Occult ideology in the christian bible?

[Sanity Check]

"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

 

-Matthew 16:19

 

 

 

Does anyone get "as above, so below" vibes from this biblical verse.

[Nungali]

Nope .

 

I do get  'so below, as above' from it though .

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

 

I am not sure exactly what occult entails, but i know there are some speculation about the gospel of mark involving a mystery tradition:

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00393389508600159

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Gospel_of_Mark

 

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by NaturaNaturans

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

Also, in «the immorality key,» the authors argues that the wine or blood of Christ, refers to the wine of dionyousus and his cult.

Furthermore, If you look at the first paragraph of John:

The Word Became Flesh

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
 

It becomes way more «mystic» if you keep in mind that it was written in greek, and «word» would be replaced with logos. To the greeks, logos was some sort of divine reason, a cosmic law that guides all things.

 

[SirPalomides]

Christian esotericism is as old as Christianity itself. For some history I can't recommend the Secret History of Western Esotericism Podcast (shwep.net) highly enough. For Christian esotericism see the episodes on, for instance, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and the Cappadocian Fathers. As with almost all of western  esotericism, some knowledge of Platonism is important. 

Edited November 28, 2023 by SirPalomides

[Daniel]

Oh!  I have a good one!

 

In Luke... ~googling~  Right.  Luke 10.

 

1 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two a others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. 2 He told them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. 3Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4 Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road.

 

5 “When you enter a house, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ 6 If someone who promotes peace is there, your peace will rest on them; if not, it will return to you. 7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

 

8 “When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you. 9 Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’

 

There's so much going on here...  But there is no doubt: Jesus knows what to do....

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shem_HaMephorash

https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/1388270/jewish/72-Names-of-G-d.htm

 

5 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

I am not sure exactly what occult entails

 

It's the theory and practice of "making miracles".   "Making miracles" is more-or-less "Magic", but, there's debate on the difference between "magic" and "miracle".  Naturally folks aren't going to appreciate the idea of Jesus working magic.  But there shouldn't be any objections to Jesus bringing down a miracle, especially if there's written precedent where another "prophet" ( another term with debatable meaning and implications ) does the same thing in perfect harmony with the will of the most high, YHVH.  That's why the example I brought from Luke is so good.  It's connected to what Moses did.  

 

In short:  occult ideologies are loopholes in the fabric of reality.  Exploiting them is a grey area where the one working the magic might do great harm to themself or others either intentionally or unintentionally.

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

3 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

some knowledge of Platonism is important. 

 

Jesus is jewish.  

 

3 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

Christian esotericism is as old as Christianity itself.

 

Which is why Judaism is needed.

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[SirPalomides]

17 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Jesus is jewish.  

 

 

So is Philo of Alexandria. He is also a Platonist. 

 

Clement, Origen, the Cappadocian Fathers, Pseudo-Dionysius, and Maximus the Confessor are not Jewish. Anyone who wants to tackle their thinking should know Platonism. 

 

17 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Which is why Judaism is needed.

 

 

Okay but 2nd Temple Judaism is a hellenized religion. 

[Daniel]

23 minutes ago, SirPalomides said:

Okay but 2nd Temple Judaism is a hellenized religion. 

 

Hellenized?  That is against judaism.  What makes you think 2nd Temple Judaism is hellenized?

 

 

The original source for this goes back to joshua:

 

לא־ימוש ספר התורה הזה מפיך והגית בו יומם ולילה למען תשמר לעשות ככל־הכתוב בו כי־אז תצליח את־דרכך ואז תשכיל׃

 

This Book of the Torah shall not depart from your mouth; but you shall meditate on it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written on it; for then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall have good success.
 

It shall not depart means no greek philosophy is permitted.  This can be linked to moses, to whom it would have originally come from the lord at sinai.  So, no.  hellenization is not judaism.

 

23 minutes ago, SirPalomides said:

So is Philo of Alexandria. He is also a Platonist. 

 

Clement, Origen, the Cappadocian Fathers, Pseudo-Dionysius, and Maximus the Confessor are not Jewish. Anyone who wants to tackle their thinking should know Platonism. 

 

Are you able to connect Jesus to learning plato?

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[SirPalomides]

9 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

Hellenized?  That is against judaism.  What makes you think 2nd Temple Judaism is hellenized?

