dating the birth stories?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

The virgin bloodline: Bible, Martyr/Trypho, 1st & 2nd Apology, James Protoevangelium

Post by mlinssen » Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:56 am

First I've looked for 'virgin' as well as 'Mary'. For quick and easy queries I always execute multiple ones, one after another; the second search was within the first, and looking for 'David' and 'Abraham' - please kick me if that is insufficient!

BereanLiteral.TXT:20 But on his having pondered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, you should not be afraid to receive Mary as your wife, for that having been conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.
BereanLiteral.TXT:27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the name of the virgin was Mary.

DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 23. Justin: But if we do not admit this, we shall be liable to fall into foolish opinions, as if it were not the same God who existed in the times of Enoch and all the rest, who neither were circumcised after the flesh, nor observed Sabbaths, nor any other rites, seeing that Moses enjoined such observances; or that God has not wished each race of mankind continually to perform the same righteous actions: to admit which, seems to be ridiculous and absurd. Therefore we must confess that He, who is ever the same, has commanded these and such like institutions on account of sinful men, and we must declare Him to be benevolent, foreknowing, needing nothing, righteous and good. But if this be not so, tell me, sir, what you think of those matters which we are investigating. And when no one responded: Wherefore, Trypho, I will proclaim to you, and to those who wish to become proselytes, the divine message which I heard from that man. Do you see that the elements are not idle, and keep no Sabbaths? Remain as you were born. For if there was no need of circumcision before Abraham, or of the observance of Sabbaths, of feasts and sacrifices, before Moses; no more need is there of them now, after that, according to the will of God, Jesus Christ the Son of God has been born without sin, of a virgin sprung from the stock of Abraham. For when Abraham himself was in uncircumcision, he was justified and blessed by reason of the faith which he reposed in God, as the Scripture tells. Moreover, the Scriptures and the facts themselves compel us to admit that He received circumcision for a sign, and not for righteousness. So that it was justly recorded concerning the people, that the soul which shall not be circumcised on the eighth day shall be cut off from his family. And, furthermore, the inability of the female sex to receive fleshly circumcision, proves that this circumcision has been given for a sign, and not for a work of righteousness. For God has given likewise to women the ability to observe all things which are righteous and virtuous; but we see that the bodily form of the male has been made different from the bodily form of the female; yet we know that neither of them is righteous or unrighteous merely for this cause, but [is considered righteous] by reason of piety and righteousness. 23
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 43. Justin: As, then, circumcision began with Abraham, and the Sabbath and sacrifices and offerings and feasts with Moses, and it has been proved they were enjoined on account of the hardness of your people's heart, so it was necessary, in accordance with the Father's will, that they should have an end in Him who was born of a virgin, of the family of Abraham and tribe of Judah, and of David; in Christ the Son of God, who was proclaimed as about to come to all the world, to be the everlasting law and the everlasting covenant, even as the forementioned prophecies show. And we, who have approached God through Him, have received not carnal, but spiritual circumcision, which Enoch and those like him observed. And we have received it through baptism, since we were sinners, by God's mercy; and all men may equally obtain it. But since the mystery of His birth now demands our attention I shall speak of it. Isaiah then asserted in regard to the generation of Christ, that it could not be declared by man, in words already quoted: 'Who shall declare His generation? For His life is taken from the earth: for the transgressions of my people was He led to death.' Isaiah 53:8 The Spirit of prophecy thus affirmed that the generation of Him who was to die, that we sinful men might be healed by His stripes, was such as could not be declared. Furthermore, that the men who believe in Him may possess the knowledge of the manner in which He came into the world, the Spirit of prophecy by the same Isaiah foretold how it would happen thus: And the Lord spoke again to Ahaz, saying, Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord your God, in the depth, or in the height. And Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord. And Isaiah said, Hear then, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to contend with men, and how do you contend with the Lord? Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and his name shall be called Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, before he knows or prefers the evil, and chooses out the good; for before the child knows good or ill, he rejects evil by choosing out the good. For before the child knows how to call father or mother, he shall receive the power of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria in presence of the king of Assyria. And the land shall be forsaken, which you shall with difficulty endure in consequence of the presence of its two kings. But God shall bring on you, and on your people, and on the house of your father, days which have not yet come upon you since the day in which Ephraim took away from Judah the king of Assyria. Now it is evident to all, that in the race of Abraham according to the flesh no one has been born of a virgin, or is said to have been born [of a virgin], save this our Christ. But since you and your teachers venture to affirm that in the prophecy of Isaiah it is not said, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' but, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son;' and [since] you explain the prophecy as if [it referred] to Hezekiah, who was your king, I shall endeavour to discuss shortly this point in opposition to you, and to show that reference is made to Him who is acknowledged by us as Christ. 43
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 45. Trypho: If I seem to interrupt these matters, which you say must be investigated, yet the question which I mean to put is urgent. Allow me first. Justin: Ask whatever you please, as it occurs to you; and I shall endeavour, after questions and answers, to resume and complete the discourse. Trypho: Tell me, then, shall those who lived according to the law given by Moses, live in the same manner with Jacob, Enoch, and Noah, in the resurrection of the dead, or not? Justin: When I quoted, sir, the words spoken by Ezekiel, that 'even if Noah and Daniel and Jacob were to beg sons and daughters, the request would not be granted them,' but that each one, that is to say, shall be saved by his own righteousness, I said also, that those who regulated their lives by the law of Moses would in like manner be saved. For what in the law of Moses is naturally good, and pious, and righteous, and has been prescribed to be done by those who obey it; and what was appointed to be performed by reason of the hardness of the people's hearts; was similarly recorded, and done also by those who were under the law. Since those who did that which is universally, naturally, and eternally good are pleasing to God, they shall be saved through this Christ in the resurrection equally with those righteous men who were before them, namely Noah, and Enoch, and Jacob, and whoever else there be, along with those who have known this Christ, Son of God, who was before the morning star and the moon, and submitted to become incarnate, and be born of this virgin of the family of David, in order that, by this dispensation, the serpent that sinned from the beginning, and the angels like him, may be destroyed, and that death may be contemned, and for ever quit, at the second coming of the Christ Himself, those who believe in Him and live acceptably — and be no more: when some are sent to be punished unceasingly into judgment and condemnation of fire; but others shall exist in freedom from suffering, from corruption, and from grief, and in immortality. 45
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 57. Trypho: (When I was silent.) That Scripture compels us to admit this, is manifest; but there is a matter about which we are deservedly at a loss— namely, about what was said to the effect that [the Lord] ate what was prepared and placed before him by Abraham; and you would admit this. Justin: It is written that they ate; and if we believe that it is said the three ate, and not the two alone— who were really angels, and are nourished in the heavens, as is evident to us, even though they are not nourished by food similar to that which mortals use—(for, concerning the sustenance of manna which supported your fathers in the desert, Scripture speaks thus, that they ate angels' food): [if we believe that three ate], then I would say that the Scripture which affirms they ate bears the same meaning as when we would say about fire that it has devoured all things; yet it is not certainly understood that they ate, masticating with teeth and jaws. So that not even here should we be at a loss about anything, if we are acquainted even slightly with figurative modes of expression, and able to rise above them. Trypho: It is possible that [the question] about the mode of eating may be thus explained: [the mode, that is to say,] in which it is written, they took and ate what had been prepared by Abraham: so that you may now proceed to explain to us how this God who appeared to Abraham, and is minister to God the Maker of all things, being born of the virgin, became man, of like passions with all, as you said previously. Justin: Permit me first, Trypho, to collect some other proofs on this head, so that you, by the large number of them, may be persuaded of [the truth of] it, and thereafter I shall explain what you ask. Trypho: Do as seems good to you; for I shall be thoroughly pleased. 57
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 63. Trypho: This point has been proved to me forcibly, and by many arguments, my friend. It remains, then, to prove that He submitted to become man by the virgin, according to the will of His Father; and to be crucified, and to die. Prove also clearly, that after this He rose again and ascended to heaven. Justin: This, too, has been already demonstrated by me in the previously quoted words of the prophecies, my friends; which, by recalling and expounding for your sakes, I shall endeavour to lead you to agree with me also about this matter. The passage, then, which Isaiah records, 'Who shall declare His generation? For His life is taken away from the earth,' Isaiah 53:8— does it not appear to you to refer to One who, not having descent from men, was said to be delivered over to death by God for the transgressions of the people?— of whose blood, Moses (as I mentioned before), when speaking in parable, said, that He would wash His garments in the blood of the grape; since His blood did not spring from the seed of man, but from the will of God. And then, what is said by David, 'In the splendours of Your holiness have I begotten You from the womb, before the morning star. The Lord has sworn, and will not repent, You are a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek,' — does this not declare to you that [He was] from of old, and that the God and Father of all things intended Him to be begotten by a human womb? And speaking in other words, which also have been already quoted, [he says]: 'Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of rectitude is the sceptre of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness, and have hated iniquity: therefore God, even your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows. [He has anointed You] with myrrh, and oil, and cassia from Your garments, from the ivory palaces, whereby they made You glad. King's daughters are in Your honour. The queen stood at Your right hand, clad in garments embroidered with gold. Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline your ear, and forget your people and the house of your father; and the King shall desire your beauty: because he is your Lord, and you shall worship Him.' Therefore these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by Him who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ. Moreover, that the word of God speaks to those who believe in Him as being one soul, and one synagogue, and one church, as to a daughter; that it thus addresses the church which has sprung from His name and partakes of His name (for we are all called Christians), is distinctly proclaimed in like manner in the following words, which teach us also to forget [our] old ancestral customs, when they speak thus: 'Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline your ear; forget your people and the house of your father, and the King shall desire your beauty: because He is your Lord, and you shall worship Him.' 63
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 66. And I, resuming the discourse where I had left off at a previous stage, when proving that He was born of a virgin, and that His birth of a virgin had been predicted by Isaiah, quoted again the same prophecy. It is as follows: And the Lord spoke again to Ahaz, saying, Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord your God, in the depth or in the height. And Ahaz said I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord. And Isaiah said, Hear then, O house of David; Is it no small thing for you to contend with men? And how do you contend with the Lord? Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign; Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat; before he knows or prefers the evil he will choose out the good. For before the child knows ill or good, he rejects evil by choosing out the good. For before the child knows how to call father or mother, he shall receive the power of Damascus, and the spoil of Samaria, in presence of the king of Assyria. And the land shall be forsaken, which you shall with difficulty endure in consequence of the presence of its two kings. But God shall bring on you, and on your people, and on the house of your father, days which have not yet come upon you since the day in which Ephraim took away from Judah the king of Assyria. Justin: Now it is evident to all, that in the race of Abraham according to the flesh no one has been born of a virgin, or is said to have been born [of a virgin], save this our Christ. 66
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 68. Trypho: You endeavour to prove an incredible and nearly impossible thing; [namely], that God endured to be born and become man. Justin: If I undertook to prove this by doctrines or arguments of man, you should not bear with me. But if I quote frequently Scriptures, and so many of them, referring to this point, and ask you to comprehend them, you are hard-hearted in the recognition of the mind and will of God. But if you wish to remain for ever so, I would not be injured at all; and for ever retaining the same [opinions] which I had before I met with you, I shall leave you. Trypho: Look, my friend, you made yourself master of these [truths] with much labour and toil. And we accordingly must diligently scrutinize all that we meet with, in order to give our assent to those things which the Scriptures compel us [to believe]. Justin: I do not ask you not to strive earnestly by all means, in making an investigation of the matters inquired into; but , when you have nothing to say, not to contradict those things which you said you had admitted. Trypho: So we shall endeavour to do. Justin: In addition to the questions I have just now put to you, I wish to put more: for by means of these questions I shall strive to bring the discourse to a speedy termination. Trypho: Ask the questions. Justin: Do you think that any other one is said to be worthy of worship and called Lord and God in the Scriptures, except the Maker of all, and Christ, who by so many Scriptures was proved to you to have become man? Trypho: How can we admit this, when we have instituted so great an inquiry as to whether there is any other than the Father alone? Justin: I must ask you this also, that I may know whether or not you are of a different opinion from that which you admitted some time ago. Trypho: It is not, sir. Justin: Since you certainly admit these things, and since Scripture says, 'Who shall declare His generation?' ought you not now to suppose that He is not the seed of a human race? Trypho: How then does the Word say to David, that out of his loins God shall take to Himself a Son, and shall establish His kingdom, and shall set Him on the throne of His glory? Justin: Trypho, if the prophecy which Isaiah uttered, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' is said not to the house of David, but to another house of the twelve tribes, perhaps the matter would have some difficulty; but since this prophecy refers to the house of David, Isaiah has explained how that which was spoken by God to David in mystery would take place. But perhaps you are not aware of this, my friends, that there were many sayings written obscurely, or parabolically, or mysteriously, and symbolic actions, which the prophets who lived after the persons who said or did them expounded. Trypho: Assuredly. Justin: If therefore, I shall show that this prophecy of Isaiah refers to our Christ, and not to Hezekiah, as you say, shall I not in this matter, too, compel you not to believe your teachers, who venture to assert that the explanation which your seventy elders that were with Ptolemy the king of the Egyptians gave, is untrue in certain respects? For some statements in the Scriptures, which appear explicitly to convict them of a foolish and vain opinion, these they venture to assert have not been so written. But other statements, which they fancy they can distort and harmonize with human actions, these, they say, refer not to this Jesus Christ of ours, but to him of whom they are pleased to explain them. Thus, for instance, they have taught you that this Scripture which we are now discussing refers to Hezekiah, in which, as I promised, I shall show they are wrong. And since they are compelled, they agree that some Scriptures which we mention to them, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and [to be called] God, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ, but they venture to assert that this man is not Christ. But they admit that He will come to suffer, and to reign, and to be worshipped, and to be God; and this opinion I shall in like manner show to be ridiculous and silly. But since I am pressed to answer first to what was said by you in jest, I shall make answer to it, and shall afterwards give replies to what follows." 68
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 75. Justin: Moreover, in the book of Exodus we have also perceived that the name of God Himself which, He says, was not revealed to Abraham or to Jacob, was Jesus, and was declared mysteriously through Moses. Thus it is written: 'And the Lord spoke to Moses, Say to this people, Behold, I send My angel before your face, to keep you in the way, to bring you into the land which I have prepared for you. Give heed to Him, and obey Him; do not disobey Him. For He will not draw back from you; for My name is in Him.' Exodus 23:20-21 Now understand that He who led your fathers into the land is called by this name Jesus, and first called Auses Numbers 13:16. (Oshea). For if you shall understand this, you shall likewise perceive that the name of Him who said to Moses, 'for My name is in Him,' was Jesus. For, indeed, He was also called Israel, and Jacob's name was changed to this also. Now Isaiah shows that those prophets who are sent to publish tidings from God are called His angels and apostles. For Isaiah says in a certain place, 'Send me.' Isaiah 6:8 And that the prophet whose name was changed, Jesus [Joshua], was strong and great, is manifest to all. If, then, we know that God revealed Himself in so many forms to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, how are we at a loss, and do not believe that, according to the will of the Father of all things, it was possible for Him to be born man of the virgin, especially after we have such Scriptures, from which it can be clearly seen that He became so according to the will of the Father? 75
