aa5874

As I am going through "Against Celsus" by "Origen" it became apparent that Celsus and even "Origen", based on the excerpts of "True Discourse" provided by Origen, was not really aware of the Gospels birth narrative of Jesus but seemed to be aware of a similar birth narrative in the "Memoirs of the Apostles" as found in the writings of Justin Martyr.

And "Origen" would make an odd reference to the "Gospels by the disciples" where Jesus was born in a CAVE.

"Against Celsus" 51 Now, there is NO Canonical Gospel where Jesus was born in a CAVE.

But, now examine the "Memoirs of the Apostles" which was READ in the churches on Sundays in the middle of the 2nd century.

"Dialogue with Trypho" LXXVIII There was some other Jesus story where Jesus was born in a CAVE that has vanished or erased but it was the CAVE birth story which was read in the churches on Sundays in the middle of the 2nd century.

"First Apology" LXVII And up to the middle of the 3rd century "Origen" was AWARE of the CAVE birth story.

What happened to the Cave birth story of Jesus?

The Cave birth story should be in conformity with the NT Canon.

Toto

Note what else Justin claims in Dialogue with Trypho.

It appears that the cave comes from Isaiah (but Justin cites Isaiah 33:16, which refers to a rock above ground) and that Mithras is associated with a cave. Justin accuses the devil of getting those who presided over the Mithraic mysteries of reading that passage in Isaiah and borrowing the cave.

Several of the apocryphal gospels have Jesus born in a cave. There is a good summary of the different sources here, although I would not endorse the theological stance of that site. The author thinks that Justin must have been influenced by Mithraists, and that Justin is the source of the Mithraic influences in the Catholic Church.

aa5874

But, "Origen" claims that the Cave birth story is in CONFORMITY with the Gospel and that even the ENEMIES of Jesus knew of the Cave.

"Against Celsus" 51
So, "Origen" appears to be an internal corroborative source that a CAVE was known or believed to be the birth place of Jesus in "CONFORMITY" with the Gospel, up to the middle of the third century and which is also found in the "Memoirs of the Apostles" called Gospels.

Solo

Thanks, Toto. The pseudo-Matthew is very useful to me, and I did not know about it.

It is hard to guess where the cave as the place of Jesus' birth originated except that it was a fairly common belief among the early Christians and that the cave as a place of a "spiritual birth" (or the so-called "second birth") was a fairly common theme in antiquity. Incidentally, Mohammed too was dwelling alone in a cave on Mount Hira when he received the great light of dawn (falaq-al-subh) from Jibril.

A really curious connection to the mystical purposes of the cave is Epimenides, a Cretan mystic and a cult leader. A verse from his Cretica is quoted in Acts 17:28, without crediting him. The verse suggests a tomb fashioned for the 'holy and high one in [whom] we live and move and have our being', which naturally gives rise to the question of origins of Paul's mystical verses of Rom 6:3-4.

Mircea Eliade tells us:

Best,
Jiri

PhilosopherJay

Hi All,

Here's another story about a God impregnated woman, whose name begins with the letter M and has two syllables, who gives birth in a cave and the child still in his swaddling clothes, soon receives some gifts:

I suggest that the cave was dropped out of the gospel stories when they were later sanitized because the idea of Jesus being born in a cave was too close to Hermes and Mithra being born in a cave. The Christians did not want it to seem that they were just copy-catting as Celsus had suggested.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

aa5874

But, the Cave birth story was not dropped up to the middle of the 3rd century since "Origen" claimed the Cave birth story was IN CONFORMITY with the Gospel.

For about 100 years at least, from Justin to "Origen", the mid-2nd to mid-3rd century, the Cave birth story was accepted as the place where Jesus born.

And, when one considers the birth narrative of gLuke then it now becomes questionable whether the Lucan birth story was even written up to the middle of the 3rd century.

The Lucan birth narrative seriously contradicts the Matthean and "Memoirs of the Apostles" birth story.

Up to the middle of the 3rd century, neither Justin Martyr, Tertullian, the excerpts of "True Discourse" nor Origen mentioned the Lucan birth story of John the Baptist and Jesus as found in gLuke.

In gLuke, there would have been no need for Herod to have killed all the children since the shepherds were told by the angels where Jesus was located who themselves located Jesus and afterwards told people about the birth of Jesus.

Luke 2. Based on gLuke, the birth of Jesus was NO SECRET at all people were told by angels that Jesus was in a manger in Bethlehem and EVEN the type of clothing he was wearing.

And the Magis who saw the star and did not report to Herod after visiting the baby Jesus cannot be found at all in gLuke.

From mid-2nd to mid-3rd century, the contradictory Lucan birth narrative of John the Baptist and Jesus were NOT mentioned by Justin Martyr, Tertullian, the excerpts of "True Discourse" and Origen.

It would appear that the Gospel called Luke was not written yet, but there is information that the "Memoirs of the Apostles" was ALREADY known and read in the churches on sundays with the Cave birth story which was in conformity with the Gospels up to the third century.

The Cave birth story and the killing of the innocent are NOT in conformity with gLuke.

mountainman

Perhaps the cave birth story had to be given the axe? It may have been a too plain and simple repetition of earlier BCE Greek legends (eg: Zeus). Origen was after all treated during the 4th and 5th centuries as a despicable heretic on some issues, and his ideas were often the subject of orthodox refutations. The cave birth story is in conformity with the suggestion (unpleasant as it may sound) that there were some primitive ideas about the birth of the new god Jesus, and that these primitive ideas were subject to some kind of major evolution and mass conformity in subsequent centuries.