"what Is Truth?"

[Ouroboros]

There is also the strange omission of any mention of the Essenes in the NT (they dont get a bad press like the sadducees or pharisees)

Before I read rest of your response, I had to make a comment on this part.

 

You took the words out of my mouth, man! I was thinking this yesterday, but didn't have access to the computer.

 

I'm going to look into how big the Essene cult were during that time. If they were anything close to a significant group that should have had some kind of attention, then my conclusion is that the early Christians definitely were the Essenes.

 

My reasoning is based on what you just said. There's no mentioning of the Essenes in the Bible. You find the Gnostics, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, Romans and many other obscure faiths and cultures. But no Essenes.

 

I think it was Philo or Josephus that made references to the Nazarene Essene, or the Essenes from Nazareth. There's been discussions if Nazareth existed or not, but I think it did, but not as an open community village, but as one of the villages the Essenes had where they grew their own vegetables and lived by their own faith. Just like the Amish or Quakers etc.

 

It all comes together now.

 

The Nazareth village, with only Essenes (they were outcast and a cult, highly disliked by the Jewish leaders), so they had to stay by themselves.

 

In that time saying someone was from Nazareth, was to say they were an Essene.

 

And of course the Essenes were preachings or teachings to the other Jews if they could.

 

Jesus was one that took that step, to bring the Essene "good message" out to the other Jews.

 

He got some followers.

 

He got killed, because the religious leaders wanted to get rid of him and his teachings, they got discouraged, but the message was the same. The message wasn't about Jesus, granted he was great in his faith, and he was a prophet for them, anointed by God to give them his message, but it was the contents, not the person that was important.

 

They kept on preaching Jesus message, and had great success in the Jewish community.

 

The leaders got scared, and started to persecute them. And Saul one of the strongest.

 

And here I think it becomes a bit more uncertain.

 

Saul realize he can't break the cult, and he have his "vision", and get the training etc, to infiltrate the cult.

 

Or

 

Saul have a, in his opinion, a "real vision". Which could have been because of natural causes, or if you want metaphysical causes.

 

But Saul/Paul puts a new spin on it, and he basically intentionally or unintentionally destroy the original gospel.

[Golden Meadows]

 

 

The Nazareth village, with only Essenes (they were outcast and a cult, highly disliked by the Jewish leaders), so they had to stay by themselves.

I couldn't find any primary references on the internet that links Nazareth with the Essenes, the ones I did see are just repeating what they have read elsewhere or with refs to the De Vinci Code. If you could give any pointers..........

 

[Ouroboros]

I only find claims that the Essenes existed around Mount Carmel, in the north Galilean district. Supposedly close to where Nazareth was supposed to be. There's no evidence of a city or village called Nazareth in the 1st century though. And most of Jesus miracles, I read, were done in the Galilean district.

 

The only reference that hints the connection is this one that I found:

Epiphanius:

 

"The Nazarean - they were jews by nationality - originally from Gileaditis (where the early followers of Yeshua fled after the martyrdom of James the Lord's brother), Bashanitis and the Transjordon . . .They acknowledged Moses and believed that he had received laws - not this law, however, but some other. And so, they were jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. They considered it unlawful to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the fathers. This was the difference between the Nazarean and the others. . . (Panarion 1:18)

 

And I read the Epiphanius defined 7 different cults in the Jewish religion, and the Nazarean were one of them. Epiphanius lived in the 5th century though.

 

And the connection to the Essenes is that they where strongly vegetarians, just like the Nazareans that are described. I don't think there's anything completely direct pointing to the connection between the Essenes as being called Nazareans, but from the different snippets I've read from Philo, Josephus and this one (and some other), there's a strong link.

 

But there are definitely some question marks in it all to. The Essenes held the Sabbath very strictly.

[Ouroboros]

And here's a complete speculation, but might there be a link between the Jewish Nazirite and Nazarean? Simpson was a nazirite. And didn't Paul make a nazirite promise? Maybe it wasn't really a place or a cult, but Jesus was just a nazirite, promised to live consecrated?

[Mythra]

Simpson was a nazirite.

 

Which Simpson? Homer or Bart?

 

 

 

 

 

[Ouroboros]

Sorry, I mean Samson. There's an episode called Simpson and Delilah. Must have gotten the name mixup from there.

 

Samson was following the Nazaritic law, not to eat animals (or unclean animals?)

 

The essenes strictly vegetarians.

 

Problem is that nazirite/nazarite would have to abstain from wine and to avoid corpses and graves. That part doesn't fit Jesus story. But all that could be a redaction of the original story. Maybe they added the water to wine miracle to separate the Paulinian Jesus from the Essene Jesus?

[Golden Meadows]

Another aspect of the "what is truth" question relates to the persons disposition. If I want to believe something then it tends to make me blind to things which should normally get in the way. When, as an adult, I converted to xtianity I really wanted to believe and I sort of pushed to the back of mind things which ordinarily should have rung alarm bells. Now that I am on the way out I am having to fight hard, not always succesfully, to avoid doing the same thing in reverse. I notice that when I was in apologetics mode as a xtian it seemed easy to put forward the argument that supported the xtian interpretation of things but now it seems equally easy to put forward a plausible counter argument to what I thought then. Methinks that much of the time "what is truth" is answered truthly by "whatever I think is expedient" and this makes me think how honest I can be with myself. None of this goes on consciously but I suspect does reflect a truth in some way.