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 »

davidmartin wrote: Thu Apr 28, 2022 12:49 am So this "non-Christian" text that scholars say "Contains no distinctively Christian, Jewish, or gnostic allusions" magically somehow knows Paul? What to make of this
I'll have no comment until I've done the translation - and regardless of that, correlation doesn't equate to causation

Philip also speaks of Greeks, barbarians, etc - and of course I'm also relating only to those texts that I know of
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by davidmartin »

mlinssen wrote: Thu Apr 28, 2022 3:31 am I'll have no comment until I've done the translation - and regardless of that, correlation doesn't equate to causation

Philip also speaks of Greeks, barbarians, etc - and of course I'm also relating only to those texts that I know of
Sure well you set me a task here to document the Thunder/Paul connection and list them that's the sort of thing i enjoy doing i'll post it back here
What led me to Cassandra's work was noticing this myself and searching to see if anyone else had as i thought it was a bit unlikely at first it was actually quite a good feeling to see some sort of confirmation
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by davidmartin »

Here is a selection, i think I've missed some whether this is really convincing I don't know. There's also the many Simonian references I've ignored for now
"I have been found among those who seek after me"
Thomas saying 2 and canonicals "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds"
"and you hearers, hear me"
The call to hear is ubiquitous in Thomas and the canonicals
I am the barren one and many are her sons. I am she whose wedding is great, and I have not taken a husband ..I am the solace of my labour pains"
See Gal 4:24 - 4:27 and the Isaiah 54:1 quote in general for a key connection:
"Be glad, barren woman, you who never bore a child; shout for joy and cry aloud, you who were never in labor; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband.”
I am shame and boldness.
2 Cor 10:1 "I, Paul, who am timid when face to face with you but bold when away"
"In my weakness, do not forsake me, and do not be afraid of my power"
"But I am she who exists in all fears and strength in trembling"
2 Cor 12:10 "For when I am weak then I am strong" and "he was crucified in weakness yet he lives with God's power"
I am senseless and I am wise
1 Cor 1:20 "In the wisdom of God the world through it's wisdom did not know him. God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe"
Paul mentions the duality of wisdom and foolishness several times in both Corinthians, eg

1 Cor 4:10
"We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored!"
Because I am a barbarian among the barbarians
A Sythian? If Jews are barbarians and Samaritans are barbarians to Jews, wouldn't a Samaritan fit here
take me to yourselves from understanding and grief.
And take me to yourselves from places that are ugly and in ruin,
and rob from those which are good even though in ugliness
"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong"
"We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world—right up to this moment"
Come forward to childhood, and do not despise it because it is small and it is little
1 Cor 13:11
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me
establish the great ones among the small first creatures
I know the first ones and those after them know me
Matt 20:26 "whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave"
"But many who are first will be last, and the last first" Mark 10:31
Be on your guard
Worth mentioning "Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong" 1 Cor 16:13
For what is inside of you is what is outside of you,
and the one who fashions you on the outside
is the one who shaped the inside of you.
And what you see outside of you, you see inside of you;
it is visible and it is your garment
Thomas saying 89 "Why do you wash the outside of the cup? Do you not realize that he who made the inside is the same one who made the outside?"
And possibly 37 for 'garments' also a symbol found elsewhere for the body
If you are condemned by this one, who will acquit you?
Or, if you are acquitted by him, who will be able to detain you?
"For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned" Matt 12:37, also Col 2:14
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 »

davidmartin wrote: Thu Apr 28, 2022 5:38 am Here is a selection, i think I've missed some whether this is really convincing I don't know. There's also the many Simonian references I've ignored for now
"I have been found among those who seek after me"
Thomas saying 2 and canonicals "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds"
"and you hearers, hear me"
The call to hear is ubiquitous in Thomas and the canonicals
I am the barren one and many are her sons. I am she whose wedding is great, and I have not taken a husband ..I am the solace of my labour pains"
See Gal 4:24 - 4:27 and the Isaiah 54:1 quote in general for a key connection:
"Be glad, barren woman, you who never bore a child; shout for joy and cry aloud, you who were never in labor; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband.”
I am shame and boldness.
2 Cor 10:1 "I, Paul, who am timid when face to face with you but bold when away"
"In my weakness, do not forsake me, and do not be afraid of my power"
"But I am she who exists in all fears and strength in trembling"
2 Cor 12:10 "For when I am weak then I am strong" and "he was crucified in weakness yet he lives with God's power"
I am senseless and I am wise
1 Cor 1:20 "In the wisdom of God the world through it's wisdom did not know him. God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe"
Paul mentions the duality of wisdom and foolishness several times in both Corinthians, eg

