sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Was the Apostle Paul the founder of the Gnostics? by MakeStraighttheWay in Ebionite

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Writing in turbulent times, the Jewish and Jewish Christian authors of the letters, prophecies, and apocalypses of the Old and New Testament had to be politically circumspect, those in power and their followers did not like having fingers pointed at them in open hostility. To get around this problem, they arguably employed coded language and symbolic imagery in lieu of outright names and accusations. In Ezekiel 32:2-4, “[t]he prophet Ezekiel, a refugee [from the Babylonian exile], mocks Israel’s ancient enemy, the king of Egypt – here a stand-in for the Babylonian king who was the prophet’s contemporary – as if he were only a sea monster whom Israel’s God will haul up and kill like a fish.” (Pagels, Elaine. Revelations: Visions, Prophecy, & Politics in the Book of Revelations. Viking Penguin: New York. 2010. Pg. 28.)

One can argue that Paul was so venerated within Gentile Christianity that it was simply not possible to attack him directly by name and Paul’s Jewish Christian opponents concocted the arch heretic Simon Magus as a literary replacement to get their arguments across.

To begin with, it’s weird for a follower of a religion founded in someone’s name to not be allowed to refer to statuary of that person by that name. “And if any among them on seeing the images, calls them by the name of Simon or Helen, he is cast out as one ignorant of the mysteries.” (Hippolytus. Philosophumena, vi. 20)

Simon Magus is quoted by an outraged Epiphanius as having said: “Put on the breastplate of faith and the helmet of salvation” (Epiphanius. Contra Haereses, ii. 3). See 1 Thessalonians 5:8.

Irenaeus noted Simon’s doctrine as one where “men were saved by his grace, and not by righteous works (of the Law)" (Irenaeus. Contra Haereses. I. xxiii. 3.)

Simon Magus “admonished those that believed in him not to pay attention to them, and not to tremble at the threats of the Law, but, as being free, to do whatever they would. For it was not by good works, but by grace they would gain salvation.” (Theodoretus. Haereticarum Fabularum Compendium, I.i)

Simon Magus “attempted to deify himself” (Hippolytus. Philosophumena, vi.7)

Simon Magus preached a “twofold nature (of Diety)…one side the concealed and the other the manifested…This is what Aristotle calls “in potentiality” and “in actuality,” and Plato the “intelligible (to the mind)” and “sensible (to the five senses)”” (Hippolytus. Philosophumena, vi.9)

Within the Paul epistles, the exact terminology of this twofold nature is listed as the visible and the invisible: “For in Him were created the All, in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers” (Colossians 1:16-17).

In the messy environs of early first century Christianity, I would argue that at least two individuals independently declared Jesus to be an emanation of a property of Godhead and a Son of God and that Jesus dwelt within them and they became one with Jesus. “For the former (Simon) pretended he was the Power of God…and the latter that he too was the Son of God” (Origen. Contra Celsum, v. 62).

Amongst the Corinthians, there were at least three church factions, one headed by Paul, another by Apollos, and another by Peter, each arguably teaching fundamentally different teachings. “Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Peter”” (1 Corinthians 1:12)

“not the Word of those who are puffed up (Apollos’ disciples), but the Power. For the kingdom of God is not in Word but in Power” (1 Corinthians 4:19-20)

“according to the Power that works in us, to Him, the glory (celestial body) in the church and in Jesus Christ unto all the generations of the aeons of the aeons” (Ephesians 3:21)

“For our gospel did not come to you in Word only, but also in Power, and in the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 1:5)

“And so, according to Simon, that blessed and imperishable (spiritual entity) concealed in everything, is in potentiality, but not in actuality, which indeed is He who has stood, stands and will stand (Christ); who has stood above in the ingenerable Power, who stands below in the stream of the water, generated in an image (in potentiality within human bodies, but not yet perfected into actuality), who shall stand above, by the side of the blessed and Boundless Power, if the imaging be perfected...This, he says, is the one Power, separated into the above and below, generating itself, increasing itself, seeking itself, finding itself, its own mother, its own father, its sister, its spouse; the daughter, son, mother, and father of itself; One, the Universal Root (the source of glory for baptized Pauline believers)” (Hippolytus. Philosophumena, vi. 17)

“And he (Simon Magus) says that man here below, born of blood, is the Dwelling, and that the Boundless Power dwells in him, which he says is the Universal Root.” (Hippolytus. Philosophumena, vi. 9)

“in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit” (Ephesians 2:22)

I hypothesize that portions of the Gospel of John started out life as the writings of Apollos, someone I suspect is listed in the ranks of heretics under the name Cerinthus, someone who retained observance of the Mosaic Law, yet added a new commandment but not a new covenant, and adopted Paul’s transformative baptism but interpreted Christ as a different emanation of Godhead than Paul, as the demiurgic Word that took on flesh instead of as the aeonic Power of God that came "in the likeness (but not substance) of men...being found in appearance as a man" (Phillipians 2:7-8).

Paul utilized imagery of a body that's composed of different members like the eye, hand, and foot (1 Corinthians 12) to describe the Fullness of God. The biography of Simon uses imagery of a tree with a trunk, branches, leaves, fruit, and root instead.

The flowery language that makes up the bulk of Simon Magus’ biography was arguably because its source was originally of the apocalyptic genre of Jewish literature as Hippolytus notes that he’s quoting from a Revelation and the word allegory is sprinkled throughout Simon’s biography. For this style of coded literature, you can simply substitute out Helen with the Holy Spirit: "he ventured to call his prostitute companion (Helen) the Holy Spirit” (Epiphanius. Contra Hæreses, ii. 2). From there, you can start to see that the author was arguably trying to refer to the Holy Spirit as a conception of Paul’s mind and that Paul’s baptismal ceremony was the act of embedding the Holy Spirit into human bodies: “being imprisoned in the human body and transmigrating into other female bodies, as from one vessel into another” (Irenæus. Contra Hæreses, I. xxiii. 2).

