aa5874

You have now contradicted yourself very badly. Examine what you wrote yesterday.

You are implying that everything you know about Christianity is complete bullshit because you are now attracted to the second century hypothesis because it helps your argument for Marcionite primacy.

stephan huller

I am attracted to beautiful women even if I know I will ultimately regret the decision some point down the road.

stephan huller

Let us try to answer the original question we raised - why don't the Jews sacrifice any more? Abu'l Fath writes of the Dositheans that 'they abolished the Festivals and the Passover sacrifice.' [82.15] So in this respect - like so many others - the Dositheans actually resemble the Rabbanites. How did the Dositheans justify the abolition of the Passover sacrifice? The dahiyah (a singular noun not a plural) is what is in English loosely called the Passover sacrifice, in the second half of the afternoon on the fourteenth day of the first month outside of the tabernacle which is not of the same category as the sacrifices of the Tabernacle. The reason they didn't perform the Passover sacrifice (for want of a better word) on the afternoon of the 14th and eat it on the Passover, the 15th, after sunset, was that this ceremony had to be performed outside the Sanctuary and if there is no Sanctuary, there is no outside.

stephan huller

Now let's move on to reconcile the strange statement earlier in the Chronicle of Abu'l Fath that despite the fact that Hadrian built a pagan shrine on the mountain next to Gerizim (= Ebal) the Samaritans basically got along famously with the Emperor. Archaeologists have pointed out that Abu'l Fath's report has misrepresented the historical facts. The temple of Zeus was built on the holy mountain Gerizim, the place that the Samaritan Pentateuch (and undoubtedly the earliest Jewish scrolls) identifies as the place designated to establish the covenant.

How then could Samaritans have looked back at Hadrian with such fondness if this is what he did to them? The Chronicle of Abu'l Fath might have a clue. We read in the first notice of Dositheus that:

A similar formula appears in Abu'l Fath 155:1 - 2 "My faith is in thee, Lord and in Dositheus thy servant, and his sons and daughters" and again 156:14 - 15 "They said the dead would rise soon, as children of Dositheus the Prophet of God [i.e. the successor of Moses]"; but in MS A "they said that the dead would soon rise thanks to Libi (Levi) and his party, the children of Dositheus the Prophet of God." The verb used here and translated 'served' is not applicable to synagogue worship. It is the verb used for the service of the Tabernacle. (It is the verb used by Christians for the offering of the Mass).

There is nothing specifically Dosithean in the doctrine of the Tabernacle being occultated in the present era, the Fanuta, or in the expectation of its manifestation in the Time of Favor the Ruuta (= the root is 'willingness'). What was distinct was their logical development of the doctrine into the treatment of the Mountain as only potentially holy at the present time.

Compare 161:13 - 14: "He (Sakta, another Dosithean sectarian) declared Mt Gerizim profane, the same as any other mountain; and said anyone praying facing Mt Gerizim might as well pray facing a grave." The logical consequence of this view would be to suspend the pilgrimages at Passover, Pentecost, and Booths till the coming of the Time of Favor.

Compare 162:16-163:1 "He (Sakta) discontinued going up to the Noble mountain" 161:12 "He (Sakta) starting making changes to the Festivals." The festivals might have been observed but certainly without the pilgrimages. This is the Jewish reasoning and practice. The meaning of the original passage must be then that study, worship and prayer in the Dosithean sacred place on the Baltatah Meadow will somehow eventually lead to the manifestation of the Tabernacle on the Mountain. (Balatah is right next to Old Shechem, across the road).

Compare 161:7 - 8 "He (Sakta) said: 'Come over to me and see how the Tabernacle appears.' They made him a tent in which he started teaching. He said 'From this tent we will go up to Mt Gerizim."

Epiphanius or his source mentions a roofless stone structure like a theatre standing on the Meadow about two Roman miles down from the later Neapolis. The big place was probably identified by them with the place of Jacob's vision and thus holy in its own right.

