Posts by peacefulpete

56

Old Greek Daniel's Son of Man

by peacefulpete in

again this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site.

the basic question i want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in daniel 7. as we all know christians understood the figure to be the messiah (christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of israel as jews typically read it?

or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?.

peacefulpete

Again this is large topic, some of which has been discussed elsewhere on this site. The basic question I want to discuss is the identification of the 'someone like a son of man" in Daniel 7. As we all know Christians understood the figure to be the Messiah (Christ), so the question posed is did the author intend it to be a singular personage or a collective symbol of the holy of Israel as Jews typically read it? Or how about the unexpected idea that the "someone like a son of man" was the very same character as the "ancient of days" in another role?

The catalyst for this discussion is the alternate reading of Dan 7:13 found in the OG (Old Greek) LXX Papyrus 967. (andCodex Chisianus MS 88) Quoting an article by Bogdan G. Bucur: (3) The Son of Man and the Ancient of Days Observations on the Early Christian Reception of Daniel 7 | Bogdan G Bucur - Academia.edu

There is a notable dierence between two extant Greek versions of Dan7:13. While Theodotion, faithful to the Aramaic text, speaks of “one likea son of man” being presented to the Ancient of Days (ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπουἐρχόμενος ἦν καὶ ἕως τοῦ παλαιοῦ τῶν ἡμερῶν ἔφθασεν), the so-calledOld Greek (hereafter OG) depicts “one like a son of man” traveling, ingodlike fashion, “upon” the clouds of heaven (Ps 103/104:1; Isa 19:1),and approaching “like the Ancient of Days” (ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἤρχετοκαὶ ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν παρῆν).

6

Prisoners of the Mind

by iloowy.goowy in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dadlccbe_js.

have you ever seen a full-grown elephant weighing thousands of pounds chained to a small stake in the ground when you visited a circus?

did it ever enter your mind and make you wonder how such a small stake in the ground could hold such a huge animal from straying outside the boundaries of the length of its chain and stake?

peacefulpete

An excellent book about the human cost and power of high control groups, I'd also recommend Hostage to Heaven.

Hostage to Heaven: Barbara Underwood, Betty Underwood: 9780517538753: Amazon.com: Books

And for a broader look at the topic:

Losing Reality: On Cults, Cultism, and the Mindset of Political and Religious Zealotry: Lifton, Robert Jay: 9781620974995: Amazon.com: Books

4

The Firefly Minister

by iloowy.goowy in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcoikaci9i4.

from ron frye, 2014. when i was a child, my parents and i visited one of my mother's sisters and her family in bloomington, indiana.

one warm evening l remember experiencing the joy of seeing hundreds and hundreds of tiny luminous insects punctuating the night sky.

peacefulpete

I used to live by the backwaters of a large lake system, at least 100 acres of marsh. The fireflies on a couple nights a year were spectacular. I still hope to time it right when I return on occasion, but rarely do I get treated to the light shows of my youth.

BTW, I know the lights were not for me, it's a giant orgy, the bugs locate each other in the dark. Before that they were predatory larvae that inject venom to paralyze small aquatic animals. Also, a bit jolting is that some species of fireflies as adults are also predatory and almost exclusively eat other fireflies that are attracted to their light hoping for some sexytime.

I understand why the narrator of that video didn't want to hear the scientific explanation for the lights he enjoyed watching, the truth is something can be both beautiful from one perspective and quite horrific from another.

7

trimethylmaneria (TMAU) fecal body odor

by Nicol in

anyone know a witness with trimethylmaneria (tmau) or fecal body odor?

.

peacefulpete

I know you are but what am I?

3

Using Corporations to do God's Work

by Eliyahu in

what is a corporation?.

"a corporation is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners.

under the law, corporations possess many of the same rights and responsibilities as individuals.

peacefulpete

I see the harm of equating fictitious 'persons' with real citizens well illustrated with the Citizens United ruling. Effectively the voice of the individual citizen is drowned out by the voice of corporate interest. In a similar way the accountability of individuals is lost under a corporate faux personhood.

It's not hard to see how either scenario could lead to injustice.

I don't see any equation to Baal worship, however. I see that as more of a brand trademark issue.

11

The Akedah

by peacefulpete in

the genesis 22 episode, often referred to as the akedah (aqueda) ie "the binding" is a topic worthy a masterclass in textual and theological development.

a comprehensive discussion regarding this development would involve volumes and still leave much to be uncertain.

in short, the internal contradictions the narrative offers as it appears in genesis have inspired millennia of interpretive expansions and elaborations.

peacefulpete

Or maybe we (US) are just slow. lol.

BTW just a reminder that I'm thumbs-uping a lot of comments but still am restricted from doing so for reasons unknown.

11

The Akedah

by peacefulpete in

the genesis 22 episode, often referred to as the akedah (aqueda) ie "the binding" is a topic worthy a masterclass in textual and theological development.

a comprehensive discussion regarding this development would involve volumes and still leave much to be uncertain.

in short, the internal contradictions the narrative offers as it appears in genesis have inspired millennia of interpretive expansions and elaborations.

peacefulpete

KoW....I understand the strict D.Hypothesis as it was originally formulated has fallen out of favor, especially outside the US. I had Jeremiah 7:31 in mind, where Yahweh is the recipient and insistent He never desired it, and my mind leapt to D. Given the multiple explanations offered, it makes sense to suggest multiple revisionists.

11

The Akedah

by peacefulpete in

the genesis 22 episode, often referred to as the akedah (aqueda) ie "the binding" is a topic worthy a masterclass in textual and theological development.

a comprehensive discussion regarding this development would involve volumes and still leave much to be uncertain.

in short, the internal contradictions the narrative offers as it appears in genesis have inspired millennia of interpretive expansions and elaborations.

peacefulpete

the Bible was corrupted almost as soon as the Writers put Quill to Parchment,

That might reflect more of our own indoctrination. The idea of purity and permanence of a text follows from a literalist mindset. Every culture has the right to naturally evolve. Maybe rather than thinking of it as corruption we should credit it with progression.

11

The Akedah

by peacefulpete in

the genesis 22 episode, often referred to as the akedah (aqueda) ie "the binding" is a topic worthy a masterclass in textual and theological development.

a comprehensive discussion regarding this development would involve volumes and still leave much to be uncertain.

in short, the internal contradictions the narrative offers as it appears in genesis have inspired millennia of interpretive expansions and elaborations.

peacefulpete

Phizzy!....thanks for commenting. Yes we can be thankful the compiler/s of the material had an almost pathological desire to retain phraseology of his sources as much as possible while attempting to create a new narrative.

From material I've read it seems the sacrifice of firstborns may have been eclipsed with the idea of the firstborn sons serving as priests, this then later replaced with the use of foreign slaves and the birth of the Levite concept. It's horrific topic and like so much we are left with historic crumbs. It is suggestive that the Deuteronomist scribes did feel compelled to offer explanations that made reference to the practice. Three solutions are offered. The death of the Egyptian firstborns, the ability to offer money as a payment for the firstborn and thirdly the Levites were designated as replacements for the firstborn that belonged to YHWH for sacrificial purpose. I think you are right that in at least some quarters the practice of human sacrifice to YHWH continued until the Exile.

Something interesting is that in 7 of the 8 "Molech" mentions, the definite article precedes Molech, IOW, it likely refers to a particular sacrifice method not a god. The one instance where there is no definite article is 1Kings 11:7 and there the LXX has Milcom, suggesting the Masoretic is a scribal error. Many etymologies have been proposed but a new and persuasive one is simply a ProtoSemitic word for 'sacrifice'. In light of this "the Moloch" references were likely a child sacrifice to Yahweh, which later scribes deny was officially prescribed.

11

The Akedah

by peacefulpete in

the genesis 22 episode, often referred to as the akedah (aqueda) ie "the binding" is a topic worthy a masterclass in textual and theological development.

a comprehensive discussion regarding this development would involve volumes and still leave much to be uncertain.

in short, the internal contradictions the narrative offers as it appears in genesis have inspired millennia of interpretive expansions and elaborations.

peacefulpete

Apparently not a topic of great interest. I had a few additional thoughts. It's actually rather surprising that while 2 passages allude to the story (Hebrews and James) no direct linkage of the Isaac role to that of Jesus is made in the NT. Early Church fathers as early as Irenaeus do of course. Often the focus of the comparison by these early church fathers is the Isaac bearing the wood for his sacrifice equating to Jesus's cross. As I've mentioned before this story might have actually contributed this detail to the passion story. I have a theory that, given the very real controversy with early Gnostic Christians regarding whether Jesus survived the attempted crucifixion by means of substitution, the comparison might have lent to the Gnostic argument, and if there were any direct references they may have been removed.

As another interesting thought, the Koran includes a version of the story with the son unnamed. This seems unusual. The story in Genesis as it appears in context has raised lot of questions. First the story describes Isaac as the first and only son yet surrounding material has Abraham father Ishmael, his firstborn according to Genesis and the Koran famously. The Koran follows apparently later traditions regarding the son's consent, even mirroring traditions that have him insist he be 'bound tightly' to prevent ruining the sacrifice. All this leads to more questions than answers. If the Koranic author was using later Jewish material then why leave the son unnamed? The obvious answer is the identification of the son as Ishmael but if that was intended why not simply name him Ishmael in the story? It's true the Koran immediately follows that pericope with Abraham learning of the birth of Isaac, so it is implied. Who knows, maybe the writer used different sources and wove his version from what he saw.

Another point that demonstrates the Rabbinic usage of the Torah. In a number of ancient Midrashic references Isaac was actually killed. In some versions the ancient Rabbis said Isaac died by some means other than the penetration of the knife but in another not only is he sacrificed but burned to ashes. His ashes are scattered but God uses a dew and resurrects him. It's all fascinating how a confusing disturbing story inspired so much.

In the end what is quite clear is that around the turn of the era the son had been interpreted as an adult (25-37yrs old in sources I found) and the model of willing martyrdom, something not suggested in Genesis.

It's also kind of ironic that a story that likely originated in the context of human sacrifice of firstborns was rehabilitated to mean something else but wound up returning to the baser notion of human sacrifice.

I'd love if Caleboutwest or PioneerSchmioneer would discuss the modern understanding of these elements.