Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The parallel passage in Marqe was mistranslated by MacDonald to say that Moses and the Israelites walked on the water to see the drowned Egyptians. I once talked about this with Benny at McCormick and Schmicks. The text only says the same thing as Philo that the Israelites were standing on the shore and saw the dead bodies of the Egyptians drowned - i.e. baptized - in the sea. *cough* *cough*

And here we go - case closed. The identification of Philo's 'fire-Logos' is well established in Philonic literature:

https://books.google.com/books?id=cOjCk ... lo&f=false

In the end this simply goes back to the idea that the Logos is the primal 'fire/man' אֵשׁ witnessed by Ezekiel. There is nothing more to say. This is everything. This is the origin of the original nomen sacrum. This is 'Jesus.' This is the end of Biblical studies as we know it. Either that or I have to get back to work.

You had me at Exodus 3.

And the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush.

But the origin of the nomina sacra (IS, IHS, IH, etc. -- and also the non-nominative forms) is another thing.

But that the fire was the Logos for Philo - that is what sealed it up for me. Of course if I had a brain I would have remembered the implications of Exodus 33 eshdat lamo. But brain no work too good.

On the origins of the nomen sacrum I've mentioned this before but the throne of St Mark has this curiosity on it - a very ancient (more ancient than the mirror letters beside it) inscription to the far left meant to be read left to right:



Alef-Shin on the original episcopal throne of Alexandria (or so I determined in a peer reviewed article at the Journal of Coptic Studies)

There it is - in square letters rather than Paleo Hebrew. I even got a guy at Oxford who was willing to try and test the dating of the inscription through some technique. I've just been so busy. But now its the holidays. I might get a free half hour to write to him. If he could just date the gunk in the much better quality two letters here than the shitty quality letters that follow, that would be enough to start with the nomen sacrum argument.

You see the two quality letters on the left against the shitty letters that came letter to the right:



and my own personal photos:



I am telling you 'fire/Jesus' is inexplicably written on the oldest artifact from the Alexandrian Church now in Venice.

Back to the fire at the burning bush being identified as 'an angel of providence' by Philo. David Runia, of course not as enlightened as Richard Carrier but someone who read at least one book by Philo notes -

Though in the majority of these texts the providential activity is ascribed to God, we must certainly regard the Logos as the agent of divine Providence (cf. above II 5.2.2.). In Agr.51 the providential task is actually delegated to the Logos. http://dare.ubvu.vu.nl/bitstream/1871/1 ... hilo_i.pdf

So when Philo says what he says about this being in the fire who is God's image and is "the angel ... who is the emblem of the providence of God" that should have been enough right there. But now we have in addition to that David Runia whom, you might notice in the link above ACTUALLY WROTE A BOOK OR TWO ABOUT PHILO. I know that Carrier has divine powers of recognition (odd thing for an atheist). But surely even with these gifts the idea that someone who has actually written one, two, three, four ... who can count any more ... books about Philo MIGHT be a better place to start than a guy trying to destroy Christianity if you're actually interested in knowing what Philo said. Maybe? Maybe, maybe? But then again, maybe you're not that interested in finding out what Philo said ...

According to Marqe, 'fire' led the Israelites:

And the people of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth (Ex. xii. 37; Targ.), the cloud above them, the fire before them - six hundred thousand, apparelled in humility, goodness and grace supporting them there. Succoth was situated on a highway, a place to which all travelers went.