Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Malachi151 · 12-27-2006, 10:21 AM

I've been reading a lot of 2nd-4th century apologetics these past few weeks, and something struck me that I hadn't realized before or heard people talk about much, and that it the importance that was placed on the "predictive ability of the scriptures".

This is a major theme of early apologetics. From Justin Martyr to Eusebius much importance is placed on the fact that the Hebrew scriptures had "correctly and precisely predicted" the coming of Jesus Christ and his life.

It seems that the acceptance of Christianity by the upper classes, and the Emperors may have had a lot to do with this, which would not be odd at all considering the amount of attention that was given to superstitious future telling and oracles by this class of people.

I don't think that this should be overlooked at all.

Consider also that the story about Constantine had to do with a vision that predicted future victory.

They believed that in Christianity they had finally found their proven and perfect future oracle.

The irony of it all is that this all stems from the fact that the Gospels were written by basing them on the Hebrew scriptures, and this whole mess then derived from nothing more than a literary quirk.

I really think that this has a lot to do with how Christianity ultimately came to power. This correlations between the NT and the OT were a central theme of apologetics.

Gamera · 12-27-2006, 01:12 PM

I don't think it was a "literary quirk" but a method of thought. Rabbinal thought in the first century sought multiple meanings in the Hebrew scriptures through exegesis. This way of understanding texts clearly influenced Jesus and Paul, and ultimately the theologians of the church, and in particular Augustine, in developing the various "levels" of exegesis. In a sense the project of mediaeval theology was to gloss the OT in terms of the NT. This hermeneutic was alien to Hellenistic culture, but it ultimately broke out of textual analysis and became a template for understanding the phenomenal world. It's basically how we interpret the world today. Our culture is doomed to exegesis.

My point is prophesy was only a small subset of exegesis. It didn't play a role in the politicizing of Christianity of Northern Europe (which I know more about than early christian/state relations), such as Harold Fairhair's consolidation of authority in Norway under Christianity.

GakuseiDon · 12-27-2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

The irony of it all is that this all stems from the fact that the Gospels were written by basing them on the Hebrew scriptures, and this whole mess then derived from nothing more than a literary quirk.

I really think that this has a lot to do with how Christianity ultimately came to power. This correlations between the NT and the OT were a central theme of apologetics.

Part of the rationale of the Second Century apologists pushing the OT connection was to try to show some continuity from Judaism. The apologists were trying to show that Christianity wasn't a new religion, but was actually an old one -- one that was in fact older than the Greek religions (which themselves were but erroneous copies based on the predictive stories in the OT.)

Malachi151 · 12-27-2006, 02:19 PM

No, no, no Gamera, you don't get off that easily, we aren't talking about the Middle Ages here, we are talking about right from the very beginning. See for example:

Quote:

Grant then, dear friend, my request, and labour with rue henceforward in your prayers in my effort to present the Proof of the Gospel from the prophecies extant among the Hebrews from the earliest times. I propose to adopt this method. I propose to use as witnesses those men, beloved by God, whose fame you know to be far-spread in the world: Moses, I mean, and his successors, who shone forth with resplendent godliness, and the blessed prophets and sacred writers. I propose to shew, by quotations from them, how they forestalled events that came to the light long ages after their time, the actual circumstances of the Saviour's own presentment of the Gospel, and the things which in our own day are being fulfilled by the Holy Spirit before our very eyes. It shall be my task to prove that they saw that which was not present as present, and that which as yet was not in existence as actually existing; and not only this, but that they foretold in writing the events of the future for posterity, so that by their help others can even now know what is coming, and look forward daily to the fulfilment of their oracles. What sort of fulfilment, do you ask? They are fulfilled in countless and all kinds of ways, and amid all circumstances, both generally and in minute detail, in the lives of individual men, and in their corporate life, now nationally in the course of Hebrew history, and now in that of foreign nations. Such things as civic revolutions, changes of times, national vicissitudes, the coming of foretold prosperity, the assaults of adversity, the enslaving of races, the besieging of cities, the downfall and restoration of whole states, and countless other things that were to take place a long time after, were foretold by these writers.

...

