Why transmigration? Because of Moses and Joshua

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Why transmigration? Because of Moses and Joshua

Post by Joseph D. L. »


“And the Lord heard your words and was angered, and he swore, ‘Not one of these men of this evil generation shall see the good land that I swore to give to your fathers, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh. He shall see it, and to him and to his children I will give the land on which he has trodden, because he has wholly followed the Lord!’ Even with me the Lord was angry on your account and said, ‘You also shall not go in there. Joshua the son of Nun, who stands before you, he shall enter. Encourage him, for he shall cause Israel to inherit it. And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it. But as for you, turn, and journey into the wilderness in the direction of the Red Sea.’

This is why episodes like Barabbas, Simon of Cyrene, and Joseph of Arimithea exist in the Gospels. It typifies the Old Testament tradition that Moses, the one who led the Israelites through the wilderness, braving hunger, thirst, and war, was himself denied entry into the promised land, the distinction going to his second, Joshua ben Nun. In the three scenes above, the themes are similarly played out. One is condemned to die (Jesus) while one is freed to carry out the remainder of the mission--delivering those who would follow to the Promised Land. That's it. There's no further meaning to be extracted from that. Insinuating that this means that Barabbas, a murdering insurrectionist, is now the vessel of the Christ-spirit, is to miss the point entirely.

This is also why the Gospels also seem to have a particular interest with groupings of two, whether it be John the Baptist and Jesus, Peter and Andrew, Nathaniel and Philip, Judas and Didymus "Judas" Thomas (I mean, that one is right on the nose), and even the brothers Zebedee. At the very least these represent varying traditions being reconciled under a Catholic homogeneity; and at the very most, a literary device that began (as per the church fathers) with the Basildians, who believed that Simon of Cyrene and Jesus had not only switched places but also forms so that they appeared as the other.

The only question after that is, which was first? Transmigration or resurrection?

Right now my money is on transmigration, as resurrection (if it did appear in Ur-John or Secret Mark) was reserved for a Lazarus like figure and not Jesus proper.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Why transmigration? Because Horus and Osiris

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Image

Horus, identified as IAO, is born from the mummy of Osiris, Roman period

https://books.google.com/books?id=Qs4vM ... r.&f=false
Horus issues forth from the body of his father.
Horus is thus the transmigration of his father Osiris, who was killed and his spirit descended into Ta-Amen, the Egyptian underworld.

Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, “Lord, by this time there will be an odor, for he has been dead four days.” Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God?” So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.” When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”

Image

A typical Egyptian mummy. All mummies were made in emulation of Osiris, the first mummy

Image

Horus and Isis resurrect Osiris, scene similar in substance with Jesus resurrecting Lazarus with Martha, Lazarus's sister, present.

Image Image Image Image

The resurrection of Lazarus. Lazarus is depicted as a standard mummy
Last edited by Joseph D. L. on Mon Feb 24, 2020 11:59 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Why transmigration? Because of John 3:6-8

Post by Joseph D. L. »


"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν μὴ θαυμάσῃς ὅτι εἶπόν σοι Δεῖ ὑμᾶς γεννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν τὸ πνεῦμα ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ καὶ τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις ἀλλ’ οὐκ οἶδας πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει οὕτως ἐστὶν πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος

The Spirit moves like the wind, going where it pleases.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Why transmigration? Because of the Dioscuri

Post by Joseph D. L. »

The Dioscuri were the twin half-brothers Pollux and Castor. Though they shared the same mother, Pollux's father was the King of the gods, Zeus, while Castor's father was an earthly king of Sparta. Thus the dichotomy of Spirit/divine, and Flesh/material, is recognized

This type of dual-symbological (a language of symbols, if you will), is present in the Gospels. Luke showcases an interest in establishing John the baptist and Jesus as dual aspects of one another, both in their familial ties (cousins) and their births being prophesied. One, however, obviously represents the spiritual dynamic of the pair. John, likewise, as John the Baptist states, "He must increase, but I must decrease." There is also the conspicuous figure of Didymus Judas Thomas, or Twin Judas of the Twin. Another circumstantial reference of the twin motif occurs in the pseudo-Ignatian Second Epistle to John, wherein it states,

And in like manner I desire to see the venerable James, who is surnamed Just, whom they relate to be very like Christ Jesus in appearance, in life, and in method of conduct, as if he were a twin-brother of the same womb. They say that, if I see him, I see also Jesus Himself, as to all the features and aspect of His body.