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 84. Justin: Moreover, the prophecy, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,' was uttered respecting Him. For if He to whom Isaiah referred was not to be begotten of a virgin, of whom did the Holy Spirit declare, 'Behold, the Lord Himself shall give us a sign: behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son?' For if He also were to be begotten of sexual intercourse, like all other first-born sons, why did God say that He would give a sign which is not common to all the first-born sons? But that which is truly a sign, and which was to be made trustworthy to mankind — namely, that the first-begotten of all creation should become incarnate by the virgin's womb, and be a child — this he anticipated by the Spirit of prophecy, and predicted it, as I have repeated to you, in various ways; in order that, when the event should take place, it might be known as the operation of the power and will of the Maker of all things; just as Eve was made from one of Adam's ribs, and as all living beings were created in the beginning by the word of God. But you in these matters venture to pervert the expositions which your elders that were with Ptolemy king of Egypt gave forth, since you assert that the Scripture is not so as they have expounded it, but says, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive,' as if great events were to be inferred if a woman should beget from sexual intercourse: which indeed all young women, with the exception of the barren, do; but even these, God, if He wills, is able to cause [to bear]. For Samuel's mother, who was barren, brought forth by the will of God; and so also the wife of the holy patriarch Abraham; and Elisabeth, who bore John the Baptist, and other such. So that you must not suppose that it is impossible for God to do anything He wills. And especially when it was predicted that this would take place, do not venture to pervert or misinterpret the prophecies, since you will injure yourselves alone, and will not harm God. 84
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 85. Justin: Moreover, some of you venture to expound the prophecy which runs, 'Lift up your gates, you rulers; and be lifted up, you everlasting doors, that the King of glory may enter,' as if it referred likewise to Hezekiah, and others of you [expound it] of Solomon; but neither to the latter nor to the former, nor, in short, to any of your kings, can it be proved to have reference, but to this our Christ alone, who appeared without comeliness, and inglorious, as Isaiah and David and all the Scriptures said; who is the Lord of hosts, by the will of the Father who conferred on Him [the dignity]; who also rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven, as the Psalm and the other Scriptures manifested when they announced Him to be Lord of hosts; and of this you may, if you will, easily be persuaded by the occurrences which take place before your eyes. For every demon, when exorcised in the name of this very Son of God— who is the First-born of every creature, who became man by the virgin, who suffered, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate by your nation, who died, who rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven — is overcome and subdued. But though you exorcise any demon in the name of any of those who were among you— either kings, or righteous men, or prophets, or patriarchs — it will not be subject to you. But if any of you exorcise it in [the name of] the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, it will perhaps be subject to you. Now assuredly your exorcists, I have said, make use of craft when they exorcise, even as the Gentiles do, and employ fumigations and incantations. But that they are angels and powers whom the word of prophecy by David [commands] to lift up the gates, that He who rose from the dead, Jesus Christ, the Lord of hosts, according to the will of the Father, might enter, the word of David has likewise showed; which I shall again recall to your attention for the sake of those who were not with us yesterday, for whose benefit, moreover, I sum up many things I said yesterday. And now, if I say this to you, although I have repeated it many times, I know that it is not absurd so to do. For it is a ridiculous thing to see the sun, and the moon, and the other stars, continually keeping the same course, and bringing round the different seasons; and to see the computer who may be asked how many are twice two, because he has frequently said that they are four, not ceasing to say again that they are four; and equally so other things, which are confidently admitted, to be continually mentioned and admitted in like manner; yet that he who founds his discourse on the prophetic Scriptures should leave them and abstain from constantly referring to the same Scriptures, because it is thought he can bring forth something better than Scripture. The passage, then, by which I proved that God reveals that there are both angels and hosts in heaven is this: 'Praise the Lord from the heavens: praise Him in the highest. Praise Him, all His angels: praise Him, all His hosts.' Mnaseas (one of those who had come with them on the second day): We are greatly pleased that you undertake to repeat the same things on our account. Justin: Listen, my friends, to the Scripture which induces me to act thus. Jesus commanded [us] to love even [our] enemies, as was predicted by Isaiah in many passages, in which also is contained the mystery of our own regeneration, as well, in fact, as the regeneration of all who expect that Christ will appear in Jerusalem, and by their works endeavour earnestly to please Him. These are the words spoken by Isaiah: 'Hear the word of the Lord, you that tremble at His word. Say, our brethren, to them that hate you and detest you, that the name of the Lord has been glorified. He has appeared to your joy, and they shall be ashamed. A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the Lord who renders recompense to the proud. Before she that travailed brought forth, and before the pains of labour came, she brought forth a male child. Who has heard such a thing? And who has seen such a thing? Has the earth brought forth in one day? And has she produced a nation at once? For Zion has travailed and borne her children. But I have given such an expectation even to her that does not bring forth, said the Lord. Behold, I have made her that begets, and her that is barren, says the Lord. Rejoice, O Jerusalem, and hold a joyous assembly, all you that love her. Be glad, all you that mourn for her, that you may nurse and be filled with the breast of her consolation, that having suck you may be delighted with the entrance of His glory.' Isaiah 66:5-11 85
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 87. Trypho: Do not now suppose that I am endeavouring, by asking what I do ask, to overturn the statements you have made; but I wish to receive information respecting those very points about which I now inquire. Tell me, then, how, when the Scripture asserts by Isaiah, 'There shall come forth a rod from the root of Jesse; and a flower shall grow up from the root of Jesse; and the Spirit of God shall rest upon Him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and piety: and the spirit of the fear of the Lord shall fill Him:' (now you admitted to me that this referred to Christ, and you maintain Him to be pre-existent God, and having become incarnate by God's will, to be born man by the virgin:) how He can be demonstrated to have been pre-existent, who is filled with the powers of the Holy Ghost, which the Scripture by Isaiah enumerates, as if He were in lack of them? Justin: You have inquired most discreetly and most prudently, for truly there does seem to be a difficulty; but listen to what I say, that you may perceive the reason of this also. The Scripture says that these enumerated powers of the Spirit have come on Him, not because He stood in need of them, but because they would rest in Him, i.e., would find their accomplishment in Him, so that there would be no more prophets in your nation after the ancient custom: and this fact you plainly perceive. For after Him no prophet has arisen among you. Now, that [you may know that] your prophets, each receiving some one or two powers from God, did and spoke the things which we have learned from the Scriptures, attend to the following remarks of mine. Solomon possessed the spirit of wisdom, Daniel that of understanding and counsel, Moses that of might and piety, Elijah that of fear, and Isaiah that of knowledge; and so with the others: each possessed one power, or one joined alternately with another; also Jeremiah, and the twelve [prophets], and David, and, in short, the rest who existed among you. Accordingly He rested, i.e., ceased, when He came, after whom, in the times of this dispensation wrought out by Him among men, it was requisite that such gifts should cease from you; and having received their rest in Him, should again, as had been predicted, become gifts which, from the grace of His Spirit's power, He imparts to those who believe in Him, according as He deems each man worthy thereof. I have already said, and do again say, that it had been prophesied that this would be done by Him after His ascension to heaven. It is accordingly said, 'He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, He gave gifts unto the sons of men.' And again, in another prophecy it is said: 'And it shall come to pass after this, I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh, and on My servants, and on My handmaids, and they shall prophesy.' 87
