pinkvoy

Philo (20 B.C.–50 A.D.), known also as Philo of Alexandria (Greek: Φίλων ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς), Philo Judaeus, Philo Judaeus of Alexandria, Yedidia, "Philon", and Philo the Jew, was a Hellenistic Jewish Biblical philosopher born in Alexandria.

Philo's dates of (20 B.C.–50 A.D.) overlaps with Jesus, so Philo is a contemporary of Jesus.

The Therapeutae were a Jewish sect in which flourished in Alexandria and other parts of the Diaspora of Hellenistic Judaism in the final years of the Second Temple period. Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BCE - 50 CE) who appears to have been personally acquainted with them.

Philo appears to be personally acquanted with them, and Therapeutae were a Jewish sect.

Philo records that they were "philosophers" (cf. I.2) that lived on a low hill by the Lake Mareotis close to Alexandria in circumstances resembling lavrite life (cf. III.22), and were "the best" of a kind given to "perfect goodness" that "exists in many places in the inhabited world"

Therapeutae were widespread, and put an emphasis on perfect goodness, and by goodness it is obvious that they are seen in terms of religion and holiness.

The term Therapeutae (plural) is Latin, from Philo's Greek plural Therapeutai (Θεραπευταί)

Therapy (in Greek: θεραπεία), or treatment, is the attempted remediation of a health problem, usually following a diagnosis. In the medical field, it is synonymous with the word "treatment". Among psychologists, the term may refer specifically to psychotherapy or "talk therapy".

An English translation of the Greek Θεραπευταί would be "healer". Philo's holiness-healer.

How does this tie in with historic Jesus?

Philo's eyewitness contemporary account of Jewish holiness healers are a sect of Judaism.

Philo is clearly describing a class of believers within the religion of Judaism of the late second Temple period, that overlaps with Jesus time.

First we need an account of religion.
This is wiki's article on religion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values.[note 1] Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.

The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a social aspect.[1] Many religions have organized behaviors, clergy, a definition of what constitutes adherence or membership, congregations of laity, regular meetings or services for the purposes of veneration of a deity or for prayer, holy places (either natural or architectural), and/or scriptures. The practice of a religion may also include sermons, commemoration of the activities of a god or gods, sacrifices, festivals, feasts, trance, initiations, funerary services, matrimonial services, meditation, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture. However, there are examples of religions for which some or many of these aspects of structure, belief, or practices are absent.

The anthropologist Clifford Geertz defined religion as a "system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.[17] Alluding perhaps to Tylor's "deeper motive", Geertz remarked that "we have very little idea of how, in empirical terms, this particular miracle is accomplished. We just know that it is done, annually, weekly, daily, for some people almost hourly; and we have an enormous ethnographic literature to demonstrate it".[18] The theologian Antoine Vergote also emphasized the "cultural reality" of religion, which he defined as "the entirety of the linguistic expressions, emotions and, actions and signs that refer to a supernatural being or supernatural beings"; he took the term "supernatural" simply to mean whatever transcends the powers of nature or human agency.[19]

The sociologist Durkheim, in his seminal book The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, defined religion as a "unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things".[20] By sacred things he meant things "set apart and forbidden — beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them". Sacred things are not, however, limited to gods or spirits.[note 2] On the contrary, a sacred thing can be "a rock, a tree, a spring, a pebble, a piece of wood, a house, in a word, anything can be sacred".[21] Religious beliefs, myths, dogmas and legends are the representations that express the nature of these sacred things, and the virtues and powers which are attributed to them.[22]

In his book ‪The Varieties of Religious Experience‬, the psychologist William James defined religion as "the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine".[23] By the term "divine" James meant "any object that is godlike, whether it be a concrete deity or not"[24] to which the individual feels impelled to respond with solemnity and gravity.[25]

Echoes of James' and Durkheim's definitions are to be found in the writings of, for example, Frederick Ferré who defined religion as "one's way of valuing most comprehensively and intensively".[26] Similarly, for the theologian Paul Tillich, faith is "the state of being ultimately concerned",[27] which "is itself religion. Religion is the substance, the ground, and the depth of man's spiritual life."[28]

When religion is seen in terms of "sacred", "divine", intensive "valuing", or "ultimate concern", then it is possible to understand why scientific findings and philosophical criticisms (e.g. Richard Dawkins) do not necessarily disturb its adherents.[29]

How do we determine if the religion of Philo's Jewish holiness healer is same sect of Judaism as Jesus and his followers?

