Originally Posted by bacht

Is the theological point of Jesus being a carpenter that he came to build a new 'house', replacing the old 'dwelling' of God (the temple)?

Originally Posted by avi

It is the Quran, not Muslims, which offers, in my opinion, the source most likely to yield fruit in this inquiry.

The general question is this: Why would this newest branch of Judaism, originating in the 7th century CE, consider Jesus and John the Baptist, equally, as prophets?

Orthodox Judaism has no such regard for them. Orthodox Christianity in the 6th and 7th centuries no longer regarded John and Jesus as of the same character, or magnitude. Prior to the first writing of the Quran, in recorded history, both men were linked, jointly, as if approximately equals in stature, only at the time of Constantine, who assigned John's birthday as the single most important holiday of the pagan calendar, the summer solstice, assigning to Jesus' birthday the second most revered pagan holiday, the winter solstice.

My guess, only fiction, not fact, is that a copy of "Memoirs of the Apostles" escaped the fires of Constantine, having traveled down to Mecca or Medina, just before Constantine's ascension to power, where it remained for a couple hundred years, largely unread, and ignored. Then the camel caravan thief, with his new treasury of gold and silks, hired some itinerant Greek speaking literate men to assist him in creating his own religion, since he himself was illiterate.

I simply lack imagination sufficient to account for the peculiarity, of regarding both John and Jesus as prophets of the same rank, absent such a mechanism--i.e. a sequestered volume of ancient writings, contradictory to all available papyrus, extant in that era. Had the founder of Islam examined contemporary Christianity for inspiration, he could not have imagined that John and Jesus occupied the same stratum in the theological universe. Had he remained convinced of the validity of orthodox Judaism, the two would not have appeared in the Quran, at all. Why did the founder of Islam focus only on those two men, and not others in the Christian myth: for example, Peter, the rock?

Why is there no mention in the Quran, of Paul, who, according to Galatians, visited Saudi Arabia? According to me, i.e. more fiction, "Memoirs of the Apostles" was written well before Paul arrived on the scene, hence, no one in Saudi Arabia had ever heard of Paul, since he would not have been mentioned in the Memoirs.

avi

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Does it not bother you [avi] (I already know it does not bother aa) that when Justin Martyr quotes from the "memoir(s)", (plural) that he is quoting from the gospels?

Originally Posted by avi

It is the Quran, not Muslims, which offers, in my opinion, the source most likely to yield fruit in this inquiry.

The general question is this: Why would this newest branch of Judaism, originating in the 7th century CE, consider Jesus and John the Baptist, equally, as prophets?

Orthodox Judaism has no such regard for them. Orthodox Christianity in the 6th and 7th centuries no longer regarded John and Jesus as of the same character, or magnitude. Prior to the first writing of the Quran, in recorded history, both men were linked, jointly, as if approximately equals in stature, only at the time of Constantine, who assigned John's birthday as the single most important holiday of the pagan calendar, the summer solstice, assigning to Jesus' birthday the second most revered pagan holiday, the winter solstice.

My guess, only fiction, not fact, is that a copy of "Memoirs of the Apostles" escaped the fires of Constantine, having traveled down to Mecca or Medina, just before Constantine's ascension to power, where it remained for a couple hundred years, largely unread, and ignored. Then the camel caravan thief, with his new treasury of gold and silks, hired some itinerant Greek speaking literate men to assist him in creating his own religion, since he himself was illiterate.

I simply lack imagination sufficient to account for the peculiarity, of regarding both John and Jesus as prophets of the same rank, absent such a mechanism--i.e. a sequestered volume of ancient writings, contradictory to all available papyrus, extant in that era. Had the founder of Islam examined contemporary Christianity for inspiration, he could not have imagined that John and Jesus occupied the same stratum in the theological universe. Had he remained convinced of the validity of orthodox Judaism, the two would not have appeared in the Quran, at all. Why did the founder of Islam focus only on those two men, and not others in the Christian myth: for example, Peter, the rock?

Why is there no mention in the Quran, of Paul, who, according to Galatians, visited Saudi Arabia? According to me, i.e. more fiction, "Memoirs of the Apostles" was written well before Paul arrived on the scene, hence, no one in Saudi Arabia had ever heard of Paul, since he would not have been mentioned in the Memoirs.

avi

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Not all. Why should it? Justin Martyr was not born until the second century. There is not any credible evidence that he ever spoke with anyone who supposedly saw Jesus perform miracles, and saw Jesus after he rose from the dead.

Justin Martyr was a fan of Bible prophecy. No rational person would be a fan of Bible prophecy. Justin Martyr was merely a Christian propagandist.

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Does it not bother you (I already know it does not bother aa) that when Justin Martyr quotes from the "memoir(s)", (plural) that he is quoting from the gospels?

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, Justin Martyr did refer to the "Memoirs of the Apostles" as Gospels but he did not claim that he had four "Memoirs of the Apostles".

"First Apolgy" LXVI

Based on Justin Marty's birth narrative of Jesus taken from the "Memoirs of the Apostles" it would appear he had a version of the Gospels that simultaneously contained parts similar to what is found in present day gMatthew and gLuke. And it must be noted that Justin did make mention of any genealogy in the "Memoirs of the Apostles".


"Dialogue with Trypho" LXXVIII The "Memoirs of the Apostles" mentioned Cyrenius which is absent in gMatthew but present in gLuke and also it mentions that Jesus was born in a cave which cannot be found in gMatthew or gLuke.

And further of all the Church writers it would appear that it was ONLY Justin Martyr who did NOT attribute any specific author to his Gospels called "Memoirs of the Apostles".

It would appear Justin Martyr BELIEVED they were written by the apostles and those who followed them but seem to have no names of the authors up to the middle of the 2nd century.

Originally Posted by aa5874

And if we assume it was NOT Teknon, "young child" but Tektwn, "carpenter" just as it is found? What next?

Origen had no problem with "carpenter" in gMatthew.

Origen has destroyed Mark 6.3.

Originally Posted by darstec

Origen wrote in Greek and would have used tekton or tecton which certainly does not mean carpenter. In fact almost every instance of the word in Greek literature refers at least to a highly skilled, highly paid artisan such as a Tiffany or a ship builder or a builder of cities.

I think the problem arises when Origen's Greek works are translated into Latin (faber is the Latin word used) where the more diminutive meaning of carpenter comes from. By then the "poor" Joshua becomes vogue, neglecting the stories of the Magi's considerable gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh paid in tribute to the greatest prince on earth as the story in the gospel goes. Just look at another prince who was paid tribute, namely Solomon. I'm not so sure the authors of those two gospels mean to imply a mere laborer or peasant.

The Joshua portrayed in the NT knew far too much of the royal court and money to be a poor peasant. But the poor, uneducated peasant just happened to be the target audience for the budding Christian religion of the fourth century. It also seems like it is the only source of new prospects today as Bishop Tutu said to his friend, pope Benny when he was elected pope.