The Secular Frontier

The crucifixion of Cleomenes III and his snake that converts the onlookers has been ignored by commenters in large part because a date for Mark has been assigned from the war due to Jesus's supposed prediction (66-74; probably 70). This seems to be mostly apologetics because it establishes the earliness boundary, not the lateness one. We are very familiar with apocalypses from antiquity that are post the event they describe by a very long time, and so the date of the event doesn't imply it happened near the fake prediction. As I said, Paul made the claim that despite the power of the crucifixion, if Christ is not raised your faith is futile and you are still in your sins (1 Cor 15:17). An initial question here is how is substitutionary atonement in play if the cross doesn't deal with sin? In previous posts I've tried to argue for a moral influence cross rather than a substitutionary atonement cross. For my purposes here, the conversion of the soldier by the crucifixion of Jesus is going to be seen through di ... Read Article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogHqVFbc0qM&t Last time I thought a bit with Robert M Price about a late date for the gospels thinking about topics like Marcion. It seemed that Mark and Matthew alluded to the Jewish revolt (though Mark was a bit of a stretch), and that all synoptics seemed to be post-Plutarch with the key allusion to the death of Cleomenes III. Let's shake that up a little with Dennis R MacDonald. Marcion’s gospel has traditionally been interpreted as an abridged version of the Gospel of Luke (e.g., by Tertullian).  It contains an abridged gospel of Luke, and instead of Acts it has some modified Pauline epistles.  We don’t have physical copies of Marcion’s gospel, but we do have it from writings of his opponents.  The current debate is whether Marcion abridges Luke, or whether Marcion’s gospel is earlier than Luke.  Dennis MacDonald argues the synoptic gospels are heavily indebted to Greek poetry.  Mark and Luke are the masters of this.&nbs ... Read Article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqewC07g4Z4 Price notes that the Gospel of Mark was probably written in Rome.  It contains Latinisms like “centurion” even though it was written in Greek.  It makes sense that it was the venerated gospel of Rome, since it is 90 percent preserved in Matthew and 60 percent preserved in Luke, so if it was not venerated by the big time church in Rome it doesn’t make sense it was preserved unlike the Q document.  The original version of Mark seems to be Ur-Mark that was penned by Marcion and the gospel itself was circulated and expanded by his students into what we have today.  Marcion thought some of the additions were okay so he thought it was fine for publication.  Marcion’s materials often seem to be a re-write of old testament stories.  Excluding the Torah commandments, Marcion thought a lot of the OT stories weren’t that bad and so retooled them for Jesus – which reflects the general Greco-Roman imitation practice of mimesis. ... Read Article

The notion of one's eyes being opened in the bible is an important theme, meaning transformation. Adam and Eve's eyes are opened to their nakedness, as Paul/Saul's were opened to the wrongness of persecuting the early church. We see something similar with the transformation of the soldiers at the cross in the synoptics, which seems to be playing off a tradition about crucified Cleomenes III in Plutarch (though this would make a late date for the synoptics). The point is, if we are going to overcome the substitutionary atonement reading of Christ's death, it will be helpful to see what a moral influence interpretation entails. Clearly substitutionary atonement is incoherent according to the criteria of Justice, for how does an innocent child in Africa being punished for the crimes of a murderer in Chicago serve Justice? The moral influence interpretation of Jesus' death, primarily associated with the theology of Abelard of Bath in the 12th century, emphasizes the transformative power of Christ's life a ... Read Article

I was thinking last time about how the Jews thought God brought judgment against them historically through them being conquered. I'd like to apply this to the destruction of the temple in 70CE. This seems to be a big impetus for the gospels, and so Mark is usually thought of as inventing Jesus making a prophecy about the destruction of the temple: In Mark 13:1-2 Jesus said, "Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down." Mark goes on to contextualize this with the corruptness of the temple with Jesus' temple tantrum event. The Roman Empire destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 CE after a five-month siege. Roman soldiers stripped the Temple Mount bare, throwing down every stone. Christians later interpreted these events as a fulfillment of one of Jesus' predictions, and some believed it was punishment for the Jews' rejection of Jesus. For example, Matthew 23:37-39 (Luke 19:41-44) depicts Jesus expressing deep sorrow and lament over Jerusa ... Read Article

