The self-evident emergence of Christianity

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: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by mlinssen »

Jair wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 6:46 pm 122994#p122994
I only mentioned the anti-demiurge stuff because I can’t think of anything else logically that would cause such an anti-Judaic sentiment to prop up where it initially never was (Thomas, in this case).

6. His Disciples questioned him; they said to him: do you desire that we Fast, and what is the manner we will pray, we will give Alms, and we will Observe what within food? IS said: do not tell lies, and he who you hate, do not make him be: they all are uncovering outward within the presence of the heaven.
There is not anyone Indeed while he is hiding, who will reveal outward not; and there is not anyone, while he is covering, who will remain with lack of him being uncovered.

Not anti-Judaic enough for you?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by mlinssen »

Jair wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 6:46 pm
That leads me to another question. Based on this theory of origins, you argue that this merging was ultimately successful. I would agree if we are looking at the creation of a new religion, Christianity, as the metric.
In essence, yes. I'm guessing it took fierce oppression for 1st - 5th CE at least, and continued for another few centuries. But that's just a fit feeling at the moment - but here we are now, and we can only conclude indeed that it was successful, yes
But what about the Judaics? Do we have any evidence that this new movement was able to make any headway among the Judaics or was that attempt eventually abandoned? What makes me wonder about this is that, the four canonical gospels that we have still seem to have very strong polemics in them.
Yes, agreed. I doubt that any if many Judaics wanted to convert, as this extremely Hellenic religion is completely different from theirs - even with the fake Judaic elements thrown in, the bogus prophecies, the false "translations" of the Tanakh. Only an idiot or fool would fall for it, but then again what exactly is the average fool percentage among religious? It's relatively high of you ask me - but we can conclude, by looking at the complete absence of anything Judaic in Christianity, that only an insignificant percentage of Christians came from Judaism
Judas essentially means Judah. If Judas is a symbolically written character, that could reek of severe polemic. And while some of the gospels may focus the blame on Pharisees, other gospels try to broaden it out again, having the people claiming guilt over the spilled blood and all.
"Essentially" - which essence exactly are you brewing there? I don't even know where else this name occurs in Coptic

Do you have specific examples of the gospels you have in mind here? I don't know any better than the four canonicals blaming Pharisees (and scribes and lawyers, depending) for "false Judaic behaviour"
How plausible really would it be for the Judaics to just go along with any of this back then, assuming these were polemics from the earlier religion that stayed intact after the merger?
Absolutely not at all if you ask me, although I have no idea of anything Judaic back then. But when I look at what the Tanakh offers and what the NT does, I can only see 2 completely different carrots as well as sticks. The only thing I can imagine it's disgruntled Judaics joining Chrestianity or Christianity: I don't feel like the NT is delivering Judaics what their Tanakh promised them; I don't see how the NT would be a rival or competitor to anything Judaic
Jair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:38 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Jair »

Matthew 27:25 re-shifts the focus from the Jewish leaders to “all the people” for that specific line, which sounds like a brutal polemic. This is absent from Mark. And throughout John, we have Pilate arguing with “the Jews”; a more specific generalization than the Synoptics which have the leaders riling up “the crowd”.

As for Judas, I used the interlinear and concordance on my bible app to find that Judas means Judah. But, the sources used could be biased. I don’t even know if they looked into the Coptic. What is the Coptic for Judas?

As for the Thomas quote being Anti-Judaic, I must be missing something in trying to read that highlighted passage. I don’t quite see it. Is it that the answer disregards fasting, prayer, and alms and is therefore an anti-Judaic polemic? I guess it just doesn’t seem like a very strong polemic. If anything it comes across as simply pushing an alternative philosophy.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Giuseppe »

Logion 47 is 100% anti-YHWH:

Jesus said: It is not possible for a man to ride two horses or stretch two bows; and it is not possible for a servant to serve two masters

You can't serve both the Unknown Father and the demiurge.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by mlinssen »

Jair wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 10:27 am Matthew 27:25 re-shifts the focus from the Jewish leaders to “all the people” for that specific line, which sounds like a brutal polemic. This is absent from Mark. And throughout John, we have Pilate arguing with “the Jews”; a more specific generalization than the Synoptics which have the leaders riling up “the crowd”.

