Bruno Bauer, Christ and the Caesars [Fictional Jesus]

[Leucius Charinus]

Sorry I missed this earlier ....

Well, I'll certainly look forward to what you find out to show that the NT was authored in the 2nd century by writers who were very comfortable with the Stoic philosophy of the Roman statesman Seneca.

The Emperor Marcus Aurelius is also perceived - in his book "Mediations" - as a Stoic author. See [wiki]Marcus_Aurelius#Writings[/wiki]

The lineage of Stoics appears to lead from the epoch BCE to the 2nd century CE as follows:

• List_of_Stoic_philosophers
  
  1st Century CE
  
  Theon of Alexandria (fl. 10 AD), Stoic philosopher.
  Attalus (Stoic) (fl. 25 AD), Stoic philosopher frequently visited by Seneca.
  Papirius Fabianus (fl. 30 AD), Teacher of Seneca. Rhetorician and philosopher.
  Julius Canus (fl. 30 AD), Stoic philosopher condemned to death by Caligula.
  Lucius Annaeus Seneca (c. 4 BC-65 AD), Statesman, philosopher, and playwright.
  Thrasea Paetus (c. 10 AD-66 AD), Roman senator and Stoic.
  Lucius Annaeus Cornutus (c. 20-c. 70 AD), Stoic teacher who wrote a Compendium of Greek Theology.
  Chaeremon of Alexandria (fl. 50 AD), Stoic philosopher and grammarian. Librarian at Alexandria.
  Paconius Agrippinus (fl. 60 AD), Stoic philosopher spoken of with praise by Epictetus.
  Heliodorus (Stoic) (fl. 60 AD), Stoic philosopher. Informer in the reign of Nero.
  Publius Egnatius Celer (fl. 60 AD), Stoic philosopher. Informer in the reign of Nero.
  Helvidius Priscus (fl. 65 AD), Stoic philosopher and statesman.
  Arulenus Rusticus (c. 30-93 AD), Statesman. Friend and pupil of Thrasea Paetus.
  Musonius Rufus (c. 25-c. 90 AD), Stoic teacher and writer.
  Euphrates the Stoic (c. 35-118 AD), Philosopher, orator and pupil of Musonius Rufus.
  Dio Chrysostom (c. 40-c. 115 AD), Greek orator, writer, philosopher and historian. 80 orations extant.
  
  2nd Century CE
  Cleomedes (fl. uncertain), Astronomer who lived later than Posidonius.
  Epictetus (of Hierapolis) (c. 55-c. 135 AD), Philosopher, pupil of Musonius Rufus.
  Hierocles (Stoic) (fl. 150 AD), Philosopher, wrote "Elements of Ethics".
  Flavius Arrianus (c. 90-175 AD), Historian and pupil of Epictetus.
  Basilides of Scythopolis (fl. 150 AD), Teacher of Marcus Aurelius.
  Apollonius of Chalcedon (fl. 150 AD), Stoic teacher of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.
  Claudius Maximus (fl. 150 AD), Stoic philosopher and friend of Marcus Aurelius.
  Cinna Catulus (fl. 150 AD), Stoic teacher of Marcus Aurelius.
  Sextus of Chaeronea (fl. 160 AD), Stoic philosopher and teacher of Marcus Aurelius.
  Junius Rusticus (c. 100-c. 170 AD), Philosopher and Consul. Adviser of Marcus Aurelius.
  Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD), Roman Emperor from 161-180 AD.
  
  3rd Century CE
  Medius (fl. 250 AD), Debated the Stoic theory of eight parts of the soul with Longinus

It is quite fascinating to see that, but for Medius in the 3rd century, the Stoic lineage appears to stop with Marcus Auleius in the 2nd century.

Does the rise in Christianity coincide with the rise of Stoicism during the 2nd century?

I find the correspondences between Stoic Theology and Christian Theology quite remarkable. IDK what others think.

To date on this thread, you've seemed to have only dumped out a lot of quotes with the words "Bauer" and "Seneca" in them somewhere. But evidence is always welcomed. Good luck!

Admittedly I simply data mined Lightfoot's treatment of Stoic influences in his 1888 "ST.PAUL and SENECA".

I did no major formatting, and did not make any comments. I was just the gathering of some of the data presented by Lightfoot.

But these are not just lots of quotes with the word "Seneca" in them, they are lots of quote from the literature of Seneca (and sometimes Plato).

And I find that these quotes clearly allude to a Stoic conception of a god which is extremely similar to a Christian concept of god.

Others may not. IDK.




LC

[Leucius Charinus]

A very interesting read (I think) re the influence of Stoicism on Paul's thought is Troels Engberg-Pedersen's Paul and the Stoics.

I attempted to outline his main thesis at at Paul and the Stoics - 1.

This is a fascinating diagram concerning the conversion to Stoicism and/or Christianity:

• Modified Diagram at vridar
  
  
  
  The I box represents the individual before being converted (to either Stoicism or Christianity). This individual values and follows the basic self-centred desires, such as for food, clothing, pleasure and so on. It does not matter if this individual belongs to whatever other social groups, or even if he or she lives a life of isolation from others, the basic values of this person relate to the person’s bodily needs and interests.
  
  The X box represents God, identified as Reason by the Stoics and with (sometimes as) Christ by Paul. When the individual (I) is “struck by” Reason/Christ (X) he attains a cognitive understanding of the nature of X, and responds with a desire to reach towards X. The individual begins to conform one’s values to those of X. This means that he comes to have an “objective” view of himself as a result of seeing himself in the same way X sees him. The individual’s desires and values now conform to those of X. The individual becomes of “one mind” with X.
  
  The S box represents the quintessential social community. After the individual is “struck by” and reaches upward towards Reason/Christ, he or she is placed via X into this community of like-minded persons. This community is the one the individual comes to identify with, no matter what other attachments to former communities or groups remain. The individual now has the same values and objective outlook on himself and the world and all others in it. The individual now has the same concern for fellow community members as does X. He/she no longer primarily values her own interests, but the interests of all members equally. The community also reaches up towards X as it continues to seek to identify more with X and the values and mind of X.

It might be argued that there was a rise in the conversion to Stoic theology over the 1st and 2nd centuries, until it was adopted by a Roman Emperor. So not only are there some very interesting literary parallels between the Stoic and Christian conceptions of God, there also appears to be a similar growth of both systems of thought over a similar epoch (1st and 2nd centuries). In the 3rd century the Stoic followers seems to disappear, while the Christian followers seem to grow. Could the Christians have somehow coopted the conversion of people to Stoicism? IDK.

Engberg-Pedersen, from what I understand, moves the Paul-Stoic link beyond the points of contact relating to ethics and builds on the fundamentals of the philosophy to enable followers to attain new identities (or "conversion experiences" and the building of new communities). Instead of living in the Logos of Reason converts live in the Christ figure (the Wisdom and Spirit of God) which essentially is Paul's substitute for the Stoic Logos/Reason.

It may sound highly intellectual and no doubt did require some nous on the part of Paul but for converts it may be seen as a poor-man's substitute for sophisticated Stoicism.

Is it not generally admitted that the early phase of Christian conversion was not effective at the intellectual end of the spectrum, and that the Christian demographics were represented in the common and illiterate people of the cities?

The appeal of this "poor-man's substitute" to the masses seems to have worked, if any of the early Christian demographic models are correct.




LC

[Leucius Charinus]

COMPARING SENECA’S ETHICS IN EPISTULAE MORALES TO THOSE OF PAUL IN ROMANS

But Lightfoot's analysis does touch a bit on the "theology," so you could of course rope them both in if you like.

Thanks.

Then again every monotheism everywhere will show several parallels...

Hence the interest in a study of parallelisms.
Parallelomania (parallels between OT/NT & other traditions) .... viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1273

If you want to bump your threads, that's fine. But don't derail other threads doing so. Split from:
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=1308

Fair enough.




LC

[GakuseiDon]

But these are not just lots of quotes with the word "Seneca" in them, they are lots of quote from the literature of Seneca (and sometimes Plato).

And I find that these quotes clearly allude to a Stoic conception of a god which is extremely similar to a Christian concept of god.

I would certainly agree! Read the Second Century apologists, who are all too eager to show that Christianity was on par with Greek philosophy. Not just Stoicism, but all the other -isms that were popular in the day. And these had been percolating through Judaism for centuries also.

Here is Justin Martyr: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... ology.html

• And those of the Stoic school--since, so far as their moral teaching went, they were admirable, as were also the poets in some particulars, on account of the seed of reason [the Logos] implanted in every race of men

Also: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... ology.html

• For while we say that all things have been produced and arranged into a world by God, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of Plato; and while we say that there will be a burning up of all, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of the Stoics: and while we affirm that the souls of the wicked, being endowed with sensation even after death, are punished, and that those of the good being delivered from punishment spend a blessed existence, we shall seem to say the same things as the poets and philosophers

Others may not. IDK.

Read Tertullian, Theophilus of Antioch. Read Athenagoras of Athens, who starts his "Plea for the Christians" to the Emperors, with: "To the Emperors Marcus Aurelius Anoninus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus, conquerors of Armenia and Sarmatia, and more than all, philosophers."

[neilgodfrey]

Is it not generally admitted that the early phase of Christian conversion was not effective at the intellectual end of the spectrum, and that the Christian demographics were represented in the common and illiterate people of the cities?

Once when reading Justin Martyr it suddenly hit me that I could be reading a case-study of "not many wise" being called: Justin saw himself as a philosopher cum Christian and as such he attracted retainers and followings from among the poor. Think the Roman client-patron system. The clients would embrace the views of their patron, of course.

The idea that the gospel started among the poor is known only via the myth of Acts or even the gospels, I think. It is a theological construct, too -- note in particular the themes of exaltation of the poor in Luke.

