The little tete-a-tete that George and I are enjoying seems to have deviated pretty far from the original topic. Would you be so kind as to move it to its own thread?
Hope you are having a great day. I would quickly note the following:
I expect better from you, George. Rather than impugn Hurtado’s motives, perhaps you could apply your zeal to gathering and presenting evidence that there was in fact an Enoch cult? So far, there is no evidence of such.
This is very much a quote-mine, George. Later in the same note, Hurtado continues:
examination of the evidence she proffers often makes it difficult to accept her claims. One example: Barker cites one line from Somn. 2.189 as showing that Philo knew and accepted the divinity of the high priest, whereas the context makes it clear that Philo specifically demurs from any such idea (‘Is he then a god? I will not say so…’).
The next time you feel tempted to get angry over a YEC quote-mine, remember our little exchange in this thread and take a deep breath…
As you are well aware, George, gnostic forms of Christianity did not begin to arise until after the entire Christian canon had been written. The most notable early gnostic teacher, Marcion, was stridently refuted by the orthodox church as a heretic.
Your embrace of Gnosticism as an explanation of Christian doctrine overlooks that fact that Gnosticism didn’t appear until well after that doctrine had already been formulated, and that the teachers of that doctrine vehemently resisted Gnostic teaching.
Your statement of Hurtado’s thesis is half-right, half-wrong. Yes, Jesus is completely elevated to the divine. No, he is not clearly in a subordinate status. One of Hurtado’s main points is that in a monotheistic setting, worship implies Godhood, full stop. And there is, by definition, only one God.
George, I do not see how you could carefully read Hurtado and come to a conclusion that completely contradicts his work. For that matter, you could also try reading Hebrews 1:3-12 -
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son,
today I have begotten you”?
Or again,
“I will be to him a father,
and he shall be to me a son”?
6 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says,
“Let all God's angels worship him.”
7 Of the angels he says,
“He makes his angels winds,
and his ministers a flame of fire.”
8 But of the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has anointed you
with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”
10 And,
“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,
and the heavens are the work of your hands;
11 they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment,
12 like a robe you will roll them up,
like a garment they will be changed.[a]
But you are the same,
and your years will have no end.”
All ten of these verses are crying out that Christ Jesus is not an angel; indeed, He is the Lord who laid the foundation of the earth from the beginning, the God whose throne is forever and ever. The angels worship Him.
George, i have always enjoyed our interactions, and I hope you will share your thoughts on the first chapter of Hebrews.
Have a good day,
Chris