Freethought & Rationalism Archive

maryhelena · 09-23-2011, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

Stephan, methinks your limiting the messianic concept here. Yes, Moses is important as a model etc. So too is David and so too is Joseph.

This is the central problem with many 'mythicists.' They don't understand Judaism. Moses is the end all and be all of Judaism and Samaritanism. If you can't grasp the significance of the person of Moses - both as a mythical and historical concept - all three monotheistic religions will never make sense to you.

Stephan, while Jewish ideas are of interest, and important, to the developing christian ideas - they are not the final arbitrator of what was of interest to, and contributed to, the developing christian perspective.

Quote:

The problem is that you haven't read enough of the literature associated with Judaism, Samaritanism, early Christianity and Islam. If you are unwilling or unable to do so, all I can do is recommend to you the classic works of Wayne Meeks on the subject. Even though there are many points of disagreement between myself and Professor Meeks he 'hits it from the front and the back' - to quote the modern American expression - when it comes to the messianic concept.

I don't want this to digress into one of our typical engagements. Just there is nothing more fundamental that the person of Moses to the messianic conception. We can disagree about whether or not Agrippa was the messiah or was really held to be the messiah but the significance of Moses to the messianic question is beyond question to Samaritanism, Judaism, Christianity and early Islam.

Yes, the Moses messianic model is relevant - but as I said in my earlier post, so too is the David model and the Joseph model.

Quote:

Yes there are COMPLIMENTARY theories and traditions. This or that debe will say the messiah will be named this or that. But these are extraneous. Moses is THE MAN as the Samaritans say. He is the man of God, the friend of God, God as man, the apostle, the prophet - indeed all the titles of Mohammed come from literature and tradition associated with Moses for good reason. Moses is God. All the myths about Enoch and Jacob mystically ending up becoming God are mythical presages for the historical appearance of Moses and the establishment of the nation of Israel. The same applies for Joseph.

Good - so let's not confine the developing christian perspective to a narrow interpretation of the Jewish messianic concept. The christian perspective focuses upon the time of Pilate - either from 19/26 c.e. to 36.c.e. Your proposed Jewish Agrippa II scenario has nothing to offer re that very specific time frame. And as such, will not help in understanding the gospel JC story. And it is that gospel JC story that is of interest to the christian perspective.

Quote:

If we want to establish the 'mythical' basis to Christianity all talk about Dionysus and pagan god is secondary and ultimately inconsequential. Look instead to the symbolism associated with Moses. The letters of Moses name are re-scrambled as 'the name of God.' Moses is king, high priest and prophet to Philo. He lived to the mystical number 120 (which equals the 12 tribes of Israel). Joshua is accorded 110 because he is 'one short' of Moses's glory. I could go on and on but I am afraid it would fall on deaf ears because I happen to be Jewish (you know the argument 'because I am Jewish' I am supposedly 'limited' to the 'myths' of my tradition).

Stephan, my primary interest is history. Interpretations of that specific history, history that relates to the gospel story time frame, are two a penny. And really, playing the Jewish card is entirely inappropriate here - it's historical facts that we are after - at least I am - and no position is going to be granted any leeway because it might have a Jewish or a Christian tag associated with it.

Quote:

So I will instead cite the critical passage from the Acts of Archelaus to give some historical context but there are countless others in the Patristic, rabbinic literature and the early hadiths. This is only the most explicit. Some historical context. When Mani the Paraclete comes to the (Marcionite) communities of Osroene the argument that is ultimately used to defeat him is that he cannot be the expected Paraclete/messiah WITHIN CHRISTIANITY because he isn't enough like Moses. Notice there is no reference to Davidic lineage, Joseph etc. because it simply doesn't matter. It isn't essential. What is essential is that the Christ is to be 'like Moses' (Deuteronomy 18:18)

In any event there are no less than seventy five references to this conception in the Acts of Archelaus. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0616.htm. Here is only the most explicit exchange:

Quote:

what precise force all these things, however, may possess, I leave to the apprehension of those who have sound intelligence. Let us come now again to that word of Moses, in which he says: The Lord your God shall raise up a Prophet unto you, of your brethren, like me. In this saying I perceive a great prophecy delivered by the servant Moses, as by one cognizant that He who is to come is indeed to be possessed of greater authority than himself, and nevertheless is to suffer like things with him, and to show like signs and wonders. For there, Moses after his birth was placed by his mother in an ark, and exposed beside the banks of the river; here, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His birth by Mary His mother, was sent off in flight into Egypt through the instrumentality of an angel. There, Moses led forth his people from the midst of the Egyptians, and saved them; and here, Jesus, leading forth His people from the midst of the Pharisees, transferred them to an eternal salvation. There, Moses sought bread by prayer, and received it from heaven, in order that he might feed the people with it in the wilderness; here, my Lord Jesus by His own power satisfied with five loaves five thousand men in the wilderness. There, Moses when he was tried was set upon the mountain and fasted forty days; and here, my Lord Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness when He was tempted of the devil, and fasted in like manner forty days. There, before the sight of Moses, all the first-born of the Egyptians perished on account of the treachery of Pharaoh; and here, at the time of the birth of Jesus, every male among the Jews suddenly perished by reason of the treachery of Herod. There, Moses prayed that Pharaoh and his people might be spared the plagues; and here, our Lord Jesus prayed that the Pharisees might be pardoned, when He said, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. There, the countenance of Moses shone with the glory of the Lord, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look upon his face, on account of the glory of his countenance; and here, the Lord Jesus Christ shone like the sun, and His disciples were not able to look upon His face by reason of the glory of His countenance and the intense splendour of the light. There, Moses smote down with the sword those who had set up the calf; and here, the Lord Jesus said, I came to send a sword upon the earth, and to set a man at variance with his neighbour, and so on. There, Moses went without fear into the darkness of the clouds that carry water; and here, the Lord Jesus walked with all power upon the waters. There, Moses gave his commands to the sea; and here, the Lord Jesus, when he was on the sea, rose and gave His commands to the winds and the sea. There, Moses, when he was assailed, stretched forth his hands and fought against Amalek; and here, the Lord Jesus, when we were assailed and were perishing by the violence of that erring spirit who works now hi the just, stretched forth His hands upon the cross, and gave us salvation. But there are indeed many other matters of this kind which I must pass by, my dearly beloved Diodorus, as I am in haste to send veil this little book with all convenient speed; and these omissions of mine you will be able yourself to supply very easily by your own intelligence. Write me, however, an account of all that this servant of the adversary's cause may do hereafter. May the Omnipotent God preserve you whole insoul and in spirit!

That is all interpretation - history, Stephan - get the history right before one tries to spin interpretations upon it.

stephan huller · 09-23-2011, 11:59 AM

Nein, nein, tausendmal nein! This isn't paganism. It is about ONE truth not many. Let's not lose sight of that. This is monotheism. This is the origin of the Marcionite emphasis of ONE gospel, ONE apostle, ONE God. There aren't three different models for anything. Look at the concept of the 'seal of the prophets' in Islam. The Moses paradigm even survives there. All things before Moses are foreshadowings of Moses who is in turn the perfect foreshadowing of the one to come. Learn the tradition. Understand it. THEN COMMENT UPON IT. Moses = Messiah. That's the core. The Pentateuch stands on a different plateau than all the other pre-Christian writings. It is the Law. There aren't a 'collection' of writings. There is the Law AND the prophets. The Law is of superior rank just as Moses is superior to the prophets, David and the Patriarchs. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the monotheistic tradition. Moses is God, Mosheh = haShem (or Shemah according to the Samaritans). This is everything there is. It is not a matter of emphasis. It is a matter of tradition.

Even the two advent system is based on monotheism, for in that system the first anointed one is the heavenly high priest (= Jesus) emptying himself into his earthly representative (= the Christ). It's just a parallel of Moses meeting the divine Name at the beginning of Exodus. Look at Ephesians chapter two. Man + God = one new man. That's the formula. It's about - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1. There is no multiplicity. One man, one God and how they became ... you guessed it - ONE. That's the essence of Christianity. Ephesians chapter 2.

stephan huller · 09-23-2011, 12:46 PM

Interestingly enough this conversation has born some fruit. I was just driving to the office and I had the idea of Moses in this thread about the burial place of Agrippa, Agrippa being Moses and then another interesting parallel popped into my head. The obvious question is where is Moses buried? Let us remind ourselves of what is in Deuteronomy:

Quote:

And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. The Israelites grieved for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days, until the time of weeping and mourning was over. [Deut 34:5 - 8]

I wonder what Marqe has to say about this. The Samaritan sectarian tradition with respect to Dositheus, the Ta'eb (= returning Moses) with its 'cave' and the disappearance of his body is clearly the closest related concept. Here is how Isser sums up what Marqe has to say about Moses:

Quote:

Book V deals with the death of Moses. Many entities plead with God not to allow the prophet to die: the powers on Sinai with whom he dwelt, the Five Books, the Name, the letters, the sea, the fire, and the cloud (V.1). Moses, standing before God, pleads for Israel, sad that they will be left without a supplicator ; he leaves final instructions with Joshua at the gate of the veil (V.2). Moses ascends Mount Nebo; at the summit he enters the cloud and is met by the angels, powers, and glory (kabod); water, heaven, earth, fire, and the cloud praise him (V.3) . The kabod leads Moses to a view of Mt. Gerizim and the Cave; he dies facing Gerizim (ibid.). The cave where Moses is buried is sealed by God, not to be opened or known until the day of vengeance (V.4). The traditions about Dositheus include a period of fasting (Epiphanius : "foolishly and dramatically persisting in a fast, as the story has it"), the mysterious death in a cave, and his body's never being found. It is most likely that the Dositheans, who considered Dositheus the eschatological prophet like Moses, also applied the ascent motif to their founder in their narrative or liturgical scriptures. [Isser, the Dositheans p. 137]

stephan huller · 09-23-2011, 01:20 PM

On the tradition that the Samaritan 'one like Moses' i.e. Dositheus also died without leaving a known burial site. Here's the summary from Jarl Fossum:

Quote:

The Samaritan chronicler says that Dositheus wrote books while staying in Shuwaika, and it is certainly true that the schismatic produced literary works. Origen reports that the Dositheans of his day "preserve books of Dositheus" (Comm. in Joh. XIII.27, ad 4.28)101. Eulogius says that Dositheus "adulterated the Mosaic Octateuch [sic!] with myriads of spurious changes of all kinds and he also left behind with his believers certain other works he had composed - foolish and outlandish and contrary to the laws of the spirit." (Photius Bibl. 285a).

When he had completed his work, Dositheus learnt that the men of the high priest were on his track, so he left Shuwaika and went to 'Anbata. This place is probably 'Anabta on the road between Nablus and Tulkarm.

Reaching 'Anabta, Dositheus - still according to Abu '1 Fath - climbed a mountain and hid himself in a cave, where he finally died of starvation, his corpse being eaten by dogs. Epiphanius testifies to the same tradition, for the bishop relates that Dositheus in his search for wisdom withdrew into a cave, where, after having persisted arduously in a fast, he died from the lack of nourishment, his body being consumed by worms and flies." (Pan 13).

SJ Isser has collated this tradition with a Dosithean tradition preserved by Origen, who reports that the Dositheans of his day not only possess books written by Dositheus but also "certain myths about him to the effect that he did not taste death but still is alive somewhere" (Comm. in Joh. XIII. 27). That Dositheus ended his earthly career by climbing a mountain and disappearing into a cave fits a Moses pattern.

In the Bible it is related that Moses went up to the top of Mt. Nebo just before he died (Deut. 34:1). To be true, the Bible goes on to tell that Moses was buried in the valley below the mountain, but Samaritan tradition knew that he entombed in a cave at the mount. Thus Marqah says that Moses "entered into the cave," and that "the mouth of the cave was closed by the Divinity" (Memar Marqah V.4).

Furthermore, although the Bible says that Moses died, there were people who maintained great prophet in fact did not die. Josephus appears to have a polemical aim when describing Moses' departure from life in the following way: "A cloud suddenly stood over him, and he disappeared into a valley, but he has written in the sacred books that he died in order that, on the ground of his outstanding virtues, it should not be said that he went back up to the Deity" (Ant. IV.326)[the Samaritans p. 325, 326]

maryhelena · 09-24-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Nein, nein, tausendmal nein! This isn't paganism. It is about ONE truth not many. Let's not lose sight of that. This is monotheism. This is the origin of the Marcionite emphasis of ONE gospel, ONE apostle, ONE God. There aren't three different models for anything. Look at the concept of the 'seal of the prophets' in Islam. The Moses paradigm even survives there. All things before Moses are foreshadowings of Moses who is in turn the perfect foreshadowing of the one to come. Learn the tradition. Understand it. THEN COMMENT UPON IT. Moses = Messiah. That's the core. The Pentateuch stands on a different plateau than all the other pre-Christian writings. It is the Law. There aren't a 'collection' of writings. There is the Law AND the prophets. The Law is of superior rank just as Moses is superior to the prophets, David and the Patriarchs. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the monotheistic tradition. Moses is God, Mosheh = haShem (or Shemah according to the Samaritans). This is everything there is. It is not a matter of emphasis. It is a matter of tradition.

