Freethought & Rationalism Archive

DCHindley · 06-18-2011, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

[Steven Carr's] quote (wherever it came from) relates what Wells is supposed to have thought Paul thought Jesus was like.

The quote comes from Earl Doherty's website, here:
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/BkrvEll.htm

Professor Wells has always maintained that this is the way Paul regarded his Christ Jesus, as a heavenly, pre-existent figure who had come to earth at some uncertain point in the past and lived an obscure life, perhaps one or two centuries before his own time. This conviction Paul had supposedly drawn from perceived revelations and a study of scripture. Wells does not suggest that any such man as Paul believed in had actually lived or contributed to later Christian traditions. Professor Ellegard, however, has taken Wells' idea a step further and has identified the Jesus of the early Christians as an actual historical figure known to us from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Teacher of Righteousness of the Qumran Essenes.

Since my only exposure to G A Wells was an earlier book of his, and I understand his opinion may have changed, I cannot determine the accuracy of Doherty's description of Wells's position that Paul believed Jesus came to earth "at some uncertain point in the past ... perhaps one or two centuries before his own time." It seems that the bolded segment is the position of Ellegard, based on later Talmudic descriptions of a certain man who lived in the times of Alexander Janneus.

Quote:

Doherty's response is that both Wells and Ellegard have the same problem. Even if Paul thought that Jesus was someone who lived one or two centuries before, we would expect Paul to have included more details about Jesus. It's human nature, apparently. As Doherty writes (my emphasis):

It is difficult to see any evidence in the pre-Gospel record of a widespread tradition or revered memory about a human founder who was a prophet, teacher and interpreter of scripture.

One could point to the same deficiency in the view of G. A. Wells. We get no sense from the early Christian (non-Gospel) record that their Jesus was looked upon as having been a prophet, a teacher, a miracle-worker. Nothing ties him to an earthly career. Even if that career had taken place in the obscure past and not within recent memory, we would expect, in principle, that something, teachings, miracles, prophecies, would in some measure be attributed to him. Yet the documents are silent.

Do not a number of researchers who study the Didache seem to be of the opinion that it gives evidence for the existence of wandering charismatic prophets and teachers who were driven to their desperate state on account of oppressive economic exploitation of the peasant class in Galilee, and that Jesus was one of them?

DCH

EarlDoherty · 06-18-2011, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCH

Do not a number of researchers who study the Didache seem to be of the opinion that it gives evidence for the existence of wandering charismatic prophets and teachers who were driven to their desperate state on account of oppressive economic exploitation of the peasant class in Galilee…

So far so good…

Quote:

...and that Jesus was one of them?

There is nothing in the Didache which offers a Jesus who was one of those wandering charismatic prophets. In fact, quite the opposite. Such a figure is conspicuous by his absence. Since (I recall) you have a copy of my newest book, you should read Appendix 8: The Absence of an Historical Jesus in the Didache. The same Appendix is found in The Jesus Puzzle.

Earl Doherty

DCHindley · 06-18-2011, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCH

Do not a number of researchers who study the Didache seem to be of the opinion that it gives evidence for the existence of wandering charismatic prophets and teachers who were driven to their desperate state on account of oppressive economic exploitation of the peasant class in Galilee…

So far so good…

Quote:

...and that Jesus was one of them?

There is nothing in the Didache which offers a Jesus who was one of those wandering charismatic prophets. In fact, quite the opposite. Such a figure is conspicuous by his absence. Since (I recall) you have a copy of my newest book, you should read Appendix 8: The Absence of an Historical Jesus in the Didache. The same Appendix is found in The Jesus Puzzle.

Earl Doherty

Thanks Earl, I'll take a look.

DCH

ApostateAbe · 06-18-2011, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCH

Do not a number of researchers who study the Didache seem to be of the opinion that it gives evidence for the existence of wandering charismatic prophets and teachers who were driven to their desperate state on account of oppressive economic exploitation of the peasant class in Galilee…

So far so good…

Quote:

...and that Jesus was one of them?

There is nothing in the Didache which offers a Jesus who was one of those wandering charismatic prophets. In fact, quite the opposite. Such a figure is conspicuous by his absence. Since (I recall) you have a copy of my newest book, you should read Appendix 8: The Absence of an Historical Jesus in the Didache. The same Appendix is found in The Jesus Puzzle.

Earl Doherty

If you claimed there was an absence of Jesus as a wandering charismatic prophet in the Didache, then that may pass. But, how do you justify the claim of "The Absence of an Historical Jesus in the Didache," when the Didache quotes Jesus like so?:

But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation. Do not pray like the hypocrites, but rather as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, like this:

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one; for Thine is the power and the glory for ever.

This quote of Jesus contained in the Didache matches word-for-word the quote of Jesus contained in both Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4, where Jesus is very much presented as a wondering charismatic prophet.

