Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

I think ML that they may have been an early offshoot sect of Christians that were trying to assimilate it toward mainstream Judaism (and Paul is similar except he's going for mainstream gentile society with his proprietary gospel).
Paul possibly encounters this sect in Galatians (if this is considered authentic, 1st century text) but they are still both renegade offshoots from the original thing (hence why Paul denies having had anything to do with the original group in galatians which is nuts otherwise!)
The original had it's own carefully crafted spirituality that these later offshoots riffed on, and all it takes is a few charismatic later comers to drive the movement off into new directions
I think the only texts we have that have any close link with the original are Thomas, the Odes and John's gospel, of these the first two haven't been tampered with.. the real significant one for me is the Odes and the connections to Thomas it has

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:04 am We could also do this top down, of course

We all know the fable that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian didn't last long

Jewish Christians drifted apart from mainstream Judaism, eventually becoming a minority strand which had mostly disappeared by the fifth century. Jewish–Christian gospels have been lost except for fragments, so there is considerable uncertainty as to the scriptures used by this group.

The split of Christianity and Judaism took place during the first centuries CE.[1][2] While the First Jewish–Roman War and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE were main events, the separation was a long-term process, in which the boundaries were not clear-cut.[1][2]

How convenient! That's like a father dumping mother and child shortly after birth - yet whereas the child is evidence of there having been a father, nothing in the NT demonstrates Judaic origins.
Where are the millions of "Jews for Jesus"? Why have there never been any at all whatsoever?

If Judaics aren't convinced of the Judaism in the NT, shouldn't we trace those Judaisms and try to hold them against the light?
Most of not all fail the test when we do, such is for sure - so then why is there so much fake Judaism in the NT?
Why is Paul trying so hard to convince his Judaic audience in Romans that Chrestianity is the fulfillment of their god's promise? And why does the complete absence of Judaic Christians attest to his utter failure from the very start of his writings until the very end of them?

Two things become immediately clear:
1. Christianity just had to have Judaic origins
2. Not a single Judaic has bought that fable ever since

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that none of the Judaic origins in the NT are credible - which raises the question why they're there.
And when we observe the entire Nag Hammadi Library we find merely a few Judaic key words: fasting, praying, circumcision, Sabbath

Do those few words justify calling the NHL Judaic? I wouldn't think so, because no one has ever dared to do the latter.
So can the NHL be deemed to contain Christian origins?
Certainly not, I would say. What say you?

I for one would like to know what Jewish Christian Gospel fragments the article is referring to.

davidmartin wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:55 am I think ML that they may have been an early offshoot sect of Christians that were trying to assimilate it toward mainstream Judaism (and Paul is similar except he's going for mainstream gentile society with his proprietary gospel).
Paul possibly encounters this sect in Galatians (if this is considered authentic, 1st century text) but they are still both renegade offshoots from the original thing (hence why Paul denies having had anything to do with the original group in galatians which is nuts otherwise!)
The original had it's own carefully crafted spirituality that these later offshoots riffed on, and all it takes is a few charismatic later comers to drive the movement off into new directions
I think the only texts we have that have any close link with the original are Thomas, the Odes and John's gospel, of these the first two haven't been tampered with.. the real significant one for me is the Odes and the connections to Thomas it has

I'm pondering along for a bit there, but I am having great difficulties because of:

1. the complete absence of Judaism in the NHL
2. the overwhelming presence of "gnostic Genesis" in many of these writings that apparently try to fill a void

When I look at the NHL, I see a lot of cryptic texts, and many of these try to conjure a "beginnings", to bring order into chaos, to invent a Genesis chapter 1 of their own making.
If they had any connection with Judaism, why not just use the Tanakh? I may have wild and crazy ideas in the eyes of the casual observer, but not even I will assert that the Tanakh wasn't readily available to the authors of the NHL.
If they had any connection with Judaism, why don't they refute the Tanakh? I would certainly expect them to state that Genesis 1 is rubbish because xyz, and that The Truth is their own ramblings because ABC

I can only conclude that the complete absence of Judaism in the NHL save for a few battered Judaic customs neatly aligns with the utter void of anything Judaic in their creation stories

Paul is, in Romans, selling a gentile religion to a Judaic audience - it doesn't get any more crystal-clear than that when we read the text. Surely that is diametrically opposed to what the Church wants us to think, but most of the NT is in that regard

Galatians?
4:21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, do you not understand what the law says?
I would really love to read something different, honestly - but Galatians appears to be nothing more than Paul trying hard to keep Judeo-Christians from turning back to Judaism.
5:2Take notice: I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.
Apparently these are fresh Hebrews, uncircumcised

I'll have another look at the Odes, though I remember it having very little traces of Christianity, if any

I think the gnostic creation accounts are the mythologised history of the early church from a gnostic perspective
The "mother" is Magdalene, the "demiurge" is the apostle. They are like warped gospel accounts, they weren't concerned with genesis they were concerned with the history of their own movement. the demiurge spawned the orthodox church for which some blamed the mother
The Odes mention the apostle frequently as an enemy who is trying to mess things up, later this was mythologised by the gnostics

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 6:06 am

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:04 am We could also do this top down, of course

We all know the fable that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian didn't last long

Jewish Christians drifted apart from mainstream Judaism, eventually becoming a minority strand which had mostly disappeared by the fifth century. Jewish–Christian gospels have been lost except for fragments, so there is considerable uncertainty as to the scriptures used by this group.