As for Judas, I used the interlinear and concordance on my bible app to find that Judas means Judah. But, the sources used could be biased. I don’t even know if they looked into the Coptic. What is the Coptic for Judas?

As for the Thomas quote being Anti-Judaic, I must be missing something in trying to read that highlighted passage. I don’t quite see it. Is it that the answer disregards fasting, prayer, and alms and is therefore an anti-Judaic polemic? I guess it just doesn’t seem like a very strong polemic. If anything it comes across as simply pushing an alternative philosophy.
Are you being serious?
The disciples inquire after core Judaic habits: fasting, praying and giving alms. Correct?

"do not tell lies, and he who you hate, do not make him be" or
"do not tell lies, and what you hate, do not do it" is the response.
You call that mere "disregarding"?

If so, can you mansplain to me how viewing something as telling lies and doing what one hates equates to disregarding?

:popcorn:
Jair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:38 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Jair »

Ok. I see it now. The first Greek translation went over my head. It was too jumbled and I couldn’t see it. Your second translation makes more sense.

I am still curious if you’ve looked into the Coptic for Judas?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by mlinssen »

Jair wrote: Fri Jul 15, 2022 10:40 am Ok. I see it now. The first Greek translation went over my head. It was too jumbled and I couldn’t see it. Your second translation makes more sense.

I am still curious if you’ve looked into the Coptic for Judas?
You can find answers to questions like that in the Commentary if you like, perhaps that's an easier way to find out why I claim what I claim: page 15-21 cover the Prologue

https://www.academia.edu/46974146/Compl ... n_content_

Or you could look at the Coptic manuscript yourself:

https://www.gospelofthomas.eu/blog/wp-c ... scan01.jpg

Second half of page is where Thomas starts, the line with number 1 coincidentally begins with Judas: ⲓ̈ⲟⲩⲇⲁⲥ
Jair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:38 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Jair »

Interesting. So once again the working hypothesis is the name, Judas, in this case, also had no connection originally with Hebrew. Of course by the time the canonical gospels were written/edited/redacted, there could have still been syncretism occurring that linked Judas with Judah but with this information that now enters the land of speculation.

I decided to read further into your commentary. So far it’s pretty interesting. I’ve barely scratched the surface though, and there’s a possibility you answer this in the commentary and that I just haven’t gotten there yet, so if that’s the case, apologies. But you mention salvation multiple times in the early parts of the commentary. Salvation from what, do you think Thomas is writing about? I’m curious because iirc you refer to Thomas as a non-religious work. By that do you mean it’s more philosophical than religious? Spiritual? Or fully secular?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by mlinssen »

Jair wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 5:27 pm Interesting. So once again the working hypothesis is the name, Judas, in this case, also had no connection originally with Hebrew. Of course by the time the canonical gospels were written/edited/redacted, there could have still been syncretism occurring that linked Judas with Judah but with this information that now enters the land of speculation.

I decided to read further into your commentary. So far it’s pretty interesting. I’ve barely scratched the surface though, and there’s a possibility you answer this in the commentary and that I just haven’t gotten there yet, so if that’s the case, apologies. But you mention salvation multiple times in the early parts of the commentary. Salvation from what, do you think Thomas is writing about? I’m curious because iirc you refer to Thomas as a non-religious work. By that do you mean it’s more philosophical than religious? Spiritual? Or fully secular?
Sorry for baiting LOL, but yes: Salvation from your Self. Thomas removes the yoke, the thing that connects two: Ego and Self

Can you erase your programming and read the text as if it were the very first text you ever read?
It all depends on the programming how much erasing you need to do, of course - but when I first read Thomas I naturally thought it was about Jesus (and read it nonetheless because of the incredibly intriguing starting logia)

And yes, it's all in the Commentary already. Everything is in it, really - save for the theory on Chrestianity becoming Christianity as well as the link between Thomas and Marcion
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Leucius Charinus »

mlinssen wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 8:59 pmAnd yes, it's all in the Commentary already. Everything is in it, really - save for the theory on Chrestianity becoming Christianity
You have already demonstrated the previously unpublished claim that the NHL Gospel of Philip explicitly mixes the two terms. So you just have to be able to unpack this Gospel of Philip.
as well as the link between Thomas and Marcion
Good luck with that.
Post Reply