There is a tradition setting Luzah on the Meadow recorded by Eusebius, Onomastikon entry 'Louza.' This is said to be inside the third milestone from Neapolis, corresponding to the location of the structure reported by Epiphanius as being on the flat ground at about the second milestone. The persistence of such a tradition is seen in the Arabic name of the Meadow - 'the Field of Glory.' For the origin of the name see the Targum on Gn. 28:16 - 17.

Presumably the Dositheans pictured Jacob on the Meadow seeing the angels coming down to the top of the Mountain and going up again. Genesis 28:17 must have been interpreted as meaning that this here on the Meadow is the House of God and that on the Mountain is the Gate of Heaven. The current Samaritan tradition sets Luzah on the top of the Mountain and accordingly locates the place of Jacob's vision there. This tradition is assumed in Jubilees 27:19 and 25. Those that set Jacob on the Mountain must have taken the verse to mean this here on the Mountain is the House of God and this here, the same place, is the Gate of Heaven. Arguments could be made mounted for both interpretations as being the plain meaning of the verse.

There is however an important additional expectation in the words of Abu'l Fath here. The top of the Mountain must have been regarded by the Dositheans as the location of the Garden or the way to the Garden just above. This is in fact the known Samaritan tradition. It follows that the four rivers that flow out from the Garden even now in the Time of Fanuta must flow from under the Mountain at some level of existence. This too is the known Samaritan tradition.

It would follow that the Land of Zawilah or Abbila in Gn 2.11, outside the Garden is the Meadow. This is also the place that Jesus conversation with the Dosithean woman Foti (= John 4) took place. The implications of that conversation relate to this discussion. Notes derive from Boid's article The First Notice of the Dositheans by Abu'l Fath Bibliotheca Orientalis p. 370 - 371. http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content...cle&id=2033367

http://www.nablusguide.com/images/st...it/balata1.jpg

stephan huller

The point of course here is that Jesus's conversation with Foti the Samaritan woman in John 2 grounds our proper understanding of when the gospel narrative HAD TO HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD TO HAVE TAKEN PLACE. In this case, the narrative had to have been written around the time of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple for it would have been old news by the time of the Bar Kochba revolt.

aa5874

There is a massive amout of evidence from antiquity supplied by Aplogetics and the Church to support the argument that the Pauline letters are very late and are Anti-Marcionite documents--After Marcion was dead.

Let us do some very simple basic logics.

Let us examine the NT Canon.

1. In the Canon Jesus of Nazareth must resurrect to Commission his disciples to preach the Gospel. See long gMark, gMatthew, gLuke, gJohn and Acts.

2. In the Canon Jesus must Ascend to heaven BEFORE the Promised Holy Ghost can arrive. See Luke 24 and Acts 1

3. In the Canon the disciples must WAIT in Jerusalem to be Filled with the Promised Holy Ghost before they can preach the Gospel. See Luke 24 and Acts 1.

Based on the Canon the Jesus cult began when Jesus of the NT was NOT on earth.

Based on the Canon, the Christian cult was started by those who claimed to have the Holy Spirit of God.

It was the Lord God who promised to send his Spirit in all flesh.

Examine the words of the Lord God in the book of Joel.

Joel 2:28 KJV The start of Christianity did NOT need Jesus.

The start of Christianity did NOT need Paul.

The start of Christianity needed those who claim to have the Spirit of God.

Christians needed to Believe the word of the Lord God in the book of Joel.

One cannot be a Christian without the Spirit of God.

Those who claimed they had the Spirit of God came BEFORE Paul.

Paul persecuted those who claimed they had the Spirit of God.

Christianity was started and developed by those who believed in the words of God according to the prophets.

Examine Acts. The author will repeat the very same passage in Joel.

The very day that the Christian cult began in Acts it was done by those who claimed they had the Spirit of God.

Acts 2:17 KJV In Acts of the Apostles, there are NO Pauline letters,No Jesus on earth, just people who claimed to be filled with the Spirit of God.

The book of Joel predates the Jesus story and the Pauline letters.

Christianity PREDATED the Jesus story and the Pauline letters.

The earliest Christians used the books of the Prophets.