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 100. Justin: Then what follows 'But You, the praise of Israel, inhabit the holy place' declared that He is to do something worthy of praise and wonderment, being about to rise again from the dead on the third day after the crucifixion; and this He has obtained from the Father. For I have showed already that Christ is called both Jacob and Israel; and I have proved that it is not in the blessing of Joseph and Judah alone that what relates to Him was proclaimed mysteriously, but also in the Gospel it is written that He said: 'All things are delivered unto me by My Father.' and, 'No man knows the Father but the Son; nor the Son but the Father, and they to whom the Son will reveal Him.' Matthew 11:27 Accordingly He revealed to us all that we have perceived by His grace out of the Scriptures, so that we know Him to be the first-begotten of God, and to be before all creatures; likewise to be the Son of the patriarchs, since He assumed flesh by the virgin of their family, and submitted to become a man without comeliness, dishonoured, and subject to suffering. Hence, also, among His words He said, when He was discoursing about His future sufferings: 'The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the Pharisees and Scribes, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again.' Matthew 16:21 He said then that He was the Son of man, either because of His birth by the virgin, who was, as I said, of the family of David and Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham; or because Adam was the father both of Himself and of those who have been first enumerated from whom Mary derives her descent. For we know that the fathers of women are the fathers likewise of those children whom their daughters bear. For [Christ] called one of His disciples— previously known by the name of Simon — Peter; since he recognised Him to be Christ the Son of God, by the revelation of His Father: and since we find it recorded in the memoirs of His apostles that He is the Son of God, and since we call Him the Son, we have understood that He proceeded before all creatures from the Father by His power and will (for He is addressed in the writings of the prophets in one way or another as Wisdom, and the Day, and the East, and a Sword, and a Stone, and a Rod, and Jacob, and Israel); and that He became man by the virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to your word.' Luke 1:38 And by her has He been born, to whom we have proved so many Scriptures refer, and by whom God destroys both the serpent and those angels and men who are like him; but works deliverance from death to those who repent of their wickedness and believe upon Him.
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 113. Justin: What I mean is this. Jesus (Joshua), as I have now frequently remarked, who was called Oshea, when he was sent to spy out the land of Canaan, was named by Moses Jesus (Joshua). Why he did this you neither ask, nor are at a loss about it, nor make strict inquiries. Therefore Christ has escaped your notice; and though you read, you understand not; and even now, though you hear that Jesus is our Christ, you consider not that the name was bestowed on Him not purposelessly nor by chance. But you make a theological discussion as to why one 'a ' was added to Abraham's first name; and as to why one '? ' was added to Sarah's name, you use similar high-sounding disputations. But why do you not similarly investigate the reason why the name of Oshea the son of Nave (Nun), which his father gave him, was changed to Jesus (Joshua)? But since not only was his name altered, but he was also appointed successor to Moses, being the only one of his contemporaries who came out from Egypt, he led the surviving people into the Holy Land; and as he, not Moses, led the people into the Holy Land, and as he distributed it by lot to those who entered along with him, so also Jesus the Christ will turn again the dispersion of the people, and will distribute the good land to each one, though not in the same manner. For the former gave them a temporary inheritance, seeing he was neither Christ who is God, nor the Son of God; but the latter, after the holy resurrection, shall give us the eternal possession. The former, after he had been named Jesus (Joshua), and after he had received strength from His Spirit, caused the sun to stand still. For I have proved that it was Jesus who appeared to and conversed with Moses, and Abraham, and all the other patriarchs without exception, ministering to the will of the Father; who also, I say, came to be born man by the virgin Mary, and lives forever. For the latter is He after whom and by whom the Father will renew both the heaven and the earth; this is He who shall shine an eternal light in Jerusalem; this is he who is the king of Salem after the order of Melchizedek, and the eternal Priest of the Most High. The former is said to have circumcised the people a second time with knives of stone (which was a sign of this circumcision with which Jesus Christ Himself has circumcised us from the idols made of stone and of other materials), and to have collected together those who were circumcised from the uncircumcision, i.e., from the error of the world, in every place by the knives of stone, to wit, the words of our Lord Jesus. For I have shown that Christ was proclaimed by the prophets in parables a Stone and a Rock. Accordingly the knives of stone we shall take to mean His words, by means of which so many who were in error have been circumcised from uncircumcision with the circumcision of the heart, with which God by Jesus commanded those from that time to be circumcised who derived their circumcision from Abraham, saying that Jesus (Joshua) would circumcise a second time with knives of stone those who entered into that holy land. 113
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 120. Justin: Observe, too, how the same promises are made to Isaac and to Jacob. For thus He speaks to Isaac: 'And in your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.' Genesis 26:4 And to Jacob: 'And in you and in your seed shall all families of the earth be blessed.' Genesis 28:14 He says that neither to Esau nor to Reuben, nor to any other; only to those of whom the Christ should arise, according to the dispensation, through the virgin Mary. But if you would consider the blessing of Judah, you would perceive what I say. For the seed is divided from Jacob, and comes down through Judah, and Phares, and Jesse, and David. And this was a symbol of the fact that some of your nation would be found children of Abraham, and found, too, in the lot of Christ; but that others, who are indeed children of Abraham, would be like the sand on the sea-shore, barren and fruitless, much in quantity, and without number indeed, but bearing no fruit whatever, and only drinking the water of the sea. And a vast multitude in your nation are convicted of being of this kind, imbibing doctrines of bitterness and godlessness, but spurning the word of God. He speaks therefore in the passage relating to Judah: 'A prince shall not fail from Judah, nor a ruler from his thighs, till that which is laid up for him come; and He shall be the expectation of the nations.' Genesis 49:10 And it is plain that this was spoken not of Judah, but of Christ. For all we out of all nations do expect not Judah, but Jesus, who led your fathers out of Egypt. For the prophecy referred even to the advent of Christ: 'Till He come for whom this is laid up, and He shall be the expectation of nations.' Jesus came, therefore, as we have shown at length, and is expected again to appear above the clouds; whose name you profane, and labour hard to get it profaned over all the earth. It were possible for me, sirs, to contend against you about the reading which you so interpret, saying it is written, 'Till the things laid up for Him come;' though the Seventy have not so explained it, but thus, 'Till He comes for whom this is laid up.' But since what follows indicates that the reference is to Christ (for it is, 'and He shall be the expectation of nations'), I do not proceed to have a mere verbal controversy with you, as I have not attempted to establish proof about Christ from the passages of Scripture which are not admitted by you which I quoted from the words of Jeremiah the prophet, and Esdras, and David; but from those which are even now admitted by you, which had your teachers comprehended, be well assured they would have deleted them, as they did those about the death of Isaiah, whom you sawed asunder with a wooden saw. And this was a mysterious type of Christ being about to cut your nation in two, and to raise those worthy of the honour to the everlasting kingdom along with the holy patriarchs and prophets; but He has said that He will send others to the condemnation of the unquenchable fire along with similar disobedient and impenitent men from all the nations. 'For they shall come,' He said, 'from the west and from the east, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.' And I have mentioned these things, taking nothing whatever into consideration, except the speaking of the truth, and refusing to be coerced by any one, even though I should be immediately torn in pieces by you. For I gave no thought to any of my people, that is, the Samaritans, when I had a communication in writing with Caesar, but stated that they were wrong in trusting to the magician Simon of their own nation, who, they say, is God above all power, and authority, and might.
DialogueWithTrypho_JustinMartyr.TXT:Chapter 127. Justin: These and other such sayings are recorded by the lawgiver and by the prophets; and I suppose that I have stated sufficiently, that wherever God says, 'God went up from Abraham,' Genesis 18:22 or, 'The Lord spoke to Moses,' Exodus 6:29 and 'The Lord came down to behold the tower which the sons of men had built,' Genesis 11:5 or when 'God shut Noah into the ark,' Genesis 7:16 you must not imagine that the unbegotten God Himself came down or went up from any place. For the ineffable Father and Lord of all neither has come to any place, nor walks, nor sleeps, nor rises up, but remains in His own place, wherever that is, quick to behold and quick to hear, having neither eyes nor ears, but being of indescribable might; and He sees all things, and knows all things, and none of us escapes His observation; and He is not moved or confined to a spot in the whole world, for He existed before the world was made. How, then, could He talk with any one, or be seen by any one, or appear on the smallest portion of the earth, when the people at Sinai were not able to look even on the glory of Him who was sent from Him; and Moses himself could not enter into the tabernacle which he had erected, when it was filled with the glory of God; and the priest could not endure to stand before the temple when Solomon conveyed the ark into the house in Jerusalem which he had built for it? Therefore neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, nor any other man, saw the Father and ineffable Lord of all, and also of Christ, but [saw] Him who was according to His will His Son, being God, and the Angel because He ministered to His will; whom also it pleased Him to be born man by the virgin; who also was fire when He conversed with Moses from the bush. Since, unless we thus comprehend the Scriptures, it must follow that the Father and Lord of all had not been in heaven when what Moses wrote took place: 'And the Lord rained upon Sodom fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven.' Genesis 19:24 and again, when it is thus said by David: 'Lift up your gates, you rulers; and be lifted up, you everlasting gates; and the King of glory shall enter;' and again, when He says: 'The Lord says to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool.' 127

