Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 11-08-2011, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Scribal error?

Doctoring, and tweaking, until it could be set in concrete by the church as being 'Paul's' letter "To The Ephesians"

If Clement had had a copy of 'Paul's' Ephesians, Why would he be engaged in experimenting with such crude composition, when he could have simply quoted the simpler, easier (and authorative) reading already given in Ephesians? (and of course also given some smidgen of credit to 'Paul' as being the author of this.)

.

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 12:08 AM

Interestingly enough I have found that at the end of the Instructor there are a series of citations of the Apostolikon which are completely at odds with the rest of the works of Clement. They are almost certainly later additions by another hand. They were literally inserted into the last chapter of the work as a kind of 'continuation' and clarification of what was said earlier. They are at complete odds with the other citations:

Quote:

However, both the laws served the Word for the instruction of humanity, both that given by Moses and that by the apostles. What, therefore, is the nature of the training by the apostles, appears to me to require to be treated of. Under this head, I, or rather the Instructor by me, will recount; and I shall again set before you the precepts themselves, as it were in the germ.

Putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. Let not the sun go down upon your wrath; neither give place to the devil. Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needs. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil-speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: and be kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ has forgiven you. Be therefore wise, followers of God, as dear children; and walk in love, as Christ also has loved us. Let wives be subject to their own husbands, as to the Lord. And let husbands love their wives as Christ also has loved the Church. Let those who are yoked together love one another as their own bodies. Children, be obedient to your parents. Parents, provoke not your children to wrath; but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Servants, be obedient to those that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the singleness of your hearts, as unto Christ; with good-will from the soul doing service. You masters, treat your servants well, forbearing threatening: knowing that both their and your Lord is in heaven; and there is no respect of persons with Him.
If we live in the Spirit, let us walk in the Spirit. Let us not be desirous of vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Be not deceived; God is not mocked. Let us not be weary in well-doing: for in due time we shall reap, if we faint not.
Be at peace among yourselves. Now we admonish you, brethren, warn them who are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded, support the weak, be patient toward all men. See that none render evil for evil to any man. Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings. Prove all things: hold fast that which is good. Abstain from every form of evil.
Continue in prayer, watching thereunto with thanksgiving. Walk in wisdom towards them that are without, redeeming the time. Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man.
Nourish yourselves up in the words of faith. Exercise yourselves unto godliness: for bodily exercise profits little; but godliness is profitable for all things, having the promise of the life which now is, and that which is to come. 1 Timothy 4:6-8

Let those who have faithful masters not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful. 1 Timothy 6:2

He that gives, let him do it with simplicity; he that rules, with diligence; he that shows mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love, in honour preferring one another. Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit, serving the Lord. Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer. Given to hospitality; communicating to the necessities of the saints. Romans 12:8-13

Such are a few injunctions out of many, for the sake of example, which the Instructor, running over the divine Scriptures, sets before His children; by which, so to speak, vice is cut up by the roots, and iniquity is circumscribed.

Innumerable commands such as these are written in the holy Bible appertaining to chosen persons, some to presbyters, some to bishops, some to deacons, others to widows, of whom we shall have another opportunity of speaking.

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 12:40 AM

This is even more complicated than I thought. Compare the reading at the ending of book three just mentioned:

Quote:

If we live in the Spirit, let us walk in the Spirit. Let us not be desirous of vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Be not deceived; God is not mocked. Let us not be weary in well-doing: for in due time we shall reap, if we faint not.

With the actual material in our received text which starts at Galatians 5.25 "If we live in the spirit" and ends with "if we faint not":

Quote:

Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other. Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. 2 Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3 If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves. 4 Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, 5 for each one should carry their own load. 6 Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor. Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.

Indeed there is no doubt that Clement's text is very different. But notice again that in another place it is different yet again:

Quote:

If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. He that sows to his flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

This is very, very difficult to figure out definitively. There is clearly a reason why no one has ever tried to work out what Clement's text of the Apostolikon was ...

