Why Pilate? Because of 'Theocratic Imperialism'

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Why Pilate? Because of 'Theocratic Imperialism'

Post by Giuseppe »

Jesus couldn't be placed in a distant and only Jewish past (even if the origin of a pre-Christian Joshua cult was so distant in the past), since he had not be restricted to only the Jews.

Jesus had to be adored by both Jews and Romans.

So he was placed under Pilate.

The idea is derived from the mythicist Edward Greenly:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Greenly
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Pilate? Because of 'Theocratic Imperialism'

Post by Giuseppe »

In the words of Greenly:

If the cult were ancient, why should it not have been assigned to a remoter period ? I think that, in this connection, an important consideration has been overlooked. The system took over the old “official” deity
Yahwe, as, in view of its largely Jewish origin, it was bound to do. But in so doing it adopted a divine kingship of the most exclusive kind. The great resurgence of the cult, however, took place within the Roman Imperium, where men’s minds were of necessity permeated with the idea of universal dominion. The two ideas were inevitably combined, thus evolving what I have elsewhere termed Theocratic Imperialism. Now, if Jesus had been relegated to a remote period, he would have been made to appear when the cultus was quite obscure and (what is more important still) on the restricted stage of Jewry. For a nascent Theocratic Imperialism that was not enough. When he appeared it must be on the stage of the world—on the universal stage. It must, therefore, be a time when Jews and Romans could appear together. That limited the timo to the period during which Judaea had been a Roman province, but before the siege of Jerusalem.

(my bold)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Pilate? Because of 'Theocratic Imperialism'

Post by Giuseppe »

In another post, Secret Alias wrote:
Secret Alias wrote: Sun Apr 22, 2018 8:39 amJoshua takes over the role from Jesus. Since the messiah is 'one like Moses' and Joshua is described in like terminology and authority with respect to Moses THEREFORE it is evidence (to the Church Fathers) that the one who will come would be named Joshua
....
Given that this is the context from which Detering builds and you in turn build we have to use the source material to question any association with Marcionism in particular. Why? Because of two bits of evidence. The first is obviously that the Church Fathers were saying Jesus = Joshua against the Marcionites. As such the Marcionites did not hold to this position.
Surely the name "Joshua", being the name of a biblical warrior and conqueror, fits perfectly the goal of the 'theocratic imperialism'. But the 'theocratic imperialism' is a phenomenon uniquely post-70. So were the marcionites also "theocratic imperialists"? If they didn't even call their Chrestos as Joshua, then the answer is no.

In some way, from a some moment in the history the name 'Joshua' had to be particularly apt for an aggressive anti-Pagan propaganda. And it is easy to realize which is that time.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply