Gday,
Thanks for your detailed post,
was a bit slow to see it sorry.
Here are my thoughts in brief, can follow up where you want...
Originally posted by Sigismundus
Kapyong--
You seem to think, not without some reasons, that Saul of Tarsus (the Roman Greek speaking capital of Cilicia - present-day Turkey) did not think
that his ‘Lord Iesous’ had an earthly physical incarnation at all – but an argument could be made that he DELIBERATELY chose NOT to focus on the
historical Palestinian based (‘ebionite’) underpinnings to the movement – being contrary to his ‘gentile-friendly agenda.
Indeed the argument is often made.
But Paul makes claims which EXCLUDE a historical Jesus.
He says the Gospel is NOW revealed in visionaries like himself.
He talks about the first Adam of earth, then the 2nd Adam (Jesus, of heaven) - there is no room for an earthly Jesus.
Originally posted by Sigismundus
Tarsus was moreover the EXACT place where Mithraism ( one of 30 ‘Mystery Religions’ of the Roman Empire) was first introduced into Rome via
Cilician Pirates c. 79 BCE (if you believe Pompey) via soldiers – having come (like Pharaseeism) from Persia (PARAS), being a Romanised mixture of
the Persian sun god MITRA and the Greco-Roman SOL INVICTUS—& Saul of Tarsus (c. 14 CE to c. 64 CE) having been brought up there would have been
influenced by the Tarsian Mithraic Mysteries – hence so much of his Weltanschauung was guided by Mystery Religion Thinking in general (as opposed to
Historical Thinking) –
There is no doubt that Paul is influenced by the dominant religious form of the day - the mystery schools.
It is clear that Paul's "Lord's Supper" (only he ever uses that term) is crafted from a pagan mystery rites, it cannot be from Jewish sources
(blood? yuck! of God?! stone him!)
Originally posted by Sigismundus
Early Church ‘fathers’ used to speak of ‘our Mysteries of Christ’ as if it existed side by side the other Pagan Mystery Religions – they ALL
focused on non-historical ‘heavenly’ models, rather than earthly persons with a biography,
e.g. the Mysteries of Mithras, of Eleuseius (i.e. Demeter & Persephone) of Attis & Kubaba-Cybele, of Isis, of Zagraeus, of Dionysius, of Orpheus, of
Wusir-Hapi (i.e. ‘Osiris-Apis’ aka ‘Serapis’) & ccountless others --
Yup, Paul's Christ fits right in here.
Originally posted by Sigismundus
BUT---if we examine the actual wording of the weird Last Supper Blood Drinking Episode in Paul (1 Corinthians 11:23) we CAN DETECT A SLIGHT TRACE of
a LIVE HISTORICAL PERSON being referenced:
For I have received from (ho Kurios) the Lord, the same tradition which I imparted to you, viz. that the Lord JESUS ON THE SAME EVENING AS HE WAS
BETRAYED TOOK BREAD & WHEN HE GAVE THANKS, BROKE IT SAYING, TAKE AND EAT: THIS IS MY BODY WHICH [SHALL BE] BROKEN FOR YOU etc.
Nobody can be sure that this was not a pious scribe placing words into Paul’s pen, but we do have SOME REFERENCE to an HISTORICAL EVENT (‘on the
night of his arrest…’)
The verb is 'paredideto' which can mean 'given up'.
No meaning of arrest there.
Paul's Lord's Supper has a different order to the Gospel Last Supper - cup vs bread.
Originally posted by Sigismundus
To Sum up: Making any mention of the historical ‘Iesous;’ would have been out of Paul’s own realm of experience (he wasn’t an eyewitness
disciple of his Lord & he knew it – he didn't get to see the ‘historical things’ that the Ebionim his enemies DID see – many were
blood-related to ‘Iesous’)
No, but there are a vast number of places where Jesus life would have clinched Paul's argument - he never reaches for Jesus's life on earth to back
him up.
Originally posted by Sigismundus
Making any kind of mention of the historical ‘Iesous’ would have weakened his position as an ‘apostle’ of ‘ho Christos Iesous’ since his
‘apostleship’ was hotly contested by the family of Iesous (the Ebionim) & relied SOLEY on hisREVELATION (‘in the Last Days, your young men shall
dream dreams…and see visions…’)
I think he really thought he WAS just as much an apostle as them -
"have I not seen the Lord?"
K.
[edit on 15-5-2010 by Kapyong]