The Jesus stories and the Pauline letters are late inventions from the 2nd century and later.

stephan huller

So to continue the conversation. We are trying to establish whether a second century dating for Paul can work given the context of Christianity as a whole. What is Christianity? If we follow what is said in John 4, the religion is connected with both Jerusalem and Gerizim losing their sacredness. Could the writing of the gospel in the second century have occurred in light of this? I have been thinking about this all night. My conclusion is - if you think Christianity is an exclusively Jewish phenomenon i.e. that it is only interested in the loss of sacredness of the sanctuary there, it would seem to me at least to make more sense to place the composition of the text in the first century. However if the narrative is also supposed to take into account the permanent loss of the holy mountain, one could make an argument perhaps that Hadrian's building of the Zeus temple on Gerizim 'caused' the Samaritans to change the location of their sanctuary. However Josephus seems to contradict that possibility when he notes there may have been two sacrificial locations - one on the mountain and another near Shechem:

The point is that it would appear that the Dosithean sacrifices at the place Jacob established Bethel - in the field - were established from a much earlier period than the Hadrianic period. One more note from Boid:

aa5874

The story in John 2 is unattested in and out the Canon and is a product of fiction. It is not logical that products of fiction must be historically accurate.

May I remind you that in gJohn Jesus was the Logos and God the Creator in John 1.

God the Creator and the Logos had NO conversation with your Foti the Samaritan woman.

It is completely unacceptable to rely on sources of fiction for historical accuracy without corroboration.

aa5874

It has been exposed the claim that the Pauline writings were composed before c 62 CE is derived from presumptions.

There is no admission in the Canon itself that letters under the name of Paul were composed before c 62 CE.

Acts of the Apostles, a major source of fiction, did not even mention any letter writing activity of Saul/Paul.

The start of the Jesus cult did NOT even require Pauline letters--Not even Jesus of Nazareth was on earth in Acts.

If it is assumed that Acts of the Apostles is historically accurate then if Paul wrote letters to Churches he must have done so AFTER c 62 CE or sometime After the time of Festus procurator of Judea.

Essentially, even the Canon itself does NOT support the presumption that the Pauline letters were composed before c 62 CE.

Outside the Canon, the first source to identify by name Pauline letters to Seven Churches also argued that Jesus was crucified under Claudius at about 50 years of age after he was about 30 years in the 15th year of Tiberius.

This would mean Jesus was crucified at about 49 CE which would render the Entire Canon as total fiction or at least not credible.

The presumption that the Pauline letters were composed before c 62 CE is totally flawed and is without a shred of support in or out the Canon.

Saul/Paul could NOT have preached Christ Crucified since the time of King Aretas if Jesus was crucified about c 49 CE. See Against Heresies 2.22

It is far superior and well supported to argue that the Pauline letters were composed no earlier than the late 2nd century which is compatible with the actual recovered dated Pauline manuscripts and the writings of Aristides, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Minucius Felix, Arnobius and Origen's Against Celsus.

stephan huller

The interest to see whether the reference to the Samaritan - and specifically Dosithean - landmark in the gospel helps us in any way identify when the gospel was written. I don't know that Hadrian's actions (= building a temple to Zeus Xenius) can be said to determine any major change to our knowledge of history. According to Ant. 12, 257 the temple on Mount Gerizim had been changed into a sanctuary dedicated to Zeus Xenios prior to the outbreak of the Maccabean war. The Samaritans as such had no part in this revolt and only took such precautionary measures for the purposes of self-preservation. In 2 Macc. 6:1-2 the temple in Jerusalem is dedicated to the Olympian Zeus and the temple on Mount Gerizim to Zeus Xenius. It is hard to see how Hadrian's actions could have changed the complexion of the religious paradigm so much that the gospel's statement - "Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem." (John 4.21) I don't see any compelling argument for a second century dating based on the Samaritan reference(s).

As we have seen from Josephus, there seems to be an indication that the Samaritans had a 'temple' (= synagogue?) at or near Shechem from the first century. I don't see how any of this can be used to strengthen that argument.