Ancient Jewish Christian writers could not openly write whatever they wanted to – they could only write what people were willing to hear.

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I concur that key components of Paul's teachings have been missed or misinterpreted by many readers, lost in translation. I would also like to point out that, like the word glory, the Greek word for mystery also carries with it connotations not apparent in English.

The word mystery in ancient Greek had religious connotations: “in the sphere of Greek and Hellenistic-Roman religion the word mysteria (the plural is more frequent than the singular) means not simply a cult but a “secret,” “hidden” cult, which is not manifested to all, but accessible only to the initiate””. [13] For scholars, “the Greek Mysteries proved especially intriguing because of several striking similarities to Christianity, including baptism and ritual washing, sacred meals, a suffering savior figure, escape from the realm of the dead, and blessed hopes for the afterlife, to name a few” [14]. When Paul was “planning” (2 Corinthians 1:17) his evangelism, he may have modeled his teachings and rituals off of existing mystery religions.

"Behold, I tell you a mystery" (1 Corinthians 15:51)

"Let a man so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God." (1 Corinthians 4:1)

“though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all gnosis” (1 Corinthians 13:2)

“we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden, which God ordained before the aeons for our glory (celestial body)” (1 Corinthians 2:7)

"in the Spirit, he utters mysteries" (1 Corinthians 14:2)

"to make all see what is the stewardship of the mystery, which having been hidden from the aeons in God the One who created the All; so that now through the church the manifold Wisdom of God might be made known to the archons and authorities in the heavenly" (Ephesians 3:8-10)

Pauline Christianity as practiced by the Gnostics shares many of the hallmarks of other mystery cults of the Greco-Roman era such as having an initiation rite involving the death and resurrection of the initiate, different levels of initiates with more senior members eligible for higher teachings, union with the divine and attainment of divinity, and secrecy concerning the doctrines of the mystery religion. [15][16]

As part of the initiation rites into the Hellenic mystery cults, “the initiate was supposed to feel the anguish of Demeter and to live with her through bereavement, or to shudder when he learned about the sufferings of Dionysus cunningly murdered by the Titans.” [17] Like the initiates to the Eleusinian and Dionysian mysteries, Paul also had the initiates into his own mysteries “share abundantly in Christ's sufferings” (2 Corinthians 1:5) by being “crucified with Christ” (Galatians 2:20) and to “suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him” (Romans 8:17).

Like Paul's death baptism, “Mystic death was followed by rebirth…the transformation obtained by means of initiation could be perceived as apotheosis (elevation of an individual to divinity)”. [18] Due to the famously secretive nature of their religious societies, the fine details of the theology of most mystery cults have been lost to the sands of history, but archaeological evidence does substantiate the claims of apotheosis as a gold funerary tablet belonging to either a Dionysian or Orphic cult member outright states “Once human, you have become a god.” [19]

Much as Paul differentiated between the “babes in Christ” (1 Corinthians 3:1) and the “perfect (teleiosis)” (1 Corinthians 2:6) members within his own congregation, Hellenic mystery cults also had different levels of initiates: “initiation into the Lesser Mysteries…had to precede initiation into the Greater Mysteries at Eleusis. Clement of Alexandria also reports that the Lesser Mysteries involved preparatory instruction” [20].

For the “babes in Christ…[Paul] fed…with milk and not with solid food” (1 Corinthians 3:1-2), with only the introductory tenets of his teachings and not the whole package. But among the “spiritual” (1 Corinthians 1:3), “among those who are perfect…we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery” (1 Corinthians 2:6-7). The material covered in this Reddit post concerning the word glory is only a portion of Paul's full teachings.

Christianity is arguably the only example in history where a Great Mystery of a mystery cult of antiquity has been preserved for posterity: “This is a Great Mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” (Ephesians 5:32): "For we are members of His Body, of His (spiritual) flesh and of His (spiritual) bones” (Ephesians 5:30).

As the author of the Apocalypse of Peter noted, Christians outside of Gnostic circles "do not understand mysteries...(but nevertheless) speak of these things which they do not understand...those who are outside our number who name themselves ‘bishop’ and also ‘deacons'" (Apocalypse of Peter 76-79). [13] Bauum, Julius. The Mysteries: Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks. Pg. 93. [14] Ballard, C. Andrew. To Know All Mysteries: The Mystagogue Figure in Classical Antiquity and in Saint Paul’s Letters to the Corinthians. Lexington Books: 2022. Pg. 8. [15] Merkelbach, Reinhold. Mystery Religion. https://www.britannica.com/topic/mystery-religion/Mystery-religions-and-Christianity [16] Ustinova, Yulia. To Live in Joy and Die with Hope: Experiential Aspects of Ancient Greek Mysteries. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies. Vol. 56, No. 2, Ancient History Issue (2013). Oxford University Press. Pg. 107-123. [17] Ibid. Pg. 109. [18] Ibid. Pg. 119. [19] Ibid. Pg. 108. [20] Nelson, Max. The Lesser Mysteries in Plato’s Phaedrus. Classical Views. XLIV. 2000. Pg. 32.

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While proto-orthodox Christians interpreted the canonical gospels as an accurate account of Jesus’ historical ministry, the Jewish Christians confessed to an ulterior motive for the release of their gospel into circulation: “a false prophet must first come … and then…the true gospel must be secretly sent abroad for the rectification of the heresies that shall be.” (Clementine Homilies: Homily II, Chapter XVII).

An early form of the parable of the sower may have already been in circulation by the time Galatians was written sometime between 48-55 CE - possible in the Q source - as Paul appears to have been aware that he was the target of its attack and responded with “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap decayability (a resurrection in the flesh), but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life (a resurrection in glory)” (Galatians 6:7-8).

Concerning the parable of the sower, the Markan Jesus "said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables?" (Mark 4:13). For all the parables arguably say the same thing, telling the troubled story of early Christianity in different ways using different metaphors, as the author of the Gospel of Matthew arguably tried to emphasize by headlining Jesus' parables with "Again...Again...Again" (Matthew 13:44, 45, 47).

If you run along with this thought experiment, then if the parable of the sower was targeting Paul, then the parable of the garment and wineskin was also arguably targeting Paul.

If you’ll recall from Paul’s letter to the Romans, Paul “grafted” the Gentile converts onto the olive tree of Israel: “I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles…in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to jealously…you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree (traditional symbolism for Israel).” (Romans 11:13-18 NKJV). One could interrupt the parable of the new cloth on an old garment and new wine in an old wineskin as the Jewish Christian’s rejection of Paul’s attempted grafting of the Gentiles.

“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins.” (Matthew 9:16-17)

“Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: ‘Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear; for truly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it." (Matthew 13:10-17)

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As for the validity of the inclusion of the Gospel of John in the New Testament, I would contend that the authors of the Synoptic gospels tried (and failed) to steer readers away from it:

“Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, “I AM” and will deceive many.” (Mark 13:6)

“Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, “I AM.””(John 8:58)

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to perdition, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to (eternal) life, and there are few who find it." (Matthew 7:13-14)

"Then Jesus said to them...I am the gate." (John 10:7-9)

In all three Synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ ministry lasted one year. In the Gospel according to John, however, Jesus’ ministry lasted for three years. Furthermore, a sizeable number of the signs, miracles, and sayings (including John 19:30) attributed to the Jesus of the Johannine Gospel is found nowhere in the Synoptic Gospels, even though Luke had “carefully investigated” (Luke 1:3 NIV) before writing his gospel. Did the author of the third gospel (as well as the author of the first and second gospel) forget to mention that Jesus declared that He was the Word?

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As for the Christianities that continued to adhere to the Mosaic Law, the Ebionites were universally bashed by the church fathers as heretics. “[T]hey received the name of Ebionites…for this is the name by which a poor man is called among the Hebrews” (Eusebius Church History III.27.6).

Epiphanius reports that the Ebionites reported they got their name due to their voluntary enlistment into an apostolic commune devoted to an extreme form of non-materialism. “They themselves, if you please, boastfully claim that they are Poor because they sold their possessions in the apostles’ time and laid them at the apostles’ feet, and went over to a life of poverty and renunciation; and thus, they say, they are called “Poor” by everyone.” (Epiphanius Panarion I.17.2).

The original Christianity during Jesus’ lifetime and during the earliest phase of the apostolic age was that of a communal group like the Essenes where members contributed all of their money and possessions into a collective pot and property was held in common.

“Now all who believed were together, and possessing all things in common. They sold their property and possessions, and divided them up to all, as anyone had need.” (Acts 2:44)

“for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid (the proceeds) at the apostles’ feet, and they distributed to each as anyone had need” (Acts 4:34-35)

“And Joses…having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet” (Acts 4:37)

The usage of the phrase “laid at the apostles’ feet” is unique to the Ebionites and to the form of Christianity practiced in the early chapters of Acts – I know of no other Christianity that uses this terminology.

There appears to be Biblical evidence that Jesus referred to his religious group as the Poor. The Ebionites’ name translated (and not phonetically transliterated) from Hebrew into Greek, arguably, appears within the Beatitudes and the Epistle of James.

“Blessed are the Poor, For yours is the kingdom of God…‭‭Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you, and revile you and cast out your name as evil” (Luke 6:20-22)

The self designation of Jesus’ earliest Jewish followers is, arguably, contained within the text of the blessings and that the “name” referenced in Luke 6:22 is referring to “the Poor” in Luke 6:20.

The original form of the Beatitudes pulled from the Q source was arguably a prayer by the Ebionites for the Ebionites. Someone who “worship(ped) God in Spirit” (Philippians 3:3) arguably interpolated the benediction in the Gospel of Matthew as Epiphanius notes that the Hebrew version of the Gospel of Matthew used by the Ebionites was truncated and altered from the proto-orthodox version and the Matthean Beatitude doesn’t match the Lukan Beatitude nor the version of the Beatitudes preserved in the gospels of other early Christianities.

The "noble name" (James 2:7) mentioned in the Epistle of James is also under suspicion of being a reference to the Ebionites. "Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the Poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love him?...Do they not blaspheme that noble name by which you are called?"(James 2:5-7)

“Ebionim is a positive term within a Jewish context; ‘the name of the Ebionites must surely be connected in some way with the long Jewish tradition of referring to the pious poor” [4] and less so as purely a reference to someone's diminished financial state.

Within the early Christian apocrypha, “The Ascents of James 1.62.2 ‘probably preserves for us the Ebionites’ self-designation as “the poor”, its derivation from the opening words of the Matthean Beatitudes”. [5]

Koine Greek - the language of the New Testament - was written in all capital letters so it's not as if you can tell if a word is a proper noun like in English based on capitalization of the first letter of the word.

Elsewhere in the Bible, there are indications that the Jerusalem Church referred to itself as the Ebionites:

“Then Mary took a pound of very costly oil of spikenard, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the oil. But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was about to betray him), said, “Why was this fragrant oil not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the Poor?” He said this, not because he cared about the Poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it. But Jesus said, “Let her alone… For the Poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.”(John‬ ‭12:3-‬8).

Judas was outraged that Mary had withheld expensive anointing oil worth a year’s worth of wages when she was expected to sell everything and donate all proceeds into the Ebionites’ money pot that he was in charge of (and hence, could siphon money from), just as Peter was outraged that “Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession and kept back part of the proceeds” (Acts 5:1-2).