Toto · 06-18-2011, 01:09 PM

The Didache

Quote:

Following issues spring to the fore :

(1) How independent is the Didache ?

If the Greek of the text is compared with that of the synoptics, the didactic points to a Jewish Christianity which is less refined & organized, in many ways traditional and articulating the major elements of the emergent Christian faith without any of the strong theological paschal architecture we find in the synoptics or in Paul. No trace of the Markian plot. Importance is given to the way of life, to prophecy, to spirito-communal gatherings, to the Parousia of Christ and to the apocalypse (which is near).

(2) An eschatological Pais-Christology ?

"Jesus Christ" is only mentioned once, during the rite of broken bread (9:3-4). The sharing of eucharistic bread is not the reason for the unification of the many participants in the one (mystical) body of Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians, 10:17) but a foretaste & anticipation of the paradisal Parousia of Christ, when all are united, and the "end time" equals the "first time". The unity of the bread and the eschatological unity of the community are linked. Christ is not mentioned during the rite of cup (9:2), neither does this title appear in the post-communal thanksgiving prayer. During the eucharist (9:2-3, 10:2-3) Jesus is called "servant" (Greek "pais") of the Father and "Christ" only once (cf. the connection with the "broken bread" and the embolism of 9:4). In this early Christian community the "end time" had already started in Jesus.

The inclusion of a prayer ascribed to "The Lord" - not to Jesus Christ - that matches Matthew does not allow you to incorporate the text of Matthew into the Didache.

ApostateAbe · 06-18-2011, 01:23 PM

If it is claimed that the early Christians documents are "silent" about the "teachings, miracles, prophecies" of Jesus, but the face of the evidence indicates that such things are not absent, then there is a problem for the argument, and it is not solved by speculating ad hoc that "Lord" does not actually count as Jesus, nor is the problem solved by speculating that the Didache, which has the same quotes of Jesus as in Matthew/Luke, somehow thought very differently about the "Lord" than Matthew/Luke. Unless you have evidence for your speculations, then don't present it as a problem. It is problem for you, not for anyone else.

Kapyong · 06-18-2011, 03:17 PM

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

This quote of Jesus contained in the Didache matches word-for-word the quote of Jesus contained in both Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4, where Jesus is very much presented as a wondering charismatic prophet.

Bollocks.

The Lord's Prayer is DIFFERENT in G.Luke and G.Matthew.

And there are many othert different versions in the MSS.
The Lord's Prayer is one of the most VARIANT parts of the whole NT.

No way it came from Jesus.

K.

ApostateAbe · 06-18-2011, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapyong

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

This quote of Jesus contained in the Didache matches word-for-word the quote of Jesus contained in both Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4, where Jesus is very much presented as a wondering charismatic prophet.

Bollocks.

The Lord's Prayer is DIFFERENT in G.Luke and G.Matthew.

And there are many othert different versions in the MSS.
The Lord's Prayer is one of the most VARIANT parts of the whole NT.

No way it came from Jesus.

K.

You got me there. The Didache version of the Lord's Prayer matches the version of Matthew, not of Luke.

aa5874 · 06-18-2011, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

...You got me there. The Didache version of the Lord's Prayer matches the version of Matthew, not of Luke.

Well, in gMatthew and gLuke Jesus was the Child of a Holy Ghost and a Virgin that Walked on water, Transfigured, was RAISED from the dead and Ascended to the Clouds.

You will NEVER get away.

Once you INTRODUCE the Bible as evidence then you MUST use ALL the evidence.

I am so glad that you entered the NT as evidence because Jesus was a Ghost story in the Canon.

EarlDoherty · 06-18-2011, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abe

If you claimed there was an absence of Jesus as a wandering charismatic prophet in the Didache, then that may pass. But, how do you justify the claim of "The Absence of an Historical Jesus in the Didache," when the Didache quotes Jesus like so?:

You would know the answer to that by reading the Appendix I spoke of in either of my books. Oh, wait, that's right. You don't bother to read the works of those you denigrate. You file complaints that unrealistic and unfair demands are being urged on you.

For your information, the Didache does not quote Jesus. It quotes sources which end up in Jesus' mouth in the Gospels.

Earl Doherty

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

06-18-2011, 01:23 PM	#6
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	If it is claimed that the early Christians documents are "silent" about the "teachings, miracles, prophecies" of Jesus, but the face of the evidence indicates that such things are not absent, then there is a problem for the argument, and it is not solved by speculating ad hoc that "Lord" does not actually count as Jesus, nor is the problem solved by speculating that the Didache, which has the same quotes of Jesus as in Matthew/Luke, somehow thought very differently about the "Lord" than Matthew/Luke. Unless you have evidence for your speculations, then don't present it as a problem. It is problem for you, not for anyone else.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.