Jesus: The Missing Years in the East

[Brickjectivity]

In Christianism there were sundry practices remarked, which betrayed that origin; the Christians never said their prayers, without facing the East, or that part of the World, whence the sun rises.

That is a bad example, because C.F. Dupuis is ignoring the fundamentals of Christianity, attributing the Christian appreciation of the Jewish tabernacle and Garden of Eden to an appreciation of the Mithras cult. The Jewish Tabernacle's door always faced East and contained the Ten Commandments according to the stories in the ancient Bible and existed millennia before Mithraism. Also in the creation stories of Genesis (very important to early Christians) the Tree of Life is located west of the flaming sword which guards the path against those who would tread the way of life toward the tree of life. Christians did not introduce these things into the Jewish books, nor were Mithraists needed to impress the importance of facing East upon Christians of the time! It makes perfect sense that Mithras may have borrowed these symbols from Christians but not the other way, so this was a bad example. If anything it places CF Dupois comments into question if he overlooked this very simple thing about Christianity before he dismissed it as a copy of Mithra-ism.

• Numbers 3:38 "Moses and Aaron and his sons were to camp to the east of the tabernacle, toward the sunrise, in front of the tent of meeting..."
• Genesis 3:24 "After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life."

 

[godnotgod]

That is a bad example, because C.F. Dupuis is ignoring the fundamentals of Christianity, attributing the Christian appreciation of the Jewish tabernacle and Garden of Eden to an appreciation of the Mithras cult. The Jewish Tabernacle's door always faced East and contained the Ten Commandments according to the stories in the ancient Bible and existed millennia before Mithraism. Also in the creation stories of Genesis (very important to early Christians) the Tree of Life is located west of the flaming sword which guards the path against those who would tread the way of life toward the tree of life. Christians did not introduce these things into the Jewish books, nor were Mithraists needed to impress the importance of facing East upon Christians of the time! It makes perfect sense that Mithras may have borrowed these symbols from Christians but not the other way, so this was a bad example. If anything it places CF Dupois comments into question if he overlooked this very simple thing about Christianity before he dismissed it as a copy of Mithra-ism.

• Numbers 3:38 "Moses and Aaron and his sons were to camp to the east of the tabernacle, toward the sunrise, in front of the tent of meeting..."
• Genesis 3:24 "After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life."

Note that Dupois is referencing Tertullian and other 'enlightened men' who are making the claim:


"Their apologist Tertullian, agrees, that from the earliest days of the introduction of this religion in the West, the more enlightened men, who had examined into it, pronounced it to be merely a sect of the Mithraic religion, and that the God of the Christians like that of the Persians, was the Sun."

 

[godnotgod]

No need for Jesus to travel to the east to learn wisdom. The wise men from the east came to him when he was young. (It's right there in the gospels, in the Pe****ta, the Greek, and every other language the gospels have been translated into.)

If Jesus were, as claimed, 'God in the flesh', he would not need instruction from men, but his travels Eastward are not necessarily for the purpose of learning, but teaching, as some of the literature suggests. Ths St. Issa scrolls, his contact with the Untouchables, his spoken words as recounted in Eastern sources that he is the 'son of God', etc, all point to his mission as a teacher. As I recall, there is even a reference from the Buddhist monks at Hemis that he taught there.

On the other hand, when we interject the Essene claim that Yeshu was raised at Mt. Carmel monastery, he would have known quite a bit by age 12 just from instruction there, and with a perspective outside the conventional one, he would have brought new insights to the elders he is reputed to have instructed in the Temple.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Note that Dupois

Wow. This is the second time you've relied on a real scholar...from a few centuries ago. So what's the rule now? Western academics are fine to use as sources if and only if they are no later than the 18th century? Sheesh.

 

[Shermana]

I respected all your posts...... and then.... this ^^^^ :sad:

Any Cornishman can tell you that Jesus went to Cornwall with Joseph of A, both before his mission and after his (failed) execution. He ran a tin mine.
Look..... walk into any Cornish Pub, buy everybody a drink and then ask the assembly (the place will be full) for their secrets about Jesus. Then, and only then, will the truth be slowly revealed to you. Be patient. The more drinks you buy, so the more clear and detailed will be the evidence.

Are you matching my sarcasm with your own or is your sarcasm radar in the shop?

 

[godnotgod]

Wow. This is the second time you've relied on a real scholar...from a few centuries ago. So what's the rule now? Western academics are fine to use as sources if and only if they are no later than the 18th century? Sheesh.

Sheesh, who is a solar deity.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Sheesh, who is a solar deity.

They way you define it, everybody from Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny to Paris Hilton.

 

[godnotgod]

They way you define it, everybody from Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny to Paris Hilton.

The Easter Bunny, yes; SC and PH, maybe; Sheesh, for sure.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Note that Dupois is referencing Tertullian and other 'enlightened men' who are making the claim:

That reply doesn't speak to the problem. You've quoted a French 18th century hobbiest, Dupuis, as if he knew what he was talking about. He claims Tertullian says such & such, but he doesn't even provide a reference, and most of Tertullian's works were lost long before that. Besides, Dupuis considers 'Enlightened' anyone who doesn't believe anything, and he considers anyone that believes anything to be a dunce. So of course he would think that Christians would copy Mithraists. On top if it his argument is poor and even stupid, as Christianity clearly copies its easterly worship from Judaism not Mithraism.

 

[godnotgod]

That reply doesn't speak to the problem. You've quoted a French 18th century hobbiest, Dupuis, as if he knew what he was talking about. He claims Tertullian says such & such, but he doesn't even provide a reference, and most of Tertullian's works were lost long before that. Besides, Dupuis considers 'Enlightened' anyone who doesn't believe anything, and he considers anyone that believes anything to be a dunce. So of course he would think that Christians would copy Mithraists. On top if it his argument is poor and even stupid, as Christianity clearly copies its easterly worship from Judaism not Mithraism.

"[An[ early Christian author who writes about the analogous elements found in both Paganism and Christianity, and attributes these resemblances to the devil, was Julius Firmicus Maternus (4th cent.). It is apparent from Firmicus's contentions in De Errore profanarum religionum that he believed the mysteries to have been prefigured by the devil. In other words, they anticipated Christianity.

The bottom line is that Mithraism in one form or another existed for centuries prior to the common era and thus predated Christianity. The contention that many of the "biographical" details assigned to Jesus Christ in the New Testament represented attributes of older gods such as Mithra is verified by the protestations of the early Christian fathers that the "devil" anticipated the advent of Jesus Christ, as purportedly predicted in the Jewish scriptures, and caused the Pagans to mimic this Jewish messiah in their gods and goddesses."

In addition, the cross, baptism, the eucharist, etc. all predated Christianity, some by thousands of years.

"Obviously, this baptism, so extensively carried out, was the order of the day long before Christianity had any influence. Indeed, baptism is a pre-Christian rite, found from India to Egypt, dating back thousands of years. How, then, did Mithraism take it from Christianity?"

Early Church Fathers on Mithraism | The Devil Did It

 

[Brickjectivity]

Firmicus argument has not been quoted, so I'm not sure what he said. Also, I don't say Mithraism took anything from Christianity, but its unlikely that Christianity got Eastward worship from it like 18century Dupois assumed. Christianity inherits many things from Judaism, and it has always been fashionable among critics to claim otherwise. They attack from all vectors, but that is one of the most common. It is artificial to insert Mithra in between the two, and also the traditional R. Catholic explanation already works that suggests Judaism is modified by Greek Platonism and Roman politics. Mithraism was common among Roman warriors, but the early Christians refused to go to war. Its not the possibility I oppose but the false certainties that keep coming from you, where you insist that such & such must be what happened based upon mere similarities that are found in common with many religions. Lots of religions recognize the existence and importance of the sun -- no surprise. The ancient Chinese liked the moon and things like light, dark, earth, wind, water, fire and so on. It doesn't mean the Christians came from China but that there are commonalities and correlations between religions.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I don't say Mithraism took anything from Christianity but that its more likely Mithraism would have copied Christianity than vice versa.

Indeed, as apart from anything else, there was no Mithraism before Christianity. The Persian deity in no way resembled the mystery cult savior deity of the Roman empire- Mithras. And we don't have any evidence that there was a Mithras before the early 2nd century. Best estimates but the origin of the cult far away from Galilee after Jesus was already dead for decades.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Anyway, the Codex Sinaiticus is quite a mess.

Never bothered to look at it I see.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I assume by 'texts' you mean mss. I must have used the wrong terminology. I meant the number of full translations of the Bible.

Anyway, the Codex Sinaiticus is quite a mess. Personally, I place more trust in the few copies of Pe****ta that agree with one another, rather than a profuse number of Greek-based NT's which not only disagree one with the other, but show unmistakeable signs of fraudulent tampering, omission, and revision.

This discussion needs to be continued on the Aramaic/Greek primacy thread.

I never thought that a thinking person would surrender to an Aramaic primacy fundamentalism.

 

[oldbadger]

Are you matching my sarcasm with your own or is your sarcasm radar in the shop?

I could not match either your knowledge, sarcasm or wit, but sometimes, only sometimes, I am inclined to a bit of lighthearted fun.
I was only pointing out that if you were to enter a Cornish pub, and buy everyone a drink, (and then another,) that slowly, very slowly, the truth of Jesus's journeys to Cornwall would reveal themselves through the spirits of the locals. Yes..... definitely through the spirits......

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Try Codex Sinaiticus - Home. You can look at the NT pages and see its immaculate condition. If you could read Greek, you would be able to read this without difficulty, which is not the case with most ancient Greek manuscripts.

This is what a sample looks like, from Luke
[British Library Add. MS 43725, ff.244v-245]

 

[godnotgod]

Never bothered to look at it I see.

A quick post from another forum reveals:


The Codex Sinaiticus comes from the Alexandrian based texts which many claim is corrupted. Ireneaus who lived in the 2nd century wrote about the scribes in Alenandria corrupting the texts.

Pastor David L. Brown states:

Tischendorf identified four different scribes who were involved writing the original text. However, as many as ten scribes tampered with the codex throughout the centuries. Tischendorf said he “counted 14,800 alterations and corrections in Sinaiticus.” Alterations, more alterations, and more alterations were made, and in fact, most of them are believed to be made in the 6th and 7th centuries. “On nearly every page of the manuscript there are corrections and revisions, done by 10 different people.” Tischendorf goes on to say,

“…the New Testament…is extremely unreliable…on many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40, words are dropped…letters, words even whole sentences are frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately canceled. That gross blunder, whereby a clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same word as the clause preceding, occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament.”

Codex Sinaiticus online « Slugger O'Toole

Here are just a couple pages showing some of the alterations:

When Greek New Testaments were going West, Aramaic texts were rapidly proliferating in the East; however, there is a marked contrast between the texts themselves. The Aramaic texts were maintained by scribes who had great reverence for each word, indeed each letter; but the same cannot be said of many Greek translations. No two Greek texts agree to the extent that over 360 Aramaic texts agree within the Pe****ta family. The reader will discover that although the Khabouris Codex contains some minor differences within the Pe****ta family (these differences are well footnoted) its accuracy is breath-taking. The base text is extremely trustworthy and has been reproduced with acute meticulousness for nearly two millennia.

http://www.aent.org/about.htm

 

[godnotgod]