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 01:08 AM

Yet the same order appears in Marcion's text apparently. Look at Tertullian's citation:

Quote:

When, therefore, he says, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ," since this cannot be accomplished except a man love his neighbour as himself, it is evident that the precept, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (which, in fact, underlies the injunction, "Bear ye one another's burdens"), is really "the law of Christ," though literally the law of the Creator. Christ, therefore, is the Creator's Christ, as Christ's law is the Creator's law. "Be not deceived, God is not mocked." But Marcion's god can be mocked; for he knows not how to be angry, or how to take vengeance. "For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." It is then the God of recompense and judgment who threatens184 this. "Let us not be weary in well-doing; " and "as we have opportunity, let us do good." Deny now that the Creator has given a commandment to do good, and then a diversity of precept may argue a difference of gods. If, however, He also announces recompense, then from the same God must come the harvest both of death and of life. But "in due time we shall reap; " because in Ecclesiastes it is said, "For everything there will be a time." [Tertullian Against Marcion 5.4]

Again compare the same section in Instructor 3.95.3:

Quote:

Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Be not deceived; God is not mocked. Let us not be weary in well-doing: for in due time we shall reap, if we faint not.

Again the received text is:

Quote:

Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3 If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves. 4 Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, 5 for each one should carry their own load. 6 Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor. Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 01:00 PM

Another parallel between the Marcionite and Clementine text of Galatians (or at least its interpretation). Tertullian's own text of Galatians (he cites with approval a variant text but does not say it is the Marcionite text necessarily):

Quote:

"But," says he, "I speak after the manner of men: when we were children, we were placed in bondage under the elements of the world." This, however, was not said "after the manner of men." For there is no figure here, but literal truth. For (with respect to the latter clause of this passage), what child (in the sense, that is, in which the Gentiles are children) is not in bondage to the elements of the world, which he looks up to in the light of a god? With regard, however, to the former clause, there was a figure (as the apostle wrote it); because after he had said, "I speak after the manner of men," he adds), "Though it be but a man's covenant, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." For by the figure of the permanency of a human covenant he was defending the divine testament. "To Abraham were the promises made, and to his seed. He said not 'to seeds, 'as of many; but as of one, 'to thy seed, 'which is Christ." Fie on Marcion's sponge! But indeed it is superfluous to dwell on what he has erased, when he may be more effectually confuted from that which he has retained. "But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son"

The point here is that Tertullian's text apparently combined Galatians 3:15 with 4:3 as (which is very reminiscent of various textual variants we have stumbled upon in the course of our discussion of Clement). As the translator notes:

Quote:

This apparent quotation is in fact a patching together of two sentences from Gal. iii. 15 and iv. 3 (Fr. Junius). “If I may be allowed to guess from the manner in which Tertullian expresseth himself, I should imagine that Marcion erased the whole of chap. iii. after the word λέγω in ver. 15, and the beginning of chap. iv., until you come to the word ὅτε in ver. 3. Then the words will be connected thus: ‘Brethren, I speak after the manner of men…when we were children we were in bondage under the elements of the world; but when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son.’ This is precisely what the argument of Tertullian requires, and they are the very words which he connects together” (Lardner, Hist. of Heretics, x. 43). Dr. Lardner, touching Marcion’s omissions in this chap. iii. of the Epistle to the Galatians, says: “He omitted vers. 6, 7, 8, in order to get rid of the mention of Abraham, and of the gospel having been preached to him.” This he said after St. Jerome, and then adds: “He ought also to have omitted part of ver. 9, σὺν τῷ πιστῷ ᾽Αβραάμ, which seems to have been the case, according to T.’s manner of stating the argument against him” (Works, History of Heretics, x. 43).

That scholars immediately assume that any variants in Tertullian's text are representative of the Marcionite text. I think we shouldn't read too much into the text. It was Tertullian's text - with its strange linking of 'speaking according to men' with 'under the elements of the world' which allows Tertullian to reshape the plain meaning of the text.

