Richard Carrier has a presentation slide:
Philo of Alexandria Tells Us:
There was a pre-Christian Jewish belief in a celestial being actually named Jesus.
He was the firstborn son of god.
He was the celestial image of god.
He was god’s agent of creation.
He was god’s celestial high priest.
See Confusion of Tongues by Philo of Alexandria, 62-63, 146-47.
See On Dreams by Philo of Alexandria, 1.215
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
On the Confusion of Tongues / A Treatise on the Confusion of Languages
** you do not have permission to see this link **
(62) I have also heard of one of the companions of Moses having uttered such a speech as this: “Behold, a man whose name is the East!”{18}{#zec 6:12.} A very novel appellation indeed, if you consider it as spoken of a man who is compounded of body and soul; but if you look upon it as applied to that incorporeal being who in no respect differs from the divine image, you will then agree that the name of the east has been given to him with great felicity. (63) For the Father of the universe has caused him to spring up as the eldest son, whom, in another passage, he calls the firstborn; and he who is thus born, imitating the ways of his father, has formed such and such species, looking to his archetypal patterns.
(146)
And even if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son of God, nevertheless let him labour earnestly to be adorned according to his first-born word, the eldest of his angels, as the great archangel of many names; for he is called, the authority, and the name of God, and the Word, and man according to God’s image, and he who sees Israel.
(147)
For which reason I was induced a little while ago to praise the principles of those who said, “We are all one man’s Sons.” For even if we are not yet suitable to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image, of his most sacred word; for the image of God is his most ancient word.
John 1: 1
NET Bible
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.
John 1: 14
NET Bible
Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory–the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.
= = =
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Philo of Alexandria, On Dreams, That They Are God-Sent
(1.215)
For there are, as it seems, two temples belonging to God; one being this world, in which the high priest is the divine word, his own firstborn son. The other is the rational soul, the priest of which is the real true man, the copy of whom, perceptible to the senses, is he who performs his paternal vows and sacrifices, to whom it is enjoined to put on the aforesaid tunic, the representation of the universal heaven, in order that the world may join with the man in offering sacrifice, and that the man may likewise co-operate with the universe.
Richard Carrier
This archangel Jesus from Zechariah Chapter 6:
He was the firstborn son of god. Romans 8: 29
He was the celestial image of god. 2 Corinthians 4: 4
He was god’s agent of creation. 1 Corinthians 8: 6
He was god’s celestial high priest. Hebrews 2: 17, 4: 14
= = =
Richard (continued)
I see Philippians 2: 5-11 telling us:
Earliest known Christians believed this preexistent being descended, became incarnate, died, rose, then appeared to select people to tell them this.
= = =
Steefen
Looking at Zechariah Chapter 6, I see verse 11 may be a reference to Joshua/Jesus.
Silver and gold you shall take and mae a crown. Place it on the head of Zerub-babel who is Joshua, son of Jeho-zadak, the high priest.
Steefen’s check on Philippians 2: 5-11
This being was in the form of god but not equal with god.
He came in human likeness. People found him to have the appearance of a human.
He even died, even a death on a cross.
So, for all this, god greatly exalted him such that at the name of Jesus,
every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess Jesus Christ is Lord to the extent that it glorifies god.
Steefen
Euhemerize: to take a god and place him on earth with other historical figures, sort of
Let’s turn to Wikipedia (if Britannica says anything different, let us know).
Euhemerus: died 250 BC. He was a Greek mythographer at the court of Cassander, king of Macedon.
The philosophy attributed to and named for Euhemerus, euhemerism, holds that many mythological tales can be attributed to historical persons and events, the accounts of which have become altered and exaggerated over time.
Euhemerus’s work combined elements of fiction and political utopianism. Early Christian writers, such as Lactantius, used Euhemerus’s belief that the ancient gods were originally human to confirm their inferiority regarding the Christian God.
Euhemerism
Euhemerus has become known chiefly for a rationalizing method of interpretation, known as “euhemerism”, which treats mythological accounts as a reflection of historical events, or mythological characters as historical personages, but which were shaped, exaggerated, or altered by retelling and traditional mores. In more recent literature of myth, such as in Bulfinch’s Mythology, euhemerism is called the “historical interpretation” of mythology.
Euhemerism is defined in modern academic literature as the theory that myths are distorted accounts of real historical events.
Euhemerus was not the first to attempt to rationalize mythology through history, as euhemeristic views are found in earlier writers, including Xenophanes, Herodotus, Hecataeus of Abdera, and Ephorus, however, Euhemerus is credited as having developed the theory in application to all myths, considering mythology to be “history in disguise”.
Robert said
The attempt to identify Philo’s various philosophical ideas of a divine logos, son and image of God, instrument and first-born of creation, with a heavenly, angelic being actually named Jesus, the son of God is extremely tenuous. Carrier tries to imagine what Philo might have thought if and when he read the Hebrew text of Zechariah, rather than focus on what Philo was actually discussing in his allegorical interpretation of the Tower of Babel story.To his credit, Carrier readily admits that his interpretation of Philo is not an argument for the ahistoricity of Jesus.
Carrier wants his readers and listeners to see the possibility that the cosmic/archangel Jesus of Paul refers to the cosmic/archangel of Philo of Alexandria.
Is the cosmic/archangel of Philo the historical Jesus Christ, Robert?