Firmicus argument has not been quoted, so I'm not sure what he said. Also, I don't say Mithraism took anything from Christianity, but its unlikely that Christianity got Eastward worship from it like 18century Dupois assumed. Christianity inherits many things from Judaism, and it has always been fashionable among critics to claim otherwise. They attack from all vectors, but that is one of the most common. It is artificial to insert Mithra in between the two, and also the traditional R. Catholic explanation already works that suggests Judaism is modified by Greek Platonism and Roman politics. Mithraism was common among Roman warriors, but the early Christians refused to go to war. Its not the possibility I oppose but the false certainties that keep coming from you, where you insist that such & such must be what happened based upon mere similarities that are found in common with many religions. Lots of religions recognize the existence and importance of the sun -- no surprise. The ancient Chinese liked the moon and things like light, dark, earth, wind, water, fire and so on. It doesn't mean the Christians came from China but that there are commonalities and correlations between religions.

A noted Talmudic scholar* gives us a scenario in which Paul pretty much created and launched modern Christianity via three crucial elements:

1. Jewish history as a backdrop for the the myth to lend credibility;
2. The doctrine of a descending teacher to mankind, taken from the Gnostics;
3. The doctrine of a dying and resurrecting god-man who acts as scapegoat for man's wrongdoings, taken from the mystery religions.

From my understanding, Rome went after Yeshua and his 'sect of the Nazarenes' to destroy and suppress, and then to replace his teachings with those of a Romanized 'Jesus', before whom one only need kneel and accept as one's personal Lord and Savior in order to attain 'salvation'. This belief involved blood sacrifice, the shedding of divine blood through which man's sins were redeemed. This is a pagan idea. Yeshu's teachings were introspective and meditative, based on the breath, not the blood. To go from a breath, or spirit-based teaching to a blood sacrificial ritual would be to go backwards in spiritual consciousness, and makes zero sense. So where do you suppose this pagan ritual originated and how did it become grafted onto Yeshu's non-blood-sacrificial teachings?

*The Problem of Paul

 

[Brickjectivity]

A noted Talmudic scholar* gives us a scenario in which Paul pretty much created and launched modern Christianity via three crucial elements

I'm already familiar with the noted Talmudic scholar and have his book. He created a scenario, but he never concluded that Paul was indeed 'A Mythmaker'. That could not be an accident. Jews were his target audience, not you; and while his scenario is interesting it is flawed. It nevertheless accomplishes the very good purpose of allowing Jews to know that their ancestors did not 'Create' Christianity. He didn't tell me the purpose of his book; but the fault of the Holocaust was dramatically important at the time the book was written. Christians appeared to share part of the blame for the Holocaust happening. (Germany was a Protestant country, for example.) Now twenty years later Jews are much better informed about Christianity, and his book has taken a back seat to other newer books and historical models. It was never intended to be a conclusive work, hence no conclusion was given but that Jews and Christians have two separate religions today.

From my understanding, Rome went after Yeshua and his 'sect of the Nazarenes' to destroy and suppress, and then to replace his teachings with those of a Romanized 'Jesus',

I don't know about that, but I think the argument about 'Sun worship' was not good.

 

[godnotgod]

I'm already familiar with the noted Talmudic scholar and have his book. He created a scenario, but he never concluded that Paul was indeed 'A Mythmaker'. That could not be an accident. Jews were his target audience, not you; and while his scenario is interesting it is flawed. It nevertheless accomplishes the very good purpose of allowing Jews to know that their ancestors did not 'Create' Christianity. He didn't tell me the purpose of his book; but the fault of the Holocaust was dramatically important at the time the book was written. Christians appeared to share part of the blame for the Holocaust happening. (Germany was a Protestant country, for example.) Now twenty years later Jews are much better informed about Christianity, and his book has taken a back seat to other newer books and historical models. It was never intended to be a conclusive work, hence no conclusion was given but that Jews and Christians have two separate religions today.

The link I provided I believe does state the purpose of his book.

I don't know about that, but I think the argument about 'Sun worship' was not good.

You do recall that Saul was busy hunting down the Nazarenes.