Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2339
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by GakuseiDon »

For those interested, here are some of Justin's Trypho's challenges to Justin over the Christ found in the Scriptures:

Prove from Scriptures that Christ had to be crucified:

And when I had ceased, Trypho said, "These and such like Scriptures, sir, compel us to wait for Him who, as Son of man, receives from the Ancient of days the everlasting kingdom. But this so-called Christ of yours was dishonourable and inglorious, so much so that the last curse contained in the law of God fell on him, for he was crucified."

Then I replied to him, "If, sirs, it were not said by the Scriptures which I have already quoted...

...

Then he replied, "Let these things be so as you say--namely, that it was foretold Christ would suffer, and be called a stone; and after His first appearance, in which it had been announced He would suffer, would come in glory, and be Judge finally of all, and eternal King and Priest. Now show if this man be He of whom these prophecies were made."

And I said, "As you wish, Trypho, I shall come to these proofs which you seek in the fitting place; but now you will permit me first to recount the prophecies...

...

And Trypho said, "Sir, it were good for us if we obeyed our teachers, who laid down a law that we should have no intercourse with any of you, and that we should not have even any communication with you on these questions. For you utter many blasphemies, in that you seek to persuade us that this crucified man was with Moses and Aaron, and spoke to them in the pillar of the cloud; then that he became man, was crucified, and ascended up to heaven, and comes again to earth, and ought to be worshipped."

Then I answered, "I know that, as the word of God says, this great wisdom of God, the Maker of all things, and the Almighty, is hid from you. Wherefore, in sympathy with you, I am striving to the utmost that you may understand these matters which to you are paradoxical; but if not, that I myself may be innocent in the day of judgment.

Prove from Scriptures that the man who was crucified and ascended to heaven is the Christ of God:

And Trypho replied, "Now, then, render us the proof that this man who you say was crucified and ascended into heaven is the Christ of God. For you have sufficiently proved by means of the Scriptures previously quoted by you, that it is declared in the Scriptures that Christ must suffer, and come again with glory, and receive the eternal kingdom over all the nations, every kingdom being made subject to Him: now show us that this man is He."

Prove from Scriptures that this Christ pre-existed as God and then chose to be born as a man:

And Trypho said, "We have heard what you think of these matters. Resume the discourse where you left off, and bring it to an end. For some of it appears to me to be paradoxical, and wholly incapable of proof. For when you say that this Christ existed as God before the ages, then that He submitted to be born and become man, yet that He is not man of man, this[assertion] appears to me to be not merely paradoxical, but also foolish."

Prove that the spirit of Elijah was in John the Baptist:

And Trypho said, "This statement also seems to me paradoxical; namely, that the prophetic Spirit of God, who was in Elijah, was also in John."

Prove that the Scriptures say that Christ submitted to be born of a Virgin:

And Trypho said, "You seem to me to have come out of a great conflict with many persons about all the points we have been searching into, and therefore quite ready to return answers to all questions put to you. Answer me then, first, how you can show that there is another God besides the Maker of all things; and then you will show,[further], that He submitted to be born of the Virgin."

...

And Trypho said, "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." I answered, "This, too, has been already demonstrated by me in the previously quoted words of the prophecies, my friends...

...

And Trypho answered, "The Scripture has not, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,' but, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son,' and so on, as you quoted. But the whole prophecy refers to Hezekiah, and it is proved that it was fulfilled in him, according to the terms of this prophecy. Moreover, in the fables of those who are called Greeks, it is written that Perseus was begotten of Danae, who was a virgin; he who was called among them Zeus having descended on her in the form of a golden shower. And you ought to feel ashamed when you make assertions similar to theirs, and rather[should] say that this Jesus was born man of men. And if you prove from the Scriptures that He is the Christ, and that on account of having led a life conformed to the law, and perfect, He deserved the honour of being elected to be Christ,[it is well]; but do not venture to tell monstrous phenomena, lest you be convicted of talking foolishly like the Greeks."

Prove from Scriptures that God endured to be born and become man:

And Trypho said, "You endeavour to prove an incredible and well-nigh impossible thing;[namely], that God endured to be born and become man."

"If I undertook," said I, "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

Prove that some of the Scriptures have been completely cancelled:

Here Trypho remarked, "We ask you first of all to tell us some of the Scriptures which you allege have been completely cancelled."

Prove that the Psalm of David refer to the Christian's Christ:

Then Trypho said, "We know that you quoted these because we asked you. But it does not appear to me that this Psalm which you quoted last from the words of David refers to any other than the Father and Maker of the heavens and earth. You, however, asserted that it referred to Him who suffered, whom you also are eagerly endeavouring to prove to be Christ."

Prove using the Scriptures that the angels revolted from God:

On this, Trypho, who was somewhat angry, but respected the Scriptures, as was manifest from his countenance, said to me, "The utterances of God are holy, but your expositions are mere contrivances, as is plain from what has been explained by you; nay, even blasphemies, for you assert that angels sinned and revolted from God."

Prove that Isaiah shows Christ to be pre-existent:

Hereupon Trypho, after I had spoken these words, said, "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," continued he, "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?"

Then I replied, "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...

Prove using Scriptures that the Christ was to suffer the suffering cursed in the Law:

Then Trypho remarked, "Be assured that all our nation waits for Christ; and we admit that all the Scriptures which you have quoted refer to Him. Moreover, I do also admit that the name of Jesus, by which the the son of Nave (Nun) was called, has inclined me very strongly to adopt this view. But whether Christ should be so shamefully crucified, this we are in doubt about. For whosoever is crucified is said in the law to be accursed, so that I am exceedingly incredulous on this point. It is quite clear, indeed, that the Scriptures announce that Christ had to suffer; but we wish to learn if you can prove it to us whether it was by the suffering cursed in the law."

I replied to him, "If Christ was not to suffer, and the prophets had not foretold that He would be led to death on account of the sins of the people...

User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2842
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Leucius Charinus »

Justin's whole faith in Christ and in Chrestianity, F-Father Justin declares, is confirmed by heathen precedents and analogies:

Joseph Wheless' decisive point on Justin's 14th century MS
"Dial, with Trypho" extracted from "FORGERY IN CHRISTIANITY", 1930


His whole faith in Christ and in Christianity, he declares, is
confirmed by these heathen precedents and analogies:
"Be well
assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the knowledge of
and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is
called the Devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; just
as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false
prophets in Elijah's days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son of
Jupiter, was begotten by [Jupiter's) intercourse with Semele, and
that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that
being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended
to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I
not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced
by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? ... And when he [the
devil] brings forward AEsculapius as the raiser of the dead and
healer of all diseases, may I not say in this matter likewise he
has imitated the prophecies about Christ? ... And when I hear that
Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving
serpent counterfeited this also." (Dial, with Trypho, ch. lxix;
ANF. i, 233.)

http://mountainman.com.au/essenes/autho ... Martyr.htm

Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:56 am
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:41 am
It is important to note that Trypho is not being made to deny Jesus existed. He is not arguing that Jesus didn’t exist. Rather, he is arguing that Justin can’t prove he did exist—and thus did or said any of the things Christians claim. Not being able to tell the difference between those two arguments is very common among historicity apologists (Hansen commits this fallacy all over her paper on Trypho). So I need to spend a moment forestalling this mistake

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/23326
Trypho didn't say that Jesus never existed. He said that Christ never existed. Christ won't exist until Elijah comes to anoint him. Men do not pop into existence when they are anointed, but roles/titles do.

As Trypho says in Chapter 49:

"But if this man appear to be Christ, he must certainly be known as man[born] of men; but from the circumstance that Elijah has not yet come, I infer that this man is not He[the Christ]."

"This man" is Jesus. For Trypho, Jesus couldn't be the Christ because he wasn't anointed by Elijah. So: (1) Jesus existed, (2) Christ does not exist.

Case closed.
Yeup. Carrier didn't bother even engaging any of my argumentation in that paper. Which is typical. If I may borrow from his regular complaint: I doubt he even read it.
Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

ABuddhist wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 4:13 am
But this interpretatation has not only been advanced by mythicists. The historicist Louis Feldman advocated such interpretations in the following 2 publications.

Feldman, Louis H. 1982. “The Testimonium Flavianum: The State of the Question.” In Christological Perspectives: Essays in Honor of Harvey K. McArthur, edited by E. Berkey and Sarah A. Edwards, 179–99. New York: Pilgrim Press.

Feldman, Louis H. 2012. “On the Authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum Attributed to Josephus.” In New Perspectives on Jewish-Christian Relations, edited by Elisheva Carlebach and Jacob J. Schacter. Leiden: Brill.

See https://vridar.org/2020/11/13/bad-histo ... s-existed/ for more details.
Irrelevant. I already note this in the paper. Feldman is also wrong. Feldman, I might add, is also the only non-mythicist in the last 100 years I've found who held this interpretation. His position was rebutted by Whealey in a comment.

Lastly, as for chiastic structures that Guiseppe and Carrier whinge about... you can literally find chiastic structures in anything. At this point, chiastic structures are almost a joke because scholars see them in every nook and cranny. But it also does him no good. At no point anywhere in the entire dialogue does Trypho ever state that Jesus never existed. He only speaks of "the Christ" and only of "the Christ" on that point, and elsewhere he makes it clear he is talking about the "messiah" and not "Jesus". He does not doubt Jesus was a human being who existed. He doubts that he was the Christ.

It is simple as that and anyone who bothers reading the entire dialogue knows this. Conjuring chiastic structures from the ether doesn't do anything.

And that is all I have to say on this. I provided several other places throughout the dialogue where Trypho is explicit on this point.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by mlinssen »

Chrissy Hansen wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:00 am
GakuseiDon wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:56 am
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 3:41 am
It is important to note that Trypho is not being made to deny Jesus existed. He is not arguing that Jesus didn’t exist. Rather, he is arguing that Justin can’t prove he did exist—and thus did or said any of the things Christians claim. Not being able to tell the difference between those two arguments is very common among historicity apologists (Hansen commits this fallacy all over her paper on Trypho). So I need to spend a moment forestalling this mistake

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/23326
Trypho didn't say that Jesus never existed. He said that Christ never existed. Christ won't exist until Elijah comes to anoint him. Men do not pop into existence when they are anointed, but roles/titles do.

As Trypho says in Chapter 49:

"But if this man appear to be Christ, he must certainly be known as man[born] of men; but from the circumstance that Elijah has not yet come, I infer that this man is not He[the Christ]."

"This man" is Jesus. For Trypho, Jesus couldn't be the Christ because he wasn't anointed by Elijah. So: (1) Jesus existed, (2) Christ does not exist.

Case closed.
Yeup. Carrier didn't bother even engaging any of my argumentation in that paper. Which is typical. If I may borrow from his regular complaint: I doubt he even read it.
The first thing that Carrier says on the entire matter is the following:

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/23326

So by the time Justin is imagining Jewish rebuttals to his movement, we aren’t dealing with opponents who actually could know Jesus didn’t exist. The best we can expect is that some might suspect he didn’t. And that is what Justin reveals to be the case. In Dialogue with Trypho 8.4 Justin depicts his imagined Jewish opponent Trypho saying (emphasis mine), “after receiving groundless hearsay,” ματαίαν ἀκοὴν, “you invent a Christ for yourselves,” ἀναπλάσσετε, “and because of him you’re heading to a pointless destruction.” To which Justin responds, “we have not believed empty fables,” and the word here is indeed myths (κενοῖς μύθοις), “or stories without any proof,” ἀναποδείκτοις λόγοις, “but stories filled with the Spirit of God, and bursting with power, and flourishing with grace!” (Dialogue 9.1).

