Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe get off the cross. You are abusive and insultive to others on here and deserve the kind of treatment you receive.

Case in point, you calling everyone who disagrees with your conclusions idiots. How is that indicative of an honest man concerned with truth and critical thinking? Tell this to your idol Carrier. I can guarantee you that he would dismiss it as well.

Also, your claim about Son of the Father is fallacious. Irenaeus writes that this was a marginal Gnostic belief. Yet you try to apply it to the Barabbas episode as a Judaizer attack on Gnostics. Why would Judiazers care, 1) about a marginal interpretation, 2) write the story as Jews demanding the release of Barabbas, and 3) Irenaeus is writing long after the Barabbas episode had been written, meaning whatever interpretation he is reporting is not the original.

It's always the same story with you. Find some obscure and otherwise innocuous passage, extract whatever you can, twist the words and phrases, insert meaning that is not readily apparent into it, then tell others of the "great discovery" you made. You are not an honest man. You have no integrity. You are not worth anyone's time. You are a fool and borderline schizophrenic.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Giuseppe »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:13 am Why would Judiazers care, 1) about a marginal interpretation,
unfortunately for you, the gospel where there is written "I and the Father are one" is not marginal, and the surprise in Irenaeus is to find these same words, "Son of Father', in a context of fugue before the Archons. Just as I find a Son of Father's fugue before Pilate in the gospel. Hence the equivalence, already proved by Doherty, Archons == Pilate. Beyond if there is a pun on Pilate/Pylatis.

Listen, you have already given occasion to Ben for show explicitly his irrational hostility against me, something of which I am partially embarrassed (it is worse than a ban). You and Ben are without the minimal bit of necessary empathy to understand what I am saying about Son of Father in Irenaeus. Therefore give me the last word in this thread and give up to disturb who has the only fault of a different view from you.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Joseph D. L. »

That is a tirade of incoherence and non sequiturs, Giuseppe. How you get from I and the Father are one, to Son of the Father is beyond me. You also ignore that Jesus Christ is also Son of the Father, so how do you ignore him and draw all of the attention onto Barabbas? What's more, and again and again, Barabbas is released...

BY THE JEWS

It is the Jews that demand his release, not Pilate. It is the Jews who are depicted as violent and offensive, so much so that they release a murderer over a man who hasn't done anything. Pilate himself even makes it clear that Barabbas is more deserving of death. So how in the hell is Barabbas a proxy for the Gnostics whom you claim hated YHWH and his messiah? You're operating on inverse logic.

Pilate is not the demiurge, to hell what Doherty has to say. Pilate is the proxy for Paul, the last of the Apostles who accepts him when all others had denied him. This is confirmed, 100%, when the centurion announces that Jesus was the son of God. Both Pilate and the centurion are proxies for Paul. Is Paul then a proxy for the demiurge? No, he isn't.

You're a damned fool Giuseppe. I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, wanted to put everything behind us, but you are impossible, insufferable, and just an all around nasty person. So I will give you the honour of having the last word, and forever and ever, as I'm following Ben's lead.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Giuseppe »

Don't you realize the parody?

"You damned Gnostics, who claim that, by saying the magical formula "I am the Son of Father", can ascend from this world just as your loved Jesus Son of Father (when he abandoned, according to you, the carnal victim on the cross), well, precisely your loved Jesus Son of Father was a damned criminal and terrorist (Barabbas) and, even worse, he was not freed by himself (as you would like), but saved... ...by the Jews themselves, considered by you as his presumed enemies!"

They behave just as you with me. Reducing the views of the interlocutor to absurd. Hence you are doing a parody against me. You are the dark inquisitor, here. I am the light of Reason.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:49 am Don't you realize the parody?
There is no parody. Parody, even back in the Greco-Roman days, was a comedic rhetorical device to emphasize absurdities. There is nothing parodic or absurd in the Barabbas episode.
"You damned Gnostics, who claim that, by saying the magical formula "I am the Son of Father", can ascend from this world just as your loved Jesus Son of Father (when he abandoned, according to you, the carnal victim on the cross), well, precisely your loved Jesus Son of Father was a damned criminal and terrorist (Barabbas) and, even worse, he was not freed by himself (as you would like), but saved... ...by the Jews themselves, considered by you as his presumed enemies!"
What an absurd parody of a rational depiction of what happened.

