the merging of the cultists with the former seditionists; rather, if I am right, it merely preserves something more original than either the synoptic version or the apocalyptic version of the tale.

This is pretty similar to what I think happened. I think after the historical Jesus died(I'm open to the idea of there being no historical Jesus but I just go with the consensus) at least some of his followers or maybe people who weren't his original followers turned him into a savior/mystery god. He was deified sometime after he died, kind of like Antinous and others in the ancient Near East. I think they also started having "visions" of Jesus like they did in the mystery religions. From "Porphyry's Against the Christians: The Literary Remains" By R. Joseph Hoffmann:

...Paul's use of body imagery in his first letter to the Corinthians and the theme of spiritual communion through the incorporation into "the body of Christ"(1 Cor. 12.27f.) is familiar from the language of the Dionysiac mysteries:"Blessed is he who hallows his life in the worship of God, he whom the spirit of God possesseth, who is one with those who belong to the holy body of God"(Euripides, Bacchae 73-75). Pagan critics of the early movement pointed to the fact that Christians addressed Jesus in terms equivalent to those used by the bacchantes(Dionysus' worshipers). Jesus was kyrios(lord) and lysios, redeemer. In the Dionysiac cult, the god redeemed adherents from a world of darkness and death by revealing himself in ecstatic visions and providing glimpses of a world-to-come.

From "Reading Dionysus: Euripides’ Bacchae and the Cultural Contestations of Greeks, Jews, Romans, and Christians" by Courtney Friesen:

Not only does Paul employ language that reflects mystery cults in several places, his Christian community resembles them in various ways.They met in secret or exclusive groups, employed esoteric symbols, and practiced initiations, which involved identification with the god’s suffering and rebirth.

From "An Introduction to the New Testament and the Origins of Christianity" By Delbert Burkett:

Certain Christian rituals show similarities to those of the mystery cults. The initiation ceremonies of the mysteries generally included a ritual purification in water, just as Christianity had an initiation ceremony(baptism) that involved immersion in water. Also like the mysteries, Christian ritual included a sacred meal shared by the worshippers.

From "Exploring the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide to the World of Jesus and the first Christians" By Albert Bell:

Most of the gods associated with mystery cults had some connection with a cycle of death and rebirth or with going into the underworld and coming out alive...The association of grain or vegetation of any type with death and rebirth is not difficult to make. Each year the seed is put into the ground (buried) and comes up again (rebirth,resurrection). This was a familiar symbol to an agrarian society, so familiar that Paul even used it in his discussion of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:35-44.

I think the gospel writers are giving Jesus a "myth" or story that shows him as a savior or divine or they are recording the myths that surrounded his life. Motifs that you find in other savior/hero(historical and mythological) stories were added to his life.

That quote "This is my beloved son with whom I'm well pleased" from 2 Peter that is said during the transfiguration and that is also said in Matthew 3:17 during his baptism is very similar to what you find in the ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. When the deceased/sun god/son of god enters the underworld this is said by the gods:

How happy is Teti[the deceased king/son of god] that his father Geb[a god] is content with him.

The deceased king(identified with the sun god) then goes through the 12 hours of the night in the underworld where he goes through a baptism and a "transfiguration" or "spiritualization" and also a death and resurrection, just like Jesus.