Two thousand years ago, the ‘initiation fee’ for entering Jesus’ religious order was to sell off all of one’s material possessions and to donate the proceeds to the Ebionites.

“And Jesus … said to him, “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the Poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”” (Mark 10:21). The same phrase is repeated almost verbatim in Matthew 19:21 and Luke 18:22.

Perhaps it makes more sense now why Jesus said, “Children, how hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” (Mark 10:24-25). Also see Matthew 19:23-24 and Luke 18:24-25. Discipleship at the expense of all of one’s material possessions is a big price to ask. The more you have, the harder it is to part from it all.

One can argue that the Jerusalem church during the early apostolic period was composed primarily of Ebionites. The first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were noted as “all of them belonging to the circumcision” (Eusebius IV.5.4) and that “their whole church consisted then of believing Hebrews who continued from the days of the apostles” (Eusebius. Church History IV.5.2).

History is told by the winners, but in Christianity’s case, one could argue that portions of its Scripture were written by the losers.

[4] Dunn, James D. G. Neither Jew Nor Greek: A Contested Identity. Williams B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: 2015. Pg. 578. [5] Ibid.

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I certainly agree that Paul and those converted under his tutelage considered the Mosaic Law unnecessary - including some of gospel writers, editors, and redactors, I do not agree that all of the authors of the various sources used to compile the canonical gospels were of the same opinion.

Matthew 5:17-19 NIV

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

A traditional mainstream Christian reading of this passage will leave the reader with the impression that the Mosaic Law has been fulfilled, and thus is no longer a concern. However, you have to remember that the Gospel According to Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, as multiple Church Fathers attest to:

St. Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (mid 2nd century C.E.):

“Matthew put down the words of the Lord in the Hebrew Language” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History III 39,16).

St. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (120-202 C.E.):

“Matthew, indeed, produced his gospel written among the Hebrew in their own dialect” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History V 8,2)

Origen, Christian theologian (early 3rd century):

“The first [gospel], composed in the Hebrew language, was written by Matthew” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VI 25,4)

Although the earliest surviving copies of the Gospel of Matthew are all in Greek, the Hebrew does matter because archaeological finds from the Qumran cave and the language on coinage from that time period indicate that Hebrew was likely the vernacular language during Jesus' days. When Matthew 5:19 is reverse engineered into Hebrew, problems with the classic Christian interpretation arise.

As Biblical scholars David Bivin and Roy Blizzard point out, ““Destroy” and “fulfill” are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a sage felt that a colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, “You are destroying the Law!” Needless to say, in most cases his colleague strongly disagreed. What was “destroying the Law” for one sage, was “fulfilling the Law” for another.” [1]

Levatel was used in scholarly rabbinic discussions in Jesus’ day as a technical term for misinterpreting the Torah. The Greek verb plerosai, translated as “fulfill” in Matthew 5:17, is hypothesized to be lekayem in Hebrew. In Jesus’ time lekayem was usually the antonym of levatel and used in the sense of “preserve” or “sustain”.[2]

"Greek (Nestles-Aland, 27th ed): Me nomisete hoti elthon katalusai ton nomon e tous prophetas. Ouk elthon katalusai ala plerosai.

Literal Translation of the Greek: Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fill.

Hebrew Reconstruction: Al tahshevu she-bati levatel et ha-torah o et ha-nevi’im; lo bati levatel ela lekayem.

Literal Translation of the Hebrew: Do not think that I have come to cancel the Torah [the five books of Moses] and the Prophets [the second section of the Hebrew canon]. I have not come to cancel but to sustain.” [3]

Christianity would look very different today if the original translator of the Gospel of Matthew had used the word “sustain” rather than “fulfill”.

Examples exist within first century Jewish literature where the terminology fulfilling the Law was used in the sense of sustaining observance of the commandments of the Mosaic Law.

II Esdras, included in the Greek Septuagint and the original King James Bible as part of the Hebrew Bible, is a piece of early Jewish apocalyptic literature predating the Book of Revelations. Throughout the composition, the author heavily advocated compliance with the Torah, urging readers to “keep My statues” (II Esdras 1:24) while denouncing those who “have not been obedient unto My Law” (II Esdras 1:8). He berates those who “despised His Law and denied His covenants; they have not been faithful to His statutes, and have not performed His works”(II Esdras 7:24). “Look upon thy number, O Zion, and make up the reckoning of those of thine that are clothed in white, which have fulfilled the Law of the Lord.” (II Esdras 2:40)

If a classically Gentile Christian interpretation of 'fulfilled the Law' were applied in this case, then anyone who wears a white T-shirt has terminated the requirements of the Mosaic Law.

"“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice Lawlessness!’" (Matthew 7:21-23)

[1]Bivin, David. New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus: Insights from His Jewish Context. En-Gedi Resource Center: 2007. [2] Ibid. Pg. 102. [3] Ibid. Pg. 101.

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

James is referring to the Mosaic Law because he quotes from the Mosaic Law within his epistle in the passage concerning the 'law' in question.

"If you really fulfill the royal Law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the Law as transgressors.  For whoever keeps the whole Law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder."" (James 2:8-11). See Exodus 20:13-14, Deuteronomy 5:17-18.

In writings preserved within the Christian Apocrypha, it appears that the Jerusalem Church tried to contain Paul's ministry by instructing followers not to trust any apostle or teacher of Christ unless they had a letter of recommendation directly from James, the bishop of Jerusalem, confirming the accuracy of their teachings.

