Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2nd Temple - Gospels /was Question

Expand Messages
  • John Lupia
    Thomas Butler: I believe it was John Lupia who questioned what the historical situation might have been that would have caused temple priests to leave the
    Message 1 of 29 , Mar 2, 2003
      Thomas Butler:
      I believe it was John Lupia who questioned what the
      historical situation might have been that would have
      caused temple priests to leave the temple. It seems
      to me that this level of corruption might be one such


      Dear Thomas:

      I do not question the historical situation, which
      existed during the public ministry of Jesus, I was
      only pointing out critical sources that do reveal what
      it was. Let me make myself clear by explaining what
      the situation was.

      Saddukaioi = Tzaddikim = �the upright or righteous
      men� the chief Kohanim in the Jerusalem Temple. This
      cultic or sectarian group of Kohanim was so called
      drawn from the second oracle of Habakkuk (c. 597 BC)
      A TZADDIK shall live by his faith, (Habakkuk 2:4).
      Tzaddik [also spelled tsaddik or tsaddiq] is both and
      adjective (righteous) and a noun (one who is just).
      This group of chief-priests was Epicurean in their
      philosophical outlook on politics, life and religion.
      Consequently, they were materialists who rejected the
      ideas of spirit or incorporeal being, such as angels,
      and denied the resurrection since it implied spirit
      and life to dead inanimate matter, something that was
      very unscientific much like the skeptics today in the
      so-called Historical Jesus research. They also strove
      to eliminate the Jewish Apocalyptic literature, which
      Jews and Protestants today called the LXX Apocrypha
      and epigraphy and pseudoepigraphy, but which has been
      perpetuated in Jewish tradition with the misnomer
      �Oral Tradition�. Jewish Apocalyptic literature was
      considered very dangerous because it pointed to a
      Messiah who would lead what they thought was a
      political revolution. Being materialistic thinkers
      they translated this into a Messiah-Revolutionary who
      would throw off Roman suppression. This they saw as
      suicidal since they knew all too well that the Jewish
      nation could never endure such a revolutionary effort
      and would be completely defeated. They were right
      about that, but wrong about the import of Jewish
      Apocalyptic literature. Jesus continuously taught the
      true meaning of what this literature meant, counter to
      what they believed.

      The Tzaddikim composed their own literature to counter
      the Book of the LXX, and when Jesus began to teach
      they began to compose literature against him. Tzaddik
      literature depicts acts in opposition to a ma'aseh,
      i.e., a similar story, about a rasha, or a wicked man.
      (See Targum J. Numbers 31:8, Yalkut Shimoney 785,
      Zohar II 194 A).

      Fleer and Afterman tell us: �All distinction depends
      on the man who separates light from darkness. He
      knows, and he can interpret the great disparity
      between stories. For the stories of Tzaddikim come
      from the Side of Holiness and are the result of
      prayer. As is taught concerning the verse: "Tell me,
      please, of all the great things Elisha has done"
      (Kings II 8:4), the Talmud (Megilla 27) explains,
      "Elisha accomplished 'great things', miracles, through
      his power of prayer." But the stories told of r'shaim
      are rooted in wicked plans, deceptions, magic; those
      things that come from the Other Side of Holiness.�

      �Hence only one who knows how to separate light from
      darkness, good from evil, can differentiate between
      stories.� (cf. Jerusalem Talmud, Brachot, perak 5,
      halacha 2.) see Gedaliah Fleer and Alan Afterman,
      �Tales of the Tzaddikim,� B'or Ha'Torah (1986)
      Article online

      The Tzaddikim literature that began to circulate after
      the crucifixion and death of Jesus was propaganda to
      refute the earliest kerygma of the apostolic community
      in its very first few years. This I have identified
      as the Gospel of Thomas, a cacographic portrait of
      Jesus and the apostles meant to deride them and
      dissuade others from believing in him. I have already
      shown how the various logia in this corpus are ribald
      puns meant to elicit guffaws from the public who heard

      St. Luke�s prologue clearly shows that the many other
      writings were cacography which were intended to
      dissuade Theophilus, the High Priest in Jerusalem AD
      37-41. Consequently, Luke must necessarily be the
      first written Gospel since he tells us that he has
      gone over everything from the beginning. Since Luke
      did not characterize the Passion Narrative with
      complete accuracy: Jesus is not crowned with thorns,
      scourged and doe not carry his cross, St. John
      immediately seized the opportunity to compose his
      Gospel to add to that of Luke in order to establish a
      fuller and more complete picture and portrait of Jesus
      and the teachings conveyed by him in speeches which
      John had copies of suggesting that he was a
      stenographer who made the records. This too I have
      pointed out before that, he took down the lengthy
      speeches that comprise the Last Supper.

      St. John�s Gospel does not mention the Tzaddikim by
      name in translation in the Greek, but rather, uses the
      Greek DIKAIOS in John 7:24 "Do not judge according to
      appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

      Tzaddik Nistar (pl. Tzadikim nistarim) = concealed
      righteous ones. This is how St. John characterizes
      both Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea (John 19:38-9).

      Tzaddik v'ra lo = a righteous man on whom evil
      befalls. This is how St. John characterizes Jesus and
      omits the account of the martyrdom of John the
      Baptist, because, it was already given by Luke and
      John wished to focus not on him, but on Jesus.

      The other leading sect were the P'rushim = Pharisees,
      commentators on Halakhah, hence called scribes,
      lawyers and teachers. These opposed the Tzaddikim and
      accepted the Jewish literature of the later books in
      the LXX. They maintained belief in spirits and angels
      and held the resurrection from the dead and also the
      Messianic Son of God who would redeem all of Israel.

      It was sometime after the Council of Jerusalem in AD
      54 when disciples of St. John the Baptizer were found
      at Ephesus and were rebuked for not baptizing using
      the Trinitarian formula that St. Matthew wrote his
      Gospel that gives this in Mt 28:19.

      As the Church began to make inroads into Rome and
      establish communities there it was then that St. Mark
      composed his Gospel to appeal to the Gentile audience
      in terms that made the theology of Jesus
      understandable to them.

      This is the thesis I had arrived at over a decade ago,
      but I still need to complete the manuscript. For the
      past 3 years I have been posting the crux of this
      thesis and have profited from many discussions to help
      tweak and focus the essential material.

      With warm regards,

      John N. Lupia, III
      31 Norwich Drive
      Toms River, New Jersey 08757 USA
      Phone: (732) 341-8689
      Email: jlupia2@...
      Editor, Roman Catholic News

      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.