Jesus and his followers do not state what sect of Judaism they practice. Common sect of Judaism in Second Temple are Pharisees, Sadducee, Zealots, Essenes, etc. Jesus never says "I'm a Pharisee" or "I'm a Sadducee or Zealot or Essene".
Philo does not identify his Jewish holiness healers by name, i.e Mr. Smith sect of Judaism Therepeatuea.

There is no label on Jesus that tells us what sect of Judaism he identifies with.

But there is a way

The duck test tells us how.

Suppose you see a bird walking around in a farm yard. This bird has no label that says 'duck'. But the bird certainly looks like a duck. Also, he goes to the pond and you notice that he swims like a duck. Then he opens his beak and quacks like a duck. Well, by this time you have probably reached the conclusion that the bird is a duck, whether he's wearing a label or not."

Wiki expands on this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

The duck test is a humorous term for a form of inductive reasoning. This is its usual expression:
“ If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. ”

The test implies that a person can identify an unknown subject by observing that subject's habitual characteristics. It is sometimes used to counter abstruse arguments that something is not what it appears to be.

Indiana poet James Whitcomb Riley (1849–1916) may have coined the phrase when he wrote "when I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." The phrase may also have originated much later with Emil Mazey, secretary-treasurer of the United Auto Workers, at a labor meeting in 1946 accusing a person of being a communist.

notice here that Emil Mazey of the United Auto Workers in 1946 was using the duck test to identify COMMUNISTS among labor union workers. Some of these LABOR UNION denied being COMMUNISTS, but if they talked like a COMMUNIST, and protest like a COMMUNIST, they are COMMUNIST.
i
Let's apply the duck test to religion, specifically Jesus and his immediate followers.

Jesus and his followers were Jews. Philo's Therapeutae were sect of Judaism
Jesus lived 4BCE-35CE, Philo's Therapeutae 10CE-40CE.

If we have a bird that doesn't have a label on it.

But if it looks like a duck

Philo's They renounced property and followed severe discipline:

"These men abandon their property without being influenced by any predominant attraction, and flee without even turning their heads back again."
—Philo para. 18

Jesus looks like a Philo's duck

Blessed are the poor.
Blessings and Woes

17 He went down with them and stood on a level place. A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coastal region around Tyre and Sidon, 18 who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases. Those troubled by impure spirits were cured, 19 and the people all tried to touch him, because power was coming from him and healing them all.

20 Looking at his disciples, he said:

“Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
21 Blessed are you who hunger now,
for you will be satisfied.
Blessed are you who weep now,
for you will laugh.
22 Blessed are you when people hate you,
when they exclude you and insult you
and reject your name as evil,
because of the Son of Man.

23 “Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the prophets.

24 “But woe to you who are rich,
for you have already received your comfort.
25 Woe to you who are well fed now,
for you will go hungry.
Woe to you who laugh now,
for you will mourn and weep.
26 Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you,
for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.

The Rich and the Kingdom of God

18 A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

19 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 20 You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.’[a]”

21 “All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

23 When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. 24 Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! 25 Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

26 Those who heard this asked, “Who then can be saved?”

27 Jesus replied, “What is impossible with man is possible with God.”

28 Peter said to him, “We have left all we had to follow you!”

29 “Truly I tell you,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or sisters or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God 30 will fail to receive many times as much in this age, and in the age to come eternal life.”

if it swims like a duck

"professed an art of healing superior to that practiced in the cities" Philo notes

Jesus swims like Philo's duck

Healing of a woodcutter's foot; Infancy Gospel of Thomas
Playmate killed and raised from dead; Infancy Narrative of James
Cure of centurion's son (servant) Mt 8:5–13 Lk 7:1–10 Jn 4:46–54
Cure of a demoniac Mk 1:23–28 Lk 4:33–37
Cure of Peter's mother-in-law's fever Mt 8:14–15 Mk 1:29–31 Lk 4:38
Cure of a leper Mt 8:1–4 Mk 1:40–45 Lk 5:12–19
Cure of a paralytic at Capharnaum Mt 9:1–8 Mk 1:40–45 Lk 4:12–19
Cure of a sick man at Bethesda Jn 5:1–15
Healing of a man's withered hand Mt 12:9–13 Mk 3:1–6 Lk 6:6–11
Raising of the son of the widow of Nain Lk 7:11–17
Healing of a blind and dumb demoniac Mt 12:22
Expulsion of demons in Gadara Mt 8:29–34 Mk 4:35–41 Lk 8:26–39
Raising (curing) of Jairus' daughter Mt 9:18–26 Mk 5:21–43 Lk 8:40
Healing of a woman with a hemorrhage Mt 9:20–22 Mk 5:24–34 Lk 8:43
Restoration of two men's sight Mt 9:27–31
Healing of a mute demoniac Mt 9:32–34
Exorcism of a Canaanite (Syro-Phoenecian) woman Mt 15:21–28 Mk 7:24
Healing of a deaf-mute Mk 7:31–37
Restoration of a man's sight at Bethsaida Mk 8:22
Exorcism of a possessed boy Mt 17:14–21 Mk 9:13–28 Lk 9:37–43
Healing of the blind man Bartimaus Jn 9:1–38
Healing of large numbers of crippled, blind and mute Mt 15:29
Healing of a woman on the Sabbath Lk 13:10–17
Raising of Lazarus from the dead Jn 11:1–44
Healing of a man with dropsy Lk 14:1–6
Healing of ten lepers Lk 17:11–19
Healing of two blind men at Jericho Mt 20:29–34 Mk 10:46–52 Lk 18:35
Healing of High Priest's servant's ear