 

 

The original source for this goes back to joshua:

 

לא־ימוש ספר התורה הזה מפיך והגית בו יומם ולילה למען תשמר לעשות ככל־הכתוב בו כי־אז תצליח את־דרכך ואז תשכיל׃

 

This Book of the Torah shall not depart from your mouth; but you shall meditate on it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written on it; for then you shall make your way prosperous, and then you shall have good success.
 

Then it can be linked to moses, to whom it would have originally come from the lord at sinai.  So, no.  hellenization is not judaism.

 

"The book says we can't do it so it can't happen": this is not how religion works, this is not how culture works, especially when we're talking about something that develops over thousands of years. Judaism has never been just one thing. 

 

Quote

 

 

Are you able to connect Jesus to learning plato?

 

 

 

 

Yes. The whole series of Christological debates and conciliar dogmas of the first millennium is pretty much incomprehensible without knowledge of Plato and Aristotle. You're not going to find words like ousia, physis, hypostasis, etc in the Hebrew scriptures. 

 

My initial comment and recommendation was aimed at those interested in studying the history of Christian esotericism. Fundamentalists would likely not be interested. 

Edited November 28, 2023 by SirPalomides

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

@Daniel nothing personal, but i wonder, do you belive everything in jewish scripture is historically correct?

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

"The book says we can't do it so it can't happen": this is not how religion works, this is not how culture works, especially when we're talking about something that develops over thousands of years. Judaism has never been just one thing. 

 

It's never been polytheism.  It's never been greek.  Once it includes other religions, it has violated the Torah and it stops being Judaism.

 

Judaism cannot call itself Judaism if it is denying the Torah.   Different interpretations can happen.  Differences of opinion *always* happen.  But that cannot ever be syncretic.  That is not Judaism.  

 

A great example is homosexuality.  Perfect example.  The conventional view is... harsh.  There's another view which is extremely permissive.  The method for making it permissive is going to the verses and very carefully reading the words, hyperliterally, which does not actually prohibit homosexuality.  In this way, the permissive point of view is certainly jewish.  The one who is carefully reading the text IS practicing Judaism.  There's another way to be permissive.  It too involves going to the Torah and reading it carefully.  That is also Judaism.

 

But simply saying I'm influenced by my surroundings, and my neighbors ,therefore homosexuality is kosher.... That's not practicing Judaism.  It cannot ever be that way.  That makes the Torah a historical suggestion not divine.

 

Quote

Yes. The whole series of Christological debates and conciliar dogmas of the first millennium is pretty much incomprehensible without knowledge of Plato and Aristotle. You're not going to find words like ousia, physis, hypostasis, etc in the Hebrew scriptures. 

 

Aren't those debates post-Jesus, post-epistles, and post-gospels?  If you'd like to discuss each of those concepts, maybe link to some defintions and their corresponding verses in the Christian bible?  I'm not asking for those words specifically to be in the verses, just the word, defintion, and a link to the scriptures which include them.

 

Honestly any example of platonism attributed to Jesus would work well.  Then it'll be interesting to see if I can source it the hebrew bible.  ( I'm guessing it'll be in psalms or isaiah, Jesus loves psalms and isaiah. )

 

Before replying I went to refresh myself on platonism, to make sure I wasn't forgetting anything.  Yes, during the 2nd temple period there is linguistic borrowing.  Words were borrowed.  I don't see any theological or mystical concepts being borrowed.  In fact I see some sharp contrasts.  And since most acaddemics are not well versed in the hebrew bible nor our mystical tradtion, they have no clue what connections are happening in the christian bible.  No clue.

 

I am shocked that Luke 10 is not on anyone's radar.  That is like a bright blinking neon sign:  "Jewish mystic was here."  Is there anything, anywhere, in platonism that explains that reference to 72 ( or 70 depending on the manuscript ) along with the directions given.  And the reference to the kingdom of god?  What's the platonic view of that chapter?

 

Quote

My initial comment and recommendation was aimed at those interested in studying the history of Christian esotericism. Fundamentalists would likely not be interested. 

 

The thread is asking about the Christian bible, not, the debates which occured later.

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

11 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

@Daniel nothing personal, but i wonder, do you belive everything in jewish scripture is historically correct?

 

Everything?  LOL.  No.  My belief is this is what God revealed to me and the jewish people at sinai.  How that happened is a expression of extremely imaginative thinking.  Although, that sort of imaginative thinking has produced very good results for those of us who practice it, so, I don't discourage it in myself or others.

 

 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Daniel

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

Do you belive in «the chosen people»? Do you think judaism is special? If so, how? 

