A Breakthrough in My Ishu Theory

[Secret Alias]

And this is the thing.

If you listen to the vast majority of modern scholarship, there were no miracles, just an anonymous 'Jesus' guy who emerges from the pages of the gospel of Mark written after the destruction of the temple - post 70 CE. The movement developed around this 'guy' spreads rapidly even though most people didn't have any idea who or what he was.

If alternatively - as I propose - the ur-gospel of Mark in the hands of the Marcionites (cf. the Philosophumena) was about a supernatural being called IC WHO WAS WELL KNOWN AND WELL ATTESTED in the world because of his many attested appearances in the 'Law.' He is the 'stranger' because his well attested appearances are 'strange' - they pop out unexpectedly at many places in the narrative (we all know the list that Justin, Clement and others give). This stranger 'man' is referenced many times in Philo, the most authoritative representative of the 'Jewish tradition' among early Christians. He is well-known, well-attested so the Christian tradition develops according to an obvious and discernable pattern. Mark identifies this 'IC' = Man as having reappeared according to the pattern in the 'Old Testament' to correct certain 'errors' established by Moses therein.

The movement is no longer based around a 'marginal Jew' of dubious historical origins. We don't need to have 'faith' that he existed. Of course he existed. He is attested in the holiest book of all books. He's the Man God who established the original Israel so what was being offered now was a new Israel. It's still non-existent history. It 'never happened.' But the concepts, 'things' and 'realities' ('Israel' and the Jews were known historical commodities) were well-known and well-attested much more than the 'marginal Jew' Jesus Christ.

In short, I think we have a better model for explaining HOW THE RELIGION OF IC DEVELOPED SO RAPIDLY. The concepts and individuals were known and attested.

[Secret Alias]

The traditional model is:

1. a historical man Jesus who accomplishes nothing of note
2. a historical man 'Paul' who see/develops this 'unnoteworthy man' as a/the primal divine being, a figure like the Man god I propose
3. the world picks up on this strange hybrid between a historical individual and a/the primal divine being AND adopts this strange rendering of his name in a form that agrees with the Man god I propose.
4. the gospel of Mark is written likely influenced and merges together (1) (2) and (3)

My model is much simpler:

Someone who is Paul and Mark just invents a narrative about the Man God coming to earth to announce the end of Judaism and replace it with a new Israel. His credibility, his appeal, his believability is that He established the original Israel. This 'Man' appears in the holy narrative at the core of the Jewish religion, the Torah. He is well known and well attested. It all makes more sense IMHO. Just figure out the Marcionite or parallel 'harmony' gospel of Justin and Tatian and you'll see a flying IC with supernatural powers who isn't a historical figure and resembles very much the shadowy 'Man' of the Torah.

[Chrissy Hansen]

We don't need to have 'faith' that he existed. Of course he existed.

I mean, we do. Because you haven't really demonstrated that there was such a deity. Only speculative "secret" readings and connections. Your model, at the moment, I think requires a lot more "faith" than believing in something that happens all the time: an obscure guy starts a religion.

HOW THE RELIGION OF IC DEVELOPED SO RAPIDLY.

Alternative: obscure people start rapidly evolving religions all the time. Given that Christianity developed out of Judaism, we can look at it, in my opinion, similarly to how various Christian denominations have evolved. Martin Luther, a random monk sitting in an abbey just stewing on problems with indulgences, managed to jumpstart an entire Reformation of the religion in his lifetime.

It seems rather natural and habitual that these events take place.

[Secret Alias]

Because you haven't really demonstrated that there was such a deity.

Sorry to cite Bill Clinton's famous line but "it depends on the meaning of is." He's a non-existent being so 'is' has to be qualified. But I cited from the opening lines of the Tibat Marque, the equivalent of the Talmud for the Samaritan people. He existed in that sense. He's a real 'imaginary being.' End of story. Here's a Samaritan talking about Ish https://books.google.com/books?id=-wn8A ... 20&f=false (p 3)

“Aa'ish” — The angel who guided Yoosef to the camping place of his brothers (Gen. 37:16-17).