The split of Christianity and Judaism took place during the first centuries CE.[1][2] While the First Jewish–Roman War and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE were main events, the separation was a long-term process, in which the boundaries were not clear-cut.[1][2]

How convenient! That's like a father dumping mother and child shortly after birth - yet whereas the child is evidence of there having been a father, nothing in the NT demonstrates Judaic origins.
Where are the millions of "Jews for Jesus"? Why have there never been any at all whatsoever?

If Judaics aren't convinced of the Judaism in the NT, shouldn't we trace those Judaisms and try to hold them against the light?
Most of not all fail the test when we do, such is for sure - so then why is there so much fake Judaism in the NT?
Why is Paul trying so hard to convince his Judaic audience in Romans that Chrestianity is the fulfillment of their god's promise? And why does the complete absence of Judaic Christians attest to his utter failure from the very start of his writings until the very end of them?

Two things become immediately clear:
1. Christianity just had to have Judaic origins
2. Not a single Judaic has bought that fable ever since

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that none of the Judaic origins in the NT are credible - which raises the question why they're there.
And when we observe the entire Nag Hammadi Library we find merely a few Judaic key words: fasting, praying, circumcision, Sabbath

Do those few words justify calling the NHL Judaic? I wouldn't think so, because no one has ever dared to do the latter.
So can the NHL be deemed to contain Christian origins?
Certainly not, I would say. What say you?

I for one would like to know what Jewish Christian Gospel fragments the article is referring to.

Probably to the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these are mentioned as known (in some cases quoted) by the Ante Nicene heresiologists however we have no independent extant text for any of them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish% ... an_gospels

Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 7:55 pm

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 6:06 am

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:04 am We could also do this top down, of course

We all know the fable that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian didn't last long

Jewish Christians drifted apart from mainstream Judaism, eventually becoming a minority strand which had mostly disappeared by the fifth century. Jewish–Christian gospels have been lost except for fragments, so there is considerable uncertainty as to the scriptures used by this group.

The split of Christianity and Judaism took place during the first centuries CE.[1][2] While the First Jewish–Roman War and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE were main events, the separation was a long-term process, in which the boundaries were not clear-cut.[1][2]

How convenient! That's like a father dumping mother and child shortly after birth - yet whereas the child is evidence of there having been a father, nothing in the NT demonstrates Judaic origins.
Where are the millions of "Jews for Jesus"? Why have there never been any at all whatsoever?

If Judaics aren't convinced of the Judaism in the NT, shouldn't we trace those Judaisms and try to hold them against the light?
Most of not all fail the test when we do, such is for sure - so then why is there so much fake Judaism in the NT?
Why is Paul trying so hard to convince his Judaic audience in Romans that Chrestianity is the fulfillment of their god's promise? And why does the complete absence of Judaic Christians attest to his utter failure from the very start of his writings until the very end of them?

Two things become immediately clear:
1. Christianity just had to have Judaic origins
2. Not a single Judaic has bought that fable ever since

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that none of the Judaic origins in the NT are credible - which raises the question why they're there.
And when we observe the entire Nag Hammadi Library we find merely a few Judaic key words: fasting, praying, circumcision, Sabbath

Do those few words justify calling the NHL Judaic? I wouldn't think so, because no one has ever dared to do the latter.
So can the NHL be deemed to contain Christian origins?
Certainly not, I would say. What say you?

I for one would like to know what Jewish Christian Gospel fragments the article is referring to.

Probably to the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these are mentioned as known (in some cases quoted) by the Ante Nicene heresiologists however we have no independent extant text for any of them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish% ... an_gospels

"The Jewish–Christian Gospels were gospels of a Jewish Christian character"

FFS! This shit is just pathetic.

Seriously!

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 9:08 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 7:55 pm

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 6:06 am

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:04 am We could also do this top down, of course

We all know the fable that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian didn't last long

Jewish Christians drifted apart from mainstream Judaism, eventually becoming a minority strand which had mostly disappeared by the fifth century. Jewish–Christian gospels have been lost except for fragments, so there is considerable uncertainty as to the scriptures used by this group.

The split of Christianity and Judaism took place during the first centuries CE.[1][2] While the First Jewish–Roman War and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE were main events, the separation was a long-term process, in which the boundaries were not clear-cut.[1][2]

How convenient! That's like a father dumping mother and child shortly after birth - yet whereas the child is evidence of there having been a father, nothing in the NT demonstrates Judaic origins.
Where are the millions of "Jews for Jesus"? Why have there never been any at all whatsoever?

If Judaics aren't convinced of the Judaism in the NT, shouldn't we trace those Judaisms and try to hold them against the light?
Most of not all fail the test when we do, such is for sure - so then why is there so much fake Judaism in the NT?
Why is Paul trying so hard to convince his Judaic audience in Romans that Chrestianity is the fulfillment of their god's promise? And why does the complete absence of Judaic Christians attest to his utter failure from the very start of his writings until the very end of them?

Two things become immediately clear:
1. Christianity just had to have Judaic origins
2. Not a single Judaic has bought that fable ever since

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that none of the Judaic origins in the NT are credible - which raises the question why they're there.
And when we observe the entire Nag Hammadi Library we find merely a few Judaic key words: fasting, praying, circumcision, Sabbath

Do those few words justify calling the NHL Judaic? I wouldn't think so, because no one has ever dared to do the latter.
So can the NHL be deemed to contain Christian origins?
Certainly not, I would say. What say you?

I for one would like to know what Jewish Christian Gospel fragments the article is referring to.

Probably to the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these are mentioned as known (in some cases quoted) by the Ante Nicene heresiologists however we have no independent extant text for any of them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish% ... an_gospels

"The Jewish–Christian Gospels were gospels of a Jewish Christian character"

FFS! This shit is just pathetic.

Seriously!

"And even though they have been lost, as we explicitly dare to say because that helps to suggest that they existed, we know for sure that those Jewish–Christian Gospels were gospels of a Jewish Christian character because we just very, very desperately need that to be true"

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 9:46 pm

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 9:08 pm

Leucius Charinus wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 7:55 pm

lclapshaw wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 6:06 am

mlinssen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 03, 2023 5:04 am We could also do this top down, of course

We all know the fable that https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christian didn't last long

Jewish Christians drifted apart from mainstream Judaism, eventually becoming a minority strand which had mostly disappeared by the fifth century. Jewish–Christian gospels have been lost except for fragments, so there is considerable uncertainty as to the scriptures used by this group.

The split of Christianity and Judaism took place during the first centuries CE.[1][2] While the First Jewish–Roman War and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE were main events, the separation was a long-term process, in which the boundaries were not clear-cut.[1][2]

How convenient! That's like a father dumping mother and child shortly after birth - yet whereas the child is evidence of there having been a father, nothing in the NT demonstrates Judaic origins.
Where are the millions of "Jews for Jesus"? Why have there never been any at all whatsoever?

If Judaics aren't convinced of the Judaism in the NT, shouldn't we trace those Judaisms and try to hold them against the light?
Most of not all fail the test when we do, such is for sure - so then why is there so much fake Judaism in the NT?
Why is Paul trying so hard to convince his Judaic audience in Romans that Chrestianity is the fulfillment of their god's promise? And why does the complete absence of Judaic Christians attest to his utter failure from the very start of his writings until the very end of them?

Two things become immediately clear:
1. Christianity just had to have Judaic origins
2. Not a single Judaic has bought that fable ever since

Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that none of the Judaic origins in the NT are credible - which raises the question why they're there.
And when we observe the entire Nag Hammadi Library we find merely a few Judaic key words: fasting, praying, circumcision, Sabbath

Do those few words justify calling the NHL Judaic? I wouldn't think so, because no one has ever dared to do the latter.
So can the NHL be deemed to contain Christian origins?
Certainly not, I would say. What say you?

I for one would like to know what Jewish Christian Gospel fragments the article is referring to.

Probably to the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of the Nazarenes. All of these are mentioned as known (in some cases quoted) by the Ante Nicene heresiologists however we have no independent extant text for any of them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish% ... an_gospels

"The Jewish–Christian Gospels were gospels of a Jewish Christian character"

FFS! This shit is just pathetic.

Seriously!

"And even though they have been lost, as we explicitly dare to say because that helps to suggest that they existed, we know for sure that those Jewish–Christian Gospels were gospels of a Jewish Christian character because we just very, very desperately need that to be true"

Exactly.

Only the "aliens built the pyramids" crowd is generally this nutty!

https://youtu.be/a4pWZHwlJ80

Aside from these three hypothetical "Jewish-Christian" apocryphal texts the entire field of textual criticism of NT apocryphal (NTA) texts has historically suffered from the view that many of them are to be perceived as "composite works". One topical example discussed a great deal is the Ascension of Isaiah in which the sub-texts "Martyrdom of Isaiah" was traditionally regarded as having a Jewish origin. (Originally presumed BCE) This practice infests the NTA and extends into some of the texts of the NHL. It is most often invoked to explain stories which included characters or events found in the LXX. This is the "Jewish connection". It's a worry.

People tend to see what they have been taught to see. Another example would be scholars trying to isolate the "Kerygmata Petrou" (the sayings of Peter) from the Clementine Recognitions. Traditional scholars like to think they have discovered original sayings of Peter as a "separate layer" in the text and then postulate the text is "composite".
https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ... etrou.html

Whereas the default investigatory position is that some enterprising (heretical) author cobbled a lot of disparate stuff together, and the text was not authored in chronological layers separated by decades or centuries. Modern study of the "Ascension of Isaiah" is now heading towards that position. Slowly.