Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pilate

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Eric Laupot's Theory

Post by billd89 »

Extraordinary and bold interpretation ! Is his work highly regarded?

"Rome's Invention of Pauline Christianity and Its Responsibility for the Great Fire of Rome in 64 C.E." in Revue des Études Juives 12/2005:
https://ur.booksc.me/book/65352906/45cf67

p.434:
It is this long-term repression of the Nazorean movement (together with its ideology) that would account, at least in part, for the lack of accurate references to this sect in ancient literature, including the New Testament. “[T]he limitation of anti-Roman polemic in what was to become New Testament documents to subtle cryptograms [i.e., derogatory code words for the Roman authorities] that only alert and informed readers will recognize testifies unambiguously to the awesome power of the Roman State... to exert that power over the lives of the early Christians.”56 This repression would also best explain Josephus’ total silence on the proper name of his Fourth Philosophy57 . This kind of censorship generally is what one would expect from an authoritarian political regime such as Rome during the course of a protracted guerrilla conflict against a strongly opposing ideology.

In turn, however, it is the existence of this drawn out guerrilla war that helps one identify the authors of the New Testament. For instance, almost no one would have deliberately chosen a guerrilla leader such as Jesus (see, for example, note 55 above) as a model for a Christian religion of love and peace — not, at any rate, without an ulterior motive. This is because the historical Jesus was not exactly the ideal model of love and tolerance. It is clear, therefore, that whoever founded Pauline Christianity most likely had an ulterior motive for selecting Jesus as an exemplification of this new religion’s values: It was almost certainly no accident that the founders of Christianity selected a guerrilla leader as their role model for pacifism. In light of everything, their reason most likely was that they were as much in- terested in twisting and depoliticizing Jesus’ anti-Roman message as they were in fostering love and cooperation. Furthermore, the New Testament is extremely sophisticated (e.g., see discussion below [and above at note 26] on Mark 5.1-20, which simultaneously draws on both Jewish traditions and Homer); and in the NT, Nazorean teachings are routinely and artfully twisted to Rome’s political advantage.

It is further obvious that Paul could not have both (1) participated in the wholesale liquidation of the Nazorean guerrillas58 and (2) later been ac- cepted by them as their “apostle to the Gentiles.” Since Paul probably did not, therefore, work for the Nazoreans, he most likely continued working for Rome (see note 58 above) even after his alleged conversion to Nazorean Judaism. In any event, having violently persecuted the Nazoreans, he al- most certainly would have needed Rome’s protection to travel around the Empire pretending to be one of them while at the same time twisting their message. Given Paul’s behavior in liquidating the Nazoreans, he most likely would never have lived long enough to complete his travels had he not received protection from the Roman army.

[...]These observations demonstrate that Paul, the putative founder of Christianity, was most likely a Roman agent.

Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pila

Post by Giuseppe »

What has to be derived from Laupot's theory is only the following part:
  • 1) the Christiani mentioned by Roman writers were not our pacifist Christians;
  • 2) a confusion happened in early second century (Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius), between riotous Christiani and pacifist Christians.
The rest from Laupot's theory (historical Jesus == Judas the Galilean) is worthy of being ignored, since it goes against the same Laupot's great finding (= that the Christiani persecuted under Nero were not our pacifist Christians).
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: Eric Laupot, The Audacious

Post by billd89 »

Ya, I'm not following you Giuseppe.

See Eric LAUPOT, "Rome's Invention of Pauline Christianity and Its Responsibility for the Great Fire of Rome in 64 C.E." pp.417-8:
The word “Christiani” (= Heb., Netsarim [“Nazoreans”]) was in fact the proper name of the Jewish resistance movement that ruled over the
land of Israel during the years 66-70 C.E 6. The Christiani were the ideological followers of the founder of their sect, whom Tacitus refers to in Annals 15.44.3 as Christus (lit., “the anointed one,” or the king of Israel). Tacitus reports in Ann. 15.44.3 that Christus had been executed by Pontius Pilate. The reader is referred in particular to this author’s two previous studies on Tacitus’ Jewish-led Christiani (see note 2 above), since they provide the basis for the present examination. It may be noted here (and see above at note 2) that the words “Christiani” and “Nazoreans” (Ναζωραῖοι, Nazōraioi, from the Heb. Netsarim, meaning more precisely, “followers of the Davidic Branch [Heb., netser; see Isa 11.1] or king”) are used interchangeably (both in this and the author’s two previous studies on the Christiani) to designate the Jewish-led ideological followers of Tacitus' Christus7