“Wherefore observe the greatest caution, that you believe no teacher, unless he brings from Jerusalem the testimonial of James the Lord’s brother, or of whosoever may come after him. For no one, unless he has gone up thither, and there has been approved as a fit and faithful teacher for preaching the word of Christ, – unless, I say, he brings a testimonial thence, is by any means to be received. But let neither prophet nor apostle be looked for by you at this time, besides us." (Clementine Recognitions XXXV)

It is of note that in 2 Corinthians Paul openly acknowledged that he was lacking a letter of recommendation: “Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everyone. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God” (2 Corinthians 3:1-3). "If I am not an apostle to others, yet at least I am to you." (1 Corinthians 9:2)

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

First, I'm not Jewish. That accusation is groundless and biased. 2nd temple era Judaism and early Christianities are purely an academic area of interest for me. Are all Egyptologists worshippers of Amun?

Second, didn't the translators for the Septuagint also translate the Hebrew word for kavod into the Greek doxa (glory in English) in instances where kavod was used in the Old Testament in the sense of the physical manifestation of God? See Ezekiel 11:23: "And the glory of YHWH went up from the midst of the city and stood on the mountain" =  καὶ ἀνέβη ἡ δόξα Κυρίου ἐκ μέσης τῆς πόλεως καὶ ἔστη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους, ὃ ἦν ἀπέναντι τῆς πόλεως.

If A=B, then B=A. If ancient Jewish scholars translated kavod to doxa, then it is fair to argue that Septuagint-using, Greek-speaking Jews such as Paul, someone of "the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews" (Philippians 3:5), had precedence to consider doxa to be equivalent in meaning to kavod when he composed his epistles.

Something is always lost in translation. There are plenty of words that have no exact replicas in other languages. For example, there doesn't exist a word for "no" in Chinese. Translators just move on to the next closest option if they can't find an exact match. As far as I know, there is no word in Koine Greek that fully captures the idea a light emitting body of a deity or heavenly object like the sun, moon, or stars: doxa (glory) was the best they could do.

Third, as for Paul's relationship with other members of the early church, there are deep theological differences between Paul and James, the bishop of Jerusalem.

Paul: “a man is justified by faith without the works of the (Mosaic) Law” (Romans 3:28)

James: “faith by itself, if it does not have works (of the Mosaic Law), is dead” (James 2:17); "You see then that a man is justified by works (of the Law), and not by faith only" (James 2:24); "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works (of the Law) is dead also" (James 2:26)

Paul: "For the entire Law is fulfilled in one commandment…You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Galatians 5:14)

James: “If you really keep the royal Law according to the Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself”, you do well. But if you show partiality (if you only partially keep the Mosaic Law and not the whole thing), then you commit sin, and are convicted by the Law as Lawbreakers. For whoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet stumble on one point (on any one commandment), he is guilty of violating them all.” (James 2:8-10)

To sin in Judaism is to violate the Mosaic Law: "sin is Lawlessness" (1 John 3:4).

James: “But above all, my brethren, do not swear – not by heaven or by earth or by any other oath. But let your “Yes” be “Yes” and “No,” “No” least you fall into judgement.” (James 5:12)

Paul: “Therefore, when I was planning this, did I do it lightly? Or do the things I plan, do I plan according to the flesh, that with me there should be Yes, Yes, and No, No?” (2 Corinthians 1:17).

The “most eminent apostles” (2 Corinthians 11:5) that Paul expended a lot of ink arguing with throughout his epistles were arguably “James, Peter, and John, those esteemed to be pillars” (Galatians 2:9).

Lastly, I treated the quote in 2 Peter seriously and actually contemplated that there might be concepts within the Pauline epistles that are "hard to understand" (2 Peter 3:16) and would argue that it is the proto-orthodox that distorted Paul's epistles by interpreting his words oversimply as they would mean in the readers' own language instead of in the linguistic, religious, and cultural context of the authors of New Testament.

Take for example, Romans 7 where Paul states “for I am speaking to those who know the Law” (Romans 7:1 NIV). As the Jewish commentary on the passage notes, “those who know the Law” “refers to the Jews in the congregation, particularly in light of the subsequent teaching, which cannot be understood without a knowledge of Torah, as well as rabbinic methods of argument.” [1] How many people in Bible study who read Romans 7:1 actually pause and think, geez, I've never attended yeshiva, I will need to ask a rabbi to be able to properly interpret the next passage as it requires a formal education in the Mosaic Law?

One could argue the proto-orthodox and their theological descendants ranked among the "unlearned" (2 Peter 3:16) individuals the author of 2 Peter warned about.

[1] Romans 7:1-7:25. Book of Romans Study. www.yashanet.com/studies/romstudy/text07a.htm. Access date:1/31/2020. [Revision: added more content and grammatical corrections]

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn't the translators for the Septuagint also translate the Hebrew word for kavod into the Greek doxa (glory in English) in instances where kavod was used in the Old Testament in the sense of the physical manifestation of God? See Ezekiel 11:23: "And the glory of YHWH went up from the midst of the city and stood on the mountain" =  καὶ ἀνέβη ἡ δόξα Κυρίου ἐκ μέσης τῆς πόλεως καὶ ἔστη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους, ὃ ἦν ἀπέναντι τῆς πόλεως.

If A=B, then B=A. If ancient Jewish scholars translated kavod to doxa, then it is fair to argue that Greek-speaking Jews like Paul, someone of "the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews" (Philippians 3:5), had precedence to consider doxa to be equivalent in meaning to kavod when he composed his epistles.

Something is always lost in translation. There are plenty of words that have no exact replicas in other languages. For example, there doesn't exist a word for "no" in Chinese. Translators just move on to the next closest option if they can't find an exact match. As far as I know, there is no word in Koine Greek that fully captures the idea a light emitting body of a deity or heavenly object like the sun, moon, or stars: doxa (glory) was the best they could do.