This is 'living' (i.e. non-academic) reference to the same phenomenon mentioned by Tal above:

In Gen 37:15 however Joseph was found by "a man" (), which the Samaritan exegesis as reflected by MS A of the ST interprets as angel, , in line with TM. Interestingly enough some MSS of the ST render in this spot as אּישׁה using the Hebrew word instead of the Aramaic in order to deliberately stress non-human nature, as stated by TM. So also for the "man" who struggled with Jacob אּישׁה (ST MS J, Gen 32:25 var ). See below Book III, 1b

The Samaritans maintain or 'preserve' the oldest Israelite tradition much older than rabbinic Judaism which by its very name only dates from the late first/second century.

[Secret Alias]

Here's what Philo says (keeping in mind the bad translation):

(17) Seeing therefore that Joseph has wholly entered into the hollow valleys of the body and of the outward senses, he invites him to come forth out of his holes, and to bring forward the free air of perseverance, going as a pupil to those who were formerly practisers of it themselves, and who are now become teachers of it; but he who appears to himself to have made progress in this, is found to be in error; "For a man," says the holy scripture, "found him wandering in the Plain,"{10}{#ge 37:15.} showing that it is not labour by itself, intrinsically considered, but labour with skill, that is good. (18) For as it is of no use to study music in an unmusical manner, nor grammar without any attention to its true principles, nor, in short, any art whatever in a manner either devoid of art or proceeding on false rules of art, but each art must be cultivated on a strict obedience to its rules; so also it is of no avail to apply one's self to the study of wisdom in a crafty spirit, or to the study of temperance in a nigardly and illiberal frame of mind, nor to courage rashly, nor to piety superstitiously, nor, in fact, to any other science which is in accordance with virtue in an unscientific manner. For all these steps are confessedly erroneous. In reference to which, a law has been delivered to us "to pursue what is just in a just Manner,"{11}{#de 16:20.} that we may cultivate justice and every other virtue by those works which are akin to it, and not by those which are contrary to it. (19) If, therefore, you see any one desiring meat or drink at an unseasonable time, or repudiating baths or ointments at the proper season, or neglecting the proper clothing for his body, or lying on the ground and sleeping in the open air, and by such conduct as this, pretending to a character for temperance and self-denial, you, pitying his self-deception, should show him the true path of temperance, for all the practices in which he has been indulging are useless and profitless labours, oppressing both his soul and body with hunger and all sorts of other hardships. (20) Nor if anyone, using washings and purifications soils his mind, but makes his bodily appearance brilliant; nor if again out of his abundant wealth he builds a temple with brilliant artments of all kinds, at a vast expense; nor if he offers up catombs and never ceases sacrificing oxen; nor if he adorns temples with costly offerings, bringing timber in abundance, and skilful ornaments, more valuable than nay of gold or silver, (21) still let him not be classed among pious men, for he also has wandered out of the way to piety, looking upon ceremonious worship as equivalent to sanctity, and giving gifts to the incorruptible being who will never receive such offerings, and flattering him who can never listen to flattery, who loves genuine worship (and genuine worship is that of the soul which offers the only sacrifice, plain truth), and rejects all spurious ministrations, and those are spurious which are only displays of external riches and extravagance.

VIII. (22) But some say that the proper name of the man who found him wandering in the plain is not mentioned, and they themselves are in some degree mistaken here, because they are unable clearly to discover the true way of this business, for if they had not been mutilated as to the eye of the soul, they would have known that of one who is truly a man, the most proper, and appropriate, and felicitous name is this very name of man, being the most appropriate appelation of a well regulated and rational mind. (23) This man, dwelling in the soul of each individual, is found at one time to be a ruler and monarch, and at another time to be a judge and umpire of the contest which take place in life. At times also he takes the place of a witness and accuser, and without being seen he corrects us from within, not suffering us to open our mouths, but taking up, and restraining, and birdling, with the reins of conscience the selfsatisfied and restive course of the tongue. (24) This convicting feeling it is which inquires of the soul when it sees it wandering about, What seekest thou? Is it wisdom? why then do you go after wickedness? Or is it temperance? but this path of your leads to niggardliness. Or is courage? by this path you will only arrive at rashness. Or are you in pursuit of piety? this is the road to superstition. (25) But if it should say that it is seeking words of wisdom, and that it is longing for them, as for what is nearest akin to its own race, we must not give implicit belief to this, for the question was not, Where are they feeding their flocks? but Where are they tending them? for they who feed their flocks supply nourishment, and all the objects of the outward senses to the animal of the outward senses devoid of reason and insatiable; by means of which outward senses and their indulgence, we become unable to govern ourselves and fall into misfortune; but they who tend their flocks, having the power of rulers and governors, make those gentle which were fierce before, checking the mighty power of the appetites. (26) If, therefore, he was in all sincerity seeking the practices of virtue, he would have sought for them among kings, and not among cup-bearers, or cooks, or confectioners, for these last prepare things which have reference to pleasure, but the former are masters of pleasure.

