Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6501
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:15 pm

John2 wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:45 am
Ben, buddy, if you haven't already, when are you going to write a book?
While flattering, the thought is also exhausting. :)
I think you answered your first question with the latter question. If you view Christianity as being a faction of the Fourth Philosophy (as I do), then the reason for its resemblance to later Rabbinic Judaism (and to other Fourth Philosophic factions) with respect messianism is due to all of these groups embracing what Josephus calls Pharisaic notions in Ant. 18.1.6: "These men agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions; but they have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say that God is to be their only Ruler and Lord."
How violent do you take the early Jesus movement to have been? Do you think that Jesus was crucified between two bandits because both he and they were seditionists? What do you make of this passage?

Matthew 11.12: 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence [? βιάζεται], and violent men take it by force [? ἁρπάζουσιν αὐτήν].

Luke 16.16: 16 The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it [εἰς αὐτὴν βιάζεται].

You tend to focus on observance of the law when you discuss the Fourth Philosophy, but what do you make of the more violent tendencies of that movement?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

John2
Posts: 2746
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by John2 » Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:59 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:15 pm

How violent do you take the early Jesus movement to have been? Do you think that Jesus was crucified between two bandits because both he and they were seditionists? What do you make of this passage?

Matthew 11.12: 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence [? βιάζεται], and violent men take it by force [? ἁρπάζουσιν αὐτήν].

Luke 16.16: 16 The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it [εἰς αὐτὴν βιάζεται].

You tend to focus on observance of the law when you discuss the Fourth Philosophy, but what do you make of the more violent tendencies of that movement?


Well, Christian writings themselves tell us how violent some Christians were (however factual you take it is another matter). According to Acts 21 and 23, there were some Christians who stirred up a riot in Jerusalem and tried to kill Paul for teaching against Torah observance and polluting the Temple. That's about as violent as it gets, and while I don't gather Jewish Christian leaders encouraged or approved of their violence, they shared their point of view and attempted to placate them in Acts 21:20-24:

Then they said to Paul, “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. But they are under the impression that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or observe our customs. What then should we do? They will certainly hear that you have come.

Therefore do what we advise you. There are four men with us who have taken a vow. Take these men, purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is no truth to these rumors about you, but that you also live in obedience to the law.



So there was a spectrum of violence within Christianity, as there was within the Fourth Philosophy as a whole (and in the big picture, within Pharisaic Judaism as a whole regarding the degree of participation in or support for the Fourth Philosophy, ala Josephus). And I guess the question boils down to how violent was Jesus, and I suppose his approach to "bringing all to destruction" (as Josephus describes the consequences of the Fourth Philosophy) was relatively moderate but extremely passive aggressive and in keeping with what Josephus says about Fourth Philosophers in Ant. 18.1.6:

They also do not value dying any kinds of death, nor indeed do they heed the deaths of their relations and friends, nor can any such fear make them call any man lord. And since this immovable resolution of theirs is well known to a great many, I shall speak no further about that matter; nor am I afraid that any thing I have said of them should be disbelieved, but rather fear, that what I have said is beneath the resolution they show when they undergo pain.

Mk. 8:31-32 and 14:61-62:

Then he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. He spoke this message quite frankly ...

Again the high priest questioned him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”

I am,” said Jesus, “and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
Show me something built to last.

Giuseppe
Posts: 5791
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:15 am

If Ben is right about Jesus being before son of Joseph and only later made son of David, then I wonder if that modification was part and parcel of a greater process known in this forum as euhemerization:


1) Jesus was euhemerized as a Galilean son of Joseph crucified by Herod under Claudius.


2) Jesus was made davidic, and Jerusalem became the place where Jesus was crucified, not under the authority of Herod: hence, Pilate enters on the scene as collateral effect of the «davidization» of Jesus. Under Tiberius.


3) Luke harmonized the two stories, by inventing the famous ping pong between Pilate and Jesus.


4) Ireneus became fool:

Herod, king of the Jews, and Ponce Pilate, procurator of the emperor Claudius, joining themselves, condamned Jesus to the crucifixion.

(Demonstratio, $ 74, Against the haeres. 2:22/5)



Note that the epistle of Barnaba, where Jesus is son of Joseph and not davidic, ignores Pilate while accuses the Jews of deicide.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6501
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:48 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:15 am
Note that the epistle of Barnaba, where Jesus is son of Joseph and not davidic, ignores Pilate while accuses the Jews of deicide.
Well, he is certainly not the son of David in Barnabas, but the epistle falls short of calling him the son of Joseph, does it not? Chapter 13 is suggestive, but I think the point is that Jesus is "not the son of man, but rather the son of God."

Chapter 13 could surely be an old exegesis designed to pave the way for Messiah ben Ephraim, but in its current use in Barnabas it looks like a purely allegorical way of subjecting the (older) Jews to the (younger) Christians.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Giuseppe
Posts: 5791
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:58 am

I am reading what the mythicst J. K. Watson writes about the passage from ben Joseph to ben David:


in short, Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim i.e. he was son of Joseph.

But then the modification happens in the same Old Testament, when the Joshua of Zecharia was hailed as ANATOLE.

ANATOLE means also sprout, shoot. The reference to the davidic root is automatic.


That passage was decisive: now any tradition about Jesus had to make him davidic.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6501
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Messiah ben Joseph & Galilee; Messiah ben David & Judea.

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Aug 20, 2019 8:05 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:58 am
I am reading what the mythicst J. K. Watson writes about the passage from ben Joseph to ben David:


in short, Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim i.e. he was son of Joseph.
Yes. Everything I have written about Messiah ben Joseph/Ephraim lately has been contingent upon that fact.
But then the modification happens in the same Old Testament, when the Joshua of Zecharia was hailed as ANATOLE.

ANATOLE means also sprout, shoot. The reference to the davidic root is automatic.
Okay, interesting. The Davidic influence was early and strong.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply