Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chris Weimer · 05-19-2005, 12:44 AM

spun off from the Carotta, Doherty, paranoia, and the mainstream thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by freigeister

The fact is that the Jewish people have for countless centuries suffered real injuries precisely as a result of "scholarly theories on the origins of the ideas of the early Jesus people." In particular, they have suffered from the cultural appropriation of their New Testament: it has been taken from them and they have been repeatedly beaten over the head with it. And, yes, thank goodness the affirmation of a wholly Jewish origin for Christianity is now well established in scholarship. I just wish guys like Borg and Crossan had the guts to take on the Hellenizing fantasists crowding the sidelines.

Jewish New Testament? Could you please be more specific about which parts of the New Testament are Jewish.

Toto · 05-19-2005, 01:12 AM

This might be a good time to mention Jesus: Pagan Christ or Jewish Messiah? by Laurence E. and Shirley S. Dalton, excerpted on ChristianOrigins, or go to the Amazon link.

The Daltons systematically compare the Jesus of the Gospels to what would be expected of a Jewish messiah.

Johann_Kaspar · 05-19-2005, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

spun off from the Carotta, Doherty, paranoia, and the mainstream thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by freigeister
The fact is that the Jewish people have for countless centuries suffered real injuries precisely as a result of "scholarly theories on the origins of the ideas of the early Jesus people." In particular, they have suffered from the cultural appropriation of their New Testament: it has been taken from them and they have been repeatedly beaten over the head with it. And, yes, thank goodness the affirmation of a wholly Jewish origin for Christianity is now well established in scholarship. I just wish guys like Borg and Crossan had the guts to take on the Hellenizing fantasists crowding the sidelines.

:thumbs:

Quote:

Jewish New Testament? Could you please be more specific about which parts of the New Testament are Jewish.

All of it.

Chris Weimer · 05-19-2005, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johann_Kaspar

All of it.

Really? So the Jews developed the concept of Logos first, right? And the idea of original sin, totally Jewish. And the triune God, absolutely Jewish. And all the polemics against Judaism, and Paul saying that Jews are false brothers, that's Jewish too, right? :down:

And stop adding things in my original post that weren't there before.

Clivedurdle · 05-19-2005, 06:00 AM

Original sin and triune God aren't in the New Testament!

There is a web site that argues Revelation is originally a Jewish Priest's work that was later xianised!

Chris Weimer · 05-19-2005, 06:12 AM

Clivedurdle - perhaps you are referring to this: http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/rjohn.html

I posted it recently in JesusMysteries, so that is you might have seen it. I can't remember who originally posted it here, Pervy maybe?

And you're right about Original Sin: it is absent from the New Testament; however, the triune formula (Father Son and Holy Spirit) is found there, and that is not from Judaism proper. And come to think about it, neither is Mother of God (the idea of a virgin giving birth to the Messiah is ludicrous, however, it did find it's way into the LXX so there's probably confused precedent).

Clivedurdle · 05-19-2005, 06:43 AM

That's it, it was posted quite a while back in bch as well.

I don't want to start a discussion about the Trinity but I thought everyone was agreed there are interpolations of certain phrases, and the concept of the trinity is a much later idea that evolved because of various discussions about the nature of jesus - most were labelled heretical when the party line was imposed.

Wallener · 05-19-2005, 07:26 AM

The proto material (Q, Secret Mark, etc and whatever) may have been Jewish - or at least Samaritan - but the idea that writings we have today, where people are encouraged to eat pork and not circumcise, are compatible with the BJ figure who thought it better to give scraps of food to dogs than to Gentiles stretches the bounds of credulity.

Chris Weimer · 05-19-2005, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallener

The proto material (Q, Secret Mark, etc and whatever) may have been Jewish - or at least Samaritan - but the idea that writings we have today, where people are encouraged to eat pork and not circumcise, are compatible with the BJ figure who thought it better to give scraps of food to dogs than to Gentiles stretches the bounds of credulity.

Wallener - the dogs to gentiles thing, I assume you mean Matthew 15:26? If that is so, then you have to take into context the whole of Matthew, and this point is the peak. Before, Jesus commanded the disciples to go for the Israelites only, but at this point he changes his mind and allows her daughter to be healed because of faith. The final one is after the passion he commands them to go to all nations.

It's a process, and entirely Christian.

Wallener · 05-19-2005, 08:08 AM

Interesting, thanks Chris. How clear are we on the redactive history of the relevant passages? By going to "all nations" and replacing a conversion to Judaism with "faith" it certainly appears to be straight-up Christian Insert.

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

05-19-2005, 01:12 AM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	This might be a good time to mention Jesus: Pagan Christ or Jewish Messiah? by Laurence E. and Shirley S. Dalton, excerpted on ChristianOrigins, or go to the Amazon link. The Daltons systematically compare the Jesus of the Gospels to what would be expected of a Jewish messiah.

05-19-2005, 06:00 AM	#5
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Original sin and triune God aren't in the New Testament! There is a web site that argues Revelation is originally a Jewish Priest's work that was later xianised!

05-19-2005, 06:12 AM	#6
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	Clivedurdle - perhaps you are referring to this: http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/rjohn.html I posted it recently in JesusMysteries, so that is you might have seen it. I can't remember who originally posted it here, Pervy maybe? And you're right about Original Sin: it is absent from the New Testament; however, the triune formula (Father Son and Holy Spirit) is found there, and that is not from Judaism proper. And come to think about it, neither is Mother of God (the idea of a virgin giving birth to the Messiah is ludicrous, however, it did find it's way into the LXX so there's probably confused precedent).

05-19-2005, 06:43 AM	#7
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	That's it, it was posted quite a while back in bch as well. I don't want to start a discussion about the Trinity but I thought everyone was agreed there are interpolations of certain phrases, and the concept of the trinity is a much later idea that evolved because of various discussions about the nature of jesus - most were labelled heretical when the party line was imposed.

05-19-2005, 07:26 AM	#8
Wallener Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Vancouver Posts: 1,043	The proto material (Q, Secret Mark, etc and whatever) may have been Jewish - or at least Samaritan - but the idea that writings we have today, where people are encouraged to eat pork and not circumcise, are compatible with the BJ figure who thought it better to give scraps of food to dogs than to Gentiles stretches the bounds of credulity.

05-19-2005, 08:08 AM	#10
Wallener Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Vancouver Posts: 1,043	Interesting, thanks Chris. How clear are we on the redactive history of the relevant passages? By going to "all nations" and replacing a conversion to Judaism with "faith" it certainly appears to be straight-up Christian Insert.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.