1 Cor 4:10
"We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored!"
Because I am a barbarian among the barbarians
A Sythian? If Jews are barbarians and Samaritans are barbarians to Jews, wouldn't a Samaritan fit here
take me to yourselves from understanding and grief.
And take me to yourselves from places that are ugly and in ruin,
and rob from those which are good even though in ugliness
"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong"
"We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world—right up to this moment"
Come forward to childhood, and do not despise it because it is small and it is little
1 Cor 13:11
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me
establish the great ones among the small first creatures
I know the first ones and those after them know me
Matt 20:26 "whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave"
"But many who are first will be last, and the last first" Mark 10:31
Be on your guard
Worth mentioning "Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong" 1 Cor 16:13
For what is inside of you is what is outside of you,
and the one who fashions you on the outside
is the one who shaped the inside of you.
And what you see outside of you, you see inside of you;
it is visible and it is your garment
Thomas saying 89 "Why do you wash the outside of the cup? Do you not realize that he who made the inside is the same one who made the outside?"
And possibly 37 for 'garments' also a symbol found elsewhere for the body
If you are condemned by this one, who will acquit you?
Or, if you are acquitted by him, who will be able to detain you?
"For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned" Matt 12:37, also Col 2:14
That's a pretty great selection david. I'll have to mul on it but this is pretty Thomasine in nature. Many who like Thomas also like Thunder - ah, so many joys so little time.
There evidently is a language base, and one of themes. And I doubt that anyone understood Thomas as I do, so this is as good as it gets I think
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 »

davidmartin wrote: Thu Apr 28, 2022 12:49 am
What caught my eye was this piece by Cassandra J. Farrin https://www.westarinstitute.org/blog/ta ... fect-mind/
My own response to this text is startled acknowledgment that the writer knew Paul’s letters. When I was working with the editors of the Acts Seminar Report, I learned that in order for an historian to claim that one author is alluding to another, by definition enough of the original has to be carried into the new work to give itself away. That happens in Thunder. “Why then do you hate me, you Greeks? Because I am a barbarian among barbarians?” (Thunder 3:3) alludes to 1 Corinthians 9:20 and Romans 1:14–15. In some ways the whole poem is a meditation on Paul’s statements like this. “Advance toward childhood; Do not hate it because it is small and insignificant” (Thunder 4:5).

The malleability of the speaker, speaking for the divine, also suggests s/he is emulating Paul, with one crucial difference that I find fascinating: Paul doesn’t mention sayings of Jesus much, but the writer of Thunder draws on both Paul’s letters and Jesus’ empire of God sayings. “Do not stare at me in the shit pile, leaving me discarded; you will find me in the kingdoms … In my weakness do not strip me bare; Do not be afraid of my power” (Thunder 2:13, 17). The poetry that resulted is beautiful, but its very difference is a strong reminder that in the study of history we need to leave room for creativity and spontaneity, too.
So this "non-Christian" text that scholars say "Contains no distinctively Christian, Jewish, or gnostic allusions" magically somehow knows Paul? What to make of this
Confirmation bias ==== by a M.A. and B.A. in Religious Studies ?
davidmartin
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by davidmartin »

Hey it's better than nothing i'm just highlighting the observation, it's worth investigating. Confirmation bias, no i could have written that article myself. The Paul connection is debatable, the connection to sayings as per Thomas is clear enough, the connection to Isaiah is too and the SImonian connections are obvious. The scholars are ignoring this because they are intellectually lazy and can't be bothered to explore it, a bit like the Odes of Solomon which hardly gets any attention either. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh but it's just to make my point there's a lot of navel gazing going on. Cassandra might only be a BA but she spotted something no-one else did
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 »

davidmartin wrote: Wed Apr 27, 2022 12:52 am
mlinssen wrote: Wed Apr 27, 2022 12:06 am gnostic Christian texts - really?
Where then do you draw the line between Christian and non-Christian?
But as an example take Eugnostos the Blessed. It appears non-Christian but was used as a source to multiple Christian texts like the Sophia of Jesus Christ which itself should be in the pot. So Eugnostos is in because it's used as a source and is unclear, heck maybe it is connected after all, that's a big unanswered question what to make of this strange text

A pagan letter of "Eugnostos the Blessed" -- the letter was then given a christian preface and a conclusion and represented in another copy as the "wisdom" which Jesus revealed to his Apostles after his death.

