H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 33)

→ Table of Contents The Didache—Part 3 We have now arrived at page 56 of Dr. Hermann Detering’s remarkable essay, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus and the Beginnings of the Joshua/Jesus Cult.” Detering breaks a great deal of new ground and, as in such cases, the points made in his piece will require testing and some will certainly require adjustment. Were an essay of equal significance written more friendly to the Christian tradition, I suspect that it would immediately find publication and would probably also secure a book contract with a mainline publisher. Like so much good mythicist work carried on today, however, Detering’s works languish largely in obscurity, and he has long since accustomed himself to a scholarly career … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 32)

→ Table of Contents The Didache—Pt. 2 Jesus/Joshua is not divine and he is not “Lord” We recall that most scholars date the Didache around 100 CE—some towards the end of I CE, and others (such as Detering and Niederwimmer) to the early part of II CE. This dating has great significance for the issues raised below. First of all, in the preceding post I pointed out that the Didache nowhere mentions ’Iésous “of Nazareth.” This must strike the reader as astonishing, given that scholars universally assume the text to be all about Jesus. They are, of course, looking at the text through a later filter—and scarcely realizing that fact. It is perhaps a minor detail, but a 100 CE Christian … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 31)

→ Table of Contents The Didache (Pt. 1) Dr. Detering points out that the Didache (“Teaching of the Twelve Apostles”) is a Church manual discovered only in 1873. “Majority opinion holds that it dates to the early second century,” he writes, reflecting the somewhat more progressive European scholarship. (American scholarship largely dates the work to I CE.) Kurt Niederwimmer (Vienna), author of the 1992 Hermeneia commentary The Didache, writes (p. 53): “An origin around 110 to 120 C.E. remains hypothetical, but there are as yet no compelling reasons to dismiss this hypothesis.” Also in agreement with Niederwimmer, Detering considers that the document is based on Jewish Vorlagen and was given only a superficial Christian veneer. Detering (p. 54) cites three passages … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 28)

→ Table of Contents Jesus, Joshua ben Nun, Dositheus, and the “True Prophet” Dr. Detering begins this section of his paper (pp. 43–48) with consideration of Dt 18:15–“The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren—him you shall heed.” Detering notes the import of the verse for the Yachad (fellowship) at Qumran, e.g., QS IX 9-11: “And you shall not stray from any rule of the Law… until the coming of a prophet and of those sent of Aaron and Israel” Other passages in the DSS write of a “Teacher of Righteousness” and a “Teacher of Truth,” both placed in apposition to Moses. In Samaritanism, Moses assumed an exalted role and … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 25)

→ Table of Contents The Therapeutae—Pt. 5 The Therapeutae, a new chronology, and Yeshu ha Notsri (For the previous post on the Therapeutae, see here.) Dr. Detering begins a fairly lengthy section of his paper (pp. 26—42) with a review of the sect of the Therapeutae as reported by Philo. The sect holds a special importance for Detering, for he places it not only at the very heart of Christian origins—that is, at Alexandria—but also at the crossroads between Buddhism and Christianity. In other words, Detering concludes that the Therapeutae were a critical lynchpin between Buddhism and the gospels. Though we have already discussed the Therapeutae at length (posts 5-8), we will here attempt to place the sect within the wider … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 24)

→ Table of Contents Buddhism and the Odes of Solomon Dr. Detering dedicates a large section of his article to Buddhism (pp. 14-26). While I find some of his arguments more persuasive than others, here I will only examine points that are relevant to our main subject: ‘crossing over’ in Buddhism and possible links with Christianity. In the process, I will also present material not mentioned by Detering that adds support to his main argument. The first part of the this post continues the discussion on the Odes of Solomon (pts. 18-20). Detering (pp. 19-20) signals a short passage from the Digha Nikaya in which the Buddha and his monks miraculously cross the Ganges: “And then the Lord came to the … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 22)

→ Table of Contents The MandeansPart 2 [H. Detering, p. 10:] Lidzbarski points to the frequent Mandaean interpretation of the Sea of Reeds as the “Sea of Ending.” As the following citation from the Book of John shows, the crossing of the sea (symbolized at the baptism by the water of the ‘Jordan’) is, for the Mandaeans, God’s judgment: the water causes the destruction of those who are evil, but for believers it is a bridge to the light. The gnostic savior calls out: I am the treasure, the treasure of life. The evil ones are blind and do not see. I call them to the light, yet they bury themselves in the darkness. ‘O you evil ones,’ I call to … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 21)

→ Table of Contents The MandeansPart 1 [ → Previous discussion of the Mandeans] [H. Detering:] [P. 9] With the Mandeans we also encounter the allegorical-gnostic interpretation of the Exodus theme. This sect originated on the eastern border between Palestine and Syria. Apparently it was genetically closely related to early Christian baptist sects. The Mandeans viewed the Exodus in a way quite similar to that already discussed. Mark Lidzbarski, the devoted translator of Mandean texts, observed: “The allegorical and eschatological interpretation of the Exodus from Egypt [by the Mandeans] goes back to Alexandrian hermeneutic: the city’s fleshpots, the view of existence as material and sensual, the Exodus as flight from this hylic world to a more spiritual plane, and the Red Sea as … Continue reading

The Detering Commentaries: Table of Contents

Dr. Hermann Detering “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus and the Beginning of the Joshua/Jesus Cult” (2018)   Commentary by René Salm This extensive series of posts explores literary, religious, and historical links between Buddhism and Christian origins. It argues that Christianity emerged from a gnostic substratum, and that the figure Jesus of Nazareth and the New Testament gospels are second century CE developments. Table of Contents Pt. 1. Some background — Structure of Dr. Detering’s article ★ Pt. 2. The later (Jesus Mythicist) chronology Pt. 3. Water, water everywhere — Materialism vs. gnosticism Pt. 4. Sacred water and hidden meaning below the surface — The serpent — Passing through the upside-down vortex — The moon — The moon, water, and … Continue reading

H. Detering, “The Gnostic Meaning of the Exodus”—A commentary (Pt. 20)

→ Table of Contents The Odes of SolomonConclusion: The theology of immanence The two prior posts have briefly considered the Odes of Solomon, a ‘Christian hymnbook’ dating to the early second century CE. My discussion took its point de départ from Dr. Detering’s observation that Ode 39 knows dual outcomes of the Exodus: “Crossing the water is the judgment—it represents salvation for believers, but destruction for unbelievers” (pp. 8–9). We have seen that this dual outcome is very ancient and goes back to the Flood. Its equivocal nature allowed gnostics to interpret water as salvation (gnosis) for those who possess understanding, and as doom for those who do not. I proposed in a prior post that the early second century CE, … Continue reading