Page 1 of 2
Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Thu Mar 10, 2022 9:59 pm
by Giuseppe
Did Jesus live in a distant, obscure past?
Price looks at G. A. Wells' concept that Jesus was a legendary hero of a more distant or obscure past. If an historical Jesus cannot be linked securely with Pilate, are the Gospels arbitrarily moving such a Wellsian Jesus up to Pilate's time, in an inviting remake of Christian origins? The suggestion is also made that 1 Cor 2:8, Col 2:15 and other passages which seem to portray Jesus' death at the hands of the demon spirits of the heavens are offered by early writers as an alternative to locating that death at an unknown historical time. But here I would suggest that legendary figures usually develop legends on earth, and I could expand on that to counter the Wellsian idea by pointing out that the epistles reflect no earthly setting for Jesus, legendary, obscure, or otherwise -- which I regard as a significant silence. (Even Hercules, a hero who can't be located in a specific historical time by his legends, still had those legends placed on earth.) The Talmudic placement of Jesus in a more distant, obscure past -- around 100 BCE -- is only one of several later Jewish traditions about when Jesus lived.
When we look at the contrast between gnostic and orthodox treatments of Jesus, we find among the gnostics an emphasis on a docetic Christ and an ongoing claim to 'revelation' teachings by Jesus. These are found in a series of dialogue Gospels in the second century, to which the orthodox church countered by emphasizing the historical boundaries of Christ's life and thus a fixed limitation on the 'genuine' acceptable teachings. But this suggests that the gnostic Christ was earlier a spiritual revealer figure, not a legendary earthly one. Price points out that when the gnostics eventually "assimilated the basic Markan story-plot" (as in those dialogue Gospels of a post-resurrection teaching Jesus) they tended to retain a docetic nature for him.
https://depts.drew.edu/jhc/doherty_price.html
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 3:07 am
by Baley
In my view the historical Jesus came first. But in the end this historical figure was not relevant for Paul and gentile christians and was overshadowed by the Christ figure of Paul's visions. Indeed the historical Jesus was probably nationalistic, pro Law and antithetical to Paul's Christ. Paul hijacked a Jewish messiah movement and turned Jesus into a cosmic phenomenon, cutting all ties with the historical figure including his name. There was no more need to allude to the earthly life of Jesus as this would only lead to uncomfortable questions and the undermining of Paul's gentile-friendly ideology. Thus the silence on the earthly Jesus is no indication that an earthly Jesus never existed nor for a primacy of a spiritual Jesus figure.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 3:14 am
by Giuseppe
The problem in your view is that it is not only Paul who is silent on Jesus, but also Hebrews, Revelation, Odes of Solomon.
An entire deliberate conspiracy of silence by more authors? Hardly so.
At any case, I have quoted Doherty here on the implications of an early date for docetism. The idea that Jesus's body was not necessary implies that the they didn't come from a view of Jesus as "earthly legendary".
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:21 am
by davidmartin
Baley wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 3:07 am
In my view the historical Jesus came first. But in the end this historical figure was not relevant for Paul and gentile christians and was overshadowed by the Christ figure of Paul's visions. Indeed the historical Jesus was probably nationalistic, pro Law and antithetical to Paul's Christ. Paul hijacked a Jewish messiah movement and turned Jesus into a cosmic phenomenon, cutting all ties with the historical figure including his name. There was no more need to allude to the earthly life of Jesus as this would only lead to uncomfortable questions and the undermining of Paul's gentile-friendly ideology. Thus the silence on the earthly Jesus is no indication that an earthly Jesus never existed nor for a primacy of a spiritual Jesus figure.
Agree in principal but think flagging the historical Jesus as you stated is merely one of the possible options. He could easily have been salvationist rather than pro Law and not entirely antithetical to Paul's Christ, the advantage being that it provides a cleaner route from the historical Jesus to Paul than if Jesus had been completely antithetical. There was common ground but also enough differences to explain the cutting of ties with the historical figure. The Odes of Solomon do actually pay homage to a historical figure as can be deduced by reading them and may be seen to oppose Paul. If there were no historical figure then why the contradiction of Paul being the 'apostle to the gentiles' but Jesus in the gospels sending his apostles out to all the world? This is not explicable unless there was a prior movement and such perturbations in the writings we have are due to interactions between these various groups and not a result of badly written fiction
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:29 am
by Giuseppe
davidmartin wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:21 amif there were no historical figure then why the contradiction of Paul being the 'apostle to the gentiles' but Jesus in the gospels sending his apostles out to all the world?
isn't the
risen Jesus who does that?
If a leader of a sect is hijacked by an usurper (=Paul), I expect the original sectarians (Matthew) preserving the real identity of their leader, not building on the same propaganda (=Marcion or Mark) of the enemy.
When Ukrainians signal the lies of the Russian propaganda, they don't build their case on that same propaganda.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:57 am
by Baley
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:29 am
If a leader of a sect is hijacked by an usurper (=Paul), I expect the original sectarians (Matthew) preserving the real identity of their leader, not building on the same propaganda (=Marcion or Mark) of the enemy.
The original sectarians were destroyed and scattered after the conquest of Jerusalem. The movement of the failed messiah made place for newer forms of Judaism while the pro gentile movement of Paul was free to make up its own (more cosmic) stories without serious opposition.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 6:08 am
by Baley
davidmartin wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 5:21 am
Agree in principal but think flagging the historical Jesus as you stated is merely one of the possible options. He could easily have been salvationist rather than pro Law and not entirely antithetical to Paul's Christ
True, we can't rule this out. It just seems more likely in my eyes that any Jewish messiah movement around this time would be quite nationalist and anti Roman (and therefore antithetical to Paul) in order to be succesful.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 6:08 am
by Giuseppe
They could escape beyond the borders of the Roman empire. Even from the Christians who did so (and they could do so only if they hated the Roman empire), we hear nothing about a Jesus who was different from the Paul's Jesus.
For example, the Elchasaites were Jewish-Christians writing out of the Empire. They adored a giant Christ.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 6:18 am
by Baley
After the Jewish War, the concept of a heavenly messiah replaced the idea of an earthly messiah (who obviously failed). The Elchasaites were probably influenced by this change of concept, too. As were other groups who centered on an earthly saviour.
Re: Doherty: More early is docetism, more early is the Jesus Revealer as opposed to a legendary earthly Jesus
Posted: Fri Mar 11, 2022 6:39 am
by Giuseppe
Baley wrote: ↑Fri Mar 11, 2022 6:18 am
After the Jewish War, the concept of a heavenly messiah replaced the idea of an earthly messiah (who obviously failed). The Elchasaites were probably influenced by this change of concept, too. As were other groups who centered on an earthly saviour.
This fact is surprising:
Jewish-Christians who hated so much Rome that they fled in Arabia, and
Jewish-Christians with a high Christology.