It seems now time to say what I consider to be desirable at present to draw from the prophetic writings for the proof of the Gospel. They said that Christ, [Whom they named] the Word of God, and Himself both God and Lord, and Angel of Great Counsel, would one day dwell among men, and would become for all the nations of the world, both Greek and Barbarian, a teacher of true knowledge of God, and of such duty to God the Maker of the Universe, as the preaching of the Gospel includes. They said that He would become a little child, and would be called the Son of Man, as born of the race of Mankind. They foretold the wondrous fashion of His birth from a Virgin, and—strangest of all—they did not omit to name Bethlehem the place of His birth, which is to-day so famous that men still hasten from the ends of the earth to see it, but shouted it out with the greatest clearness. As if they stole a march on history these same writers proclaimed the very time of His appearance, the precise period of His sojourn on earth.
It is possible for you, if you care to take the trouble, to see with your eyes, comprehended in the prophetic writings, all the wonderful miracles of our Saviour Jesus Christ Himself, that are witnessed to by the heavenly Gospels, and to hear His divine and perfect teaching about true holiness. How it must move our wonder, when they unmistakably proclaim the new ideal of religion preached by Him to all men, the call of His disciples, and the teaching of the new Covenant. Yes, and in addition to all this they foretell the Jews' disbelief in Him, and disputing, the plots of the rulers, the envy of the Scribes, the treachery of one of His disciples, the schemes of enemies, the accusations of false witnesses, the condemnations of His judges, the shameful violence, unspeakable scourging, ill-omened abuse, and, crowning all, the death of shame. They portray Christ's wonderful silence, His gentleness and fortitude, and the unimaginable depths of His forbearance and forgiveness.
The most ancient Hebrew oracles present all these things definitely about One Who would come in the last times, and Who would undergo such sufferings among men, and they clearly tell the source of their foreknowledge. They bear witness to the Resurrection from the dead of the Being Whom they revealed, His appearance to His disciples, His gift of the Holy Spirit to them, His return to heaven, His establishment as King on His Father's throne and His glorious second Advent yet to be at the consummation of the age. In addition to all this you can hear the wailings and lamentations of each of the prophets, wailing and lamenting characteristically over the calamities which will overtake the Jewish people because of their impiety to Him Who had been foretold. How their kingdom, that had continued from the days of a remote ancestry to their own, would be utterly destroyed after their sin against Christ; how their fathers' Laws would be abrogated, they themselves deprived of their ancient worship, robbed of the independence of their forefathers, and made slaves of their enemies, instead of free men; how their royal metropolis would be burned with fire, their venerable and holy altar undergo the flames and extreme desolation, their city be inhabited no longer by its old possessors but by races of other stock, while they would be dispersed among the Gentiles through the whole world, with never a hope of any cessation of evil, or breathing-space from troubles. And it is plain even to the blind, that what they saw and foretold is fulfilled in actual facts from the very day the Jews laid godless hands on Christ, and drew down on themselves the beginning of the train of sorrows.

...

If so many things were proclaimed by the Hebrew divines, and if their fulfillment is so clear to us all to-day, who would not marvel at their inspiration? Who will not agree that their religious and philosophic teaching and beliefs must be sure and true, since their proof is to be found not |5in artificial arguments, not in clever words, or deceptive syllogistic reasoning, but in simple and straightforward teaching, whose genuine and sincere character is attested by the virtue and knowledge of God evident in these inspired men? Men who were enabled not by human but by divine inspiration to see from a myriad ages back what was to happen long years after, may surety claim our confidence for the belief which they taught their pupils.

...

To the Gentiles too it should appeal, if they would fairly consider it, because of the extraordinary foreknowledge shown in the prophetic writers, and of the actual events that occurred in agreement with their prophecies. It should convince them of the inspired and certain nature of the truth we hold: it should silence the tongues of false accusers by a more logical method of proof, which slanderers contend that we never offer, who in their daily arguments with us keep pounding away with all their might with the implication forsooth that we are unable to give a logical demonstration of our case, but require those who come to us to rest on faith alone.
- EUSEBIUS; THE PROOF OF THE GOSPEL

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eu...e_03_book1.htm

See also the works of Justin Martyr.