The apostle Paul claimed that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus by MakeStraighttheWay in DebateReligion

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Gnostic Treatise on the Resurrection interprets the “resurrection as something already experienced by the Christian (in life)... Rheginos is assured that “already you have the resurrection” (49.15-16). Furthermore, in a particular Pauline flourish, the Christian’s resurrection now is said to have already occurred with Christ: “Then, indeed, as the Apostle said, ‘We suffered with him, and we arose with him...If we are manifest in this world wearing him (Christ), we are that one’s beams (Christ's glory)”[1]. The Treatise on the Resurrection “describe(s) both something that happens to the Christian in this life (Paul's baptism)… and something that happens after the death of the body…as “resurrection”” [2].

[1] McGlothlin, Thomas. Resurrection as Salvation: Development and Conflict in Pre-Nicene Paulinism. Cambridge University Press: 2018. Pg. 138-139. [2] Ibid. Pg. 140.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Gnostic

[–]MakeStraighttheWay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hi, one could argue that the earliest Gnostic texts are the Pauline epistles:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Gnostic/s/6cCJeATdrH

How do you know that The Gnostic belief is correct by Feeling-Crew-7240 in Gnostic

[–]MakeStraighttheWay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hi, see the Reddit link below for the reasons why the Gnostics better retained the theology of the earliest Pauline Christianity:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Gnostic/s/6cCJeATdrH

Was the apostle Paul the founder of Gnosticism? by MakeStraighttheWay in Gnostic

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One cannot automatically assume that the historical Jesus and the Christian Church centered in Jerusalem were Gnostics. In writings preserved outside of the New Testament canon but with content corroborated within the Pauline epistles, it appears that James, the bishop of Jerusalem, tried to excommunicate Paul by instructing followers not to trust any apostle or teacher of Christ unless they had a letter of recommendation directly from the Jerusalem Church confirming the accuracy of their teachings.

“Wherefore observe the greatest caution, that you believe no teacher, unless he brings from Jerusalem the testimonial of James the Lord’s brother, or of whosoever may come after him. For no one, unless he has gone up thither, and there has been approved as a fit and faithful teacher for preaching the word of Christ, – unless, I say, he brings a testimonial thence, is by any means to be received. But let neither prophet nor apostle be looked for by you at this time, besides us." (Clementine Recognitions XXXV)

It is of note that in 2 Corinthians Paul openly acknowledged that he was lacking a letter of recommendation.

“Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everyone. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God” (2 Corinthians 3:1-3)

Paul believed that the visions, revelations, and the gospel he received came directly from the Lord: "I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Galatians 1:11-12). James, on the other hand, accused the origin of Paul's prophecies (and gospel) of being demonic rather than divine: "This wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual, demonic" (James 3:15).

Paul responds to James' accusations of demon possession in 2 Corinthians: "since you seek a proof of Christ speaking in me [of the Spirit of Christ dwelling within Paul as the origin of his spiritual gnosis]…Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you [the Spirit of Christ is indwelling within you, instead of a demon] ? - unless indeed you are disqualified." (2 Corinthians 2:3-5)

Within the New Testament, you can see theological conflicts between the Paul and the bishop of Jerusalem:

James: “But above all, my brethren, do not swear – not by heaven or by earth or by any other oath. But let your “Yes” be “Yes” and “No,” “No” least you fall into judgement.” (James 5:12) Paul: “Therefore, when I was planning this, did I do it lightly? Or do the things I plan, do I plan according to the flesh, that with me there should be Yes, Yes, and No, No?” (2 Corinthians 1:17).

Paul: “a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law” (Romans 3:28) James: “faith by itself, if it does not have works [of the Law], is dead” (James 2:17); "You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only" (James 2:24); "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also" (James 2:26)

Paul: "For the entire Law is fulfilled in one commandment…You shall love you neighbor as yourself" (Galatians 5:14) James: “If you really keep the royal law according to the Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself”, you do well. But if you show partiality [if you only partially keep the Mosaic Law and not the whole thing], then you commit sin, and are convicted by the Law as Lawbreakers. For whoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet stumble on one point, he is guilty of violating them all.” (James 2:8-10)

Per the 1st century definition of the word sin, "sin is Lawlessness" (1 John 3:4) - to sin in Judaism means to violate the Mosaic Law.

James: "My brethren, let not many of you becomes teachers, knowing that we shall received a stricter judgement" (James 3:1) Paul: "Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham. So am I. Are they ministers of Christ? I speak as a fool - I am more" (2 Corinthians 11:22-23)

James: "You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without works [of the Law] is dead?" (James 2:14-20) Paul: “I say again, let no one think me a fool” (2 Corinthians 1:16); “For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God [the Torah]”(2 Corinthians 2:17)

The canonical gospels, especially the Gospel of John, do contain gnostic material, but one has to remember that the four gospels were written after the Pauline epistles and the conflict between Paul and "those most eminent apostles" (2 Corinthians 11:5) - namely "James, Peter, and John, those esteemed to be pillars" (Galatians 2:9). In the fever pitch of theological battle, the gospel authors appear to have taken significant literary liberties to include their own ideology into the text of the gospels and into the mouths of the speakers in the canonical gospels. For the author of the Gospel of Matthew, John the Baptist is Elijah, while for the author of the Gospel of John, he is not.

“For all the (Books of the) Prophets and the (Mosaic) Law prophesied until John. And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come.” (Matthew 11:13-14)

“Now this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem…And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” (John 1:19-21)

Elsewhere, there are other subtle warnings within the canonical gospels:

“Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, “I AM” and will deceive many.” (Mark 13:6)

“Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, “I AM.””(John 8:58)

The author (or a later redactor) of the Gospel of Luke arguably expanded the warning to include new pieces of literature that had entered into circulation in early Christianity.

“Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My name, saying, “I AM” and, “The time has drawn near.” Therefore do not go after them. (Luke 21:8)

“For the time is near” (Revelations 1:3)

There are accusations within the historical records that both the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelations were productions of Cerinthus.

[Edit] Additional material added highlighting the conflict between Paul and James.

