Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by mlinssen »

Ken Olson wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 8:26 am
mlinssen wrote: Tue Jan 25, 2022 8:02 am Thanks Ken, I was working on that as well, a you can see. What is the point that you wanted to make?
I didn't know you were working on it. I thought we should have the Greek of Philo to look at.

Best,

Ken
:thumbup:

I had written the first post and then realised that it was on the hyperlinked part, which has no relation to the Philo piece that was quoted first :facepalm:

I should take a break I think, certainly after the marathon I just finished. But I notice that the last part of that I did there, namely all the Oxyrhynchus fragments, has invigorated a certain kind of anger towards the shameless "harmonisation by false translation" of which among others Gathercole is so very guilty.
Which kind of proves the point for the statement in the first few words to this paragraph

Later
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by Jax »

I ask all of you to be critical, to pay attention to what you are quoting, because you are contributing to the falsification of history by carelessly quoting what others feed you.
Seconded
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by schillingklaus »

Nowhere does Magne make any statement whatsoever concerning the authenticity of whatever epistle of the NT. Each passage is evaluated for what it has to say, and only logical connections are pointed out.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by Giuseppe »

Salm has written a very suggestive article. I invite your reading of it. In particular, this point:

So we see—from the very beginning of the production of Catholic writings—those texts hammering away at the notion of “Christ,” “Christ Jesus,” and “Jesus Christ.” Often, they even drop “Jesus” and simply enjoin belief in “Christ.”

Soon after the canonical gospels were ‘published’ a barrage of epistles began to circulate—first under the name of “Paul” and soon thereafter under the (equally spurious) name of “Ignatius.” These were letters to the congregations that mirrored and reinforced what the Christ instructs in the gospels. The foremost requirement was belief in Jesus Christ—as we read so often in the various epistles. This includes belief in Christ’s atoning death on the cross and in his promise to return at the end of days to rescue (“resurrect”) those who believe in him. The reasoning is in fact circular: those who believe in Christ will be saved by their belief in Christ. That circularity doesn’t seem to have bothered (or dawned on) anyone.

The early Catholic texts

What we learned above furnishes a new tool for generally ordering Christian texts chronologically in late antiquity. If the text contains the word “Christ,” then we can confidently conclude that it is Catholic and postdates the middle of the second century.

Surely this is strange: the pauline epistles would be designed to reinforce "what the Christ instructs in the gospels", even if what led me to mythicism was precisely the Doherty's commentary on Paul.

If the Pauline epistles were post-Gospels, then their role would be not so different from the Ignatian epistles: mere polemic against an entire mass of docetists who had to be converted.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by mlinssen »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 1:24 pm Salm has written a very suggestive article. I invite your reading of it. In particular, this point:

So we see—from the very beginning of the production of Catholic writings—those texts hammering away at the notion of “Christ,” “Christ Jesus,” and “Jesus Christ.” Often, they even drop “Jesus” and simply enjoin belief in “Christ.”

Soon after the canonical gospels were ‘published’ a barrage of epistles began to circulate—first under the name of “Paul” and soon thereafter under the (equally spurious) name of “Ignatius.” These were letters to the congregations that mirrored and reinforced what the Christ instructs in the gospels. The foremost requirement was belief in Jesus Christ—as we read so often in the various epistles. This includes belief in Christ’s atoning death on the cross and in his promise to return at the end of days to rescue (“resurrect”) those who believe in him. The reasoning is in fact circular: those who believe in Christ will be saved by their belief in Christ. That circularity doesn’t seem to have bothered (or dawned on) anyone.

The early Catholic texts

What we learned above furnishes a new tool for generally ordering Christian texts chronologically in late antiquity. If the text contains the word “Christ,” then we can confidently conclude that it is Catholic and postdates the middle of the second century.

Surely this is strange: the pauline epistles would be designed to reinforce "what the Christ instructs in the gospels", even if what led me to mythicism was precisely the Doherty's commentary on Paul.

If the Pauline epistles were post-Gospels, then their role would be not so different from the Ignatian epistles: mere polemic against an entire mass of docetists who had to be converted.
Salmon is quite right with his claim - and his dating.
It is very likely that Paul didn't know the gospels and vice versa. The broadband connection was not that good in those days, and reception particularly bad in Palestine. Still is, I hear
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by schillingklaus »

The fight against docetism is not the one and only reason for the Catholic edition; rather, they also aim for a unification and canonization of liturgical practice. This is especially the case for the passages on the eucharist.

Jesus had to be believed to be the Christ predicted by Scripture so Jews would accept his kerygma concerning lturgical and ethical practice as intended by YHWH, although they actually undermine the Law and the Prophets. The belief in the Christ is only a tool, not an end.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Salm: the epistles make the case for the acceptance of the gospels

Post by Giuseppe »

The belief in the Christ is only a tool, not an end.
True. However, as Nietzsche said, sometimes the tool itself becomes a end per se. The Barabbas episode is there to witness forever a very old opposition to growing identification of "Christ" and "Jesus". If a such insistence was addressed against mere Jews who denied that Jesus fulfilled the Scriptures, then there would be no Jewish crowd crying "free Jesus the Son of the Father!". The Jewish opposition would be against any Jesus.
Post Reply