Getting back to the Dioscuri, the myth runs that, [quoting from the wikipedia in full for context]
The cousins carried out a cattle-raid in Arcadia together but fell out over the division of the meat. After stealing the herd, but before dividing it, the cousins butchered, quartered, and roasted a calf.[11] As they prepared to eat, the gigantic Idas suggested that the herd be divided into two parts instead of four, based on which pair of cousins finished their meal first.[11] Castor and Pollux agreed.[11] Idas quickly ate both his portion and Lynceus' portion.[11] Castor and Pollux had been duped. They allowed their cousins to take the entire herd, but vowed someday to take revenge.[11]

Some time later, Idas and Lynceus visited their uncle's home in Sparta.[11] The uncle was on his way to Crete, so he left Helen in charge of entertaining the guests, which included both sets of cousins, as well as Paris, prince of Troy.[11] Castor and Pollux recognized the opportunity to exact revenge, made an excuse that justified leaving the feast, and set out to steal their cousins' herd.[11] Idas and Lynceus eventually set out for home, leaving Helen alone with Paris, who then kidnapped her.[11] Thus, the four cousins helped set into motion the events that gave rise to the Trojan War.

Meanwhile, Castor and Pollux had reached their destination. Castor climbed a tree to keep a watch as Pollux began to free the cattle. Far away, Idas and Lynceus approached. Lynceus, named for the lynx because he could see in the dark, spied Castor hiding in the tree.[11] Idas and Lynceus immediately understood what was happening. Idas, furious, ambushed Castor, fatally wounding him with a blow from his spear—but not before Castor called out to warn Pollux.[11] In the ensuing brawl, Pollux killed Lynceus. As Idas was about to kill Pollux, Zeus, who had been watching from Mt. Olympus, hurled a thunderbolt, killing Idas and saving his son.[11]

Returning to the dying Castor, Pollux was given the choice by Zeus of spending all his time on Mount Olympus or giving half his immortality to his mortal brother. He opted for the latter, enabling the twins to alternate between Olympus and Hades.[12][13] The brothers became the two brightest stars in the constellation Gemini ("the twins"): Castor (Alpha Geminorum) and Pollux (Beta Geminorum). As emblems of immortality and death, the Dioscuri, like Heracles, were said to have been initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries.[j]
Though quick, there is a neat little parallel here to the Gospel of John. The mortal Castor climbs into a tree and is struck by a spear. And though this summary says that Castor was dying, I have read other commentators say that he was in fact dead, and the Pollux had to give half of his immortality to resurrect him. Not saying that there is a direct take way from this, just something to point out.

Anyway, getting back to the Dioscuri. Another pair of twins that were venerated in the early centuries of the Christian era were Cautes and Cautopates, the twin torch bearers for Mithras. Interpretations and opinions vary as to what the two actually represented. Some consider them to be only followers of Mithras; while others assume that they are in fact aspects of Mithras.

Image

Cautes and Cautopates flank a tropian that a man appears to be bound to at the base.

Image

The heads of Cautes, Mithras and Cautopates are placed on a tree

This brings us to the boanerges, the brothers Zebedee, James and John.

James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James (to whom he gave the name Boanerges, that is, Sons of Thunder)

A weird fact to consider about this title the Marcan author gives to James and John is that he 1)never follows through or reveals what relevance this has, and 2) he writes as if those reading already know of its significance and so didn't feel the need to elaborate further.

So why are James and John give this special distinction, "Sons of Thunder", above the other Apostles? Even Simon, who is given the name Peter/Petra, i.e. Rock. Matthew 20:20-28 may give a clue,

Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came up to him with her sons, and kneeling before him she asked him for something. And he said to her, “What do you want?” She said to him, “Say that these two sons of mine are to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.” Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” And when the ten heard it, they were indignant at the two brothers. But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Both brothers are ready and willing to die for their lord. Notice how the other Apostles become "indignant at the two brothers".