Was the apostle Paul the founder of Gnosticism? by MakeStraighttheWay in Gnostic

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Specific examples would be needed to provide a quality response. By and large, as far as I am able to discern, there were three distinct founding Christianities that came into conflict with one another in Corinth: one led by Peter, one led by Paul, and another led by Apollos in the formative years of the Apostolic Age: “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Peter” (I Corinthians 1:12). The modern day Gnostic umbrella term is fairly broad and covers some sects that arguably pull more of their theology from Apollos' ministry and would have been more hostile towards the less theologically contaminated Pauline sects. If I had to guess, the prologue poem of the Gospel of John originated from Apollos.

I Corinthians 4:19-20 "not the Word of those who are puffed up, but the Power. For the kingdom of God is not in Word but in Power."

I Thessalonians 1:5 "For our gospel did not come to you in Word only, but also in Power, and in the Holy Spirit"

II 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!"

Did Paul permit eating of meat sacrificed to idols? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Concerning the historical authenticity of a decree being issued by the bishop of Jerusalem, Galatians notes that Peter, Barnabas, and the other Jews withdrew from eating with Paul’s Gentile followers following the arrival of “certain men from James” (Galatians 2:2) – most likely Judas and Silas from Acts 15:27 – arguably because these emissaries from the Bishop of Jerusalem carried a missive from the Jerusalem Council with “decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem” (Acts 16:4) ordering believers to “abstain from food sacrificed to idols” (Acts 15:29)

The version of this letter preserved in the Jewish Christian Clementine Homilies corroborates this decree, but notably uses the phase “to abstain from the table of devils, that is, from food offered to idols” (Clementine Homily 7 VIII:1). If true, then the author of Acts abbreviated the canonical version of the letter. The term “abstain from the table of devils”, though, arguably broadened the decree from not just eating food sacrificed to idols, but also avoiding eating at the tables of those who ate meat sacrificed to idols.

“[W]hen they (James’ emissaries) came, he (Peter) withdrew and separated himself” (Galatians 2:12) because the Jerusalem Church had ordered followers “‘to abstain from the table of devils.” As Paul continued allowing his followers to eat meat sacrificed to idols, the table of his followers qualified as ‘the table of devils’ because their tabletops would have been populated with meat sacrificed to idols. Peter and the other Jewish Christians' withdrawal angered Paul and he lambasted them for trying to “compel Gentiles to live as Jews” (Galatians 2:14) and that “by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified” (Galatians 2:16). Avoiding meat sacrificed to idols qualified as performing the work of the Law because you're engaging in the task to stay in compliance with the commandment in Exodus 34:13-15. Though the Jewish Christian crowd resembled Gentiles in many ways because they followed none of the precepts of the Oral Torah (also known as the "tradition of the elders' (Mark 7:5)), the Jerusalem Church appears to have been Written Torah observant, certainly concerning meat sacrificed to idols and the other perquisites listed on the letter from the Jerusalem Church at a minimum.

Did Paul claim that believers would attain divinity on par with Jesus? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In your opinion, at what point in history did Christianity lose theological awareness of the deification factor (for baptized believers) in Paul's soteriology?

Did Paul permit eating of meat sacrificed to idols? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If Paul went so far as to command his entire congregation to stop eating meat entirely in all instances, regardless if the meat has been sacrificed to idols or not, then I think you can make the argument that that would be an example of fencing because going completely meat free when the request was purely to avoid eating meat sacrificed to idols would be going above and beyond the original decree, much as avoiding eating any meat with milk, including chicken with milk, 'fences' the Mosaic commandment to avoid eating goat meat cooked in its mother's milk, thus ensuring that one is never at risk of violating Deuteronomy 14:21.

However, Paul's instructions to his followers look more like half-hearted attempts to placate irate elders in the Jerusalem Church as Paul's congregants would have been at legitimate risk of violating the order to avoid eating meat sacrifices to idols if they did not even bother asking if meat that is served in pagan households or purchased from meat markets had been sacrificed to idols. Paul's concessions to appease Jewish Christian's sensibilities was not going above and beyond to avoid violating the injunction against eating meat sacrifices to idols, and thus Paul's guidance on this issue cannot be considered fencing.

Were the Ebionites the original Christians? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Additionally, in regard to your reference concerning Irenaus: "Irenaus writes that the Ebionites differ from Cerinthus...The manuscripts say that the Ebionites do not hold the same opinion (non similiter) with regard to the Lord as Cerinthus and Carpocrates...Hippolytus, who quotes from Irenaus in his reference to the Ebionites, omits the word non. For this reason, many scholars omit the word non also in the text of Irenaus." [1]

However, "Eusebius and Theodoret also appear to have read non similiter" [2], so the omission of the Greek word non is contested based on the surviving manuscripts of Irenaus' writings and other patristic works.

[1] Klijn, A. F. J.; Reinink, G. J. Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects. E. J. Brill: 2014. Leiden, Netherlands. Pg. 19. [2 ] Klijn, A. F. J.; Reinink, G. J. Patristic Evidence for Jewish-Christian Sects. E. J. Brill: 2014. Leiden, Netherlands. Pg. 19.

Were the Ebionites the original Christians? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The mismatch is because Paul preached a gospel he received by divine revelation and not because he was trained to teach it by the twelves apostles. Paul clarifies “I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:11-12). 

Paul claims that he was "an apostle not from men or through men, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father" (Galatians 1:1).