6. LAUPOT, “Christiani’s Rule over Israel,” 74-78. (The reader will further note that the first paragraph in sec. 2 [p. 72] should read profectas … ex Iudaeis [“from the Jews”] and the last words in sec. 2 [p. 74] should read: “Flavius Josephus, Titus’ aide.” In addition, a stronger argument for the relevance of Isa 11.1 to the coins of Israel during the Jewish War [see the reference in the next-to-last paragraph on p. 75 to the “solitary branch” on the coins as a possible symbol for Israel] is that, outside of the Old Testament [Isa 4.2, 60.21, 61.11, etc.], the solitary branch, per se, was apparently not used by Jews during the Greco-Roman period as a symbol for Israel. See Erwin R. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period [13 vols.; Bollingen Foundation 37; {New York}: Pantheon, 1953-1968] 13.123, s.v. “Israel, symbolism.” Therefore the solitary branches on the coins most likely referred to Isa 11.1’s royal branch or line of Davidic kings — with a possible secondary reference, following Isa 4.2, 60.21, etc., to Israel.)
7. See LAUPOT, “Tacitus’ Fragment 2,” 234, 244, 245-46 passim.

What I am curious about: who originates this particular hypothesis, “Christiani” (= Heb., Netsarim [“Nazoreans”]) ? Laupot cites his own work, then digressively, E.R. Goodenough (who I am following **key idea** there was a Jewish Mystical Cult in the First C. AD); what else is on point here?
billd89 wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 1:22 pmSee Frank R. Zindler’s “Cognitive Dissonance: the Ehrman-Zindler Correspondence” p.22:
In my opinion (and also in the opinion of William Benjamin Smith {1850-1934}, who also had the nom-de-plume of ‘Criticus’), the Hebrew antecedent {for ‘Nazara’ and ‘Nazaret(h)} is the word ‘netser’ -- meaning ‘sprout, shoot,’ or ‘branch.’ It is found most prominently in Isaiah 11:1: “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a BRANCH shall grow out of his roots.” As you know, this verse was popular at Qumran. You may not know, however, that according to Epiphanius, before Christians were called Christianoi, they were called Iessaioi - Jessaeans. I think this clearly relates the word ‘netser’ to early Christianity.

The relationship between "netser" and both "NazOraios" and "NazarEnos" seems very strong. […] Jesus of Nazareth would originally have been ‘Jesus the Branch’ - as in ‘Branch Son-of-David-ian.’ (Actually, ‘Branch Son-of-Jesse-an’!)

I still cannot fathom who the God of the Living Water is. But we may discern something, the name of the Founder of this 'Sethian' cult, that long-gone Therapeut (Attendant) to whom they pray for Perfectioning.

Yesseus, Host of the Righteous Jessaean.
Yesseus, Sacrifice of the Righteous Jessaean.
Yesseus, Branch of the Righteous Jessaean.
...

Again, recall Philo's defense (c.25 AD) of a notorious 'Son of God'/Sethian? initiate who had boldly chosen the Name 'Arise!' (Anatole/Zemach = Branch) at De Confusione Linguarum, 62-3.
Who can forget the Branch Davidians? 'We had to bomb the children to save the children.'

Image
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pila

Post by Giuseppe »

What do you know about E.R. Goodenough ? Is he a mythicist?
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: E.R. Goodenough

Post by billd89 »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 11:11 am What do you know about E.R. Goodenough ? Is he a mythicist?
No: he was a Methodist :lol:

1938 review of By Light, Light. The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism [1935] (a major source for the modern 'kabbalah' that I am investigating, following the Edelsteins' recherches): see https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1452047.pdf
First Prof. Goodenough claims that the Hellenistic mysteries were not, as commonly thought, anthropomorphic cults. The myths of Osiris and Isis and the Orphic cult were merely the symbol of metaphysical truth. The Hellenistic philosophers adapted their rational concepts to Greek mysteries and used them as a basis of emotional experience. Thus the Hellenistic world sought through mystic experience a path to ultimate reality, which is infinite and essentially beyond relation with the universe because of the limitations of matter. The myths became a typology and the mystic experience became the paramount element in religion. Second, Dr. Goodenough claims that Philo was also influenced by Orphic mysteries and that he allegorized or "mysticized" the biblical narratives in the same manner as Plutarch did the Egyptian cult of Isis. The infinite became the god of the Streaming Sophia; Moses became the priest, hierophant, and lawgiver; and the personalities of the patriarchs were interpreted as symbols of a higher and lower mystery. All the incidents related in the Pentateuch are interpreted as symbols of the mystic road to God through Sophia. Such a mystical theology could have developed only if Judaism was already recognized as a mystic cult. Mystic Judaism was not invented by Philo but Philo infused a philosophy into the Jewish mystery as Plutarch had done to the Greek mysteries. Thus Dr. Goodenough writes: "After Judaism had, at least in its own eyes, been recognized as a religion offering a way to mystic objectives in conscious comparison with other mysteries, it could go on to represent itself as the only mystery, and deal with its own mythology and mystic philosophy without further reference to its "competitors" (p. 10). The writer seems to be convinced that the Jews had their mystic initiation baptism, like the Christians later, and a "sacred table" (p. 8; se also pp. 256-264). Thus, according to Prof. Goodenough, the writings of Philo reveal that Alexandrian Judaism was a transformation normative Judaism into a mystic cult similar to the Greek mysteries.

Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: E.R. Goodenough

Post by Giuseppe »

billd89 wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 12:00 pm No: he was a Methodist :lol:
Image
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: E.R. Goodenough

Post by billd89 »

Actually.

Yale Prof. Goodenough became a radical sort of luminary in the archaeological world (c.1935-55), and Methodism WAS his background. Link.
wrote:An approach far more radical than Blau's caught the American imagination through the second half of the century. E. R. Goodenough, a former Methodist minister turned "historian of religion" ...
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pila

Post by Giuseppe »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Jul 14, 2022 10:23 am


Nous pourrions alors voir (ce n'est plus notre dominicain qui parle) les choses se dérouler chronologiquement ainsi: des mouvements de juifs messianiques (dits christianoi, ce sont ceud dont parle Suétone) ont lieu à Rome sous Caligula (empereur de 37 à 41) et sous Claude (41 à 54); des mouvements de juifs baptistes prêchant un baptême de rémission des péchés se manifestent en Judée autour de Jean-Baptiste; des appels à un autre type de baptême, «au nom de Jésus», s'élaborent, dont celui des textes dits de Paul [si celui-ci a existé, Flavius Josèphe n'en parlant jamais]; et enfin l'invention du personnage Jésus-Christ dans des textes se développe après 70, mettant en scène la “mort” et la “résurrection” du peuple juif; après quoi on peut alors constater (et dans un contexte explicitement conquis par l'hellénisme) la croyance au caractère historique de ce qui était “annoncé-réalisé” dans ces textes.

What Charbonnel is saying, in short:
  • 1) rebel messianism in Judea and in the Diaspora: they were called 'Chrestiani', followers of 'Chrestos'.
  • 2) invention of Jesus Christ.
  • 3) "authentication", by Roman authorities (Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, etc) of the existence of historical followers of Jesus Christ by identifying them with the same rebel Chrestiani.
  • 4) the same second century Christians are drawn in error in thinking that the Chrestiani were the early Christians.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2269
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pila

Post by StephenGoranson »

To the question above, "Is [Eric Laupot's] his work highly regarded?" As far as I know, no, at least, not widely.
Acts 11 appears not embarrassed by the name Christian.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Charbonnel joins Eric Laupot on the criminal origin of the label 'Christiani' as the reason of the dating under Pila

Post by Giuseppe »

StephenGoranson wrote: Sun Jul 09, 2023 7:48 am To the question above, "Is [Eric Laupot's] his work highly regarded?" As far as I know, no, at least, not widely.
Acts 11 appears not embarrassed by the name Christian.
Limited to the question of interest,

...i.e. that Suetonius, Pliny ( = hence the same Trajan, until to a second before he read the Pliny's report about the Christians being pacifists), and Tacitus, all considered the Chrestiani/Christiani as not at all the same Christians of Jesus who was called the Christ,...

I think that the Laupot's thesis, even if it is not called as his own thesis, is held by many scholars (in primis Etienne Nodet).
Post Reply