Richard Carrier does put forth that the biographical/historical information added to the cosmic/archangel Jesus was an example of euhemerism–he said it was not the only example because there were numerous examples in the Middle East, though not in China.
If a being does not have a body, but later has a body, it is when that being uses that physical body, actions become historical; but, claimed actions need to be investigated and shown there are no disputes. The birth of Jesus is disputed when one compares the year of birth given by Matthew vs Luke.
Richard Carrier
This archangel Jesus from Zechariah Chapter 6:
He was the firstborn son of god. ** you do not have permission to see this link **
He was the celestial image of god. ** you do not have permission to see this link **
He was god’s agent of creation. ** you do not have permission to see this link **
He was god’s celestial high priest. ** you do not have permission to see this link **
= = =
Richard (continued)
I see ** you do not have permission to see this link ** telling us:
Earliest known Christians believed this preexistent being descended, became incarnate, died, rose, then appeared to select people to tell them this.
= = =
Romans c. 57
2 Cor c. 55-56
1 Cor. c. 53-54
Hebrews c. 70-100
Philippians c. 55
53 – 100 C.E.
I do not see how Richard Carrier got
from
God’s eldest son, the eldest of angels, the Word, the image of God
to
Joshua/Jesus in Zechariah.
= = =
Larry Hurtado
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Carrier fulminates but gives an inaccurate representation of the Philo text [Robert says he gives an inaccurate representation of the Zechariah text].
Philo does comment on Zechariah 6: 11-14.
Zechariah orders crowns plural, not crown singular because he predicts and praises the appearance of two figures, not one figure:
1) Joshua
2) branch/shoot, a royal figure who will rebuild the temple and sit on a throne.
The priest will sit at the right side of royalty.
“(Actually, the best English translation of the text is probably the Jewish Publication Society Hebrew-English TANAKH.) And, by the way, the larger text of Zechariah makes it abundantly clear that two “anointed” figures are central in the oracles for the future of the Jewish people.”
“Philo does not refer to ‘an archangel Jesus.’ “
As I’ve said, I’ve got a number of other pressing commitments for my time. So, I’ll move on. But I presume that Carrier will let forth another long and equally intemperate screed, full of the usual bleatings about being ignored, and verbal “chaff” to distract from the issues on which he’s been found wanting.
Richard Carrier
The Ascension of Isaiah
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
Reference that Wikipedia says this about The Ascension of Isaiah.
Proto-Trinitarianism
Some scholars have noted that the Ascension reflects a proto-Trinitarian perspective,** you do not have permission to see this link ** writes;
The most extended narrative of heavenly worship is in 9.27-42, however, where a similar triadic view is presented. Having reached the seventh heaven, which is bathed in incomparable light, Isaiah sees innumerable angels and “all the righteous from the time of Adam onwards” (9.6-9). Then, after his angel guide explains how the descent of the Beloved One will make it possible for the righteous to receive their robes, crowns, and thrones (9.10-26), Isaiah sees a figure “whose glory surpassed that of all” being worshiped by Adam, Abel, and all the other righteous and angels (9.27-28). Crucially, at this point the angel guide directs Isaiah to “Worship this one,” whom the angel identifies as “the Lord of all the praise which you have seen” (9.31-32), the Beloved One; Isaiah joins in the worship and sung praise directed to this figure. Then another glorious figure approaches, subsequently identified as “the angel of the Holy Spirit who has spoken in you and also in the other righteous” (9.36), and Isaiah is likewise told to join the angels in worshiping this one (9.35-36). Finally, in a carefully prepared climax to this scene, Isaiah sees “the Great Glory” (but with his spirit, for it appears that his eyes are blinded by the light of this glory, 9.37), and he relates how “my Lord” and “the angel of the Spirit” both offered worship to this third figure, along with “all the righteous” and the angels (9.40-42).** you do not have permission to see this link **
Theological controversy
The Ascension of Isaiah suggests early Christian belief in subordinationism, similar to that of Origen and, later, Novatian.** you do not have permission to see this link ** This would be cause to label the story as heretical in the Western Orthodox tradition, along with similar theological beliefs, such as Arianism. Nonetheless, early Jewish-Christians, most likely in the Palestinian region, would have found this story influential in understanding theology, pneumatology and Christology, largely due to its referral to the Hebrew scriptures’ prophets.
Richard Carrier (continued)
At the same time the canonical gospels are being written, this gospel is being written, The Ascension of Isaiah.
Steefen
There is a scholar who can be found who does not say late first century to early second century, but to after the early second century.
Richard Carrier (continued)
Isaiah has a vision explaining the cosmic Jesus. Carrier says, in the vision, Jesus is crucified.
Wikipedia on the structure of The Ascension of Isaiah:
The second part of the book (chapters 6-11) is referred to as the Vision of Isaiah and describes an angel-assisted journey, prior to the events of the first part of the book, by Isaiah through the Seven ** you do not have permission to see this link **
Ehrman Blog is TOO SLOW.
Bart says he discusses The Ascension of Isaiah in his book Forgery and Counterforgery.
It appears he discusses it in Chapter 11: Anti-Jewish Forgeries.
The Ascension of Isaiah on Amazon
– A Roibert Henry Charles version
– A John Shepherd version
– A Robert Charles version: Ge’ez-English Edition (Ethiopic Library Collection)
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)