FirstApology_JustinMartyr.TXT:And all the Jews even now teach that the nameless God spoke to Moses; whence the Spirit of prophecy, accusing them by Isaiah the prophet mentioned above, said The ox knows his owner, and the ass his master's crib; but Israel does not know Me, and My people do not understand. Isaiah 1:3 And Jesus the Christ, because the Jews knew not what the Father was, and what the Son, in like manner accused them; and Himself said, No one knows the Father, but the Son; nor the Son, but the Father, and they to whom the Son reveals Him. Matthew 11:27 Now the Word of God is His Son, as we have before said. And He is called Angel and Apostle; for He declares whatever we ought to know, and is sent forth to declare whatever is revealed; as our Lord Himself says, He that hears Me, hears Him that sent Me. Luke 10:16 From the writings of Moses also this will be manifest; for thus it is written in them, And the Angel of God spoke to Moses, in a flame of fire out of the bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, the God of your fathers; go down into Egypt, and bring forth My people. Exodus 3:6 And if you wish to learn what follows, you can do so from the same writings; for it is impossible to relate the whole here. But so much is written for the sake of proving that Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and His Apostle, being of old the Word, and appearing sometimes in the form of fire, and sometimes in the likeness of angels; but now, by the will of God, having become man for the human race, He endured all the sufferings which the devils instigated the senseless Jews to inflict upon Him; who, though they have it expressly affirmed in the writings of Moses, And the angel of God spoke to Moses in a flame of fire in a bush, and said, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yet maintain that He who said this was the Father and Creator of the universe. Whence also the Spirit of prophecy rebukes them, and says, Israel does not know Me, my people have not understood Me. Isaiah 1:3 And again, Jesus, as we have already shown, while He was with them, said, No one knows the Father, but the Son; nor the Son but the Father, and those to whom the Son will reveal Him. Matthew 11:27 The Jews, accordingly, being throughout of opinion that it was the Father of the universe who spoke to Moses, though He who spoke to him was indeed the Son of God, who is called both Angel and Apostle, are justly charged, both by the Spirit of prophecy and by Christ Himself, with knowing neither the Father nor the Son. For they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become acquainted with the Father, nor to know that the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God. And of old He appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets; but now in the times of your reign, having, as we before said, become Man by a virgin, according to the counsel of the Father, for the salvation of those who believe in Him, He endured both to be set at nought and to suffer, that by dying and rising again He might conquer death. And that which was said out of the bush to Moses, I am that I am, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, and the God of your fathers, Exodus 3:6 this signified that they, even though dead, are yet in existence, and are men belonging to Christ Himself. For they were the first of all men to busy themselves in the search after God; Abraham being the father of Isaac, and Isaac of Jacob, as Moses wrote.
FirstApology_JustinMartyr.TXT:But lest some should, without reason, and for the perversion of what we teach, maintain that we say that Christ was born one hundred and fifty years ago under Cyrenius, and subsequently, in the time of Pontius Pilate, taught what we say He taught; and should cry out against us as though all men who were born before Him were irresponsible — let us anticipate and solve the difficulty. We have been taught that Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and men like them; and among the barbarians, Abraham, and Ananias, and Azarias, and Misael, and Elias, and many others whose actions and names we now decline to recount, because we know it would be tedious. So that even they who lived before Christ, and lived without reason, were wicked and hostile to Christ, and slew those who lived reasonably. But who, through the power of the Word, according to the will of God the Father and Lord of all, He was born of a virgin as a man, and was named Jesus, and was crucified, and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, an intelligent man will be able to comprehend from what has been already so largely said. And we, since the proof of this subject is less needful now, will pass for the present to the proof of those things which are urgent.

