Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 05-16-2011, 12:41 AM

I normally spend the time cutting and pasting a whole argument from my blog. It's late and the post is here -

http://stephanhuller.blogspot.com/20...hristiany.html.

The bottom line is that the Marcionites never heard of John the Baptist or Jesus's baptism by anyone (how could an angelic hypostasis receive baptism from a man?). The Jews never heard of John the Baptist (even though the gospels claimed he baptized 'all the Jews'). The Mandaean stories about 'John' are set closer to the date of the destruction of the temple. I have always thought that John the Baptist was a hoax and I finally figured out how the claims of dating the alleged baptism to January 6th arise from conflicts within Iranian religion dating back to the time of Cyrus.

The bottom line is that Secret Mark came first and the canonical gospels recast the story in a way to prove Jesus's alleged 'humanity' - something which contradicted all the original tenets of Christianity from the earliest period. The Gospel of Mark relies heavily on Zoroastrian concepts for its angelology and demonology. Here is another example of that dependence (which is no real surprise given that Zoroastrianism abounds in the Pentateuch (the four rivers of Pardes are Iranian, eshdat lamo etc). I think there are good arguments to me made for the use of mythology in the gospel.

andrewcriddle · 05-17-2011, 12:56 PM

The Mandaeans do have an account of the baptism of Jesus by John. (I agree that there are major problems in using the Mandaean material as evidence for historical events in the 1st century CE.)

Andrew Criddle

avi · 05-17-2011, 01:22 PM

Thanks, Andrew.

Unfortunately, (unless I am mistaken) our oldest extant manuscript dates from the 16th century.....

I am unconvinced that such a text would have retained the original Mandean thoughts, without interpolation in the intervening centuries....

avi

stephan huller · 05-17-2011, 01:27 PM

Hi Andrew

Yes the Mandaeans have essentially two descriptions of baptism - the story of Jesus being baptized by their John which clearly develops much in the way Samaritans know of John the Baptist (i.e. through Christian sources). Both groups are hostile to the Jesus tradition owing to its association with Byzantine culture. I am not so sure that both groups were not originally related to Christianity somehow.

I have always believed that the Haran Gawaitha is the earliest Mandaean scripture. It survived only among the Iranian Mandaeans from what I can tell. The story of the baptism of 'John' has many points of contact with the heretical gospel narratives. It is a real pity it has only survived in a fragmentary form:

Quote:

when the boy (i.e. John/Yahia-Yuhana) was born Anus'-'Uthra came by command of the great Father of Glory and they came before Hibil-Ziwa by command of the great Father of Glory and travelled over deserts towards Mount Sinai and proceeded ... towards a community called Ruha's that is situated near the place where the Ark was built (...?) and she will be a deliverer (midwife) to the child ... into Parwan, the white mountain, an earthly place. And (in?) that place the fruit and sky are large. There ... (groweth?) the Tree which nourisheth infants . And they took back Sufnai the lilith to a (?) place so that when they should perform a living baptism to purify the child, the apostle of Kusta, Yahia-Yuhana...

... And they did not alter the order or commands which emanated from the presence of the great Father of Glory... Sufnai the lilith took him (the child) before the eyes of his mother fell upon him... at the order of Anus'-'Uthra. And they mounted up towards Parwan, the white mountain... (a place where) fruit and sky is (are?) large. There they set down Yahia near the Tree which nourisheth nurslings... Then Sufnai the lilith returned to her place. When thirty days had passed, Hibil-Ziwa came at the command of the great first Father of Glory, and he came to the Median hill-country and sent Anus'-'Uthra to Bihram, son of 'uthras and to the Median mountains. And they took Bihram from the Median hills and went... (to Parwan?) and performed baptism and baptised the child beside the Tree that nourisheth nurslings. And (when) he was seven years old, Anus'-'Uthra came and wrote for him the A, Ba, Ga, Da ... and, until he was twenty-two years old, he taught him about all nasirutha .

... then, at the command of the great Father of Glory he set the crown on him and seated him beside himself, until they came to the city of Jerusalem amongst the community which Ruha founded... all belonged to her and to her seven sons except (those from?) the Median hills , Aharan ...

.. Hibil-Ziwa, of the Median hills, upon which they wandered from mountain to mountain. ... mountain to the city of the Nasoraeans is a distance of six thousand parasangs; it is called the enclave ('hdara') of Hibil-Ziwa... Then Yahia-Yuhana took the jordan and the medicine Water (of Life)... and he cleansed lepers, opened (the eyes of) the blind and lifted the broken (maimed) to walk on their feet ... by the strength of the lofty King of Light - praised be his Name! - and gave speech and hearing to all who sought (him). And he was called in the world " envoy of the High King of Light " - praised be his Name! - (even) at the (very) abode and building of Ruha and Adonai and her seven sons.

The teaching of the A,B,G's is remarkably similar in mind to the story known to the Marcosians, the Epistle of the Apostles and various infancy narratives. The figure of Anus Uthra serves as the rough equivalent of the heavenly Jesus. I also think that the Marcionite gospel began with Jesus's appearance at 'beth shida' (= the house of demons) because it was similarly structured as the Mandaean material i.e. a neo-Zoroastrian/Jewish narrative involving the cleansing of demonic powers from the house/world.

If Reizenstein is to believed some of the Mandaean literature derives from a first century 'Enosh Apocalypse' also cited in the Cologne Manichaean corpus about the visit of this heavenly being to Jerusalem roughly corresponding to the gospel.

stephan huller · 05-17-2011, 01:32 PM

Just as a side note. It is very difficult to argue against the Zoroastrian influence in the Gospel of Mark. The demonology is very atypical of mainstream Jewish thought. The first half of the book (i.e. before Jesus turns his head to Jerusalem) is almost single-mindedly focused on the nature of demons and their control of the world etc. A Zoroastrian Weltanschauung

stephan huller · 05-17-2011, 02:08 PM

And since Andrew brought up the Mandaean connection, I thought I'd mention an interesting parallel to Secret Mark in the so-called 'John Book' of the Mandaeans. It references a mystery initiation administered by angels and then a Jordan crossing where John rides the 'Instructor-ship' from one shore to the other. The purpose of the crossing is similar to the gospel narrative (i.e. the ultimate destruction of the temple):

Quote:

YAHYĀ proclaims in the nights and says: "Through my Father's discourses I give light and through the praise of the Man, my creator, I have freed my soul from the world and from the works that are hateful and wrong. The Seven put question to me, the Dead who have not seen Life, and they say: "In whose strength dost thou stand there, and with whose praise dost thou make proclamation?" Thereon I gave to them answer: "I stand in the strength of my Father and with the praise of the Man, my creator. I have built no house in Judæa, have set up no throne in Jerusalem. I have not loved the wreath of the roses, not commerce with lovely women. I have not loved the defective,1 not loved the cup of the drunkards. I have loved no food of the body, and envy has found no place in me. I have not forgotten my night-prayer, not forgotten wondrous Jordan. I have not forgotten my baptizing, not [forgotten] my pure sign. I have not forgotten Sun-day, and the Day's evening has not condemned me. I have not forgotten Shilmai and Nibdai, who dwell in the House of the Mighty. They clear me and let me ascend; they know no fault, no defect is in me."

When Yahyā said this, Life rejoiced over him greatly. The Seven sent him their greeting and the Twelve made obeisance before him. They said to him: "Of all these words which thou hast spoken, thou hast not said a single one falsely. Delightful and fair is thy voice, and none is an equal to thee. Fair is thy discourse in thy mouth and precious thy speech, which has been bestowed upon thee. The vesture which First Life did give unto Adam, the Man, the vesture which First Life did give unto Rām, the Man, the vesture which First Life did give unto Shurbai, the Man, the vesture which First Life did give unto Shum bar Nū, (Shem bar Noah)—has He given now unto thee. He hath given it thee, O Yahyā, that thou mayest ascend, and with thee may those ascend * * * * * * The house of defect will be left behind in the desert. Everyone who shall be found sinless, will ascend to thee to the Light's region; he who is not found sinless, will be called to account in the guard-houses."