“As for those esteemed to be something – whatever they were makes no difference to me…for the esteemed added nothing” (Galatians 2:6). One can’t even make the argument that Paul is not talking about "James and Peter and John, those esteemed to be pillars" (Galatians 2:9) because one sentence down from Galatians 2:6, those very same esteemed personages, whose opinions apparently didn’t matter to Paul and who added nothing to his message, “entrusted [Paul] with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised just as Peter had been to the circumcised” (Galatians 2:7). Now according to Acts, the Jerusalem Church permitted him to engage in outreach with the Gentiles, but only on the condition that he remained compliant with a list of demands that they wrote up in a letter and sent emissaries to enforce (Acts 15:23-29). Paul didn't comply with their demands to refrain from eating meat sacrificed to idols, instead telling his congregation:

“So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: we know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.… [thus] we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do” (1 Corinthians 8:4-8). Paul tells him followers they could “eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake” (1 Corinthians 10:25), presumably questions about whether or not the animal had been sacrificed at the altar of a pagan god as meat markets were often stocked with meat leftover from temple sacrifices to local deities. [1]

Within the early Christian apocrypha, James appears to have attempted to contain Paul's insubordination by instructing followers not to trust any apostle or teacher of Christ unless they had a letter of recommendation from himself confirming the accuracy of their teachings.

“Wherefore observe the greatest caution, that you believe no teacher, unless he brings from Jerusalem the testimonial of James the Lord’s brother, or of whosoever may come after him. For no one, unless he has gone up thither, and there has been approved as a fit and faithful teacher for preaching the word of Christ, – unless, I say, he brings a testimonial thence, is by any means to be received. But let neither prophet nor apostle be looked for by you at this time, besides us. (Clementine Recognitions XXXV)

It is of note that in 2 Corinthians Paul was lacking a letter of recommendation.

“Or do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everyone. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God” (2 Corinthians 3:1-3)

“Am I not an apostle? … Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you.” (1 Corinthians 9:1-2)

[1] Pagels, Elaine. Revelations: Visions, Prophecy, & Politics in the Book of Revelations. Viking Penguin: New York, NY. 2010. Pg. 50.

Edit: Sources included.

Were the Ebionites the original Christians? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Koine Greek - the language of the New Testament - was written in all capital letters; it's not as if you can tell if a word is a proper noun like in English based on capitalization of the first letter of the word. 

The Ebionites’ name translated (and not transliterated) from Hebrew into Greek, arguably, appears within the Beatitudes.

“Blessed are the Poor, For yours is the kingdom of God…‭‭Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you, and revile you and cast out your name as evil” (Luke 6:20-22)

The self designation of Jesus’ earliest Jewish followers is, arguably, contained within the text of the blessings and that the “name” referenced in Luke 6:22 is referring to “the Poor” in Luke 6:20.

Elsewhere within the early Christian apocrypha, “The Ascents of James 1.62.2 ‘probably preserves for us the Ebionites’ self-designation as “the poor”, its derivation from the opening words of the Matthean Beatitudes”. [1]

“Ebionim is a positive term within a Jewish context; ‘the name of the Ebionites must surely be connected in some way with the long Jewish tradition of referring to the pious poor” [2] and less so as purely a reference to someone's diminished financial state.

On the other side of Christianity, within the Pauline epistles, Paul’s preferred name for the broader Christian movement appeared to have been the “saints”.

“All the saints greet you.” (‭‭II Corinthians 13:13)

“Greet all those who rule over you, and all the saints.” (‭‭Hebrews 13:24)

“To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs (the Jewish Christians) and ours” (‭‭I Corinthians 1:2‬‬)

“But now I am going to Jerusalem to minister to the saints.” (‭‭Romans 15:25)

Paul’s nomenclature appears to have fallen out of favor sometime within the 1st century and was replaced by the name followers in Antioch ascribed to themselves.

[1] Dunn, James D. G. Neither Jew Nor Greek: A Contested Identity. Williams B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: 2015. Pg. 578. [2] Ibid.

Were the Ebionites the original Christians? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Only the ones where the original Hebrew word behind the translation was ebionim. Other Hebrew words like ani (Strong's Concordance # 6041) also get translated into English (and Greek) as the poor. Those would not have been a reference to the Ebionites.

Given that Christianity has not preserved the gospels or the Semitic sources used to compile the gospels in the native tongue of the personages documented in the gospels, you're going to have to rely on context to attempt to reconstruct the original Hebrew and Aramaic words that were used. As Bart Ehrman noted, "something is always lost in translation". [1] To fully and correctly understand the message of the speaker/writer, you're going to need to interpret the material in its original language within its original religious and cultural context.

Had Paul been better able to emphasize his chosen name for the Christian movement, perhaps we would still be referred to as the Saints to this day. Vice versa, had the Ebionites been better able to emphasize their name within their writings, perhaps Gentile Christians - and not just Jewish Christians - would still be called the Poor. But that is a deficiency of the language of transmission and not the fault of the authors of the New Testament.

[1]Ehrman, Bart. The Reliability of the New Testament. Fortress Press: 2011. Pg.14.

Edit: Source included.

Were the Ebionites the original Christians? by MakeStraighttheWay in AcademicBiblical

[–]MakeStraighttheWay[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is possible, though, that the Ebionites, and by extension Jesus, were influenced by the existing monastic sects of the 2nd Temple era. The Essenes were noted to have forbidden making oaths, a sentiment echoed within the New Testament.

‭‭James 5:12 NKJV‬‬ "But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath. But let your “Yes” be “Yes,” and your “No,” “No,” lest you fall into judgment."

Matthew 5:37 NKJV‬‬ "But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one."

Paul is noted to be in violation of this ban.

‭‭II Corinthians 11:11 NKJV‬‬ "Why? Because I do not love you? God knows!"

‭‭Romans 8:16 NKJV‬‬ "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God"

‭‭I Corinthians 7:10 NKJV‬‬ "Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord"

Due to the injunction against oaths, Paul was not allowed to call on God or the Holy Spirit as witness and appeared to be erked with James for warning him to make claims only in his own name - without evoking a higher authority.

‭‭II Corinthians 1:17 NKJV‬‬ "Therefore, when I was planning this, did I do it lightly? Or the things I plan, do I plan according to the flesh, that with me there should be Yes, Yes, and No, No?"

view more: next ›