mountainman

It would appear that the NT has been intentionally altered - at a number of places - for the express purpose of making the "partial asceticism" practiced by Jesus a little more rigorous than just "prayer alone".

On the one hand Partial asceticism appears to be reflected in Jewish custom - for example see Judaism Transcends Catastrophe: God, Torah, and Israel Beyond the Holocaust By Jacob Neusner (via Google books).

On the other hand in the Greek traditions, whom the NT authors were addressing, the instances of the practice of a "full asceticism" such as that disclosed in the life of Pythagoras, for example, was well known. Indian Hindu asceticism (eg: yoga) and also Buddhist asceticism (and its monastic practices) would also have been common knowledge to the Graeco-Roman civilisation.


In the 1st four centuries of the common era Apollonius of Tyana and many Neoplatonic/Neopythagorean philosophers followed these
practices of full asceticism. The history of the ascetic practices in Egypt is documented in Philo's description of the "Therapeutae", for example.

In contrast, neither Jesus or his apostles appear as practitioners of "full asceticism", but rather various forms of "partial asceticism" which are identifiable in the following actions described in the "story" of the New Testament:

The Eightfold Path of "Partial Asceticism" in the New testament

(1) "Noble Silence": fundamental to all other ancient (and modern) ascetic practices is passed over in silence.
(2) Eating meat: not the promotion of vegetarian practices
(3) Drinking Wine: not the avoidance of alcohol.
(4) Hanging out in the Pub after work: Consorting
(5) Fasting not necessary! Direct link to God through "Prayer" alone.
(6) Healing practices: fasting not required for doctor! "Prayer power"!
(7) Monastic Customs: The Politics of Tax policy statements - eg: "Render unto Caesar ..."
(8) Nonviolence: "Then would my servants fight" --- is both conditioned and disclaimed.

It would appear that the text of the New Testament has been intentionally altered in order to present a more ascetic message. Originally, being in some direct contact with God (perhaps hovering above the clouds in a geostationary orbit), Jesus and the Apostles are presented as performing healings with the power of prayer alone. This state of affairs was apparently not to the liking of some people who made several "corrections" to the text of the NT and added "and fasting" to three instances of "prayer".

By whom were these intentional alterations undertaken, and when?
Has anyone seen any theories by the textual critics on this issue?

Causes of Textual Variation

Categories drawn from Metzger,
The Text of the New Testament


2. Intentional Alterations

Category E. To reflect or promote monastic customs *** [1]

Fast Move number 1

Mark 9:29 "and fasting" added after "prayer"

Presumed Original text =

And he said unto them,
This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer.

Intentionally altered to =

And he said unto them,
This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.

Fast Move number 2

Similarly in Acts 10:30.

Presumed Original text =

And Cornelius said, Four days ago at the ninth hour
I prayed in my house, and, behold,
a man stood before me in bright clothing,

Intentionally altered to =

And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour;
and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold,
a man stood before me in bright clothing,

Fast Move number 3

Similarly in 1 Cor. 7:5.

Presumed Original text =

Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time,
that ye may give yourselves to prayer; and come together again,
that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Intentionally altered to =

Defraud ye not one the other, except [it be] with consent for a time,
that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again,
that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

monastic customs*** [1]

As an aside it appears rather questionable whether there were any christian monastic customs until the fourth century at which time Athanasius's authorship of the hagiographical "Life of Saint Anthony" is described by Arnaldo Momigliano.

mountainman

Jesus does not condone Nonviolence

"Then would my servants fight"

What sort of a religion condones violence?

Here Jesus appears to be saying that there may in fact come a time when his servants would pick up sticks and stones, swords and axes, and march off to a Holy War in his Name, above all other names. This is bullshit. The new testament is a later Roman public relations exercise for the Greek speaking civilisation in the Roman Empire.

Jesus and Buddha obvious supported different policies on the political reality and philosophical issue of non violence. Would anyone care to explain this without the assumption that the Jesus figure was a fabricated literary collage?