Even the two advent system is based on monotheism, for in that system the first anointed one is the heavenly high priest (= Jesus) emptying himself into his earthly representative (= the Christ). It's just a parallel of Moses meeting the divine Name at the beginning of Exodus. Look at Ephesians chapter two. Man + God = one new man. That's the formula. It's about - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1. There is no multiplicity. One man, one God and how they became ... you guessed it - ONE. That's the essence of Christianity. Ephesians chapter 2.

OK, Stephan, I'm pulling out of this discussion................

Quote:

"It is about ONE truth not many"

All I can do is shake my head.....:sadyes:

Stephan, enjoy the journey but never think for one moment that 'truth' will let you grasp it's tail.....All it wants is for one to undertake that journey, to keep the mind running smoothly, ticking over and focusing ahead.

'Truth' is far more like the 'heartbeat' of the mind than any specific idea that we may conjure up.

Quote:

"Perhaps the mission of those who love mankind is to make people laugh at the truth, to make truth laugh, because the only truth lies in learning to free ourselves from insane passion for the truth."

Umberto Eco (b. 1932), Italian semiologist, novelist. Brother William,
in The Name of the Rose, "Seventh Day: Night (2)" (1980; tr. 1983).

When one is initially searching for 'truth' one is fired up with enthusiasm - then as the years pass, while the commitment remains, realization about the illusive nature of ones quest brings not despair but joy. One is happy with ones journey - one can laugh at 'truth's intransigence, laugh at the game it is playing - and laugh at oneself for ones past seriousness in thinking it could be caught. Laughter, they say, is the best medicine - and isn't it a distinguishing mark of being human? So perhaps its not altogether unreasonable to expect 'truth' and laughter to join forces once in a while!

stephan huller · 09-24-2011, 12:13 AM

I would recommend setting aside a three day weekend and go to a service at a mosque, a synagogue and a church and absorb the religious culture. Just a thought.

maryhelena · 09-24-2011, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I would recommend setting aside a three day weekend and go to a service at a mosque, a synagogue and a church and absorb the religious culture. Just a thought.

icardfacepalm:

stephan huller · 09-24-2011, 12:22 AM

I am dead serious. It is easy to postulate theories about traditions in the abstract but when you actually get to know the culture, you start to realize how unworkable they are Did I ever tell you I met an American sales manages in Rio who told me he had prostitutes living with him to help improve his Portuguese. He really had a point though. You only know a language or tradition when you get up close and personal with it.

Iskander · 09-24-2011, 03:03 AM

Have you borrowed that one from Groucho Marx?

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

09-23-2011, 11:59 AM	#22
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Nein, nein, tausendmal nein! This isn't paganism. It is about ONE truth not many. Let's not lose sight of that. This is monotheism. This is the origin of the Marcionite emphasis of ONE gospel, ONE apostle, ONE God. There aren't three different models for anything. Look at the concept of the 'seal of the prophets' in Islam. The Moses paradigm even survives there. All things before Moses are foreshadowings of Moses who is in turn the perfect foreshadowing of the one to come. Learn the tradition. Understand it. THEN COMMENT UPON IT. Moses = Messiah. That's the core. The Pentateuch stands on a different plateau than all the other pre-Christian writings. It is the Law. There aren't a 'collection' of writings. There is the Law AND the prophets. The Law is of superior rank just as Moses is superior to the prophets, David and the Patriarchs. If you don't understand this, you don't understand the monotheistic tradition. Moses is God, Mosheh = haShem (or Shemah according to the Samaritans). This is everything there is. It is not a matter of emphasis. It is a matter of tradition. Even the two advent system is based on monotheism, for in that system the first anointed one is the heavenly high priest (= Jesus) emptying himself into his earthly representative (= the Christ). It's just a parallel of Moses meeting the divine Name at the beginning of Exodus. Look at Ephesians chapter two. Man + God = one new man. That's the formula. It's about - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1. There is no multiplicity. One man, one God and how they became ... you guessed it - ONE. That's the essence of Christianity. Ephesians chapter 2.

09-24-2011, 12:13 AM	#26
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I would recommend setting aside a three day weekend and go to a service at a mosque, a synagogue and a church and absorb the religious culture. Just a thought.

09-24-2011, 12:22 AM	#28
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I am dead serious. It is easy to postulate theories about traditions in the abstract but when you actually get to know the culture, you start to realize how unworkable they are Did I ever tell you I met an American sales manages in Rio who told me he had prostitutes living with him to help improve his Portuguese. He really had a point though. You only know a language or tradition when you get up close and personal with it.

09-24-2011, 03:03 AM	#29
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	Have you borrowed that one from Groucho Marx?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.