The Jesus of Gnostic wasn't a terrorist or criminal. Meanwhile, you accused the Gnostics of lambasting Jews for worshiping a terrorist and criminal (YHWH). So if there is a parody, it's the Gnostics parodying the Jews you absolute idiot.
They behave just as you with me. Reducing the views of the interlocutor to absurd. Hence you are doing a parody against me. You are the dark inquisitor, here. I am the light of Reason.
Image
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Giuseppe »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:12 pm The Jesus of Gnostic wasn't a terrorist or criminal.
well: according to the parody addressed against him, he was. Because Barabbas is defined as rebel and killer.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2099
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Charles Wilson »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:38 pm Because Barabbas is defined as rebel and killer.
Once again, you've completely misunderstood the Barabbas story. Once again, the story is found in Josephus and it involves the Parthians, their search for a King and a woman named Thermusa ("Musa" in the Wiki-P article). Once again, She arranges to have the King's sons sent to Rome as pledges and, when the Parthians need one of them back, the Parthian nobility crown Orodes III as King.

It gets worse.

See also: Josephus, Antiquities, 18, 2, 4.

Metaphysics will get you nowhere here.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:38 pm
Joseph D. L. wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 12:12 pm The Jesus of Gnostic wasn't a terrorist or criminal.
well: according to the parody addressed against him, he was. Because Barabbas is defined as rebel and killer.
Are you dizzy from that circular logic, Giuseppe?
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Charles, Barabbas is based on the scapegoat of Leviticus 16:

The Lord spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the Lord and died, 2 and the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat. 3 But in this way Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with a bull from the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. 4 He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. 5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.

6 “Aaron shall offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. 7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel.[a] 9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.

11 “Aaron shall present the bull as a sin offering for himself, and shall make atonement for himself and for his house. He shall kill the bull as a sin offering for himself. 12 And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from the altar before the Lord, and two handfuls of sweet incense beaten small, and he shall bring it inside the veil 13 and put the incense on the fire before the Lord, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is over the testimony, so that he does not die. 14 And he shall take some of the blood of the bull and sprinkle it with his finger on the front of the mercy seat on the east side, and in front of the mercy seat he shall sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times.

15 “Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, sprinkling it over the mercy seat and in front of the mercy seat. 16 Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meeting, which dwells with them in the midst of their uncleannesses. 17 No one may be in the tent of meeting from the time he enters to make atonement in the Holy Place until he comes out and has made atonement for himself and for his house and for all the assembly of Israel. 18 Then he shall go out to the altar that is before the Lord and make atonement for it, and shall take some of the blood of the bull and some of the blood of the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar all around. 19 And he shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with his finger seven times, and cleanse it and consecrate it from the uncleannesses of the people of Israel.

20 “And when he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall present the live goat. 21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins. And he shall put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness. 22 The goat shall bear all their iniquities on itself to a remote area, and he shall let the goat go free in the wilderness.

23 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. 25 And the fat of the sin offering he shall burn on the altar. 26 And he who lets the goat go to Azazel shall wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the camp. 27 And the bull for the sin offering and the goat for the sin offering, whose blood was brought in to make atonement in the Holy Place, shall be carried outside the camp. Their skin and their flesh and their dung shall be burned up with fire. 28 And he who burns them shall wash his clothes and bathe his body in water, and afterward he may come into the camp.

29 “And it shall be a statute to you forever that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict yourselves and shall do no work, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you. 30 For on this day shall atonement be made for you to cleanse you. You shall be clean before the Lord from all your sins. 31 It is a Sabbath of solemn rest to you, and you shall afflict yourselves; it is a statute forever. 32 And the priest who is anointed and consecrated as priest in his father's place shall make atonement, wearing the holy linen garments. 33 He shall make atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make atonement for the tent of meeting and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly. 34 And this shall be a statute forever for you, that atonement may be made for the people of Israel once in the year because of all their sins.” And Aaron[c] did as the Lord commanded Moses.

And this is the source for Barabbas as proved by the Epistle of Barnabas:

Understand, then, you children of gladness, that the good Lord has foreshown all things to us, that we might know to whom we ought for everything to render thanksgiving and praise. If therefore the Son of God, who is Lord [of all things], and who will judge the living and the dead, suffered, that His stroke might give us life, let us believe that the Son of God could not have suffered except for our sakes. Moreover, when fixed to the cross, He had given Him to drink vinegar and gall. Hearken how the priests of the people gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished. What, then, says He in the prophet? And let them eat of the goat which is offered, with fasting, for all their sins. Attend carefully: And let all the priests alone eat the inwards, unwashed with vinegar. Wherefore? Because to me, who am to offer my flesh for the sins of my new people, you are to give gall with vinegar to drink: eat alone, while the people fast and mourn in sackcloth and ashes. [These things were done] that He might show that it was necessary for Him to suffer for them. How, then, ran the commandment? Give your attention. Take two goats of goodly aspect, and similar to each other, and offer them. And let the priest take one as a burnt-offering for sins. And what should they do with the other? Accursed, says He, is the one. Mark how the type of Jesus now comes out. And all of you spit upon it, and pierce it, and encircle its head with scarlet wool, and thus let it be driven into the wilderness. And when all this has been done, he who bears the goat brings it into the desert, and takes the wool off from it, and places that upon a shrub which is called Rachia, of which also we are accustomed to eat the fruits when we find them in the field. Of this kind of shrub alone the fruits are sweet. Why then, again, is this? Give good heed. [You see] one upon the altar, and the other accursed; and why [do you behold] the one that is accursed crowned? Because they shall see Him then in that day having a scarlet robe about his body down to his feet; and they shall say, Is not this He whom we once despised, and pierced, and mocked, and crucified? Truly this is He who then declared Himself to be the Son of God. For how like is He to Him! With a view to this, [He required] the goats to be of goodly aspect, and similar, that, when they see Him then coming, they may be amazed by the likeness of the goat. Behold, then, the type of Jesus who was to suffer. But why is it that they place the wool in the midst of thorns? It is a type of Jesus set before the view of the Church. [They place the wool among thorns], that any one who wishes to bear it away may find it necessary to suffer much, because the thorn is formidable, and thus obtain it only as the result of suffering. Thus also, says He, Those who wish to behold Me, and lay hold of My kingdom, must through tribulation and suffering obtain Me.