Here, there is a split of traditions. The most common tradition has James suffering death while John lives until the End Times (again, the motif of one dying and the other surviving), while a very tenuous tradition preserved only in a commentary on Papias states that both brothers did die, and at roughly the same.

[I would also like to add here the detail in Matthew, where the brothers are called to drink from the same cup as Jesus. The death of the brothers Julian and Pappos is described poetically as them not drinking from glass coloured goblets anymore.]
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Why transmigration? Because of Peregrinus Proteus

Post by Joseph D. L. »


Unlucky Peregrinus, or, as he delighted to style himself, Proteus, has done exactly what Proteus in Homer did. After turning into everything for the sake of notoriety and achieving any number of transformations, here at last he has turned into fire; so great, it seems, was the love of notoriety that possessed him. And now your genial friend has got himself carbonified after the fashion of Empedocles, except that the latter at least tried to escape observation when he threw himself into the crater, while this gentleman waited for that one of the Greek festivals which draws the greatest. crowds, heaped up a very large pyre, and leaped into it before all those, witnesses; he even addressed the Greeks on the subject not many days before his venture.

I think I can see you laughing heartily at the old man’s drivelling idiocy—-indeed, I hear you give tongue as you, naturally would: "Oh, the stupidity! Oh, the vainglory! Oh"—everything else that we are in the habit of saying about it all. Well, you are doing this at a distance and ‘with far greater security, but I said it right by the fire and even earlier in a great crowd of listeners, angering some of them—as many as admired the old man’s fool-hardiness; but there were others beside myself who laughed at him. However, I narrowly missed getting torn limb from limb for you by the Cynics just as Actaeon was by his dogs or his cousin Pentheus by the Maenads.

The complete mise en scène of the affair was as follows. You know, of course, what the playwright was like and what spectacular performances he presented his whole life long, outdoing Sophocles and Aeschylus. As for my part in it, as soon as I came to Elis, in going up by way of the gymnasium I overheard a Cynic bawling out the usual street-corner invocations to Virtue in a loud, harsh voice, and abusing everyone without exception. Then his harangue wound up with Proteus, and to the best of my ability I shall try to quote for you the very words he said. You will find the style familiar, of course, as you have often stood near them while they were ranting.

“Does anyone dare,”, he said, “to call Proteus vainglorious, O Earth, O sun, O rivers, O sea, O Heracles, god of Our fathers !—Proteus, who was imprisoned in Syria, who renounced five thousand talents in favour of his native hand, who was banished from the city of Rome, who is more conspicuous than the sun, who is able to rival Olympian Zeus himself? Because he has resolved to depart from life by way of fire, are there people who attribute this to vainglory?’ Why, did not Heracles do so? Did not Asclepius and Dionysus, by grace of the thunderbolt? Did not Empedocles end by leaping into the crater?”

When Theagenes —for that was the bawler’s name—said that, I asked a bystander, “What is the meaning of his talk about fire, and what have Heracles and Empedocles to do with Proteus?” “Before long,” he replied, Proteus is going to burn himself up at the Olympic festival.” “How,” said I, “and why?” Then he undertook to tell me, but the Cynic was bawling, so that it was impossible to hear anyone else. I listened, therefore, while he flooded us with the rest of his bilge-water and got off a lot of amazing hyperbole about - Proteus, for, not deigning to compare him with the man of Sinope,8 or his teacher Antisthenes, or even with Socrates himself, he summoned Zeus to the lists. Then, however, he decided to keep them about equal, and thus concluded his speech: “These are the two noblest masterpieces that the world has seen—the Olympian Zeus, and Proteus; of the one, the creator and artist was Phidias, of the other, Nature. But now this holy image is about to depart from among men to gods, borne on the wings of fire, leaving us bereft.”

Proteus was the god of seas and rivers and had the power to change his shape and form. Proteus is used as an epithet in much the same way Christ is used.

Compare what Lucian says about Peregrinus Proteus to what Pauls says of himself:

For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

Post Reply