Jerome cites two interpretations: (1) that the 'elements of the world' are the angels which preside over the four elements of the world — earth, air, fire, and water; (2) that the term refers to the law of Moses and the words of the prophets as having provided a rudimentary instruction appropriate for children (PL 26:397). Yet the second interpretation is clearly 'allegorical' - or perhaps better - the text of Tertullian hints at something other than an obvious meaning of στοιχεῖα here. The idea that Paul means 'the law' is a bit of a stretch even though the term can mean 'the sounds that make up letters.'

My point then is that the normal way of reading this reference in Tertullian is silly. It is not proof of the contents of the Marcionite Apostolikon. It is only clearly a reference to Tertullian's text and Tertullian's interpretation of στοιχεῖα requires some sort of preamble like 'I speak after the manner of men.' The obvious meaning is something like 'zodiac signs' or physical elements of the world. Indeed Eduard Schweizer and Dietrich Rusam have shown that up to New Testament times, “elements of the world” exclusively means the four or five physical elements the world consists of. (E. Schweizer, “Slaves of the Elements and Worshippers of Angels: Gal 4: 3, 9 and Col 2:8, 18, 20,”JBL107 (1988): 455–68; idem, “Altes und Neues zu den 'Elementen der Welt' in Kol2,20; Gal 4,3.9,” in K. Aland and S. Meurer (eds. Wissenschaft und Kirche: Festschrift für Eduard Lohse (Bielefeld: Luther, 1989) 111–18; D. Rusam, “Neue Belege zu den στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (Gal 4,3.9; Kol 2,8.20),” ZNW 83 (1992): 119–25; cf. J. Blinzler, “Lexikalisches zu dem Terminus τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου bei Paulus,” in Studiorum Paulinorum Congressus Internationalis Catholicus Vol. 2 (AnBib 18; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963) 429–43 here 439. It is very unlikely that we find a different meaning.

So here is where things get interesting (and ultimately where we get back to our discussion of the ending of 1 Corinthians). The Marcionites apparently took the meaning of στοιχεῖον to mean the physical 'elements' or building blocks of the world. This is clearly demonstrated in Tertullian's testimony. In other words, the interpretation naturally 'fits' with the idea of the Marcionites of the Marcionites connecting 1 Cor 15:50 "flesh and blood cannot inherit ..." with material in Galatians because the apostle was apparently telling them you've got to change and transform your flesh in order to be qualify for the kingdom of God.

Now we shouldn't argue that the Marcionites didn't also take στοιχεῖα to mean 'the Law' in an allegorical sense. The point is only that the early Catholics were going out of there way to silence the obvious meaning of the material which just so happens to follow from the heretical interpretation of 1 Cor 15:50. Remember, when Irenaeus and Tertullian acknowledge some kind of connection between 1 Cor 15:50 and Galatians they strangely skip over chapters 3 and 4 and allow only for the idea of 'works of the flesh' in chapter 5. This is strange in itself and seems to deliberately avoid the obvious parallel between the oft repeated heretical notion that this flesh is enslaved to the powers of this world which in turn follows from the plain meaning of τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου.

Interesting also is the fact that Clement accepts the literal meaning of τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου to mean 'the four elements' of the world as we see:

Quote:

Now persuasion is [the means of] being established in the faith. Beware lest any man spoil you of faith in Christ by philosophy and vain deceit, which does away with providence, after the tradition of men; for the philosophy which is in accordance with divine tradition establishes and confirms providence, which, being done away with, the economy of the Saviour appears a myth, while we are influenced after the elements of the world, and not after Christ. [Colossians 2:8] For the teaching which is agreeable to Christ deifies the Creator, and traces providence in particular events, and knows the nature of the elements to be capable of change and production, and teaches that we ought to aim at rising up to the power which assimilates to God, and to prefer the dispensation as holding the first rank and superior to all training.

