dog-on

Maybe Marcion and the gnostics were the originals.

dog-on

I just haven't found any good evidence that places any Christianity in that area, whereas we have plenty that places it in Rome.

jgreen44

I agree for the following reasons.

1) Jerusalem was utterly destroyed in AD70. A few years later arises the concept of the New Jerusalem, a (new age) spiritual city currently existing in heaven but which will also appear on earth when "all is accomplished".

2) The Temple was utterly destroyed in AD70. The gospels have Jesus referring to himself as the Temple (John 2:19) and Paul refers to each individual human beng as embodying "God's temple" (more new age thinking) (1 Corinthians 3:16-17).

John 2:19
Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

1 Corinthians 3:16-17
16 Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? 17 If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple

3) With the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, Jews were no longer able to follow the law as they once did. So some Biblical justification had to be found for this new reality. Enter Paul and all of his talk about the law being a curse. Now each believer had to work out his "own salvation in fear and trembling" (more new age thinking).

4) An authentic "proof text" was always kept in the Temple in Jerusalem, against which all other Torah scrolls would be checked. But after the destruction of the Temple this sort of proof-reading was no longer possible. Consequently, after AD 70 the textual basis of Judaism was de-emphasized in favor of a spiritual (new age) emphasis.

2 Corinthians 3

2 You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. 3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

4 Such confidence as this is ours through Christ before God. 5 Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. 6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

5) Without the written law (verifiably authentic Torah scrolls), God was now revealed through the creation, including the personal revelations of individual mortal human beings.

Romans 1:19-20

what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

show_no_mercy

Which is ironic, considering that one of the points of the OT was a replacement of the various temples outside of Jerusalem that made sacrifices to YHWH to Jerusalem-centered temple worship. It looks like it just went full-circle.

spamandham

...that's what I was talking about. Jews lived all over the empire.

spamandham

...as an aside, I never thought of the implication of this. This passage is anachronistic if Paul wrote prior to the fall of the temple. You'd have to argue that it's just a coincidence that Paul equates the body with the temple and discusses the destruction of the the temple ..*before* the temple was destroyed. Isn't it obvious that the reason the writer can so easily substitute the body for the temple, is because the temple has already been destroyed?

jgreen44

That is clearly the best explanation. Because why on earth would an observant Jew such as Paul suggest such a thing if the Temple still existed?

Clivedurdle

On temples, it might not be as easy as that.

A major difference between the Greeks and the Persians, from Marathon and way way back, is how do you worship the gods.

Is it priesthood of all believers, the Greek idea, or Most High with a central temple and High Priest - The Persian and Jewish idea?

Paul is possibly showing how wide Jewish views were and is an example of a very Greek orientated Jew - but the Festival of Lights illustrates that as well.

See Tom Holt Persian Fire.

If he was from Tarsus and the clear gnostic roots also point to a strong Greek background, but then again, which of the varieties of Paul might this body is a temple one be?

The distinction between High Priests and priesthood of all believers is related to the structures of societies - hierarchical or more democratic, cities with kings or tribal arrangements. The stories of Saul becoming a king illustrate this process from within Judaism.

Which interestingly means we might pick our religions and myths according to our political sensibilities. And therefore xianity might be a result of the move from the Roman Republic to the Empire. It was the Rubicon wot done it!

spamandham

Maybe, but I would like to see something Greek or gnostic predating Paul that equates the body with a temple, because this just seems too coincidental. The body = temple theme is replayed in the Gospels where Jesus is equated with the temple, with forknowledge of the destruction of the temple.

Note that leading up to vs 16 is another implication of destroyed earthly temples, that in my mind implies the great Jewish 2nd temple said to have been constructed of gold, silver, and costly stones.

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work.

Clivedurdle

Is Paul pre 70?