Bolland's view on the relation between the earliest gospel and the destruction of the Temple

[billd89]

Bolland was really the first scholar, even before Couchoud himself!, to talk about a celestial crucifixion in outer space

You play that meme alot. So much, I saw this and needed to share:

That evil planetary spirit is Saturn, Kronos or Phaenon, who was also called Jaldaboath or Chaoskind by the Gnostic or Theosophical Christians of the second century, and in astrology is still considered the evil one par excellence15). And according to John 16:11 the ruler of this world has been judged: the Jewish god has been cast out by the Father!

I'm curious about Phaenon and Chaoskind ...

[Giuseppe]

You play that meme alot. So much, I saw this and needed to share:

Wonderful! I will diffuse it!!!

[Giuseppe]

Bolland saw 1 Cor 15:5 as evidence of the pauline author's knowledge of the Earliest Gospel.
Now, I wonder what could be there of anti-demiurgism in the fact that the betrayer Judah was not still invented.

The point is that Bolland thought that the Earliest Gospel was a drama in 5 acts.

It is a drama in 5 acts, as figured by Robertson: the last supper, the arrest and deportation from the garden, the trial by Pontius Pilatus, the crucifixion, and finally the resurrection.

http://www.egodeath.com/BollandPhilosophyOfReligion.htm

In this way the original anti-demiurgism could be more easily masked.

• The last supper: the gift of the gnosis;

• the arrest and deportation from the garden: the same fate of the genesiac Serpent, found in another garden (of Eden);

• the trial by Pontius Pilatus, i.e. the best candidate to the role of killer of Joshua "Son of Joseph" (Pilate having exterminated en masse the Samaritans, so-called "sons of Joseph");

This would explain why the way was open to judaization of the Earliest Gospel.

What was sufficient was to eclipse the reference to the garden of Eden, where the Genesiac Serpent, gifter of gnosis, was damned by YHWH. The Garden, interpreted by the Judaizers as the garden of Gethsemane, was considered evidence of Jesus being the davidic Messiah of YHWH.

[schillingklaus]

Bolland's thesis is that the first gospel was written after the 70 CE by a Jewish-Hellenistic religion mystery in Alexandria who adored already (before the 70) an anti-demiurgical deity called Jesus (not a historical being). The pauline epistles were written in the second century.

NOTA BENE: Paul was created after the fabrication of the earliest gospel. Even the pauline fragments where an only celestial crucifixion is in view (for example: Ephesians 6:12), postdate the earliest gospel.

I do not use to talk about an earliest gospel as this would require to be able to say what exactly constitutes a gospel, and I do not know where to start. But it is already clear that the connection between gospels and Paul must be a complicated multi-way process, not a simple unidirectional thing as promoted by naive scholars who call Mark the enactor of Paul. In fact, the synoptic-style gospels were only able to appreciate Paul after the epistles had been sanitized by the Roman Catholic church as a response to the challenges of other claimants like Marcion.