We often look at the idea of sin from the point of view of an individual’s personal shortcomings.  In light of this modern interpretation of the individual, Jesus’s sacrifice as substitutionary atonement seems to make sense.  But this is not the ancient view.  The Jews for instance taught God brought judgement on Egypt, not as individual persons, but the corporate punishment for the sins of a society and its enslavement of the Jewish people.  In fact, the biblical narrative has to answer that basic question: How can the Jews be God’s chosen people if they keep getting conquered? The Bible provides several explanations for why the Israelites (Jews) experienced numerous conquests despite being considered God's chosen people: (1) Disobedience to God's Laws: One of the primary reasons given in the Old Testament is the Israelites' disobedience to God's laws and commandments. For instance, in Deuteronomy 28, there are blessings promised for obedience and curses for disobedienc ... Read Article

We thought previously about the pneumatikos or resurrection spiritual body of Jesus that would allow him to simultaneously indwell all believers as "Christ in You" to power you up in your spiritual fight against the tempter. In this conclusion I'll flesh this out a little. Adam and Eve were given God’s word/law regarding the Tree and were banished from Eden for transgressing it. Why the ridiculous overreaction by God? After all, the serpent was truthful. They didn’t die the day they ate the fruit. This drama was replayed in the figure of the last Adam Jesus. In the temptation we read: 5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 saying to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written,‘He will command his angels concerning you,’and ‘On their hands they will bear you up,so that you will not dash your foot against a stone.’ ”7 Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’ ... Read Article

The interpretation of "Christ in You" being angelic possession as a haggadic midrash of the "excellent spirit" of Daniel 6:3 (being both the character of Daniel and the spirit that guided and empowered him), we noted the connection to the daimonion guiding Socrates. By the Roman Imperial period we find Jesus in, this concept had become the idea of a full blown personal patron deity that people had access to. So, we read: Imperial recipients, on the other hand, no longer adhered to this skeptical restraint; the Socratic daimonion was equated with the daimon, a personal patron god, and was thus given a clear purpose. This was the common interpretation among the Platonists of the imperial period. It was assumed that everyone, or at least every good person, had a daimon as a protector. The special nature of Socrates' inspirations was only seen in the exceptional quality of his relationship with his outstanding daimon. The daimonion of Socrates was thus integrated into the general demonology and interpreted ... Read Article

And Daniel was clothed in purple and was great and esteemed before king Darius, as he was knowledgeable and intelligent and a holy spirit was in him (Daniel 6:3, Old Greek) And Daniel was above them, because an excellent spirit was in him, and the king appointed him over his whole kingdom (Daniel 6:3, Theodotion) Robyn Faith Walsh has noted the importance of pagan philosophy for understanding pneuma/spirit in the New Testament. I would like to point out some connections between the New Testament and Daniel on pneuma. One of the interesting things Paul says is that it isn't just the cross, but if Christ is not raised your faith is useless and you are still in your sin (1 Cor 15:17). The popular interpretation of early Christianity of Jesus's death as substitutionary atonement has a great deal of difficulty dealing with this passage, since the cross doesn't conquer Sin, but there it is in First Corinthians. The point is that Christ needed to die and be raised because he would then be able t ... Read Article

In 2011, Jesus Mythicism, the idea that Jesus never existed, was at peak popularity on the internet with sites like Neil Godfrey's Vridar and Project Reason's forum, and I was searching for scholarship engaging with Christ Myth theorist Earl Doherty, and I found Prof James McGrath’s blog where he was critically blogging through Doherty’s book "Jesus: Neither God Nor Man."  For example, two of McGrath's posts were: Chapter 1 of Earl Doherty’s Jesus: Neither God Nor Man Chapter 5 Of Earl Doherty's Jesus: Neither God Nor Man Robert M. Price's mythicist book "The Christ Myth Theory and Its Problems" was out, along with Bart Ehrman's Critique. It would still be a few years until Richard Carrier's and Raphael Lataster's mythicist books would come out. This year as part of the Public Theology/Philosophy initiative, I blogged through the new anthology “The Next Quest For The Historical Jesus (2024).”  I took 1-3 excerpts from each chapter and did a little commentary. From ... Read Article