Quote:

There were, then, among the Jews certain men who were prophets of God, through whom the prophetic Spirit published beforehand things that were to come to pass, ere ever they happened. And their prophecies, as they were spoken and when they were uttered, the kings who happened to be reigning among the Jews at the several times carefully preserved in their possession, when they had been arranged in books by the prophets themselves in their own Hebrew language. And when Ptolemy king of Egypt formed a library, and endeavoured to collect the writings of all men, he heard also of these prophets, and sent to Herod, who was at that time king of the Jews, requesting that the books of the prophets be sent to him. And Herod the king did indeed send them, written, as they were, in the foresaid Hebrew language. And when their contents were found to be unintelligible to the Egyptians, he again sent and requested that men be commissioned to translate them into the Greek language. And when this was done, the books remained with the Egyptians, where they are until now. They are also in the possession of all Jews throughout the world; but they, though they read, do not understand what is said, but count us foes and enemies; and, like yourselves, they kill and punish us whenever they have the power, as you can well believe. For in the Jewish war which lately raged, Barchochebas, the leader of the revolt of the Jews, gave orders that Christians alone should be led to cruel punishments, unless they would deny Jesus Christ and utter blasphemy. In these books, then, of the prophets we found Jesus our Christ foretold as coming, born of a virgin, growing up to man's estate, and healing every disease and every sickness, and raising the dead, and being hated, and unrecognised, and crucified, and dying, and rising again, and ascending into heaven, and being, and being called, the Son of God. We find it also predicted that certain persons should be sent by Him into every nation to publish these things, and that rather among the Gentiles [than among the Jews] men should believe in Him. And He was predicted before He appeared, first 5000 years before, and again 3000, then 2000, then 1000, and yet again 800; for in the succession of generations prophets after prophets arose.

...

Since, then, we prove that all things which have already happened had been predicted by the prophets before they came to pass, we must necessarily believe also that those things which are in like manner predicted, but are yet to come to pass, shall certainly happen. For as the things which have already taken place came to pass when foretold, and even though unknown, so shall the things that remain, even though they be unknown and disbelieved, yet come to pass. For the prophets have proclaimed two advents of His: the one, that which is already past, when He came as a dishonoured and suffering Man; but the second, when, according to prophecy, He shall come from heaven with glory, accompanied by His angelic host, when also He shall raise the bodies of all men who have lived, and shall clothe those of the worthy with immortality, and shall send those of the wicked, endued with eternal sensibility, into everlasting fire with the wicked devils. And that these things also have been foretold as yet to be, we will prove. By Ezekiel the prophet it was said: "Joint shall be joined to joint, and bone to bone, and flesh shall grow again; and every knee shall bow to the Lord, and every tongue shall confess Him." Ezekiel 37:7-8; Isaiah 45:24 And in what kind of sensation and punishment the wicked are to be, hear from what was said in like manner with reference to this; it is as follows: "Their worm shall not rest, and their fire shall not be quenched;" Isaiah 66:24 and then shall they repent, when it profits them not. And what the people of the Jews shall say and do, when they see Him coming in glory, has been thus predicted by Zechariah the prophet: "I will command the four winds to gather the scattered children; I will command the north wind to bring them, and the south wind, that it keep not back. And then in Jerusalem there shall be great lamentation, not the lamentation of mouths or of lips, but the lamentation of the heart; and they shall rend not their garments, but their hearts. Tribe by tribe they shall mourn, and then they shall look on Him whom they have pierced; and they shall say, Why, O Lord, have You made us to err from Your way? The glory which our fathers blessed, has for us been turned into shame."
- Justin Martyr, First Apology

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm

The reality is that the New Testament was written by by putting together a story based on references to the "Old Testament". The later people who read the New Testament then saw all of the parallels between the two as "proof of divine prophesy", and this very thing, more than anything else, is what assure these people that "this religion was true".

Not only that, but they went on to supposed that there were still yet more divine prophecies in the Hebrew scriptures for the future, and thus they believed that if they adopted this religion, and studied its works, they could foretell the future.

This, of course, would have been highly desirable to Emperors and military commanders, and this is how the religion gained appeal with them, because they were led to believe that this was "the one true oracle", and that the priests could study these scriptures and tell the future, which would give them power.