Protoevangelium_James.TXT:10. And there was a council of the priests, saying: Let us make a veil for the temple of the Lord. And the priest said: Call to me the undefiled virgins of the family of David. And the officers went away, and sought, and found seven virgins. And the priest remembered the child Mary, that she was of the family of David, and undefiled before God. And the officers went away and brought her. And they brought them into the temple of the Lord. And the priest said: Choose for me by lot who shall spin the gold, and the white, and the fine linen, and the silk, and the blue, and the scarlet, and the true purple. And the true purple and the scarlet fell to the lot of Mary, and she took them, and went away to her house. And at that time Zacharias was dumb, and Samuel was in his place until the time that Zacharias spake. And Mary took the scarlet, and span it.
Protoevangelium_James.TXT:20. And the midwife went in, and said to Mary: Show thyself; for no small controversy has arisen about thee. And Salome put in her finger, and cried out, and said: Woe is me for mine iniquity and mine unbelief, because I have tempted the living God; and, behold, my hand is dropping off as if burned with fire. And she bent her knees before the Lord, saying: O God of my fathers, remember that I am the seed of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; do not make a show of me to the sons of Israel, but restore me to the poor; for Thou knowest, O Lord, that in Thy name I have performed my services, and that I have received my reward at Thy hand. And, behold, an angel of the Lord stood by her, saying to her: Salome, Salome, the Lord hath heard thee. Put thy hand to the infant, and carry it, and thou wilt have safety and joy. And Salome went and carried it, saying: I will worship Him, because a great King has been born to Israel. And, behold, Salome was immediately cured, and she went forth out of the cave justified. And behold a voice saying: Salome, Salome, tell not the strange things thou hast seen, until the child has come into Jerusalem.
Last edited by mlinssen on Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8568
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:58 am