And Life is victorious.

Yahyā proclaims in the nights, Yōhānā on the Night's evenings.

YAHYĀ proclaims in the nights and says: "In the name of Him who is wondrous and all-surpassing! The Sun sat in his Court, and the Moon sat in the Dragon. The Four Winds of the House get them gone on their wings and blow not."

The Sun opened his mouth and spake unto Yahyā: "Thou hast three [head-] bands [and] a crown which equals in worth the whole world. Thou hast a Instructor (mashklil) ship, which sails about here on the Jordan. Thou hast a great vessel which sails about here 'twixt the waters. If thou goest to the House of the Great [One], remember us in the Great's presence." Thereon Yahyā, opened his mouth and spake to the Sun in Jerusalem: "Thou enquirest about the [head-] bands, may the Perfect (pl.) watch o'er thy crown. This mashklil-ship they have carpentered together with glorious splendour. On the vessel that sails 'twixt the waters, the seal of the King has been set. She who in thy house plays the wanton, goes hence and approaches the dung-house;8 she seeks to have children from her own proper spouse, and she does not find them. If she then has fulfilled her vow, and she departs she is unworthy for the House of the Life and will not he alotted to the Light Dwelling. [John Book 19, 20]

I just asked James McGrath whether this last section -i.e. John going 'betwixt the Jordan' is derived from Psalm 114 (113 LXX) given that this already occurs in the Mandaean Ginza R. 5.2 (Lidzbarski, 178); and later, in the story of the baptism of Manda d Hayye by Yohana in Ginza R. 5.4 (Lidzbarski, 192) - i.e. it is said that the waters of the Jordan turned backward at the glory of Manda Hayya.

05-16-2011, 12:41 AM	#1
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	The Iranian Origins of Christianity Demonstrate Why Jesus's Baptism by John is a Fake I normally spend the time cutting and pasting a whole argument from my blog. It's late and the post is here - http://stephanhuller.blogspot.com/20...hristiany.html. The bottom line is that the Marcionites never heard of John the Baptist or Jesus's baptism by anyone (how could an angelic hypostasis receive baptism from a man?). The Jews never heard of John the Baptist (even though the gospels claimed he baptized 'all the Jews'). The Mandaean stories about 'John' are set closer to the date of the destruction of the temple. I have always thought that John the Baptist was a hoax and I finally figured out how the claims of dating the alleged baptism to January 6th arise from conflicts within Iranian religion dating back to the time of Cyrus. The bottom line is that Secret Mark came first and the canonical gospels recast the story in a way to prove Jesus's alleged 'humanity' - something which contradicted all the original tenets of Christianity from the earliest period. The Gospel of Mark relies heavily on Zoroastrian concepts for its angelology and demonology. Here is another example of that dependence (which is no real surprise given that Zoroastrianism abounds in the Pentateuch (the four rivers of Pardes are Iranian, eshdat lamo etc). I think there are good arguments to me made for the use of mythology in the gospel.

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

05-17-2011, 12:56 PM	#2
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	The Mandaeans do have an account of the baptism of Jesus by John. (I agree that there are major problems in using the Mandaean material as evidence for historical events in the 1st century CE.) Andrew Criddle

05-17-2011, 01:22 PM	#3
avi Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Location: eastern North America Posts: 1,468	Thanks, Andrew. Unfortunately, (unless I am mistaken) our oldest extant manuscript dates from the 16th century..... I am unconvinced that such a text would have retained the original Mandean thoughts, without interpolation in the intervening centuries.... avi

05-17-2011, 01:32 PM	#5
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Just as a side note. It is very difficult to argue against the Zoroastrian influence in the Gospel of Mark. The demonology is very atypical of mainstream Jewish thought. The first half of the book (i.e. before Jesus turns his head to Jerusalem) is almost single-mindedly focused on the nature of demons and their control of the world etc. A Zoroastrian Weltanschauung

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.