The elements are worshipped,— the air by Diogenes, the water by Thales, the fire by Hippasus; and by those who suppose atoms to be the first principles of things, arrogating the name of philosophers, being wretched creatures devoted to pleasure. Wherefore I pray, says the apostle, that your love may abound yet more and more, in knowledge and in all judgment, that you may approve things that are excellent. Philippians 1:9-10 Since, when we were children, says the same apostle, we were kept in bondage under the elements of the world. And the child, though heir, differs nothing from a servant, till the time appointed of the father. Philosophers, then, are children, unless they have been made men by Christ. For if the son of the bond woman shall not be heir with the son of the free, Genesis 21:10; Galatians 4:30 at least he is the seed of Abraham, though not of promise, receiving what belongs to him by free gift. But strong meat belongs to those that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Hebrews 5:14 For every one that uses milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe, Hebrews 5:13 and not yet acquainted with the word, according to which he has believed and works, and not able to give a reason in himself. Prove all things, the apostle says, and hold fast that which is good, 1 Thessalonians 5:21 speaking to spiritual men, who judge what is said according to truth, whether it seems or truly holds by the truth. He who is not corrected by discipline errs, and stripes and reproofs give the discipline of wisdom, the reproofs manifestly that are with love. For the right heart seeks knowledge. Proverbs 15:14 For he that seeks the Lord shall find knowledge with righteousness; and they who have sought it rightly have found peace. And I will know, it is said, not the speech of those which are puffed up, but the power. In rebuke of those who are wise in appearance, and think themselves wise, but are not in reality wise, he writes: For the kingdom of God is not in word. 1 Corinthians 4:19-20 It is not in that which is not true, but which is only probable according to opinion; but he said in power, for the truth alone is powerful. And again: If any man thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. For truth is never mere opinion. But the supposition of knowledge inflates, and fills with pride; but charity edifies, which deals not in supposition, but in truth. Whence it is said, If any man loves, he is known.

It is important to again reinforce that Tertullian obviously goes against the same Marcionite interpretation of τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου time and again:

Quote:

Now, from whom comes this grace, but from Him who proclaimed the promise thereof? Who is (our) Father, but He who is also our Maker? Therefore, after such affluence (of grace), they should not have returned “to weak and beggarly elements.” [Gal. iv. 9] By the Romans, however, the rudiments of learning are wont to be called elements. He did not therefore seek, by any depreciation of the mundane elements, to turn them away from their god, although, when he said just before, “Howbeit, then, ye serve them which by nature are no gods,” [Gal. iv. 8] he censured the error of that physical or natural superstition which holds the elements to be god; but at the God of those elements he aimed not in this censure. He tells us himself clearly enough what he means by “elements,” even the rudiments of the law: “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years” [Gal. iv. 10]—the sabbaths, I suppose, and “the preparations,” and the fasts, and the “high days.” For the cessation of even these, no less than of circumcision, was appointed by the Creator’s decrees

and even more clearly in the discussion of Colossians:

Quote:

When, again, he warns them to "beware of subtle words and philosophy," as being "a vain deceit," such as is "after the rudiments of the world" (not understanding thereby the mundane fabric of sky and earth, but worldly learning, and "the tradition of men," subtle in their speech and their philosophy),888 it would be tedious, and the proper subject of a separate work, to show how in this sentence (of the apostle's) all heresies are condemned, on the ground of their consisting of the resources of subtle speech and the rules of philosophy. But (once for all) let Marcion know that the principle term of his creed comes from the school of Epicurus, implying that the Lord is stupid and indifferent;889 wherefore he refuses to say that He is an object to be feared.