Perhaps you ladies would benefit from a reading comprehension class or two
Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

Yeah none of that undermines my point in the slightest and is completely consistent with Justin just doubting that Jesus is the Christ (not doubting that Jesus existed). Literally nothing in that contradicts my position in the slightest.

Don't worry, from here I won't bother replying to you. I've got immensely better things to do. Like watching the grass grow.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13931
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Giuseppe »

Chrissy Hansen wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:02 am

Lastly, as for chiastic structures that Guiseppe and Carrier whinge about... you can literally find chiastic structures in anything.
that kind of criticism works perfectly against who finds chiastic structures in Mark (see inter alia David Oliver Smith), surely not against Carrier in the case of Justin, where it is too much evident that Justin himself is interpreting the Trypho's words "You invented a Christ for yourselves" as the accusation that the Christians believed in "empty fables" or, which is worse, "stories without any proof".
Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:41 am
Chrissy Hansen wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:02 am

Lastly, as for chiastic structures that Guiseppe and Carrier whinge about... you can literally find chiastic structures in anything.
that kind of criticism works perfectly against who finds chiastic structures in Mark (see inter alia David Oliver Smith), surely not against Carrier in the case of Justin, where it is too much evident that Justin himself is interpreting the Trypho's words "You invented a Christ for yourselves" as the accusation that the Christians believed in "empty fables".
Again, it does nothing with my argumentation. The fact that they believed in an empty fable that Jesus was "the Christ" does not mean he is intimating that Jesus never existed. Until Carrier can point to an explicit example of Trypho saying Jesus never existed (not claims that the Christ does not exist, which is a separate issue), I will remain completely unconvinced, no matter how many chiastic structures he conjures up.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 13931
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Giuseppe »

Chrissy Hansen wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:41 am
Chrissy Hansen wrote: Thu Mar 30, 2023 4:02 am

Lastly, as for chiastic structures that Guiseppe and Carrier whinge about... you can literally find chiastic structures in anything.
that kind of criticism works perfectly against who finds chiastic structures in Mark (see inter alia David Oliver Smith), surely not against Carrier in the case of Justin, where it is too much evident that Justin himself is interpreting the Trypho's words "You invented a Christ for yourselves" as the accusation that the Christians believed in "empty fables".
Again, it does nothing with my argumentation. The fact that they believed in an empty fable that Jesus was "the Christ" does not mean he is intimating that Jesus never existed. Until Carrier can point to an explicit example of Trypho saying Jesus never existed (not claims that the Christ does not exist, which is a separate issue), I will remain completely unconvinced, no matter how many chiastic structures he conjures up.
The point is more complex than that. It is not 'you invented a Christ for yourselves' the real mythicist accusation, in Trypho's words. Please compare the Trypho's words with Carrier's interpretation of them:

Trypho's words Carrier's interpretation of them
“But Christ — if He has indeed been born, and exists anywhere — is unknown, and does not even know Himself and has no power until Elias come to anoint Him , and make Him manifest to all” “the real guy is somewhere else”
“after receiving groundless hearsay,” “we have no evidence your guy even existed”
“you invent a Christ for yourselves,” “much less is the guy.”

Chrissy Hansen
Posts: 566
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm

Re: Richard Carrier's decisive point on Justin's Trypho

Post by Chrissy Hansen »

Okay, Carrier's interpretation is *groundless* speculation.

"the real Messiah is somewhere else"
"we have no evidence your guy was ever the messiah"
"you invent a messiah for yourselves"

Until you can provide clear, explicit, and concise evidence that Carrier's interpretation is anything more than wild speculation, I will have no reason to agree with it.
Post Reply