[Maddie]

14 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 My belief is this is what God revealed to me and the jewish people at sinai.

 

The obvious problem with this is that there isn't any evidence that the Exodus actually happened as described in the Torah. 

[Daniel]

16 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

The obvious problem with this is that there isn't any evidence that the Exodus actually happened as described in the Torah. 

 

It's not a problem for me.  Strangely, it's a benefit.   But that's a long story.

 

Maybe think of it this way?  There is no evidence for almost ANYTHING in the Torah the way it is described.  By the time you've gotten to the exodus:

1. 7 days of creation
2. talking serpent
3. Adam lives to be nearly 1000
4. an impossibly large ark
5. an impossible weather event
6. an impossible flood
7. all the earth sharing a language
8. a tower being constructed to heaven
9. abimelech's entire household is cursed in an impossible manner
10. abram's small houehold ( soon to be abraham ) conquers 5 other nations
11. the man circumcises himself
12. has a child at 99
13. jacob does some weird stuff mating the sheep
14. each of the 10 plagues is impossible
15. the splitting of the red sea is impossible

There's no evidence for any of it.  It's fine. 

 

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

I agree, it is fine. It is the case for all religions and myths, and they can still carry great depth and value. But think about it. Judaism didnt evolve in a vacuum. The region was dominated by Persia and hellenistic kingdoms for centuries before and while the torah was put together. Monotheism predates judaism. Greek philosophy was dominant in the eastern mediteranian. Genesis and the flood myth dates back to sumeria. Why are you so opposed to judaism being influenced by other traditions? No culture exists in a vacuum. 
 

The people who became jews where ones polytheistic. If your argument is that they werent yet jews because of that, then i can accept that argument.

[Maddie]

23 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

It's not a problem for me.  Strangely, it's a benefit.   But that's a long story.

 

Maybe think of it this way?  There is no evidence for almost ANYTHING in the Torah the way it is described.  By the time you've gotten to the exodus:

1. 7 days of creation
2. talking serpent
3. Adam lives to be nearly 1000
4. an impossibly large ark
5. an impossible weather event
6. an impossible flood
7. all the earth sharing a language
8. a tower being constructed to heaven
9. abimelech's entire household is cursed in an impossible manner
10. abram's small houehold ( soon to be abraham ) conquers 5 other nations
11. the man circumcises himself
12. has a child at 99
13. jacob does some weird stuff mating the sheep
14. each of the 10 plagues is impossible
15. the splitting of the red sea is impossible

There's no evidence for any of it.  It's fine. 

 

 

If you don't mind me asking, since you seem to believe and follow this religion, why then is it not a problem to you that there is no evidence that any of it is true?

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Maddie

[Daniel]

44 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Do you belive in «the chosen people»? Do you think judaism is special? If so, how? 

 

Chosen people?  Not really.  It can't be a chosen people because it's not a bloodline, it's not genetic.  We accept converts, but strongly discourage it.  God did choose to have a nation set apart.  The question is, set apart for what?  We have a rather difficult set of rules to follow.  None of us are exempt ( although the women have much more freedom ).  Once a Jew, always a Jew.  There is no escaping it.  There are benefits, of course, but, it doesn't make us greater just different.

 

Judaism is special because it permits approaching the divine on a very high level without losing our sense of self nor losing the capability for accurately assessing right from wrong.  It's also a huge religion inspite of our minimal number of adherents.  There is a cornucopia of opportunity to encounter the divine in Judaism.  That's the benefit of having so many laws.  Each one is an opportunity. 

[Daniel]

23 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said:

I agree, it is fine. It is the case for all religions and myths, and they can still carry great depth and value. But think about it. Judaism didnt evolve in a vacuum. The region was dominated by Persia and hellenistic kingdoms for centuries before and while the torah was put together. Monotheism predates judaism. Greek philosophy was dominant in the eastern mediteranian. Genesis and the flood myth dates back to sumeria. Why are you so opposed to judaism being influenced by other traditions? No culture exists in a vacuum. 
 

The people who became jews where ones polytheistic. If your argument is that they werent yet jews because of that, then i can accept that argument.

 

You're making quite a lot of assumptions.

 

For example:  Monotheism predates judaism? 

 

In the other thread I referred you to archeological evidence of jewish monotheism.  You have a date for that 900BCE.  I suppose I can search for the archeology report from the excavation.  Hopefully I still have it saved somewhere.  Which monotheistic religion predates it?  It's not the Persians.  Contrary to popular belief Zoroastarianism is not monotheistic.  It looks like it until you read the gathas where there are multiple devas.  Do people say it's monotheistic?  Sure.  Have they read the gathas?  Nope. 

 

Ignoring the label monotheism, if the gathas and avestas are read there is virtually zero similarities between zoroastarianism and judaism.  Zero.  So where is the influence?  What's shared between them?  ( I'm asking rhetorically.  I know what people claim is shared between them. The foremost authority on it is ... Boyce, Boyles.... ummm..  I have her book. I've researched the arguments they're all lacking. ) 

 

I just checked.  Mary Boyce.  The problemm here is the inherent bias. Mary Boyce is in-love with zoroastarianism.  So she's natually going to see their influence everywhere even if it doesn't exist.  And if she isn't an expert on judaism, then, she's going to make some rather massive blunders.

 

The same thing happens with sumerian genesis myths.  Have you actually read them?  Do you know what they are?  Have you read the Enuma Elish?  Did you know that the earlier version has zero correspondence with the genesis myths?  None!  The Enuma Elish has adapted over time.  The oldest version is 2000BCEish.  Nothing matches.  In 1000BCEish after there was contact with judiasm, there are minor matches.  A sentence or two has similarity.  Then, the version that is most common that people read is, I think, from 700BCEish.  That one has 2 or 3 decent matches with genesis.  2 or 3 similarites out of 1000+ lines of text.  The entire story is different!  But a few things are the same.  Then, the Enuma Elish shows up again in another adpated version around 300CE.  That one, yes, more similarities.  But it's still nothing at all like the genesis creation myth.

 

What this shows is a consistent trend of the Enuma Elish changing over time, becomiing closer and closer to the genesis myth.  The Akkaidans, if you research it have a track record for doing this.  They were adopting other people's religions as they conquered them.  This is what they did.  Compare that to the jewish scripture which discourages it.  Why would jewish "prophets" take someone else's story if they are preaching don't mix with the others?  It makes no sense.  Borrowing frommt he others encourages mixing.  It validates tthe other's beliefs.  That's why the Akkadians did it.  They wanted the other peoples to join them.  "We believe what you believe, now, join our empire."  Jews said the opposite:  "We don't believe what you believe, please don't join us."

 

If you read the epic of gilgamesh, the same thing happens there.  There's multiple versions.  The first version has zero similarity at all.  There isn't even a flood in it!  Then, I think it's arround the same time 1000BCE, poof!  A flood shows up in the story.  What happened around 1000BCE?  The ( 2nd? ) iron age collapse.  It was a catalytst for a great deal of mixing of peoples, a massive poswer struggle.  Adopting other people's myths was a way to solidfy the masses.

 

"Why are you so opposed to judaism being influenced by other traditions?"

 

It needs to be true, my-dude.  If it's not true, and it's just rumors, I'm going to push back against it.  Don't you care about whether or not it's true? 

 

Mayybe ask yourself this:  "Why aren't any of the sources your watching on youtube ( or maybe reading in books ) telling you there are multtiple versions of the Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh?  Why aren't they telling you that the early versions have NO matches with Genesis at all?"

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, Maddie said:

 

If you don't mind me asking, since you seem to believe and follow this religion, why then is it not a problem to you that there is no evidence that any of it is true?

 

 

I don't want to go too deep into this.  This isn't the proper venue.

 

The best I can say, I think, is, there's a method to the madness.  If you want to discuss it in more depth, maybe send me a private message.

 

 

[SirPalomides]

14 hours ago, Daniel said:

 

It's never been polytheism.  It's never been greek.  Once it includes other religions, it has violated the Torah and it stops being Judaism.

 

Judaism cannot call itself Judaism if it is denying the Torah.   Different interpretations can happen.  Differences of opinion *always* happen.  But that cannot ever be syncretic.  That is not Judaism.  

 

Then Judaism has never existed since no non-syncretic form of Judaism has ever existed, whether considering, e.g. its emergence from the polytheist Canaanite religious milieu, or the pervasive Platonism in the kabbalah. Are you going to argue that Judaism influenced by kabbalah is fake Judaism? Good luck with that! Even the reliance on the Torah is not a consistent feature- see the evidence from the polytheist Jewish community in Elephantine. What you present here is a sanitized, tidy, revisionist, sectarian account of religion, akin to the Wahhabis' presentation of their version as the true Islam, which can only work by ignoring (or literally demolishing) huge chunks of history. Again, one can't understand an ancient religious current by looking at a book- that's true today in the era of mass literacy, and it's even more so in times when the vast majority of people acquired and passed on religious (and other) knowledge orally.  This is before even addressing the huge textual problems with the scriptures in question and the questions of of who compiled them and when, how they were edited, altered, etc. 

 

14 hours ago, Daniel said:

 

Aren't those debates post-Jesus, post-epistles, and post-gospels?  If you'd like to discuss each of those concepts, maybe link to some defintions and their corresponding verses in the Christian bible?  I'm not asking for those words specifically to be in the verses, just the word, defintion, and a link to the scriptures which include them.

 

You won't find any of those terms in the New Testament. They had to be brought in because, in fact, it is impossible to get what we think of as Christianity from the scriptures alone.

 

But if you want to see the Hellenic impact in the New Testament, let's look at the letters, the oldest material in the New Testament. There we find allegorical readings of the Hebrew scriptures (e.g. Galatians on Sarah and Hagar), echoing a method pioneered by the Stoics vis-a-vis Greek myths; we hear that the Mosaic law is "a copy and shadow of heavenly things"; we encounter a sharp contrast between "the flesh" and "the spirit"; speaking of the resurrection, Paul distinguishes the "psychic" body (soma psychikon) and the "spiritual" body (soma pnevmatikon). 

 

We also have to account for some key notions that, while not Hellenic, don't seem to have precedent in the Tanakh. We learn, for instance, that the Mosaic law was delivered not directly by God but by angels; that this world/age is ruled by a collection of wicked heavenly rulers ("archons"); that Christ descended from some higher realm to deliver us from these rulers with secret wisdom (these ideas are often presented as characteristic of the gnostics but they're right there in Paul). Which also goes to show how much of a moving target it is to define "real" Judaism. 

 

 

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Hello Sir Palomides,

 

It's good to see you back.  You raise some good points here and I will expand on them later today.  I had started to prepare them in the Abrahamic discussion section, but may post them here.  If I post them elsewhere I will post a link to them here.

 

51 minutes ago, SirPalomides said:

. . . see the evidence from the polytheist Jewish community in Elephantine. What you present here is a sanitized, tidy, revisionist, sectarian account of religion, akin to the Wahhabis' presentation of their version as the true Islam.  (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

It specifically concerns the Elephantine settlement, so it is good that you bring it up here as it will create interest in what I intend to post.  I will also note that it was similarities between Qabalah and Plotinus that lead me to start investigating Biblical history back in the late Seventies.  My research continued for several years.  I will probably post more about that at some point.

 

ZYD

[Zhongyongdaoist]

2 hours ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

3 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

. . . see the evidence from the polytheist Jewish community in Elephantine. What you present here is a sanitized, tidy, revisionist, sectarian account of religion, akin to the Wahhabis' presentation of their version as the true Islam.  (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

It specifically concerns the Elephantine settlement, so it is good that you bring it up here as it will create interest in what I intend to post.  I will also note that it was similarities between Qabalah and Plotinus that lead me to start investigating Biblical history back in the late Seventies.  My research continued for several years.  I will probably post more about that at some point.

 

I have made the post I mention above in the Abrahamic Religions discussion section, a simple click on the link will get you there.  I'm sorry that the post is so sparse, but the text quoted there is very interesting and relevant.  I will post more in that  section later to put it in a wider context, unfortunately I don't have time now.

 

ZYD

[Daniel]

 

5 hours ago, SirPalomides said:

Then Judaism has never existed since no non-syncretic form of Judaism has ever existed, whether considering

 

Assumption ^^

 

Quote

, e.g. its emergence from the polytheist Canaanite religious milieu

 

Judaism rejected the canaanite "milieu".  Rejection is the opposite of syncretic.

 

Quote

, or the pervasive Platonism in the kabbalah

 

A common misconception. ^^

 

Quote

Are you going to argue that Judaism influenced by kabbalah is fake Judaism?

 

Nope.  Jewish kabalah is found in Tanach.  So it's not borrowing nor influenced by it.

 

Quote

Even the reliance on the Torah is not a consistent feature- see the evidence from the polytheist Jewish community in Elephantine.

 

If they were worshipping egyptian gods, they were not practicing judaism.  It really is simple.  

 

Leviticus:  18:3
כמעשה ארץ־מצרים אשר ישבתם־בה לא תעשו וכמעשה ארץ־כנען אשר אני מביא אתכם שמה לא תעשו ובחקתיהם לא תלכו׃
After the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, shall you not do; and after the doings of the land of Canaan, where I bring you, shall you not do; nor shall you walk in their ordinances.