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 01:37 PM

In fact we can use Han J. W. Drijvers brilliant study of the Marcionite understanding of τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου from Syriac and Armenian sources to help solidify the original connection with 1 Cor 15:50 even more:

Quote:

The Creator made the world together with Matter that functioned as a female and wife. When the Creator saw that the world he had created with Matter was good, he planned to make man. He descended to the earth to Matter and said to her: give me from your earth and I will give spirit and let us make man after our likeness (cf Gen 1.26). Matter gave of her earth and the Creator formed man and breathed his spirit in him (Gen 2.7) and a man became a living soul. The Creator formed Adam and Eva and put them in paradise and there the Creator and Matter together gave him their commands and rejoiced in him as their common son, The God of the Law, the kosmokrator, however, saw that Adam was good and tried to steal him from Matter. He said: "Adam I am God, and there is no one else, and you shall have no other god before me. When you will have other gods before me, know that you will die" (cf. Ex. 20, 1-5; Gen. 2, 17). Thereupon Adam separated from Matter and did not listen to her orders. Matter knew then that the Creator had deceived her and had broken the treaty. In revenge Matter created many gods and filled with them the earth completely, so that Adam could no longer find his Creator when he looked for him. And she created many idols and filled the world with them and the name of the Lord of creatures disappeared and was not be found any more' (Wardapet Eznik of Kolb, Against the Heresies, IV,1 ; JM Schmid, Des Wardapet Eznik von Kolb Wider die Sekten,174ff)

Two points in Eznik's report are of particular interest for our purpose, more so since they are confirmed by Ephrem Syrus. The first point is that the world was created by a sexual act of the Creator and Matter. The second is that idols were products of Matter and the cult of idols was so widespread in the world before Christ's appearance that even worship of the Creator had completely disappeared.[Marcion's Reading of Gal. 4,8: Philosophical Background and Influence on Manichaeism,” in A Green Leaf: Papers in Honour of Jes P. Asmussen (Leiden: EJ Brill, 1988) p. 321]

This analysis in turn gives way to even more penetrating insight into the Marcionite tradition:

Quote:

The allusions to the Marcionite myth as told by Eznik are clear and in particular the reference to Gal. 4,8. The material elements the stoicheia of Gal. 4,8-9 are explicitly called idols like Tertullian did in Adv. Marc. V, 4. That Ephrem also knew Marcion's view of the cult of the idols as the veneration of the elements of the world that together form the Hyle, becomes clear from various strophes of Hymn contra Haereses 48. This hymn treats the place of Matter in Marcion's system and contains allusions to the same myth that is recorded by Eznik, whereas the Transfiguration on the Mountain is also discussed16. In strophe 2 Ephrem mentions the different manifestations of the Hyle: 'And when Hyle is a unity (hd' hy mdm), whence are then the kinds without number: heaven, and water, and also fire, and darkness, light, and wind, natures that are different from each other (kyn' prysy hd mn hd)'. Strophe 16 and 18 call the demons Hyle's products or offspring (yldyh dhwl') and even Hyle itself Satan. Is it too far-fetched to assume that Marcion identified demons and idols as Tatian (Or. 21,2) and Justin (1,5,2) did?17. Tatian also knew of the identification of pagan idols with demons and elements as appears from Or. 21,

Mind now what I say, men of Greece: do not allegorize either your stories or your gods, for if you try to do so your conception of divinity is subverted not only by us but also by yourselves.
For either the demons, if they are such as you describe them, are base in character, or, if they are transferred to the more natural plane, are not the superhuman beings you describe, I would neither be persuaded myself nor would I try and persuade my neighbour to worship the substance of the elements. The arguments of Metrodo- rus of Lampsacus, who turns everything into allegory in his work On Homer, are totally absurd; for he says that Hera or Athena or Zeus are not what their believers say, who made shrines and temples for them, but that they are natural substances and arrangements of elements' (φύσεως δὲ ὑποστάσεις καὶ στοιχείων διακοσμήσεις)[Tatian Oratio 21]