~ p.414, Robin Lane Fox - Pagans and Christians


So they start with a pagan text Eugnostos ("Right Thinking"), the Blessed: NHC 3.3

They then add "the Saviour" to become NHC 5.1

They then add a conclusion to become NHC 3.4 "The Sophia of Jesus Christ"

I am inclined to read this as an indication that the editors of the NHL were trying to describe and highlight the process and the method of the "Christianization of pagan literature" whereby pagan literature was simply made Christian by the addition of various key words.
Jair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:38 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Jair »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 5:15 am This is intended to be my last paper on it all: 3 years, over 2,000 pages written in 32 papers - and the puzzle is solved

https://www.academia.edu/76105160/The_s ... ristianity

Abstract:

This article proposes a business case for the emergence of Christianity, and one that has its basis in society at large, crossing the boundaries of time and place.
Under the circumstances presented it was nigh inevitable that Christianity came into being, and Mark and Paul will demonstrate the alignment in identical goals accomplished via similar methods, unified under one and the same overarching plan

Judaism plays a more than pivotal role in Christian origins and the two share a common history that goes back many decades, perhaps even centuries

I ran into difficulties when creating a Discussion, so that'll be some time although lately Academia Support has resolved issues in a matter of mere hours!
Regardless, I wish you a very interesting read as usual, and welcome any and all feedback
I read through this yesterday. It’s an intriguing theory for sure. I do have some questions though.

I’m assuming that you are of the camp that a spiritual Jesus came first before stories of an earthly Jesus. I am trying to understand how groups who revered a spiritual Jesus that never physically walked this earth could get to the point of anti-Judaism and conflict you theorize as the catalyst for the merging of the religions. Do you believe that what started out as a simple belief in a spiritual Jesus was coupled with anti-demiurge theology which eventually evolved into a story being written that blamed the Judaics? And then over time and generations more people believed this story to be true, and thus more anger grew against the Judaics to the point of outright open conflict?

Does this also mean that you theorize that Jesus originated completely outside of Judaism with no connection whatsoever, at the very beginning?
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: Mon Jul 11, 2022 2:21 pm
mlinssen wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 5:15 am This is intended to be my last paper on it all: 3 years, over 2,000 pages written in 32 papers - and the puzzle is solved

https://www.academia.edu/76105160/The_s ... ristianity

Abstract:

This article proposes a business case for the emergence of Christianity, and one that has its basis in society at large, crossing the boundaries of time and place.
Under the circumstances presented it was nigh inevitable that Christianity came into being, and Mark and Paul will demonstrate the alignment in identical goals accomplished via similar methods, unified under one and the same overarching plan

Judaism plays a more than pivotal role in Christian origins and the two share a common history that goes back many decades, perhaps even centuries

I ran into difficulties when creating a Discussion, so that'll be some time although lately Academia Support has resolved issues in a matter of mere hours!
Regardless, I wish you a very interesting read as usual, and welcome any and all feedback
I read through this yesterday. It’s an intriguing theory for sure. I do have some questions though.

I’m assuming that you are of the camp that a spiritual Jesus came first before stories of an earthly Jesus.
I'm in my own camp: Thomas created IS as literary character alone. In his text, IS merely is a concept who reveals himself to "them in flesh". The text isn't concerned at all with emphasising anything further, but Thomas uses different verbs for resembling and being comparable to
I am trying to understand how groups who revered a spiritual Jesus that never physically walked this earth
Naturally, that is an assumption. On top of another assumption. And when you believe in something it simply becomes true to you, so it's irrelevant whether it actually happened because you believe that it did do so. Take Santa: it works exactly that way
could get to the point of anti-Judaism and conflict you theorize as the catalyst for the merging of the religions.
One thing at a time please.
1. There's a religion and it gets refuted - perfectly regular, correct?
2. There's anti-Judaism and it gets countered - perfectly regular, correct?
3. Groups revere a Jesus - perfectly regular, correct?
4. Jesus (the religion's protagonist) is believed to be an entirely spiritual being - perfectly regular in any other religion, correct?
5. Jesus (the religion's protagonist) also is believed to be an entirely human being - perfectly regular in any other religion, correct?
Do you believe that what started out as a simple belief in a spiritual Jesus was coupled with anti-demiurge theology which eventually evolved into a story being written that blamed the Judaics? And then over time and generations more people believed this story to be true, and thus more anger grew against the Judaics to the point of outright open conflict?
Basically yes, but all you need to do for that is follow Thomas and create a narrative out of it.
Don't overestimate the anti-demiurge nonsense as it isn't important: Marcion says nothing about it and the failure of the Falsifying Fathers to address that with actual quotes or text demonstrates their lies about it. Marcion, like Thomas, talks about the father alone and that's it - the FF invented him criticising Yahweh because they needed to portray him negatively on the topic whereas he is perfectly *absent* on it, not even neutral.
But yes, Thomas got taken into a narrative, the anti-Judaism and other themes enlarged, and the story was believed by a growing number of people and thus became True as every other story can only become true when it's believed by people
Does this also mean that you theorize that Jesus originated completely outside of Judaism with no connection whatsoever, at the very beginning?
Absolutely. Thomas invented IS together with all other characters: viewtopic.php?p=122994#p122994
Jair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:38 pm

