Littlejohn

In "fishing" here and there ...

Jesus was actually in Antioch, and the followers of his sect were not called "Christians" but "Chrestians." His Jewish denigrators (those of the diaspora) and those pagans of Greek language they called them instead in so far different way. "Revelation to John" can also help us to understand it ...

"...this could be as early as about 45-50AD..."

No. This happened between 55 and 60AD. (or perhaps even a little before of 55)


Littlejohn
.

sharrock

I came across this on wiki, looking for "Chrestus"...

Bolland’s theory of early Christianity
Bolland continued Bruno Bauer's "concepts about Philo, the Caesars, and their influence[3]" on the development of Christianity. He believed that the basis for Christianity developed among strongly syncretised, Hellenized Jews in Alexandria and Judeophile Greeks in the early Common Era. These early beliefs revolved around a mythical Chrestos figure, and were not connected to a nationalistic Messiah figure. Among the influences in these theosophical circles were Gnosticism and Hermeticism. Philo’s writings were also a step in this development, especially the concept of the Logos.

The development of Christianity took place during the first century in the decades after the Second Temple’s fall when the mythic Chrestos figure became transformed into the legendary Jesus. Bolland states that the transformed Chrestos received the name of Moses’ successor, Joshua the son of Nun, who became "leader of the people of Israel, as Moses failed to complete the task to guide the people into the promised land[4]".

According to Bolland the Gospel of Matthew is the oldest, followed by Luke’s and then Mark’s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerardu...sephus_Bolland

mountainman

That's a fine distinction Littlejohn. What sort of evidence do you think you'll offer in support of this conjecture for such a chronology?

Best wishes,


Pete

Littlejohn

Hi Jim!

From my experience, I can say that neither Bauer nor Bolland approached most of the others exegetes to historical truth, even if some element of their speculations can be considered valid. Despite the lies spread by the world patristic (especially Eusebius) there is absolutely no connection between Philo and Christianity: neither that of first centuries nor, let alone, the current one!

"..and were not connected to a nationalistic Messiah figure.."

The discourse about the connection between the figure of the expected Messiah by the common Jewish imaginary and that of Jesus the nazarene is rather complex. Whereas the "nickname" with which Jesus was known outside of Palestine was CHRESTOS and not Christos, there were, however, some periods of his life, rather short for the truth, in which he may have been referred to as the "Christos".

The first period is on its first maturity, between 34-40AD, when he had to be between 28 and 34 years of age, while the second regarded the last years of his life (one or perhaps two years). In the first case it was certainly not the Messiah awaited by Orthodox Jews, but linked at the figure of the third son of Adam, ie Seth: THE MAN's SON, namely Adam, the "MAN" par excellence! Even John the Baptist was also a Messiah for his followers (many at the time), on the same type of Seth. However, his figure of reference was ENOCH. (Anush, in mandaean literature)

In the second period, on the contrary, the identification was with the Messiah awaited by Orthodox Jews. A lead us to this "discovery" are, all the first, the canonical gospels (see Palm Sunday), Josephus and Origen. I repeat that it was a very short period, compared to the whole existence of Jesus.

After the fall of "Second Temple", came the phenomenon of "Judeo-Christianity", which had nothing to do (at least directly) with the Catholic-christian cult, created in the first half of the second century. The Judeo-Christian church was founded in Antioch, between 85 and 90 (from patristic literature, one intuit that his first "Bishop" came in "charge" around 88AD). His message was NOT "catholicum", that's universal, but addressed specifically to the world of messianistic Palestinian rebellion, whith hope of inducing the rebels definitively to cease all hostilities towards the Roman ruler and avert the risk of a second more disastrous war (as unfortunately happened: war of 132-136).

The promised prize for those that renounced to the violence and agreed to live so mild, was the right to reach the "Kingdom of God" after death, thanks to the sacrifice of the Messiah crucified (John of Gamala). As we know, this message was not accepted (at least not from the "target" expected, although, in all likelihood, there were Jews who adhered to this message) and the rebels continued on their way, in going meet at their terrible fate: disintegration of the Jewish nation!

One sees that Bolland was not of short imagination ....

All this is true only if one takes into account that this "first gospel" was not a gospel at all but a mere collection of sayings of Jesus (or "oracles"). The Gospel of Matthew, as we know today, was written between 140-150, ie when the Catholic cult was founded. For the Gospel of Luke, the speech is a far more complex.

