stephan huller

No, I don't think it has anything to do with Julius Caesar. I think it has something to do with the crucified one being 'king of the Jews.' Those who exclude the Jews and Jewish myths from the discussion do so because they are too lazy to apprehend a complex, foreign paradigm with many variations.

la70119

I just showed you, the Roman Imperial Cult, starting with the funeral of Julius Caesar, had INVENTED the Latin Cross Crucifix. Christianity would adopt it later on.

No, it is NOT JUST Jewish myths. It is NOT JUST pagan myths, either. Nor is it JUST the life and times of Julius Caesar. We are talking about the development of Christianity over time, culminating in Constantine's "re-invention" of Christianity in 325 CE with the Council of Nicaea, where the attendees had to iron out a LOT of differences.

Christianity "borrowed" ideas from everything, everywhere.

There are Israeli Messianic Jews who recognise "Jesus Christ" "Mashiakh Yeshuah" but insist that Christianity, both ancient and modern, has ZERO Jewish roots to it.

stephan huller

I wonder whether we are making the right inferences from the Epistle of Barnabas:

For [the Scripture] says, And Abraham circumcised ten, and eight, and three hundred men of his household. What, then, was the knowledge given to him in this? Learn the eighteen first, and then the three hundred. The ten and the eight are thus denoted— Ten by Ι, and Eight by Η . You have [the initials of the, name of] Jesus.

And because the cross was to express the grace by the letter Τ, he says also, Three Hundred.

οτι δε ο σταυρος εν τω Τ ημελλεν εχειν την χαριν, λεγει και τριακοσιους.

He signifies, therefore, Jesus by two letters, and the cross by one.

δηλοι ουν τον μεν Ιησουν εν τοις δυσιν γραμμασιν, και εν τω ενι τον σταυρον

He knows this, who has put within us the engrafted gift of His doctrine. No one has been admitted by me to a more excellent piece of knowledge than this, but I know that you are worthy. [Barnabas 9]

We assume of course that Clement confirms the same schema but it is interesting to note that he stops short of explicitly referencing the cross:

As then in astronomy we have Abraham as an instance, so also in arithmetic we have the same Abraham. "For, hearing that Lot was taken captive, and having numbered his own servants, born in his house, 318," he defeats a very great number of the enemy. They say, then, that the character representing 300 is, as to shape, the type of the Lord's sign, and that the Iota and the Eta indicate the Saviour's name

Καθάπερ οὖν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀστρονομίας ἔχομεν ὑπόδειγμα τὸν Ἀβραάμ, οὕτως ἐπὶ τῆς ἀριθμητικῆς τὸν αὐτὸν Ἀβραάμ.ἀκούσας γὰρ ὅτι αἰχμάλωτος. ἐλήφθη ὁ Λώτ, τοὺς ἰδίους οἰκογενεῖς τιηʹ ἀριθμήσας καὶ ἐπεξελθὼν πάμπολυν ἀριθμὸν τῶν πολεμίων χειροῦται. φασὶν οὖν εἶναι τοῦ μὲν κυριακοῦ σημείου τύπον κατὰ τὸ σχῆμα τὸ τριακοσιοστὸν στοιχεῖον, τὸ δὲ ἰῶτα καὶ τὸ ἦτα τοὔνομα σημαί νειν τὸ σωτήριον

Yes given that Barnabas now equates the cross with the letter T it seems to be an open and shut case. Yet it has to be noted that Clement never says that the T is a cross, only that it is a 'sign of the Lord.'

Interestingly various things are identified as being a 'sign of the Lord' or a 'sign of Christ.' Clement's original point here seems not to be that the T is the sign of the Lord but the number 300 as we see a little below:

Now there are some who say that three hundred cubits are the symbol of the Lord's sign; and fifty, of hope and of the remission given at Pentecost; and thirty, or as in some, twelve, they say points out the preaching [of the Gospel]; because the LOrd preached in His thirtieth year; and the apostles were twelve. And the structure's terminating in a cubit is the symbol of the advancement of the righteous to oneness and to "the unity of the faith."

This has to be taken very seriously. Irenaeus complains that there are a bunch of Alexandrian heretics who take thirty to be a 'sign' of Jesus (and three hundred is a development of that). Indeed the only shape that is ever said to be the sign of the Lord in Clement's writings is the golden lamp of the temple:

The golden lamp conveys another enigma as a sign of Christ, not in respect of form alone, but in his casting light, "at sundry times and divers manners," on those who believe on Him and hope, and who see by means of the ministry of the First-born. And they say that the seven eyes of the Lord "are the seven spirits resting on the rod that springs from the root of Jesse."

ἔχει δέ τι καὶ ἄλλο αἴνιγμα ἡ λυχνία ἡ χρυσῆ τοῦ σημείου τοῦ Χριστοῦ, οὐ τῷ σχήματι μόνῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ φωτεμβολεῖν πολυτρόπως καὶ πολυμερῶς τοὺς εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύοντας ἐλπίζοντάς τε καὶ βλέποντας διὰ τῆς τῶν πρωτοκτίστων διακονίας

stephan huller

The foreign influence is exaggerated. Jews are always hesitant to accept foreign contact (except with prostitutes and Chinese food). Somehow that's different.

la70119

Show me where Cohen and others have demonstrated this. The problem is, Josephus is the only historical works about Rome and the Roman Levant we have. The fact that the histories of Justinus of Tiberias have been lost doesn't help much.

la70119

You forget, in the Second Century Christianity became predominantly Gentile and observant Jews would have nothing to do with it, unless some Christian who was already Jewish convinced him.

stephan huller

Read Shaye Cohen's book on Josephus in Galilee. The hypomnema thesis is a well known part of Cohen's reconstruction of Josephus. Google it

stephan huller

You've not demonstrated that the chresimon originated with Caesar only that the Romans used or adapted it

stephan huller

For what it is worth the Hebrew phrase “THE lamp” (of the temple) ha menorah = 300. You can tell I have too much time on my hands

la70119

He does NOT say the T is 'a sign of the Lord,' but rather 'THE sign of the Lord.' It is as clear in Greek as it is in English.

Again, the number 300 is THE symbol of THE Lord's sign. "T" in the ancient Greek counting system.

The golden lamp, obviously, was the seven-branched Menorah in the House of the Holy Place, or Temple. Clement's explanation is self-explanatory. Plus, it is an expression of an espaliered tree in that it looks like a tree. Now do I have to explain that the row of lit candles on top combined with the main stem in the middle form a kind of "T"?