rgprice wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:57 am
Secondly, this makes sense of Martyr's writings, and shows how obvious the "lost source" actually was. It was hiding in plain sight, as per usual with this stuff.
There is little doubt that Justin Martyr had access to a text or tradition like the Infancy Gospel of James. But, if Matthew postdates Justin, what text ("memorabilia") is Justin quoting here?

Dialogue with Trypho 105.6: 6 For he also exhorted his disciples to surpass the Pharisaic policy, with the warning that, if not, they might be sure they could not be saved, and these words are recorded in the Memorabilia, “Unless your justice fully exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not go into the kingdom of the heavens” (= Matthew 5.20).

Dialogue with Trypho 107.1: 1 And that on the third day after being crucified he was going to rise again it is written in the Memorabilia that some from your race, seeking after him, said, “Show us a sign,” and he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign, and no sign shall be given to them except the sign of Jonah” (= Matthew 16.4). And, since he said this in a hidden manner, it was to be understood by those listening that after he was crucified he would resurrect on the third day.


Ken Olson
Posts: 369
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by Ken Olson » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:09 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:39 am
Right. Otherwise we face the anomaly of either Matthew or Luke (or both) drawing heavily from James yet managing to avoid drawing the same materials from James. The choice is between (A) a natural conflation of Matthew and Luke by James and (B) some kind of weird conspiracy.
You're making an observation about the data and then asking which of two choices would be the more logical deduction to draw from it instead of just asserting your conclusion and describing it as clear, obvious, and indisputable?

It's a bold strategy, Ben. Let's see if it pays off.

rgprice
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by rgprice » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:13 am

Good point Ben. Also there is the issue of John in the IGoJ. Who John is exactly isn't explained. He's not given much of an introduction, but he is apparently supposed to be John the Baptist. It seems odd that the writer wouldn't clarify this more if they weren't building upon an earlier tradition where is identity his already explained.
There is little doubt that Justin Martyr had access to a text or tradition like the Infancy Gospel of James. But, if Matthew postdates Justin, what text ("memorabilia") is Justin quoting here?
In theory, it is possible that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke both had birth narratives added to them after the fact. This seems more doubtful with Matthew however, but it is not altogether unreasonable. Both Gospels suffer from the same phenomenon of the birth story not really connecting to the rest of the story.

What Tyson proposes for Luke is that the body of Luke, from 3:1, is essentially a Marcionite Gospel, with the beginning and end added on later by a different author, who is also the writer of Acts. But essentially, they didn't rewrite Marcion's Gospel or do extensive editing of it, they actually just took a version of Marcion's Gospel and added bookends to it.

The same argument can really be made for Matthew. It's possible that the body of Matthew, from 3:1 was written by one person and later the birth narrative as prepended to it. I'm not saying I endorse such a view, I'm just saying it is a possibility.

And to clarify, the passage about Jonah was not in Marcion's Gospel, so we know that Martyr can't be getting it from there. But does it not seem strange that if Martyr knew Matthew's Gospel with the birth narrative that he would be referencing the IGoJ for the birth story instead of Matthew?

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by mlinssen » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:17 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:58 am
rgprice wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:57 am
Secondly, this makes sense of Martyr's writings, and shows how obvious the "lost source" actually was. It was hiding in plain sight, as per usual with this stuff.
There is little doubt that Justin Martyr had access to a text or tradition like the Infancy Gospel of James. But, if Matthew postdates Justin, what text ("memorabilia") is Justin quoting here?

Dialogue with Trypho 105.6: 6 For he also exhorted his disciples to surpass the Pharisaic policy, with the warning that, if not, they might be sure they could not be saved, and these words are recorded in the Memorabilia, “Unless your justice fully exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not go into the kingdom of the heavens” (= Matthew 5.20).

I haven't the foggiest, but kingdom of 'the heavens' is very distinctly Matthean. You must have a particularly exact translation, mine just says 'heaven' there, the usual biblical translator cardinal sin
Dialogue with Trypho 107.1: 1 And that on the third day after being crucified he was going to rise again it is written in the Memorabilia that some from your race, seeking after him, said, “Show us a sign,” and he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign, and no sign shall be given to them except the sign of Jonah” (= Matthew 16.4). And, since he said this in a hidden manner, it was to be understood by those listening that after he was crucified he would resurrect on the third day.[/box]
Mark 8:11 (I'm seriously having severe clipboard issues atm LOL, will reboot in a bit)


User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by mlinssen » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:21 am

rgprice wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:13 am
In theory, it is possible that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke both had birth narratives added to them after the fact. This seems more doubtful with Matthew however, but it is not altogether unreasonable. Both Gospels suffer from the same phenomenon of the birth story not really connecting to the rest of the story.
Lost sources, layered traditions, oral memory: all lenders of last resort, panic brakes, and desperate last attempts

Don't go there, just don't, really. The majority of biblical research / academics / scholarcrap buys it, but it is rubbish. It is a one-way street into impasse, stalemate. Impossible to prove impossible to deny - it's just a conversation stopper of the highest order

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by mlinssen » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:26 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:39 am
Right. Otherwise we face the anomaly of either Matthew or Luke (or both) drawing heavily from James yet managing to avoid drawing the same materials from James. The choice is between (A) a natural conflation of Matthew and Luke by James and (B) some kind of weird conspiracy.
I'd like to put an end to that fruitless dead-end as well, please.
Everyone knows that Matthew and Luke drew from Mark, everyone agrees to that. But no one seems to mind that they both drew their own material

Yet suddenly, when direction of dependency in other sources is discussed, it is the most natural and logical assumption that anyone drawing from a source that someone else has also drawn from will end with the exact same results?

Bolx. Big bolx

Ask Goodacre: it's not source that determines the outcome, it's destination. You write for an audience, and that audience determines the content of your text. Wherever you got it from. Utter, utter strawman, Ben

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by mlinssen » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:32 am

Ken Olson wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:09 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:39 am
Right. Otherwise we face the anomaly of either Matthew or Luke (or both) drawing heavily from James yet managing to avoid drawing the same materials from James. The choice is between (A) a natural conflation of Matthew and Luke by James and (B) some kind of weird conspiracy.
You're making an observation about the data and then asking which of two choices would be the more logical deduction to draw from it instead of just asserting your conclusion and describing it as clear, obvious, and indisputable?

It's a bold strategy, Ben. Let's see if it pays off.
Ken Olson wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:09 am

You're making an observation about the data and then asking which of two choices would be the more logical deduction to draw from it instead of just asserting your conclusion and describing it as clear, obvious, and indisputable?