S.C.Carlson · 12-27-2006, 03:07 PM

It is not clear to me that, despite the attempt of the 2d century apologists, that any ruler adopted Christianity, much less because of scriptural prophecies.

For Constantine at the beginning of the 4th century, it was because a dream (in hoc signo vinces) or his Christian mother.

Stephen

Malachi151 · 12-27-2006, 03:36 PM

Oh come on Carlson, are you buying into these legends?

Constantine converted because of a dream?

Come on.

At any rate, I'm just making the point that the parallels between the NT and the OT were seen as a major piece of "evidence" for the "truth" of the religion, and also led to the belief in the predictive powers of the scriptures.

The truth is, though, that the scriptures weren't predictive at all, the writers fo the Gospels simply copied from the scriptures then they wrote their stories.

mountainman · 12-27-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

The reality is that the New Testament was written by by putting together a story based on references to the "Old Testament". The later people who read the New Testament then saw all of the parallels between the two as "proof of divine prophesy", and this very thing, more than anything else, is what assure these people that "this religion was true".

Are you discussing its credulousness, or scientific "predictability".
Either way, to say the same things out of the mouth of Julian:

Though it has in it nothing divine,
by making full use of that part of the soul
which loves fable and is childish and foolish,
it has induced men to believe
that the monstrous tale is truth.

Quote:

Not only that, but they went on to supposed that there were still yet more divine prophecies in the Hebrew scriptures for the future, and thus they believed that if they adopted this religion, and studied its works, they could foretell the future.

The only person I know who has made reference to the
divine prophecies in the Hebrew scriptures for the future
which were coming true in their lifetime, was Eusebius,
in his "Life of the Thrice Blessed Emperor".

Quote:

This, of course, would have been highly desirable to Emperors and military commanders, and this is how the religion gained appeal with them, because they were led to believe that this was "the one true oracle", and that the priests could study these scriptures and tell the future, which would give them power.

If I asked you for citations supporting this conjecture you may
be forced to cite the "miraculous conversion of Constantine", so
I wont. But if you have some, I'd be interested to hear of them.

IMO, Emperors and military commanders encouraged monotheism
because of its unifying effect upon the state of the nation. In the
epoch in which the mainstream HJ and MJ theorists expect to find
evidence of the evolution of "the tribe of christians", there are a
number of very specific citations to this effect.

Here is one from "the tribe of Persians":

DEATHBED ADVICE 241CE
ARDASHIR to SHAPUR I:

“Consider the Fire Altar and
the Throne as inseparable
as to sustain each other."

The reference above to "the Fire Altar" is to the Persian
monotheism at that time. It united the tribe, and the rulers
understood that this was a good thing.

The first emperor to countenance/embrace christianity is
purported to have been Philip the Arab. But setting this
traversty aside, the next was purportedly Constantine.

The question is whether Constantine embraced the new
and strange Roman religion, or created it, in order to unify
the religious order of the Roman empire, and provide himself
with a third strand and channel of imperial power, in addition
to the military order, and the civilian order.

Thus, I do not think it was "predictive ability", unless this was
reserved for those who were clearly "childish", in the sense of
Julian's quote above. IMO, the power of the rulers is greatly
enhanced if everyone thinks the same way, in a mono-type
fashion, according to line and verse, etc, etc: mono-worship,
mono-power to the people in control of the religion, and where
the emperor or ruler or king or prime minister or president or
Pooh-Bar or dictator controls the people who control the religion,
as is evident in the above quotation from 251 CE.

S.C.Carlson · 12-27-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Oh come on Carlson, are you buying into these legends?

Constantine converted because of a dream?

Come on.

OK, I was wrong about the "dream" part. Eusebius, Vita Constantini 1.28.2, claimed it was a vision.

Granted, it could be exaggerated or fabricated (which is why I mentioned his mother, though people do convert from having what they interpret as a vision), but "legend" seems to be a rather poor term for an event described by a contemporary biographer.

Stephen

Malachi151 · 12-27-2006, 04:11 PM

Well, that's part of what I was saying. His supposed "vision" was a premonition of victory. Whether this was true or not, it could have been true and come true by chance, it illustrates what I am saying, the valuing of the religion because of its believed predictive nature.