 

The fact that some people, or even many people did it, is irrelevant.  That confirms the story in the hebrew bible.  None the less, it's an assumption that there were no monotheistic jews in the area.  The wiki article below indicates otherwise.

 

In the course of this appeal, the Jewish inhabitants of Elephantine speak of the antiquity of the damaged temple:

 

Now our forefathers built this temple in the fortress of Elephantine back in the days of the kingdom of Egypt, and when Cambyses came to Egypt he found it built. They (the Persians) knocked down all the temples of the gods of Egypt, but no one did any damage to this temple.

 

Notice the distinction?  Their forefatthers built the temple to YHVH, the god of abraham, isaac, and jacob.  And persians didn't knock it down.  That specific temple was not egyptian.  IOW, not syncretic.  It's different.

 

the papyri show that the Jews at Elephantine sent letters to the high priest in Jerusalem asking for his support in re-building their temple, which seems to suggest that the priests of the Jerusalem Temple were not enforcing Deuteronomic law at that time. Cowley notes that their petition expressed their pride at having a temple to Ya'u Yahweh (no other god is mentioned in the petition) and gave no suggestion that their temple could be heretical.

 

What most don't know is, the common jews did not learn the law nor study it until around 200 bce.  They were known as am-ha-aretz.  The people of the earth.  It's written about in the mishnah.  There's halachic concerns about working with the am-ha-aretz regarding whether or not to asssume that produce rec'd from them had been tithed properly.

 

Quote

What you present here is a sanitized, tidy, revisionist, sectarian account of religion, akin to the Wahhabis' presentation of their version as the true Islam, which can only work by ignoring (or literally demolishing) huge chunks of history. Again, one can't understand an ancient religious current by looking at a book- that's true today in the era of mass literacy, and it's even more so in times when the vast majority of people acquired and passed on religious (and other) knowledge orally.  This is before even addressing the huge textual problems with the scriptures in question and the questions of of who compiled them and when, how they were edited, altered, etc. 

 

First of all.  Some things are simple.  Some things are complex.  When it comes to syncretism and polythesim, it's really simple.  That you don't like it really doesn't change anything.  Regarding judaism as a religion, it is a "revealed" religion.  That means it has scripture which is deemed to be revealed, known, extant.  That really is all there is to it.  I am not bothered in the slightest with labeling it fundementalist, nor wahabi, nor bible-thumper, nor any of that.  It's just a simple fact.

 

These arguments about whether it is editted, or revised, or altered, or corrupted, are all valid discussions to have.  But.  When it comes to polytheism and syncretism the entire story would have to be rewritten, top to bottom, in order to reverse it into polytheistic syncretism. 

 

Quote

You won't find any of those terms in the New Testament.

 

Which is why I said, they didn't need to be there.

 

Quote

They had to be brought in because, in fact, it is impossible to get what we think of as Christianity from the scriptures alone.

 

You can call it fact... that doesn't make it fact.

 

Quote

But if you want to see the Hellenic impact in the New Testament, let's look at the letters, the oldest material in the New Testament. There we find allegorical readings of the Hebrew scriptures (e.g. Galatians on Sarah and Hagar), echoing a method pioneered by the Stoics vis-a-vis Greek myths; we hear that the Mosaic law is "a copy and shadow of heavenly things"

 

Hebrews 8...

 

 

Quote

we encounter a sharp contrast between "the flesh" and "the spirit"; speaking of the resurrection, Paul distinguishes the "psychic" body (soma psychikon) and the "spiritual" body (soma pnevmatikon). 

 

1 Corithians 15...

 

If you recall I asked if Jesus could be connected to learning platonism.  I didn't ask about the author referred to as "Paul".  None the less I'll re-read those and get back to you.

 

Quote

We also have to account for some key notions that, while not Hellenic, don't seem to have precedent in the Tanakh. We learn, for instance, that the Mosaic law was delivered not directly by God but by angels; that this world/age is ruled by a collection of wicked heavenly rulers ("archons"); that Christ descended from some higher realm to deliver us from these rulers with secret wisdom (these ideas are often presented as characteristic of the gnostics but they're right there in Paul). Which also goes to show how much of a moving target it is to define "real" Judaism. 

 

"... they're right there in Paul."  <---- not Jesus. 

 

   Judaism is not a moving target when it comes to polytheism and syncretism.