It's a bold strategy, Ben. Let's see if it pays off.
Becuase it's not an observation Ken, it's a very subjective assumption wrapped as very subjective assumption

"anomaly", natural", "weird" - and that is just the outer layer.

So Ben, Ken: you both think it is a very natural conflation of Luke And Matthew to assert that the virgin Mary was from the Davidian bloodline and gave birth in a cave?
That is more like an exact (can't emphasis it enough really) verbatim copy of "just Just"

And that is exactly where the sting is in: James and Just agree very, very strongly against LukeMatthew

hakeem
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:20 am

Re: ProtoEvJames, Justin Martyr, Matthew: birth in a cave, Magi

Post by hakeem » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:38 am

mlinssen wrote:
There's more to these texts than copied here, e.g. Justin prepping Scriptortions, alleged fulfilled prophecies. Justin is Matthew, or it is his twin brother.
But my current (that of today, yes) thesis is that it was Justin who took Marcion and turned it into Luke, while writing his own (Matthew). A bit of linguistical comparison should prove all that within an hour
Your thesis is hopeless flawed. Origen's Against Celsus" blows your thesis out of the water.

The cave birth story was also known to other Christian writers.

It must be noted that although Origen in "Against Celsus" directly referred to Gospels called Matthew, Mark, Luke and John he attributed the cave birth story to the "Gospels by the disciples".

Origen's Against Celsus 1.
With respect to the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, if any one desires, after the prophecy of Micah and after the history recorded in the Gospels by the disciples of Jesus, to have additional evidence from other sources, let him know that, in conformity with the narrative in the Gospel regarding His birth, there is shown at Bethlehem the cave where He was born, and the manger in the cave where He was wrapped in swaddling-clothes.

And this sight is greatly talked of in surrounding places, even among the enemies of the faith, it being said that in this cave was born that Jesus who is worshipped and reverenced by the Christians.

Ignatius, Clement, Aristides, Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome and others do not mention any birth story of Jesus found in a Gospel of James.

The Proto Evangelium of James is a very late writing which was unknown up to at least the 4th century. No early Christian writer referred to the Proto Evangelium of James when writing about additional details of the birth of Jesus not found in gMatthew, gLuke or the Memoirs of the Apostles.

The Proto Evangelium of James is just another fable falsely attributed to a supposed apostle of Jesus.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8568
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: dating the birth stories?

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:43 am

Ken Olson wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:09 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 6:39 am
Right. Otherwise we face the anomaly of either Matthew or Luke (or both) drawing heavily from James yet managing to avoid drawing the same materials from James. The choice is between (A) a natural conflation of Matthew and Luke by James and (B) some kind of weird conspiracy.
You're making an observation about the data and then asking which of two choices would be the more logical deduction to draw from it instead of just asserting your conclusion and describing it as clear, obvious, and indisputable?
Folly on my part, I know.
rgprice wrote:
Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:13 am
Good point Ben. Also there is the issue of John in the IGoJ. Who John is exactly isn't explained. He's not given much of an introduction, but he is apparently supposed to be John the Baptist. It seems odd that the writer wouldn't clarify this more if they weren't building upon an earlier tradition where is identity his already explained.
It is pretty clear that the Infancy Gospel of James is relying at least upon something like the Gospel of Luke for the story of Zechariah, Elizabeth, and John:
  • Zechariah is the high priest at the time when Mary is betrothed to Joseph in the temple at age 12 (chapters 8-9). A bit later, at the decision to have Mary spin the veil (chapter 10), it is said that he is dumb and cannot speak; therefore Samuel is serving in his stead. It is not said why Zechariah is dumb.
  • Elizabeth is Mary's kinswoman (chapter 12), and she says that something leaps in her womb as Mary comes to visit her after having spun the veil. It is not said what or who is in her womb.
  • Elizabeth hides John, named here for the very first time in the text, while Herod is carrying out the massacre of the innocents (chapter 22). John is introduced as if he needs no introduction.
  • Zechariah is approached by Herod's men during their search for John, and they ask him where his son is (chapter 23); this is our first clue that Zechariah even has a son, let alone that the son is John, of the womb of Elizabeth, implying that Elizabeth is married to the high priest. Zechariah refuses to tell, and he pays the price for that refusal.
If you did not already know the full story as told in the gospel of Luke, this entire subplot would be jarring and confusing. It is not as if information is being deliberately withheld for a dramatic revelation later; the manner is rather of enjoying the luxury of assuming that the reader already knows who these people are and how they are related to each other.
In theory, it is possible that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke both had birth narratives added to them after the fact. This seems more doubtful with Matthew however, but it is not altogether unreasonable.
I am pretty sure that the Lucan infancy narrative was added after the body of Luke was composed, yes. As for Matthew, you are right: it is harder to make the argument. But the huge contradiction between Jesus being a proper descendant of David (which has to be through the paternal line) and Jesus not having a human father indicates, at the very least, that Matthew has combined two separate ideas into his infancy narrative.
And to clarify, the passage about Jonah was not in Marcion's Gospel, so we know that Martyr can't be getting it from there.
Nor is it in the Gospel of Mark. Mark 8.11-13 has something similar, but it lacks mention of the sign of Jonah:

Code: Select all

  Matthew 16.4:      γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ μοιχαλὶς σημεῖον ἐπιζητεῖ
Dialogue 107.1:      γενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ μοιχαλὶς σημεῖον ἐπιζητεῖ
     Mark 8.12: τί ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη                ζητεῖ    σημεῖον

  Matthew 16.4:                 καὶ σημεῖον οὐ δοθήσεται αὐτῇ   εἰ μὴ τὸ σημεῖον Ἰωνᾶ
Dialogue 107.1:                 καὶ σημεῖον οὐ δοθήσεται αὐτοῖς εἰ μὴ τὸ σημεῖον Ἰωνᾶ
     Mark 8.12: ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, εἰ             δοθήσεται τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ  σημεῖον
The wording in Justin Martyr is very Matthean, not Marcionite, Lucan, or Marcan.
But does it not seem strange that if Martyr knew Matthew's Gospel with the birth narrative that he would be referencing the IGoJ for the birth story instead of Matthew?
Not really. Matthew and Luke offer very different stories of Jesus' birth, stories which are hard to justify with each other. Justin would have been doing himself a favor in referencing a story which had already combined and harmonized them both.

Post Reply