IX. Therefore the man, who saw the deceit, answered rightly, "They are departed hence." (27) And he shows here the mass of the body; clearly proving that all those by whom labour is practised for the sake of the acquisition of virtue, having left the regions of earth, have determined on contemplating only what is sublime, dragging with them no stain of the body. For he says, too, that he had heard them say, (28) "Let us go to Dotham:" and the name Dotham, being interpreted, means "a sufficient leaving;" showing that it was with no moderate resolution, but with extreme determination that they had decided on leaving and abandoning all those things which do not co-operate towards virtue, just as the customs of women had ceased any longer to affect Sarah. But the passions are female by nature, and we must study to quit them, showing our preference for the masculine characters of the good dispositions. Therefore the interpreter of divers opinions, the wandering Joseph, is found in the plain, that is to say, in a contention of words, having reference to political considerations rather than to useful truth; (29) but there are some adversaries who, by reason of their vigorous body, their antagonists having succumbed, have gained the prize of victory without a struggle, not having even had, to descend into the arena to contend for it, but obtaining the chief honours on account of their incomparable strength. Using such a power as this with reference to the most divine thing that is in us, namely, our mind, "Isaac goes forth into the Plain;"{12}{#ge 24:63.} not for the purpose of contending with any body, since all those who might have been his antagonists, are terrified at the greatness and exceeding excellence of his nature in all things; but only washing to meet in private, and to converse in private with the fellow traveller and guide of his path and of his soul, namely God. (30) And the clearest possible proof of this is, that no one who conversed with Isaac was a mere mortal. Rebecca, that is perseverance, asks her servant, seeing but one person, and having no conception but of one only, "Who is this man who is coming to meet us?" For the soul which perseveres in what is good, is able to comprehend all self-taught wisdom, which is named Isaac, but is not yet able to see God, who is the guide of wisdom. (31) Therefore, also, the servant confirming the fact that he cannot be comprehended who is invisible, and who converses with man invisibly, says, "He is my lord," pointing to Isaac alone. For it is not natural that, if two persons were in sight, he should point to one alone; but the person whom he did not point to, he did not see, inasmuch as he was invisible to all persons of intermediate character.

[Secret Alias]

Now I hate the way Philo writes. It's so flowery and clever. He's very good at not saying what he wants to say. So let's start with the standard English translation of Genesis:

Now his brothers had gone to graze their father’s flocks near Shechem, 13 and Israel said to Joseph, “As you know, your brothers are grazing the flocks near Shechem. Come, I am going to send you to them.”

“Very well,” he replied.

14 So he said to him, “Go and see if all is well with your brothers and with the flocks, and bring word back to me.” Then he sent him off from the Valley of Hebron.

When Joseph arrived at Shechem, a man found him wandering around in the fields and asked him, “What are you looking for?”

16 He replied, “I’m looking for my brothers. Can you tell me where they are grazing their flocks?”

17 “They have moved on from here,” the man answered. “I heard them say, ‘Let’s go to Dothan.’”

So Joseph went after his brothers and found them near Dothan

[Secret Alias]

So let's try to figure out what Philo is saying:

Joseph is sent unto them [his brothers by the ish] because he is unable to bear the somewhat austere knowledge of his father; that he may learn, under gentler instructors [the ish] for he [his father Jacob/Israel] uses a doctrine woven together from divers foundations very variegated and very artfully made, in reference to which the law-giver says, that he had "a robe of many colours made for Him;"{5}{#ge 37:3.} signifying by this that he is an interpreter of labyrinth-like learning, such as is hard to be explained ... He therefore is sent, to be untaught this doctrine [by Jacob/Israel] ... "For behold," says he, "thy brethren are tending their sheep," that is to say, they are governing all the irrational part that is in them, "in Shechem" ... But up to the present time you are full of self-complacency, as one who has received true instruction; for although you have not as yet plainly asserted this, you still say that you are ready to be taught again, when you say, "Behold, here am I," by which expression you appear to me to exhibit your own rashness and easiness to be persuaded more than your readiness to learn; and a proof of what I say is this, "And a little afterwards the true man will find you wandering in the Way,"{8}{#ge 37:15.} ... for he says, "Go and see" ... Seeing therefore that Joseph has wholly entered into the hollow valleys of the body and of the outward senses, he invites him to come forth out of his holes, and to bring forward the free air of perseverance, going as a pupil to those who were formerly practisers of it themselves, and who are now become teachers of it ... "For a man," says the holy scripture, "found him wandering in the Plain,"{10}{#ge 37:15.} showing that it is not labour by itself, intrinsically considered, but labour with skill, that is good ... But some say that the proper name of the man who found him wandering in the plain is not mentioned, and they themselves are in some degree mistaken here, because they are unable clearly to discover the true way of this business, for if they had not been mutilated as to the eye of the soul, they would have known that of one who is truly a man, the most proper, and appropriate, and felicitous name is this very name of man, being the most appropriate appelation of a well regulated and rational mind. This man, dwelling in the soul of each individual, is found at one time to be a ruler and monarch, and at another time to be a judge and umpire of the contest which take place in life. At times also he takes the place of a witness and accuser, and without being seen he corrects us from within, not suffering us to open our mouths, but taking up, and restraining, and birdling, with the reins of conscience the selfsatisfied and restive course of the tongue ... Therefore the man, who saw the deceit, answered rightly, "They are departed hence." (27) And he shows here the mass of the body; clearly proving that all those by whom labour is practised for the sake of the acquisition of virtue, having left the regions of earth, have determined on contemplating only what is sublime, dragging with them no stain of the body. For he says, too, that he had heard them say, (28) "Let us go to Dotham:" and the name Dotham, being interpreted, means "a sufficient leaving;" showing that it was with no moderate resolution, but with extreme determination that they had decided on leaving and abandoning all those things which do not co-operate towards virtue, just as the customs of women had ceased any longer to affect Sarah. But the passions are female by nature, and we must study to quit them, showing our preference for the masculine characters of the good dispositions. Therefore the interpreter of divers opinions, the wandering Joseph, is found in the plain, that is to say, in a contention of words, having reference to political considerations rather than to useful truth; (29) but there are some adversaries who, by reason of their vigorous body, their antagonists having succumbed, have gained the prize of victory without a struggle, not having even had, to descend into the arena to contend for it, but obtaining the chief honours on account of their incomparable strength. Using such a power as this with reference to the most divine thing that is in us, namely, our mind, "Isaac goes forth into the Plain;"{12}{#ge 24:63.} not for the purpose of contending with any body, since all those who might have been his antagonists, are terrified at the greatness and exceeding excellence of his nature in all things; but only washing to meet in private, and to converse in private with the fellow traveller and guide of his path and of his soul, namely God. (30) And the clearest possible proof of this is, that no one who conversed with Isaac was a mere mortal. Rebecca, that is perseverance, asks her servant, seeing but one person, and having no conception but of one only, "Who is this man who is coming to meet us?" For the soul which perseveres in what is good, is able to comprehend all self-taught wisdom, which is named Isaac, but is not yet able to see God, who is the guide of wisdom. (31) Therefore, also, the servant confirming the fact that he cannot be comprehended who is invisible, and who converses with man invisibly, says, "He is my lord," pointing to Isaac alone. For it is not natural that, if two persons were in sight, he should point to one alone; but the person whom he did not point to, he did not see, inasmuch as he was invisible to all persons of intermediate character.

In other words, the ish is God.

[MrMacSon]

Someone who is Paul and Mark just invents a narrative about the Man God coming to earth to announce the end of Judaism and replace it with a new Israel. His credibility, his appeal, his believability is that He established the original Israel. This [A] 'Man' appears in the holy narrative at the core of the Jewish religion, the Torah ... Just figure out the Marcionite or parallel 'harmony' gospel of Justin and Tatian ...

You've argued the point

... Jews avoid using Yahweh and instead use the Hebrew ha Shem (השמ) for 'the Name.' The Samaritans however use the Aramaic שמה "His name." The numerology is the same = 345 = Moses

... the Samaritan Targum has אישה His Man. Tal takes the form to be imitating שמה. But the Hebrew equivalent would be אישו and שמו. I think that's significant.

... Origen explicitly says in his letter to Africanus איש is rendered in Greek as ΙΣ. It's pronounced 'ish' by Jews. But a Targumic rendering of אישו is Ishu/Isu ...