Epistle of Barnabas confirms that the source for Barabbas is the scapegoat, and that it was interpreted by the early Christians as the transmigration of the Christ Spirit.

Giuseppe can find no actual Gnostic texts for his theories. We're just expected to believe his particular interpretations of this.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2099
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Evidence that Irenaeus knows the meaning of Barabbas ("Son of Father")

Post by Charles Wilson »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Tue Jul 07, 2020 2:27 pm Charles, Barabbas is based on the scapegoat of Leviticus 16:

[box]Moreover, when fixed to the cross, He had given Him to drink vinegar and gall. Hearken how the priests of the people gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished. What, then, says He in the prophet? And let them eat of the goat which is offered, with fasting, for all their sins. Attend carefully: And let all the priests alone eat the inwards, unwashed with vinegar. [/box]

Epistle of Barnabas confirms that the source for Barabbas is the scapegoat, and that it was interpreted by the early Christians as the transmigration of the Christ Spirit.

Giuseppe can find no actual Gnostic texts for his theories. We're just expected to believe his particular interpretations of this.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/barnabas.html

Joseph D. L. --

I hardly know where to begin (That hasn't stopped me before.)

At this point, I have no reason to doubt your insight in re.: "Barabbas is a coded story based on ______________________." Look at the christianwritings.com Site for possible dates of the E of B. You may be completely correct.

However, what distinguishes your View from Giuseppe's? If it comes down to a choice of Metaphysics, one view is as good as another. So, what recommends your position?

Here's where I come in. I've found a large number of analogous readings of Historical Documents that provide a basis for understanding on what the Christian Movement was founded. I could be right or wrong but the Derivatives have to be found and then explicated correctly.

Examples from your Box above: The vinegar on a sponge on a hyssop stick, given to "Jesus" on the cross:

Suetonius, 12 Caesars, "Vitellius":

"Beginning in this way, he regulated the greater part of his rule wholly according to the advice and whims of the commonest of actors and chariot-drivers, and in particular of his freedman Asiaticus. This fellow had immoral relations with Vitellius in his youth, but later grew weary of him and ran away. When Vitellius came upon him selling posca at Puteoli, he put him in irons, but at once freed him again and made him his favourite..."

Note: What is "Posca"? "The drink of the Legions", a tart mix of vinegar and water with various flavorings. ApologetixR has to explain the Homosexual Motif away PRONTO but the early (Roman) Church, KNOWING the origins, still leaves clues.

Giuseppe's Demi-Urge Musings are the equivalent of a von Daniken in Jerusalem 2000 years ago.
There is a Thread leading from Asiaticus to a coded rewrite that makes the Epistle of Barnabas a plausible explanation after the Transvaluation.

Examples multiply exponentially. "Lamb of God" in GJohn. "You must be born again." "He meant to pass them by..." in early Mark. The Prologue in GJohn finds "Jesus" as a pre-existent god and that changes everything. It is simply not enough to posit a Pauline Metaphysics as Foundational, to be reasoned from.

Luke 19: 39 - 40 (RSV):

[39] And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, "Teacher, rebuke your disciples."
[40] He answered, "I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out."

What does this mean? Where did it come from? If it is a simple "Glorious Story of Jesus" then it is Metaphysics as well. One view is as good as the next. Giuseppe does not realize this.

These people 2000 years ago were smart and it was easy to take a phrase and build an explanation that makes vinegar on a sponge on a hyssop stick into an argument against the Jews and a command to eat goat with vinegar. See Also: Foot Washing. Append the name "Luke" to a particular version of Text and it becomes Veridical, especially against a Marcion.

You're fine, Joseph D. L.. That explanation goes far.
Where did it come from? That's where we are now.

CW
Post Reply