Gamera · 12-27-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Well, that's part of what I was saying. His supposed "vision" was a premonition of victory. Whether this was true or not, it could have been true and come true by chance, it illustrates what I am saying, the valuing of the religion because of its believed predictive nature.

But the use of prophets and prophesies per se is not a Judeo-Christian peculiarity. The classical world is rife with oracles and soothsayers and omen-interpretation. It is a central aspect of all pagan religions that I know of. The oracle at Delphi played a central role in the politics of pre-Chrisitan Greece, for instance.

So that prophetic mindset was something the Greek and Roman hiers of the Chrsitian and Hebrew scriptures brought with them. They didn't get it from those particular texts. It isn't surprising that texts filled with prophesies, particular political prophesies about the rise and fall of empires, would impress them.

Though I do think it is interesting that the apoligists used the prophesies as an argument for the validity of those texts. Only because such arguments are pretty much lacking in the texts themselves. I mean that Paul and the others don't use that particular argument, and it didn't appear to interest them.

12-27-2006, 10:21 AM	#1
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Scriptural predictions the reason Xianity was adopted by rulers? I've been reading a lot of 2nd-4th century apologetics these past few weeks, and something struck me that I hadn't realized before or heard people talk about much, and that it the importance that was placed on the "predictive ability of the scriptures". This is a major theme of early apologetics. From Justin Martyr to Eusebius much importance is placed on the fact that the Hebrew scriptures had "correctly and precisely predicted" the coming of Jesus Christ and his life. It seems that the acceptance of Christianity by the upper classes, and the Emperors may have had a lot to do with this, which would not be odd at all considering the amount of attention that was given to superstitious future telling and oracles by this class of people. I don't think that this should be overlooked at all. Consider also that the story about Constantine had to do with a vision that predicted future victory. They believed that in Christianity they had finally found their proven and perfect future oracle. The irony of it all is that this all stems from the fact that the Gospels were written by basing them on the Hebrew scriptures, and this whole mess then derived from nothing more than a literary quirk. I really think that this has a lot to do with how Christianity ultimately came to power. This correlations between the NT and the OT were a central theme of apologetics.

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

12-27-2006, 01:12 PM	#2
Gamera Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Palm Springs, California Posts: 10,955	I don't think it was a "literary quirk" but a method of thought. Rabbinal thought in the first century sought multiple meanings in the Hebrew scriptures through exegesis. This way of understanding texts clearly influenced Jesus and Paul, and ultimately the theologians of the church, and in particular Augustine, in developing the various "levels" of exegesis. In a sense the project of mediaeval theology was to gloss the OT in terms of the NT. This hermeneutic was alien to Hellenistic culture, but it ultimately broke out of textual analysis and became a template for understanding the phenomenal world. It's basically how we interpret the world today. Our culture is doomed to exegesis. My point is prophesy was only a small subset of exegesis. It didn't play a role in the politicizing of Christianity of Northern Europe (which I know more about than early christian/state relations), such as Harold Fairhair's consolidation of authority in Norway under Christianity.

12-27-2006, 03:07 PM	#5
S.C.Carlson Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 1,307	It is not clear to me that, despite the attempt of the 2d century apologists, that any ruler adopted Christianity, much less because of scriptural prophecies. For Constantine at the beginning of the 4th century, it was because a dream (in hoc signo vinces) or his Christian mother. Stephen

12-27-2006, 03:36 PM	#6
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Oh come on Carlson, are you buying into these legends? Constantine converted because of a dream? Come on. At any rate, I'm just making the point that the parallels between the NT and the OT were seen as a major piece of "evidence" for the "truth" of the religion, and also led to the belief in the predictive powers of the scriptures. The truth is, though, that the scriptures weren't predictive at all, the writers fo the Gospels simply copied from the scriptures then they wrote their stories.

12-27-2006, 04:11 PM	#9
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Well, that's part of what I was saying. His supposed "vision" was a premonition of victory. Whether this was true or not, it could have been true and come true by chance, it illustrates what I am saying, the valuing of the religion because of its believed predictive nature.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.