The subtlety of the Hebrew could disguise the presence of Ishu:

And he called (ויקרא) to Moses and the Lord spoke to him (Lev 1:1).

"And he called" (ויקרא) first appears in Genesis 1:5 onward ... It could be read (in a secret way) that one being - the 316 (= Ishu/Ishah) - appeared to Moses and became the conduit for Yahweh ...

... The Torah is rooted in gematria as the name Moses and the 318 men story illustrate ...

So when Moses sees the burning bush. He sees a 'fire man' in the burning bush because God is fire and a man.
When the Israelites see God on the mountain they see fire and man. And so and so on

... it's Israelite. God is man. Man is God. Moses = the Name/His Name (Hebrew/Aramaic). Moses comes down the mountain and he's divine. Moses is called the Man of God or God Man ish ha'Elohim because he's a fully divinized human being https://books.google.com/books?id=VC0Ev ... im&f=false. The story of Israel (a man seeing God according to Philo,1 the upright yasharim according to Jewish tradition which requires the Samaritan ignoring the difference between sin and shin) is the story of the restoration or the attainment of the divinity of Adam from the beginning. The difference between the Christian Ishu and Moses is that the latter became divinized by the former and apparently took issue with some of the commandments made in his name.

While "a narrative about the [ultimate] Man God coming to earth to announce the end of Judaism and replace it with a new Israel" eventuates with/as Christianity; and, while the texts attributed to Paul and/or Mark are key and integral to that, I wouldn't say they 'invented' it.

As you've alluded, Philo had a role1 (as would have the milieu of so-called apocrypha and pseudepigraphica (some labelled 'gnostic' or 'gnostic-Christian') )

The first to use the expression "original man," or "heavenly man," is Philo, in whose view the γενικός, or ουράντος ἄνθρωπος, "as being born in the image of God, has no participation in any corruptible or earth-like essence; whereas the earthly man is made of loose material, called a lump of clay" (De Allegoriis Legum I. xii.). The heavenly man, as the perfect image of 'the Logos', ...an incorporeal intelligence purely an idea; while the earthly man, who was created by God later, is perceptible to the senses and partakes of earthly qualities (De Mundi Opificio i. 46) ... Setting out from the duplicate Biblical account of Adam who was formed in the image of God (Gen. i. 27), and of the first man, whose body God formed from the earth (Gen. ii. 7), [Philo] combines with it the Platonic doctrine of ideas; taking the primordial Adam as the idea, and the created man of flesh and blood as the "image" ...

Th[e] doctrine concerning 'the Logos', as also that of man made "in the likeness" (De Confusione Linguarum, xxviii.), though tinged with true Philonic coloring, is also based on the theology of the Pharisees

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/arti ... dam-kadmon

That Jewish Encyclopeadia entry notes

... the key to Paul's doctrine [is] the first and second Adam. The main passage in Pauline Christology is 1 Cor. xv. 45-50 [in which] there is a double form of man's existence; for God created a heavenly Adam in the spiritual world and an earthly one of clay for the material world. The earthly Adam came first into view, although created last. The first Adam was of flesh and blood and therefore subject to death—merely "a living soul"; the second Adam was "a life-giving spirit"—a spirit whose body, like the heavenly beings in general, was only of a spiritual nature ... Paul...is not dependent upon Philo for his Christology, as most scholars hold; indeed, he differs from him on most essential points. With Philo the original man is an idea; with Paul he is the personality of Jesus. With Philo the first man is the original man; Paul identifies the original man with the second Adam..

How these ideas were processed by Marcion and his followers, and their detractors, and by Justin and his followers, would also be key to how Christian theology was finalised.

[Secret Alias]

On the meaning of the twice repeated Philonic terminology the 'true man'

Dodd is struck by the texts in Philo in which the Logos is equated with the archetypal man ... He speculates that, just as both Philo and John speak of the true God (ἀληθινὸς θεὸς), so the evangelist would have used the Philonic phrase ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος (true man), had he not been bound by tradition to the Aramaizing expression

We find ὁ ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος or ὁ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπος reappearing in Philo in many places (Gig. 32-33 ; Plant. 42 ; Opif. 134 et Leg. I, 31) but Dodd wrongly connects this with the Johannine concept of the 'Son of Man.' The true man = ish.

[Secret Alias]

He is the only ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος (as Philo called the Logos), the Urbild, the archetypal or model Man, the King of men, and “draws all men” to Him. He could not have been so perfect a man without being also divine.