Peter Kirby

Certainly, if you had any thoughts on criteria, those would be a great start.

The thread begins with a mention of Burton Mack on being convincing regarding detecting various movements. What are the conclusions of Mack, and how does he ground them? (You can point out the page numbers.)

best,
Peter Kirby

Jehanne

Another excellent scholar:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=3250048

Amaleq13

Where do you see that in the text?

It seems to me to be a story created for believers in the Pauline gospel and intended to provide everything that gospel lacked.

andrewcriddle

There are major problems with the definition of Gnosticism but regarding Plato as a Gnostic probably expands the term so widely as to make it of limited use.

What I meant by Gnostic Christianity is Christianity that draws a radical distinction between the God Angel etc who created the visible universe and the God who is the Father of Jesus Christ.

I am not aware of good non-Christian parallels to this before the late 1st century CE. The Hermetic tractate Poimandres would be among the earliest examples.

Andrew Criddle

Vivisector

Hi again, RL

I think that you certainly bring up some valid points when it comes to characterizing conditions in Judea and surrounding environs. Maybe the effects of all the combined influences were to create conditions where the various groups either existed or could coalesce quickly around a particular set of beliefs and practices.

If I understand the implications of your second para., I'm not sure how it would explain this (I should say assumed) early diversity. If you're suggesting it all began by someone selling a MJ to the ready and waiting cults, then it only substitutes the question of how the inventor of MJ pulled it all off rather than the HJ. The original point of curiosity would still stand; whereas many have imagined Christianity to have originated shortly after Jesus death in a single stream of beliefs/practices that only later branched into the various communities, it might be that the better model is that of a hub and spokes. The obvious question, then, is who/what is the hub?

Regards,

V.

Vivisector

Thanks for the info; this book (as well as another) of his is high on my list. I suppose I need to stop trying to buy it for a song on Ebay and pony up!

Vivisector

As an unrefined list with no claim to exhaustivity, I'd think that similarities and differences in the following regards might be helpful in differentiating among "communities" (to the degree that they can be evaluated):

1. Provenance
2. Prior religion (e.g., Pagan, Jewish, Hellenistic-Jewish, Gnostic)
3. Date of origin
4. Christology (e.g., docetist, adoptionist)
5. Point(s) of emphasis (words, deeds and/or cosmic significance of Jesus).
6. Soteriology
7. Eschatology

I'll have to lay hands on my copy of Mack for this one.

Regards,

V.

Jehanne

http://www.booksold.com/

Select 'AddALL' option.

rlogan

Sure, Viv.

Doherty of course makes the observation of diversity followed by coalescence, and uses it to buttress the theory of the MJ followed by an HJ.


As I see it, the conditions of turmoil provide fertile ground for a number of "Savior" cults springing up independently. When the power of the temple dynasty has been smashed there is no central authority. People are not going to abandon religious belief altogether, but are now ripe for modifying pre-existing beliefs.

From the Jewish side, as God's chosen people, the desperate faith in a savior coming is only too understandable. And there were numerous bona-fide candidates both before and after the destruction of the Temple. Some experienced fleeting victories against Roman occupation forces.

So the "hub" in this model is the ubiquitous yearing for the savior, unorganized, but in most cases looking for clues in the HB books.

Here is a cunning way to produce the savior, avoid contradiction with the facts of overwhelming authority, and organize the disparate groups.

First, the "victory" is in a higher and everlasting plane as opposed to the downtrodden suddenly rising up to smite occupation armies. The savior, instead of being a mighty General, is a figure we can identify with because of his suffering.

The sacrificial aspect fits snugly into the pre-existing dogma while at the same time fulfills the "savior coming" yearing in a way that does not contradict the facts of servitude to the occupation.

The "savior coming" engine is harnessed ultimately with a historical Jesus that has a flush of trump cards. A sacrifice. Prophetic pedigree from the HB. A historical actualization with authoritative apostles that must be followed. The empathetic suffering.

So I would not even say the MJ is the impetus. Rather, the MJ is an initial answer to some vexing questions about where the savior is and how the downtrodden will be victorious in spite of defeat in the earthly sphere.

The business about Jesus coming "within the lifetimes" of those still living is not an innovation of the Christians in my view. It was a feature of Christianity that was required in order to market itself in an eschatological environment.



- cheers.

yalla

FYI.Then it occurred to me that the request may have been rhetorical....? Any way it's Ch.2 of "Who Wrote the NT?", pp.43ff.IMO entirely unconvincing being based on presumptions that [1] Q existed [2]pre-Marken pronouncement stories existed [3] gTom is independent of the synoptics [4] Congregation of Israel existed [5] Jerusalem Pillars accurately portrayed by Acts.Basically Mack seems to presume something eg.bits of mark are pre-Mark, and then describes such a community as if real. Circular reasoning IMO.