DCHindley

As I regularly trot out my proposal that the epistles of Paul are interpolated so as to overlay originally Jewish, but not Christian, letters, with a strata of peculiarly Christological statements, I thought I might show how a similar process was done with Jewish synagogue prayers by the compiler of the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles (aka Apostolic Constitutions).

I chose the first such prayer in D R Darnell's translation of the "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers" in Charlesworth's Old Testament Apocrypha (vol 2 pg 671ff). These are prayers in the Apostolic Constitutions that most of the scholars who have studied them believe are Jewish synagogal prayers from Alexandria or Syria, which have been touched up to make them represent the kind of prayer that the compiler thought early Christians might actually say.

This particular prayer is in AC 7.26. The compiler is thought to have composed the AC around 380 CE. The original prayers are dated somewhere between 135 CE (due to familiarity with the OT translations of Aquila) to as late as shortly before the AC were compiled ca 380. For the heck of it, I also show the parallels with the Didache, as it is unclear how these two works relate to one another. Usually AC is thought to either incorporate much of the Didache or both works borrowed from a similar source. Personally I think the form in AC seems more natural than that in the Didache, at least in this example. You decide.

The translation of AC and Didache used here are the ones in The Ante Nicene Fathers vol 7. The sections that Darnell brackets off in AC are his, not mine, but they are eerily similar to the kind I find in the Pauline letters. brrr.

Apostiolic Constitutions Bk 7, ch 26 (from Migne Constitutiones Apostolorum = PG 01, pg 138-139)	ANF vol 7 pg 471	BibleWorks 8, Didache 10:	Didache 10:
1 Μετὰ δὲ τὴν μετάληψιν οὕτως εὐχαριστήσατε·	1 After the participation, give thanks in this manner:
2 Eὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι, ὁ Θεὸς καὶ Πατὴρ [Ἰησοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν], ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἁγίου ὀνόματός σου οὗ κατεσκήνωσας ἐν ἡμῖν,	2 We thank thee, O God and Father [of Jesus our Saviour], for Thy holy name, which Thou hast made to inhabit among us;	2a Εὐχαριστοῦμέν σοι πάτερ ἅγιε ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἁγίου ὀνόματός σου οὗ κατεσκήνωσας ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν	2a We thank Thee, holy Father, for Thy holy name which Thou didst cause to tabernacle in our hearts,
3 καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς γνώσεως καὶ πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ ἀθανασίας ἧς ἔδωκας ἡμῖν [διὰ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Παιδός σου.]	3 and that knowledge, faith, love, and immortality which Thou hast given us [through Thy Son (literally: “paidos” = boy servent) Jesus].	2b καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς γνώσεως καὶ πίστεως καὶ ἀθανασίας ἧς ἐγνώρισας ἡμῖν διὰ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ παιδός σου σοὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας	2b and for the knowledge and faith and immortality, which Thou madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever.
4 Σὺ δέσποτα παντοκράτορ, ὁ Θεὸς τῶν ὅλων, ὁ κτίσας τὸν κόσμον καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῷ [δι' αὐτοῦ]	4 Thou, O Almighty Lord, the God of the universe (lit. the all), hast created the world, and the things that are therein, [by Him];	3 σύ δέσποτα παντοκράτορ ἔκτισας τὰ πάντα ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός σου	3 Thou, Master almighty, didst create all things for Thy name's sake
5 καὶ νόμον καταφυτεύσας ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἡμῶν καὶ τὰ πρὸς μετάληψιν προ ευτρεπίσας ἀνθρώποις,	5 and hast planted a law in our souls, and beforehand didst prepare things for the convenience of men.
6 ὁ Θεὸς τῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἀμέμπτων πατέρων ἡμῶν, Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακώβ, τῶν πιστῶν δούλων σου,	6 O God of our holy and blameless fathers, Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, Thy faithful servants;
7 ὁ δυνατὸς Θεός, ὁ πιστὸς καὶ ἀληθινὸς καὶ ἀψευδὴς ἐν ταῖς ἐπαγγελίαις,	7 Thou, O God, who art powerful, faithful, and true, and without deceit in Thy promises;
8 [ὁ ἀποστείλας ἐπὶ γῆς Ἰησοῦν τὸν Χριστόν σου ἀνθρώποις συναναστραφῆναι ὡς ἄνθρωπον, Θεὸν ὄντα λόγον καὶ ἄνθρωπον, καὶ τὴν πλάνην πρόρριζον ἀνελεῖν]	8 [who didst send upon earth Jesus Thy Christ to live with men, as a man, when He was God the Word, and man, to take away error by the roots]

DCH

PhilosopherJay

Hi DCHindley,

This is excellent work.
It seems clear that there is nothing Christian about Paul's letters except for a few phrases randomly inserted mentions of Jesus/Christ. Otherwise, he's just a good old Jewish man who has read his Philo well.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

aa5874

What!!! 350 references to Christ can hardly be called random.

The Pauline writers mentioned Christ OVER 350 times but the FOUR gospels only mentioned Christ about about 58 times in total.