and quacks like Philo's duck


"the entire interval from dawn to evening is given up by them to spiritual exercises. For they read the holy scriptures and draw out in thought and allegory their ancestral philosophy, since they regard the literal meanings as symbols of an inner and hidden nature revealing itself in covert ideas."
—Philo, para. 28

Mark 4

New International Version (NIV)
The Parable of the Sower

4 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.”

9 Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”

13 Then Jesus said to them, “Don’t you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable? 14 The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown.”
A Lamp on a Stand

21 He said to them, “Do you bring in a lamp to put it under a bowl or a bed? Instead, don’t you put it on its stand? 22 For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open. 23 If anyone has ears to hear, let them hear.”

24 “Consider carefully what you hear,” he continued. “With the measure you use, it will be measured to you—and even more. 25 Whoever has will be given more; whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.”
The Parable of the Growing Seed

26 He also said, “This is what the kingdom of God is like. A man scatters seed on the ground. 27 Night and day, whether he sleeps or gets up, the seed sprouts and grows, though he does not know how. 28 All by itself the soil produces grain—first the stalk, then the head, then the full kernel in the head. 29 As soon as the grain is ripe, he puts the sickle to it, because the harvest has come.”
The Parable of the Mustard Seed

30 Again he said, “What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? 31 It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds on earth. 32 Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds can perch in its shade.”

33 With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. 34 He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.

When we apply the duck test to Jesus and Philo, we find that Jesus walks swims and quacks like Philo's Jewish holiness healer.

Going back to this quote
My response to Frank Zindler on the above stated claim: Suppose you see a bird walking around in a farm yard. This bird has no label that says 'duck'. But the bird certainly looks like a duck. Also, he goes to the pond and you notice that he swims like a duck. Then he opens his beak and quacks like a duck. Well, by this time you have probably reached the conclusion that the bird is a duck, whether he's wearing a label or not."


Frank Zindler is plainly wrong. Philo of Alexandria did know about Jesus and his disciples and did write about him. Only he called them Jewish holiness-healers.

Birds to not have a sign or label that tells us what kind of bird they are. But it is possible to identify the birds based on their characteristics.

Jesus does not identify what sect of Judaism, and Philo doesn't identify his Therapeutae. Religions are classified based on beliefs about the sacred, scripture and practice.

Jesus sect of Judaism can be identified by Philo as Therapeutae based on the extensive agreement of his observations and historic records.

outhouse

so far you have only provided weak evidence that amounts to imagination.



jesus small sect of Galilee traveling jews, was unknown and not a religion.



jesus was unknown until the passaover temple incident that got him killed and remembered



is mythology

we know he could not have traveled with 12 as they would have starved.

he traveled with his inner circle according to anthropologist and scholars like Johnathon Reed and John Crossan, and Marcus Borg





no but the scripture does identify him as a peaceful zealot which were typical in Galilee, as well as by his actions in the temple involving money, and his death in which they state was for tax evasion


all jews were religious and had many healers as that was the only health care avalible. and that is not enough to tie in jesus to your fantasy


bull dung

pinkvoy

Suppose you see a bird walking around in a farm yard. This bird has no label that says 'duck'. But the bird certainly looks like a duck. Also, he goes to the pond and you notice that he swims like a duck. Then he opens his beak and quacks like a duck. Well, by this time you have probably reached the conclusion that the bird is a duck, whether he's wearing a label or not."

Toto

Why this thread? What are you saying here that you could not have written in the first thread you started on Philo and the Essenes?