Last time we looked a bit about Paul’s claim that Jesus was killed by the archons of this aion (rulers of this age), and this reflected the demonic spirits influencing Pilate and the Jews (eg., the crowd, the supreme council) against Jesus.  This follows the same idea as when the gospels say Satan entered Judas. Paul thought he was the prophesied one the Old Testament talked about who would bring the Jewish God to the gentiles and then the end would come.  He says, though, that Satan was hindering him in his mission (1 Thess 2:18).  Paul's experience shows that Satan can hinder Christians in many ways, including: Tempting people to sin, Accusing people, Trying to outwit and deceive people, and Ensnaring people.  We see the example he gives of the super apostles who were converting his followers with another gospel.  Scripture says when the word is sewn into a new believer, the devil comes to steal it away (Mark 4:15).  Scripture talks about demonic influencers: e.g., the ... Read Article

Jacob Berman and Godless engineer debated the historicity of Jesus tonight regarding Paul and other things: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgEcgOzkOiU&t I'm mentioning this because the passage in Paul of The Jews killing Jesus (which I first talked about following Benjamin White HERE) came up, as well as Paul's claim that the archons of this aion (rulers of this age) killed Jesus (which I look at in my mythicism essay), meaning the evil spirits controlling the rulers, like the gospels saying Satan entered Judas. This must be the case because for Paul the rulers of this age who killed Jesus were evil, and Paul elsewhere says we should obey our human leaders because they are good and chosen by God (Romans 13:1-7). Of course, these good leaders can do evil, but this is because they can be under the influence of evil spiritual forces. This is why the resurrected Christ indwelling in you and possessing you as a spirit is so important because it sanctifies and purges you of evil influence. In other ... Read Article

In 2011 I was searching for scholarship engaging Christ Myth Theorist Earl Doherty, who argued Jesus never existed, and I found Prof James McGrath’s blog where he was critically blogging through Doherty’s book.  For example: Chapter 1 of Earl Doherty’s Jesus: Neither God Nor Man This year as Public Theology/Philosophy, I tried blogging through “The Next Quest For The Historical Jesus (2024).”  I took 1 to a few excerpts from each chapter and did a little commentary.  Hopefully people will be inspired to read this great book: Complete Index Blogging The Next Quest For The Historical Jesus Anthology Of Essays I'll leave you with a puzzle. You may ask, what of the armless Jesus spoke of in the title?  What good is a Jesus who can’t be crucified?  Star Wars also has the idea of a chosen one, but unlike Jesus he is persuaded by the devil-like Sidious and turns to the dark side.  Arguing against Jesus is like a back and forth light saber fight that you can’t win because Jesus is al ... Read Article

Check out our 3 Mythmas posts for this year: Christmas and Genealogies: The Adoption of Jesus by Joseph in Matthew and Luke Merry Midrash: A Late Christmas Present with Dr Robert M Price Did Jesus Have a Wife? Artificial Intelligence and the Virgin Birth And, from Secular Web Kids, Darth Harley, Bark Lord of the Sith wants to wish everyone a Merry Sithmas: ... Read Article

When we think about Jesus as the Messiah / King of the Jews, if we think of the virgin birth and Jesus being distanced there from the impurity of the sexual, I wondered what Grok 2 AI might say about sexuality and purity of such kings in the bible. Here's the response I got: The Bible provides several insights into the sexual purity expected of kings, though it often does so through narratives and laws that apply broadly to all Israelites, with specific examples and consequences for kings: General Teachings on Sexual Purity: The Bible emphasizes that sexual purity is part of God's will for all His people. For instance, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 states, "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God." This principle of purity extends to everyone, including kings, as they are expected to be exemplars of moral behavior. ... Read Article