Now, Philo mentioned a crucified risen Christ ZERO times but an apologetic source claimed "Paul" was aware of gLuke. See Church History 6.25.

stephan huller

To me at least it seems that Jesus is merely equated with the divine name which goes into resides in the heart of believers like God lived in the desert tabernacle. More interesting to me DCH is whether you can do anything with the so-called Clementine liturgy in Book Eight of the Apostolic Constitutions. That would really interest me

PhilosopherJay

Hi aa5874,

Let us say that you have been taught that the greatest film hero was named James. In some references, he is called James Bond and in some references he is called James Dean. They are however one and the same person. When you read the word "James" in a biography of James Dean, it refers to James Bond AKA James Dean and when you read the "James" in a James Bond novel, it also refers to James Bond AKA James Dean.

If you are an alert reader you might see that the term "James" is always referring to an actor in one and a secret agent in the other.

A quick search at Bible Gateway, In the New International Version, reveals 962 mentions of Jesus in the Gospels, but only 4 references to Christ. On the other hand, in the epistles of Paul, we get 219 references to Jesus, but 372 references to Christ.

In other words we're getting a ratio of 99.56% in references to Jesus versus Christ in the Gospels. On the other hand the ratio is 37.05% in reference to Jesus versus Christ in the epistles.

However when we take out the times that Paul refers to Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus or the Lord Jesus, we find not 219 references to the word "Jesus" by itself but 22 references. Out of 22, 14 of them are in Hebrews and are clearly referring to Joshua of Nin, the Hebrew prophet. This means the real ratio is just 8 to 372. This is 2.1%

Here's a chart

NIV Version	References to Jesus Alone	References to Jesus Christ/Christ Jesus/Lord Jesus
Gospels	99.56%	.44%
Paul’s Epistles	2.1%	97.9%

The King James version is worse. There are only five times (excluding Hebrews) where the term "Jesus" is used by itself in a sentence without a reference to Christ or Lord in the Pauline epistles.

Romans 3:26
to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Ephesians 4:21
if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus:

2 Corinthians 11:4
For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it!

1 Thessalonians 1:10
and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

1 Thessalonians 4:14
For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.

We can substitute the word "Lord" or "God" in each of these sentences without affecting the meaning.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Sarai

Very interesting discussion, and thought-provoking work, DCH. I'm very interested in your Pauline interpolation theory. My particular interest is in Jewish apocalyptic and any residual non-Judahcentric "Israelisms" that might be present in them. I'd be very interested in a de-Christianized Paul, as there might be some nuggets in there for me. Can you direct me to more info, or should I just start pulling up all your posts to learn more?

Regards,
Sarai

DCHindley

Ben C Smith was kind enough to post my preliminary analysis of the letters of the Pauline corpus at his Text Excavatiuon website, here. It shows in English where I believe the interpolations have been inserted, using 2 columns, with the "recovered" text in column 1 and the interpolations in column 2.

One thing to warn you about, the letters without interpolations is not only much more readable but knows nothing whatsoever of Jesus Christ. It is all about the ability of gentiles who believed in the God of the Jews to share in the promise of a blessed age made by God to Abraham, on the basis of the faith Abraham had in the promise even before he circumcised himself. Paul believed that meant that gentiles who also put their faith in the God of the Jews could also inherit without requiring circumcision.

I had started a Greek-English analysis but was not happy with the Greek texts I had available (ASCII transliteration and proprietary fonts). Now that I have upgraded to BibleWorks v.8, which has the accented text in unicode UTF-8 format, I'll redo the one I just completed on Galatians (used ASCII transliteration of the Greek), another one half completed on Romans, and start on the rest in earnest. There will also be a web page created shortly.

Enjoy ...

DCH

avi

I concur with the other forum members, very interesting, thanks DCH.

Jay, I am intrigued by your reply.

Three points:
a. I am apprehensive (glass is always bone dry for me) about using KJV. Have you also looked at the different Greek versions?

b. Is there any significance in the word order, i.e. ihsou cristou, versus cristou ihsou?
c. Does your analysis lend credence to, or oppose, or offer no support for the hypothesis that Paul's epistles were written AFTER the Gospels?

In other words, would you have expected the numerical ratios to be different, if Paul's letters had originated first, followed by the Gospels, some decades later?

avi

PhilosopherJay

Hi Avi,

Good questions.

a. I actually did NIV for the statistics. I just used used King James to pick out the only 5 quotes where NIV and King James agreed it didn't say Lord or Christ with Jesus. I guess my point was that even the very times when the text doesn't explicitly say Lord Jesus or Christ Jesus, it still seems to be talking in the same tone about Jesus. Probably Lord or Christ was just lost through copyist error in these few instances where it doesn't appear.

b. I couldn't find any difference in word order, Christ Jesus or Jesus Christ just seems arbitrary. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if someone else found something. I didn't spend a lot of time on it.

c. I think it makes the order of Paulines, 40-60 C.E., and Gospels, 70-90 C.E., look ridiculous. One has to imagine that Paul and his followers always used the term Christ or Lord with Jesus, but somehow the gospel writers who came afterward never used it and never remembered anybody using it doing his lifetime.

I think accepting that all these references to Lord Jesus and Christ Jesus and Jesus Christ are Mid-to-late second century interpolations put in after the gospels or some form of the gospels were written makes sense. The original text does seem like Jewish text that has been artificially converted with insertions.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Sarai

Thank you so much for the link, DCH. I'm VERY excited to start reading your work. I've downloaded each of the PDF's so I'll have them for future reference, and for those moments that my internet seems to get a dibbuk!

Regards,
Sarai