Page 2 of 2

Re: Magharians, a Heretical Hermit Sect c.50 BC?

Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2022 7:35 pm
by yakovzutolmai
billd89 wrote: Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:01 pm Or should we assume the '2nd Creator' idea began generations before 20 AD, within some some radical 'cave community' or synagogal network?
Again, I repeat myself, because my contributions are not being read.

The original YHWH may very well have been a consolidation of the dual-faced god, Osiris and Set as two faces of Ra, Yam and Hadad as two moods of Cronus. And Cronus-as-Atar Ra-as-Min being themselves consolidated as Atar-Min or Atum-Ra. Thus YHVH as Yam Hadad Vav Hamor. Vav meaning hook, such as what Osiris holds, and Hamor being the Sethian donkey of the Hyksos which the Bible is eager to discuss in relation to deity and the inhabitants of Shechem.

So YHVH begins as the concept of consolidation, but vaguely defined within a broader polytheism. With many priesthoods (Aaronite, Levite, Hamorites, Jerusalemites) consolidated under a composite deity.

Thence, Neo-Assyrian hegemony. The scholarship points to a Neo-Assyrian philosophy of many gods which are emanations or variations of a single principle, the later Kabbalistic Ein Sof, but represented as Asshur - who may be the Christian era reference for Joseph, in the context of the Lost Tribes. There is also evidence that Persian religion and identity faced an important filter during the Neo-Assyrian era when Persians lived by Lake Urmia and were subjects of Assyria. The Zoroastrian used of Asshur's solar wings is telling.

From this, considering also the Assyrian demonology, the prophetic tradition, and the Assyrian influence on "Israelite" groups in the Christian era, we see a heavy influence within Judaism. Metatron or Enoch become this Joseph figure, a King of Heaven, the hidden power behind the thrones of the gods. Even with YHWH ascendant, the true power of the cosmos is the Ein Sof, the Metatron.

Next we have Persian influence on Judea, where the idols and priesthoods associated with it are actually, legally consolidated into a kind of monolatry. It's a plausible origin point for the concept of "Yehudim" and the Deuteronomical texts, if they preceded the Pentateuch.

Add in Platonic influence, the Pentateuch, and YHWH merges with the Monad to become Monotheos.

Meanwhile, we still have Samaritan/Israelite Yehudim with loyalty to the old cult system of many gods, recognizing Metatron as the secret one-force, one-principle behind all. YHWH becomes what he emerged to be in the late Israel period: some version of Dagon. So how could he be higher than Asshur?

Meanwhile, in Egypt, the same cults which were teaching Atum-Ra to Shasu still exist. They are teaching that Yahweh is the same as Adam, who is also the Joshua High Priest.

Finally, Pharisees and Sadducees in Jerusalem and Galilee are upholding YHWH as Monotheos and distinct from Babylonian and Egyptian ideas (when that is not at all true).

I favor the notion that Christianity is what happened when the Egyptian and Babylonian "heretics" shared notes in Eastern Galilee.

And I am almost certain that Simon Magus was Simon Boethus, who, as High Priest, was recognized as the new Adam within the system of his own cult from Egypt.

The cult of Melchizedek seems to be a version of the cult of Marduk, which identifies the Asshur second power in heaven as Melchizedek. They, being responsible for the violent messianism and immanentized eschaton. The proof being that Paulina from Josephus and the concept of Pantera are both derivative of Marduk cult ideas.


Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2022 12:46 pm
by billd89
yakovzutolmai wrote: Sun Mar 06, 2022 7:35 pm
billd89 wrote: Wed Mar 24, 2021 2:01 pm Or should we assume the '2nd Creator' idea began generations before 20 AD, within some some radical 'cave community' or synagogal network?
Again, I repeat myself, because my contributions are not being read.
Look at the Date-stamps. I posted that on 3/24/21; you didn't even join this forum until 5/17/2021 - two months later. There's NO WAY you were "repeating yourself" by answering almost a year later.

Re: Magharians, a Heretical Hermit Sect c.50 BC?

Posted: Tue Mar 08, 2022 9:16 pm
by yakovzutolmai
Sorry it was a bit of a drive-by shooting and not keeping with my purposes and self-policed etiquette. The content was posted elsewhere so I had no need to "repeat myself". Apologies. Enthusiasm and all.

Nonetheless, since I have your attention, I would draw your attention to the question of "Who were the Jews?"

I don't think the ethnic identity called Yehudim were exclusive to the captive Judeans in Babylon. I think some other, broader, identity adopted the label in response to the proliferation of Deuteronomical literature by Jewish-Babylonian merchants.

Judeans did not like Samaritans, but did Jesus say they were not of Israel? And what of the Assyrian captivity Israelites still in Mesopotamia? Moreover, if the fifth-fourth century "Yehudim" were previously some other identity that included Israel and Judeans, then the Lost Sheep gains a meaning greater than the gospel narrative.

What if Christianity was struggling with Hasmonean (Sadducaical/Pharisaical) Judaism for the allegiance of a broader group of Israelites who maybe never were fully Jewish? I'm not sure what this identity is, but we can say it's non-Aramean, non-Arab (as defined in Roman times), non-Assyrian, non-Phoenician, non-Chaldean, non-Edomite. That does not mean it is "Jewish".

One possibility are the former Amorites, which "disappeared" as an identifiable ethnic group after the Bronze Age Collapse. What if they became the Yehudim? I'm not so sure this is right, although at one time Amorite = Canaanite was loosely correct. Maybe we could say something like ethnic Semites where Arameans might have been recognized as only linguistically Semitic. Maybe ALL recognized ethnic Semites (Amorites, Canaanites, Israelites, Judeans, Elba-ites, Babylonian Amorites, Mari-ites) consolidated in the meta-culture as "Yehudim" by the Roman Era, bringing the variety of their religious baggage with them.

So, with regards to the original question about these sects, I'd explore whether we have the right understanding of who even is counted as a Jew from 500 BC - 200 AD.