"Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

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

"Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

Philippians 2:6-11
6 who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
8 he humbled himself
and became obedient to the point of death—
even death on a cross.


9 Therefore God also highly exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bend,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

If the title of the thread is true, then the goal of the kenosis was to make Jesus a mere human being. Hence Jesus is exalted as consequence of the his euhemerization.

The author of the hymn was exalting Jesus not because of the his deity as pre-existent being (that is assumed in the background, though), but in virtue of the his "euhemerized" status: his becoming a simple man like one of the prophets.

Hence there is a latent conflict: who isn't euhemerizing Jesus is de facto denying that he was obedient to God. He can only be an enemy of the Jewish God just as Satan (the Serpent?) was.
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: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

Note also that, as reward for the his "euhemerization", Jesus is exalted by assuming the name of YHWH, the god of the Jews. In this way the author was claiming the identity between the God of which Jesus was the image (before the his euhemerization) and the god of which Jesus becomes the image after his euhemerization.

Since the euhemerization = judaization, then a doubt is thrown on the real "identity" between these two gods. Why did the author need to point out that Jesus had to assume as his second intime nature the nature derived from who is named just "YHWH" ?

I may try here an Argument from a Coincidence-Too-Much-Great-To-Be-Such:

1) that a deity is reduced to a mere man is a coincidence

2)
that a mere man is exalted again to a deity is a coincidence

3) that the deity of the point 2 is meant to be the same deity of the point 1 is a coincidence

4) that the deity to whom he is raised again (the deity of the point 2) is named YHWH is a coincidence

But the occurrence of 1, 2, 3 and 4 is not more a coincidence.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Ben C. Smith »

It is like nails on a chalkboard to me to hear you using the term euhemerization/euhemerism in this way, to mean a god actually becoming a human.

ETA: Yesterday somebody on this forum used the pseudo-title "Revelations" for the last book of the NT canon, another corruption which batters my eardrums. Thankfully, this individual corrected it to Revelation in his post almost immediately.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:28 am It is like nails on a chalkboard to me to hear you using the term euhemerization/euhemerism in this way, to mean a god actually becoming a human.

ETA: Yesterday somebody on this forum used the pseudo-title "Revelations" for the last book of the NT canon, another corruption which batters my eardrums. Thankfully, this individual corrected it to Revelation in his post almost immediately.
My point is that who is degrading the status of a god has to have a strong reason to do so, to overcome the embarrassment derived from the reduction of the status of a such god.

Hence also the so-called "kenosis" of the hymn to Philippians is a reduction of the status of a god, something that has to be made only under the weight of a strong need.

From this POV, this may help you to consider any reduction of the status of a god as an euhemerization, de facto. Isn't it? And in this sense not a so innatural thing "like nails on a chalkboard".
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:39 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:28 am It is like nails on a chalkboard to me to hear you using the term euhemerization/euhemerism in this way, to mean a god actually becoming a human.

ETA: Yesterday somebody on this forum used the pseudo-title "Revelations" for the last book of the NT canon, another corruption which batters my eardrums. Thankfully, this individual corrected it to Revelation in his post almost immediately.
My point is that who is degrading the status of a god has to have a strong reason to do so, to overcome the embarrassment derived from the reduction of the status of a such god.

Hence also the so-called "kenosis" of the hymn to Philippians is a reduction of the status of a god, something that has to be made only under the weight of a strong need.

From this POV, this may help you to consider any reduction of the status of a god as an euhemerization, de facto. Isn't it?
No.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:40 am
No.
I would answer "No" just as you if I don't see that:

1) the presumed "embarrassment" for the claimed reduction of the status of a god is overcame by the his receiving just the name of YHWH in the consequent exaltation.

This would move me to apply an "hermeneutic of suspicion": why just "YHWH"? Why is the embarrassment overcame by the hero becoming just "YHWH" ?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Ben C. Smith »

I have no idea what you are saying.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:49 am I have no idea what you are saying.
if we assume that the received name "above any other name etc" is Kyrios, i.e. YHWH, the god of the Jews, then the doubt is raised: did the author betray a particular insistence about the his claimed identity between YHWH (the god to whom the hero is exalted as reward, by being called "Kyrios") and the "god" mentioned in verse 6?

Was there someone who was claiming the contrary? And therefore one who was contrasting this reduction/kenosis/degrading/ehuemerization (or how you want to call the decision to become a slave etc)?
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: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

If I am correct when I argue that the author of the hymn was insisting (with relative excessive emphasis that betrayed him) that the deity who "humbled himself" was someway related to YHWH, against who preached the contrary (= that the original deity mirrored previously by him is not YHWH but a higher, alien god), then the point is made that the community of the Pillars (from which Paul received the Hymn so as it stands) was born as reaction against the Gnostic Myth of the Revealer from a higher god than the Demiurge.

In other terms: Gnostic origins of the Jesus Myth.
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: "Servant of God" is only a man like Moses, David, etc...

Post by Giuseppe »

I had written:
Giuseppe wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:46 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:40 am
No.
I would answer "No" just as you if I don't see that:

1) the presumed "embarrassment" for the claimed reduction of the status of a god is overcame by the his receiving just the name of YHWH in the consequent exaltation.

This would move me to apply an "hermeneutic of suspicion": why just "YHWH"? Why is the embarrassment overcame by the hero becoming just "YHWH" ?
I have given the reason in theory to answer "yes" and not "No" to consider the kenosis as a real embrional form of euhemerization (why a deity was converted to a man): basically, embarrassment for the implications of the contrary (if Jesus is not lowered, then he is enemy of YHWH).

But which is the evidence of this embarrassment?

Short answer: the fact that in a later hymn we have another perfect example of kenosis, one where a deity is lowered (from a high status) to transform him in a positive image of the demiurge against a previous negative image of the demiurge. This makes absolutely not a coincidence the fact that in the Hymn of Philippians the reward for the hero is his being named Kyrios, i.e. YHWH. If there is evidence of embarrassment for a deity being the bad Demiurge in a case, then why should not be identical embarrassment for a deity being not YHWH in another case?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Post Reply