Re: The self-evident emergence of Christianity

Post by Jair »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 10:37 pm
Jair wrote: Mon Jul 11, 2022 2:21 pm
mlinssen wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 5:15 am This is intended to be my last paper on it all: 3 years, over 2,000 pages written in 32 papers - and the puzzle is solved

https://www.academia.edu/76105160/The_s ... ristianity

Abstract:

This article proposes a business case for the emergence of Christianity, and one that has its basis in society at large, crossing the boundaries of time and place.
Under the circumstances presented it was nigh inevitable that Christianity came into being, and Mark and Paul will demonstrate the alignment in identical goals accomplished via similar methods, unified under one and the same overarching plan

Judaism plays a more than pivotal role in Christian origins and the two share a common history that goes back many decades, perhaps even centuries

I ran into difficulties when creating a Discussion, so that'll be some time although lately Academia Support has resolved issues in a matter of mere hours!
Regardless, I wish you a very interesting read as usual, and welcome any and all feedback
I read through this yesterday. It’s an intriguing theory for sure. I do have some questions though.

I’m assuming that you are of the camp that a spiritual Jesus came first before stories of an earthly Jesus.
I'm in my own camp: Thomas created IS as literary character alone. In his text, IS merely is a concept who reveals himself to "them in flesh". The text isn't concerned at all with emphasising anything further, but Thomas uses different verbs for resembling and being comparable to
I am trying to understand how groups who revered a spiritual Jesus that never physically walked this earth
Naturally, that is an assumption. On top of another assumption. And when you believe in something it simply becomes true to you, so it's irrelevant whether it actually happened because you believe that it did do so. Take Santa: it works exactly that way
could get to the point of anti-Judaism and conflict you theorize as the catalyst for the merging of the religions.
One thing at a time please.
1. There's a religion and it gets refuted - perfectly regular, correct?
2. There's anti-Judaism and it gets countered - perfectly regular, correct?
3. Groups revere a Jesus - perfectly regular, correct?
4. Jesus (the religion's protagonist) is believed to be an entirely spiritual being - perfectly regular in any other religion, correct?
5. Jesus (the religion's protagonist) also is believed to be an entirely human being - perfectly regular in any other religion, correct?
Do you believe that what started out as a simple belief in a spiritual Jesus was coupled with anti-demiurge theology which eventually evolved into a story being written that blamed the Judaics? And then over time and generations more people believed this story to be true, and thus more anger grew against the Judaics to the point of outright open conflict?
Basically yes, but all you need to do for that is follow Thomas and create a narrative out of it.
Don't overestimate the anti-demiurge nonsense as it isn't important: Marcion says nothing about it and the failure of the Falsifying Fathers to address that with actual quotes or text demonstrates their lies about it. Marcion, like Thomas, talks about the father alone and that's it - the FF invented him criticising Yahweh because they needed to portray him negatively on the topic whereas he is perfectly *absent* on it, not even neutral.
But yes, Thomas got taken into a narrative, the anti-Judaism and other themes enlarged, and the story was believed by a growing number of people and thus became True as every other story can only become true when it's believed by people
Does this also mean that you theorize that Jesus originated completely outside of Judaism with no connection whatsoever, at the very beginning?
Absolutely. Thomas invented IS together with all other characters: viewtopic.php?p=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).

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. 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.

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.

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?
Post Reply