stephan huller

Now the jesters have had their say, I have been thinking about Carrier's point and I don't think he needs to go to Zechariah 6:12 to get a pre-existent spiritual Jesus. Numbers 13:16 is more useful for his purposes - the passage where Moses sends Oshea to spy on the land and 'girds' him with the name Jesus. Here is what Philo says about this name change in On the Change of Names (acknowledging that I using Yonge's horrible translation):

Thus much we have thought fit to say on this subject. But, moreover, Moses also changes the name of Hosea into that of Joshua; displaying by his new name the distinctive qualities of his character; (122) for the name Hosea is interpreted, "what sort of a person is this?" but Joshua means "the salvation of the Lord," being the name of the most excellent possible character; for the habits are better with respect to those persons who are of such and such qualities from being influenced by them: as, for instance, music is better in a musician, physic in a physician, and each art of a distinctive quality in each artist, regarded both in its perpetuity, and in its power, and in its unerring perfection with regard to the objects of its speculation. For a habit is something everlasting, energising, and perfect; but a man of such and such a quality is mortal, the object of action, and imperfect. And what is imperishable is superior to what is mortal, the efficient cause is better than that which is the object of action; and what is perfect is preferable to what is imperfect. (123) In this way the coinage of the above mentioned description was changed and received the stamp of a better kind of appearance. And Caleb himself was changed wholly and entirely; "For," as the scripture says, "a new spirit was in Him;"{42}{#nu 14:24.} as if the dominant part in him had been changed into complete perfection; for the name Caleb, being interpreted, means "the whole heart." (124) And a proof of this is to be gathered from the fact that the mind is changed, not by being biassed and inclining in one particular direction or the other, but wholly and entirely in the direction which is good; and that, even if there is any thing which is not very praiseworthy indeed, it makes that to depart by arguments conducive to repentance; for, having in this manner washed off all the defilements which polluted it, and having availed itself of the baths and purifications of wisdom, it must inevitably look brilliant.

spin

On Joshua try this.

aa5874

The use of the "Ascension of Isaiah" to claim Jesus was ONLY Celestial and was not claimed to be on earth is hopelessly flawed.

In the "Ascension of Jesus" it is clearly claimed that Jesus LIVED in Nazareth of Galilee and performed miracles in the LAND of Israel and that the CHILDREN of Israel handed him over to be crucified.


The Ascension of Isaiah

stephan huller

Kraft overstates the Samaritan interest in Joshua. I've pointed that out to him and he responded by pointing out errors on my blog. Yes there is that statement from that sixth century Alexandrian book but the Samaritan section is highly speculative (a polite way of saying - meh). With that said the rest of the stuff stands up pretty well.

Bingo the Clown-O

The ‘giving the name’ motif is absent in Numbers 13:16-17 LXX.

How come?

Anyone want to tackle that?

Bingo the Clown-O

Try this too:

The Cult of Joshua 1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13461451/The-Cult-of-Joshua

The Cult of Joshua 2
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity...oshuaCult1.php

stephan huller

I'm still in bed but the naming of Joshua (Jesus) appears after Moses picks all the spies in the LXX. it's only absent from the Samaritan

Duvduv

And how would you reconcile that with elements which are NOT corroborated anywhere, especially in any Jewish sources from antiquity?
There is NO corroboration of any kind for the Masada suicides in any Jewish sources from antiquity.

There is NO corroboration of any kind of a Vespasian messiah figure from any Jewish sources from antiquity. If anything the writer invented the claim out of thin air to pander to the imperial authorities.

There is NO corroboration for "Essene" habitation of Qumran in any Jewish sources from antiquity.

There is NO corroboration for the ridiculous story of Herod taking the daughter of a cohen-priest as a wife with the permission of her grandfather when according to Jewish sources the Herodian Edomites had the status of half-converted slaves.

Duvduv

Presumably if there were some Joshua-savior element among Jews as described in the article, the ancient Christian texts would have been brimming with the allusions, metaphors and similarities with direct reference to the Book of Joshua itself, and this itself would be the basis for a Greek name of YESOOS as a corruption of an equivalent YESOOAS.

The Tanakh-friendly Romans who attributed salvation to YESOOS certainly did not have to argue the idea that he was not an illegitimate son of someone named Pandera with some uppity Jews or Romans who relied on Jewish arguments since in any case YESOOS was NOT the same person as YESHU of the Jewish tradition from the 1st century BCE.

Yet this distinction is NEVER raised among the same apologists who are ostensibly arguing with the Jews about the identity of their savior (regardless of this identity as the promised Jewish messiah).

aa5874

How would you reconcile elements in Jewish writings that are not corroborated anywhere, especially Roman and Greek sources??

There is NO corroboration for Daniel in the Lion's den, the Giant Goliath, Samson and many other Jewish stories in Greek and Roman sources.

There is no corroboration for the ridiculous stories about Adam and Eve, Noah and Moses in Roman and Greek writings

You must admit that Jewish writings contain some of the most ridiculous stories that are believed up to this very day by Jews.