Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 12:14 AM

Here are some of the places in the Samaritan liturgy that the same name אישו (= His Man) appears http://books.google.com/books?id=vtZ...%22%20&f=false Please remember this is only Book One in the series. Ten places.

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 12:17 AM

Notice also how many times the word 'Man' is evoked in the inscription.

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 12:46 AM

Samaritan Aramaic (not Hebrew) references to Moses as God's man (= His Man) in Marqe:

Quote:

The righteous one, who was from Isaac, he taught in the valley of the Yabbok when he stood with His man, and he touched the hollow of his thigh (Gen. xxxii. 25). (p. 79)

Blessed is our Lord who magnifies His beloved and cares for them in all their activity. It behoves us to walk in the ways of life and not depart from the True One, but to observe the command of Moses, His Man. (p. 149)

Always God extends His abundant goodness and grace, but Israel are provocative. God says, "That I may consume"160 (Ex. xxxii. 10; Targ.), but Moses His Man prays and says, " Turn from thy fierce wrath" (Ex. xxxii. 12; Targ.). By reason of his prayer God repents of all the affliction which threatened to take place. Praised be the Merciful One whose mercies are hidden from His servants, who guards them when they are repentant181 and for their sake preserves their children, that He may teach them of His grace, that they may walk in obedience to His will. Let us believe in Him and in Moses His prophet, and let us bow down before Him and testify, saying, "There is only one God." (p. 167)

If the first reference was written in Hebrew then you would have THE EXACT EQUIVALENT of Justin Martyr's claim in Dialogue 125:

Quote:

The righteous one, who was from Isaac, He taught in the valley of the Yabbok when he stood with אישו, and he (= אישו) touched the hollow of his thigh (Gen. xxxii. 25). (p. 79)

D C Allison's [Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History p. 299] summary of Justin Dial 125:

Quote:

According to Justin (Dial. 125.3), Jesus bore the name “Israel,” with which he christened Jacob after wrestling with him.

There is something here, that is massively important and hitherto unrecognized by scholarship.

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 01:00 AM

I bet Benny tells me that Jacob is אישו but same difference as the names change.

DCHindley · 07-05-2013, 06:32 AM

Stephan,

Sometimes I think you think everything is distantly related to Marcionites.

Could you please cite some sort of authority or some more than accidental sources for this claim?

I have heard of them being related to the baptizing sects usually associated with John the Baptist (Mandaean Drāšā D-Yaḥyā "Book of John") and the Elkesites (Berlin Mani Codex), but to Marcionites?

Is this related to your latest linguistic excursion into your grand theory that Mani was influenced by Marcion's teachings? :thinking:

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

And what does 'being a Christian mean'? I think the Mandaeans were distantly related to the Marcionites. But again, what is a Christian? I have always thought the Marcionites were sort of Jewish, hence Tertullian directing the same treatise basically against Jews and Marcionites.

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 07:38 AM

Well, I don't mean to get off on an unwanted tangent but in the strictest sense of the word, all the Christian sects are 'related.' The Orthodox and every heretical group right? There is demonstrable proof that the Manichaeans reused a Mandaean hymn so they are 'related.' There is evidence that the Manichaeans saw Marcion as one of the 'heralds' of Mani. So at the very least not only are the Manichaeans and the Marcionites and the Manichaeans and the Mandaeans 'related' but even the Marcionites and the Mandaeans too. Like two people 'related' through marriage (i.e. 'inlaws'). But I do suspect that the relationship between two 'antinomian' Jewish sects has to be even stronger than that. Have you actually thought through your criticism of my statement or is something else at work here.

Jaybees · 07-05-2013, 07:46 AM

I've skimmed through the 36 postings to this thread, so I undoubtedly missed the obvious comment which is: "What in the world difference would it make whether or not Jesus ever existed?" So long as the belief that Jesus existed continues, that's what counts.

Suppose, just for kicks, that the myth-sayers are correct, that Jesus is all a figment of some 1st Century scribes. So what? As long as the churches are full, the coffers replenished, the soothing words said over and over again---that's all that matters.

arnoldo · 07-05-2013, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

And what does 'being a Christian mean'? I think the Mandaeans were distantly related to the Marcionites. But again, what is a Christian? I have always thought the Marcionites were sort of Jewish, hence Tertullian directing the same treatise basically against Jews and Marcionites.