The "duck" test is not a scientific test. It was used in the McCarthyite era to label people as "communist" who were not. It is a tool of ideological warfare.

Is there any good reason why I should not close this thread or merge it with its twin?

pinkvoy

The duck test is a humorous term for a form of inductive reasoning.

Indiana poet James Whitcomb Riley (1849–1916) may have coined the phrase when he wrote "when I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck.

Indiana poet James Whitcomb Riley (1849–1916) predates American communist scare of the 1950's and 60s.


inductive reasoning is used in science.

Inductive reasoning, also known as induction, is a kind of reasoning that constructs or evaluates propositions that are abstractions of observations of individual instances. Inductive reasoning contrasts with deductive reasoning in that a general conclusion is arrived at by specific examples.


http://www.experiment-resources.com/...reasoning.html
If you want you can add "part 3". Here I use the duck test to respond to certain claims made in "part 2" by outhouse et al.

Toto

I didn't say that McCarthy invented the duck test, just that it was used to mislable people as communists during the red scare.

You can point out similarities between Jesus and the Essenes, but you have ignored the differences. The similarities may just be due to the common Jewish and Hellenistic elements in both the gospels and what we know about the Essenes. But what about the magical properties of the name of Jesus, the idea of salvation through this "son of God"? How do you connect the Essenes with the crucifixion? Why would anyone bother to crucify an Essene?

If it's not a duck, but a swan, or a chicken with a sore throat, or an unknown species of fowl with some superficial connection to ducks, where is your duck test? You need a lot more to be sure it's a duck. DNA testing, maybe, or at least some close observation that you don't have.

And you list yourself as an atheist on your profile. Why are you presenting this dogmatic, deficient apology for the "reliability of the New Testament" ????? I could use your "duck test" to decide that you are really a Christian apologist.

pinkvoy

A lot of things can be misused.

Here I am applying the duck test to Philo's Therapeutae and Jesus.

I was going to address the other issues you cite in other future threads. i.le part 3 part 4 part 5 part 6 etc.

Think of it as Earl Doherty posting his "theories" over numerous threads.

Philo writes about both Therapeutae and Essenes and if I could ask him about the relation between the two, I would.

DNA testing is coming soon.

Toto

:banghead:

OK, bring it on.

pinkvoy

a partial response to your other claims....

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...t/essenes.html

Shaye I.D. Cohen:
Samuel Ungerleider Professor of Judaic Studies and Professor of Religious Studies Brown University

SIGNIFICANCE OF SCROLLS

[What is the significance of the Qumran Scrolls?]

Even before the Qumran Scrolls were discovered, we knew that Judaism in the time of Jesus was a very diverse phenomena. After all, the Jewish historian Josephus gives us the names of Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. We know from the New Testament of a group called Herodians - what they are exactly, we don't know, but there they are. Rabbinic texts add the names of yet other groups and then once the war comes around, in the year 66, we have the names of a whole slew of other groups.... Plus, we have a very wide ranging rich literature from this period which is impossible to imagine all coming from a single source, or all coming from a single school or a single class. The result was, even before the Qumran Scrolls were discovered, we knew or sensed that Judaism in the 1st century of our era was a very rich and varied phenomena. What the Qumran Scrolls do is to demonstrate clearly and unambiguously the truth of that which we always somehow felt or intuited....

The Qumran Scrolls show us the existence of a sect, a group that has separated itself from society at large, a group that defines itself against the Temple, the single central institution of Judaism..., and sees itself as the repository of everything that is sacred and true and sees all other Jews out there, including the priests, as wrong at best and at worst, irredeemably wicked. That is something which we had never previously seen....

The Qumran Scrolls also reveal a whole range of new books which we previously had not known, or had known about only in fragments or only in quotations, or perhaps in corrupted versions. We now have the original text. We have now a rich library of text showing that diversity was even greater than we had ever imagined and the range of possibilities for 1st century Judaism was far bigger than any of us had ever suspected.

Since there appears to be a variety of sects of Judaism in second Temple, the duck test to identify which sect of Judaism cross referenced to the contemporary literature seems a promising approach

tanya

You seek to explain why Philo makes no reference to Jesus, his sect, his followers, or his execution, let alone his resurrection.

Do you have some evidence of therapeutae in Galilee? Did Philo, writing about them, explain that they ALSO resided (in addition to environs of Alexandria) in Galilee?

Did Philo write about religious sects including Mandaeans, or Zoroastrians, or followers of Mithraism? No? Should we conclude that those three groups were also Therapeutae, because Philo did not describe their customs and beliefs, either?