The best greetings


Littlejohn
.

Littlejohn

It's very simple: when it will come to emerge from the "mists" of the New Testament the figure of true historical Jesus the nazarene, then the evidences spring out automatically!

All my best

Littlejohn
.

mountainman

What about other Nazarenes such as Apollonius of Tyana the Nazarene?

Best wishes,

Pete

Toto

No one calls Apollonius a Nazarene except the author of this alternative history that you have dug up.

The idea that Apollonius was an Essene, that mobs of Christians burned down the library of Alexandria to suppress all knowledge of him, and that the Crusaders fought Muslims to suppress the last copy of his Life by Philostratus. . . it's all just too far out there.

mountainman

Josephus states flatly that the Essene lifestyle and the Pythagorean lifestyle were the same. (Antiquities 15.10.4).

That the christians burned down the library of Alexandria is generally admitted. What is as yet not clear at this stage is the political reasons for the "job". Why do you think the library was torched?

You are of course aware of the events which surrounded the reappearance of the book of Philostratus over the successive centuries between antiquity and the present day, and how the various opposition was raised against the book of Philostratus, and more specifically how all published editions of the work of Philostratus could not be distributed unless, at the preface of the work there also existed the treatise of Eusebius of Cesarea, in his polemical work "Against Hierocles" and "the history of Philostratus". In this manner the antidote to the poison of Philostratus was administered in the one package.

All too far out there Toto? Not by a long shot IMO.

Best wishes,


Pete

Littlejohn

Great Pete!... When in an Italian forum I mentioned to this detail, a guy, who boasted of being very deeply within in exegetic studies, almost gave me as the crazy for saying that at the time of Herod there were "Essene - pythagoreans". Did not miss his offensive sarcasm on it. When then I reported the reference to which you have above mentioned, accompanied it by more than justified insulting comments addressed at the "guy", which had clearly shown to be an ass, he "escaped" from the forum for not reappear never again!

Please note that Simon Magus, Dositeus and Jesus himself (though today it is not yet in "clear") were of the pythagorean gnostics (*) and that all three of these characters were students of John the Baptist. It is clear that the "Essene-pythagoreans", of which talks us Josephus, were precisely the "nasurei" (or "nasorei") of John the Baptist.

Surely the father of John, Zechariah, (**) (perhaps the adoptive father of John) also was an Essene-pythagorean. That is easily deducible by the famous silence from which he was shot while was in the temple (see Protoevangelium of James and other gospels of the infancy) It is absolutely known to scholars that the new pupils of the school of Pythagoras had to face a period of silence that could go from three to five years. In this period they could communicate by writing words in the dust of the ground, through a cane or a stick whatsoever. This is precisely what was said by Simon Magus. Something of this sort appears in the mandaean literature.

All this is not difficult to guess. It's more than certain that the Alexandrian library contained any manuscripts very compromising for "holy" lies built by the "holy" forger clergy! (see Morton Smith and the letter of Clement Alexandrian)


All my best

______________

Notes:

(*) - Which also Dositeus was a gnostic-pythagorean, one perceives by his cosmogony (mentioned in the works patristic), of purely numerologic type: pythagorean, precisely.

(**) - There is the founded suspicion that the "Yehoshuah ben Perachiah", which appears in a famous talmudic passage referring to Jesus, may have been, in a very distant time, ie when still had not "uncorked" the catholic repression (first, that's, of the fourth century), "Yohchanan ben Zechariah": namely 'John son of Zechariah', who was master of Jesus (Yeschu in the talmudic step ). All this does not exclude the possibility that at the time of King Alexander Janneo (which is placed, in a deliberately wrong way, the episode about ben Perachiah and Yeschu) may be actually lived a character who, because of its negative peculiarities (under the rabbinic point of view), may have deserved the contemptuous acronym "YESCHU." This is MUCH more intriguing than what you might imagine, since it led into error the same EPIPHANIUS!


Littlejohn
.

Toto

Josephus does not say that the Essenes were the same as Pythagorans, just that they had the same lifestyle. He attributes this to the Pythagoreans borrowing from the Essenes, but the reverse is more likely to be true. Josephus, of course, was trying to justify Judaism to a Hellenistic Roman audience, so he was motivated to portray Jewish practices in terms most familiar to his audience.

In Josephus, Judaism and Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata, available on Google books, there is some discussion of this at p. 249.