To R. Hiyya bar Abba and “Trypho” being christian meant misinterpreting jewish scriptures among other things. For example, Trypho makes the objection that Jesus can't be the messiah since Elijah did not anoint him which would eventually bring about the “great and terrible day of the Lord.” Justin explains that this would eventually be fulfilled in the second advent of Christ. Trypho seems to “buy” Justin's argument (of the two advents) to some degree but perhaps Hiyya bar Abba would not be so accommodating.

Quote:

R. Hiyya bar Abba said: If a whoreson should say to you, "They are two gods," quote God as saying in reply: I am the One of the sea and I am the One of Sinai.

R. Hiyya bar Abba taught: Should a whoreson say to you, "They are two gods," reply to him, Scripture does not say "The gods have spoken ... face after face" but The Lord has spoken with you face after face.

Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism by Alan Segal (or via: amazon.co.uk)

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 08:14 AM

Right but the Dialogue doesn't exist in its original form. It was re-edited at the end of the second century

http://www.stephanhuller.blogspot.co...s-were-re.html

So the bottom line is - take the Dialogue with a grain of salt.

stephan huller · 07-05-2013, 01:23 PM

For people who don't understand how Jews read Genesis 32. A rabbi spells it out:

Quote:

Jewish history has shown there to be a mystical being, only called “Ish” by the Torah, who has stalked our history. This apparition made its first appearance when it wrestled with Jacob throughout the night. When the dawn rose, the “Ish”, to disengage himself from Jacob's firm grip, blessed him by changing his name from Jacob to the far superior appellation of Israel. But it was also apparent that the Ish had hurt Jacob by striking him in his thigh, forcing him to limp.

He is again found when he accosts Joseph and sends him in the direction of his brothers who were waiting to do him harm. Joseph nearly was killed for listening to the Ish, but ultimately rose to great heights when he became the viceroy of Egypt, allowing Jewish history to continue on its proper course. There is little doubt that this Ish again perpetrated great harm to the Jewish people during the Holocaust, although they rose from the ashes to return to their ancient homeland, Israel. As Jewish history shows clear signs of moving toward the fulfillment of biblical prophecies, it is hoped that this Ish will have no more negative influence, but will be instrumental in leading us to the final redemption.

http://books.google.com/books?id=KLJ...gbs_navlinks_s

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-05-2013, 12:14 AM	#31
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Here are some of the places in the Samaritan liturgy that the same name אישו (= His Man) appears http://books.google.com/books?id=vtZ...%22%20&f=false Please remember this is only Book One in the series. Ten places.

07-05-2013, 12:17 AM	#32
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Notice also how many times the word 'Man' is evoked in the inscription.

07-05-2013, 01:00 AM	#34
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I bet Benny tells me that Jacob is אישו but same difference as the names change.

07-05-2013, 07:38 AM	#36
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Well, I don't mean to get off on an unwanted tangent but in the strictest sense of the word, all the Christian sects are 'related.' The Orthodox and every heretical group right? There is demonstrable proof that the Manichaeans reused a Mandaean hymn so they are 'related.' There is evidence that the Manichaeans saw Marcion as one of the 'heralds' of Mani. So at the very least not only are the Manichaeans and the Marcionites and the Manichaeans and the Mandaeans 'related' but even the Marcionites and the Mandaeans too. Like two people 'related' through marriage (i.e. 'inlaws'). But I do suspect that the relationship between two 'antinomian' Jewish sects has to be even stronger than that. Have you actually thought through your criticism of my statement or is something else at work here.

07-05-2013, 07:46 AM	#37
Jaybees Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Hawaii Posts: 9,233	I've skimmed through the 36 postings to this thread, so I undoubtedly missed the obvious comment which is: "What in the world difference would it make whether or not Jesus ever existed?" So long as the belief that Jesus existed continues, that's what counts. Suppose, just for kicks, that the myth-sayers are correct, that Jesus is all a figment of some 1st Century scribes. So what? As long as the churches are full, the coffers replenished, the soothing words said over and over again---that's all that matters.

07-05-2013, 08:14 AM	#39
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Right but the Dialogue doesn't exist in its original form. It was re-edited at the end of the second century http://www.stephanhuller.blogspot.co...s-were-re.html So the bottom line is - take the Dialogue with a grain of salt.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.