[neilgodfrey]

I'd like to know if the Stoic model of "conversion" could also have relevance to the experience of spirit possession that Stevan Davies speaks of in relation to Jesus and the first Christians and that James C. Hanges sees in Paul and his converts. Troels Engberg-Pedersen, iirc, has two PhDs, one in Stoicism and one in Pauline thought/New Testament, so presumably what he says about Stoicism and its relation to Pauline thought is correct.

Is there a counterpart with the person who loses themselves to "the spirit" and then enters a new community as a consequence? I understand that part of their conversion experience is a surrendering of their "I" identity (as per the diagram LC gives above) and complete surrender of their identities into the Spirit consciousness or identity. From that moment on they are no longer feeling part of the world but live "in the spirit" and "in their new community" as "new identities".

[MrMacSon]

Read Tertullian, Theophilus of Antioch. Read Athenagoras of Athens, who starts his "Plea for the Christians" to the Emperors, with: "To the Emperors Marcus Aurelius Anoninus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus, conquerors of Armenia and Sarmatia, and more than all, philosophers."

Note that in "Plea for the Christians" there is no reference to Jesus, and there is this -

CHAP. III. CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS.

Three things are alleged against us: atheism, Thyestean feasts, OEdipodean intercourse.

Similar charges brought against another pre-Christian religion.

[Leucius Charinus]

Is it not generally admitted that the early phase of Christian conversion was not effective at the intellectual end of the spectrum, and that the Christian demographics were represented in the common and illiterate people of the cities?

Once when reading Justin Martyr it suddenly hit me that I could be reading a case-study of "not many wise" being called: Justin saw himself as a philosopher cum Christian and as such he attracted retainers and followings from among the poor. Think the Roman client-patron system. The clients would embrace the views of their patron, of course.

The idea that the gospel started among the poor is known only via the myth of Acts or even the gospels, I think. It is a theological construct, too -- note in particular the themes of exaltation of the poor in Luke.

There is no doubt that the Roman client-patron relationship (incorporating the Roman slave-owner relationship) persisted from the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire. However AFAIK the rise of Christianity from the lower levels of society is also being inferred via the archaeological remains, which are largely very silent. The implication here is that if Christianity is not represented in the archaeology, then it may not have been embraced by the well-to-do classes (responsible, with exceptions of course, for the archaeological remains).

I have not before come across any convincing arguments and/or evidence of how the Christians managed to engineer such a successful conversion process in the first three centuries. These notes concerning similar models of conversion between Stoicism and Christianity are at least a step towards explaining this process. So thanks for making these notes available.



LC

[GakuseiDon]

Note that in "Plea for the Christians" there is no reference to Jesus, and there is this -

CHAP. III. CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST THE CHRISTIANS.

Three things are alleged against us: atheism, Thyestean feasts, OEdipodean intercourse.

Similar charges brought against another pre-Christian religion.

That's interesting. Which religion was that? Do you have a source detailing those charges?

[Leucius Charinus]

I'd like to know if the Stoic model of "conversion" could also have relevance to the experience of spirit possession that Stevan Davies speaks of in relation to Jesus and the first Christians and that James C. Hanges sees in Paul and his converts. Troels Engberg-Pedersen, iirc, has two PhDs, one in Stoicism and one in Pauline thought/New Testament, so presumably what he says about Stoicism and its relation to Pauline thought is correct.

Does Troels Engberg-Pedersen venture beyond Pauline thought? According to the reading of Lightfoot's material Stoicism appears in the "Sermon on the Mount" and throughout the gospels as well.

Is there a counterpart with the person who loses themselves to "the spirit" and then enters a new community as a consequence? I understand that part of their conversion experience is a surrendering of their "I" identity (as per the diagram LC gives above) and complete surrender of their identities into the Spirit consciousness or identity. From that moment on they are no longer feeling part of the world but live "in the spirit" and "in their new community" as "new identities".

I think this could be seen as a very similar "varieties of religious experience". Justin Martyr's encounter with the Old Man by the sea shore might be a good example of this type of experience, but I am not aware of other similar "spiritual conversions" in the Ante-Nicene literature. Are there any other such accounts?


OP: The influence of the Caesar's in some sort of "Conversion Experience"

I can only repeat the comment in order to spark discussion, but Marcus Aurelius was seen as a "Good Emperor" who was an author of a book "Meditations". Here we must understand that Caesar is introducing a heritage of Stoic philosophy, ethics and also theology. How do good civilians in the Roman Empire of the 2nd century learn to approach God? How do they become "converted" to an understanding of that Age and Epoch into which they were born?

They read all about Stoic sayings, or if they are illiterate, go to the theatre and listen to a reading of the literature of the Stoic theologians.

So what did the Christians do at this time? Like everyone else they wanted to get vitally involved and in touch with all this stuff.

The NT authors seemed to have borrow Stoic literature as part of the mix for their own books.

This seems to suggest a 2nd century authorship for the NT.

Perhaps Bauer's logic was similar to the above? IDK.







LC