Tatian's mention of Metrodorus of Lampsacus work On Homer guides us into the allegorization of Homer's myths and deities that was normal practice in Greek philosophical circles and that form the background of Marcion's views of idols and elements. Ever since Empedocles Homer's gods were considered natural elements and his myths allegories of natural processes19. Marcion's view of creation whereby the Creator is a male principle and Hyle a female according to Eznik of Kolb and Ephrem Syrus may go back to the allegorization of the myth of Proteus and Eidothea (Odyssee IV, 365-440). Eidothea the waternymph and Proteus' daughter helps Menelaos on the island of Pharos to find out which sin he committed against which of the gods so that he cannot return to his home. According to Sextus Empiricus (Adv. Math., IX, 5) Proteus represents the demiurgic principle, the causa agens, and Eidotheia in her turn passive matter which can take various forms in the process of creation20. It may be of some interest that the same Sextus Empiricus preserved a text about a weak and malevolent god who shows great similarity with Marcion's Creator21. Starting from this text J. Gager argued that Marcion must have had some knowledge of philosophical issues of his time. Marcion's view of creation hints at the same.

Marcion's view of idolatry that was instituted by Hyle as the cult of the natural elements, stoicheia, that form together the Hyle and therefore can be considered as her offspring22, also finds its origin in philosophical teachings current in his time and in particular aiming at a demythologization of the traditional gods. One of the best representatives of this trend in philosophy is the first century rhetor Heraclitus, who wrote a long allegory of Homer's epic that is known under the title quaestiones homericae. Other examples are a work on the life and work of Homer that is attributed to Plutarch and must have been written in the first half of the second century AD, so during Marcion's lifetime23. A common trait of all these philosophical works is the allegorization of Homer's deities as natural elements, parts of Hyle, that together in various mixtures form this visible world24. It is a kind of philosophical knowledge that we also find in Justin, Aelius Aristides, and Tatian. Taking into considertation Tertullian's polemic with Marcion in Adv. Marc. I, 13 and V, 4 and the terminology used there, Marcion must have known these philosophical issues, must have used them in his conception of creation as a kind of cooperation between the Creator and Matter, and in his view of pagan idolatry as an institution in particular linked with Matter, and therefore must have expressed that philosophical knowledge in the wording of Gal. 4,8.

When indeed such details of Marcion's thoughtworld and Bible text betray his philosophical background, like the main lines of his system do too, there is no ground for ascribing such elements in Marcion's doctrine to later Manichaean influence on specific Marcionite groups in the Syrian area25. Marcionite influence on Manichaeism is rather much greater and more substantial than is usually assumed. Marcion's reading of Gal. 4,8 and the ideas lying behind it also exerted a certain influence on Mani. Of particular interest is strophe 2 of Hymn contra Haereses 48 which gives in condensed form Marcion's cosmology that is based on the creation story of Genesis 1:

Moses wrote that God Himself created the heaven and the earth.
From the earth that He had created He formed us (cf. Gen. 2,7)
And the name Creator testifies to (that).
And when Hyle is a unity, whence are then the kinds without number
Heaven, and water, and also fire, and darkness, light, and wind.
Natures that are different from each other'.

The occurrence of heaven as first 'nature' in the enumeration of the elements finds its explanation in Gen. 1,1-2: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void. The earth without form and void is the Hyle, the sum of the five natures or elements. That this Marcionite concept is aimed at by Ephrem and not Bardaisan's elements becomes clear from another passage in Ephrem's work, where he writes: Marcion (says) that a heaven also is found beneath the Stranger, the heaven of the Maker'26. The five elements in Marcion's system are the same as Bardaisan's. In Marcion they represent — unlike in Bardaisan — the evil stoicheia together forming Hyle, from which the Creator formed the whole visible world through his sexual cooperation or union with Hyle. That idea might go back to Gen. 1,2 "And the Spirit of God moved upon the water"

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 02:07 PM

More examples of parallels between the interpretation of τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Clement and Marcion:

Quote:

Galatians 4, 9 Let the philosophers, then, own as their teachers the Persians, or the Sauromatae, or the Magi, from whom they have learned the impious doctrine of regarding as divine certain first principles, being ignorant of the great First Cause, the Maker of all things, and Creator of those very first principles, the unbeginning God, but reverencing "these weak and beggarly elements," Clemens Alexandrinus Protrepticus MONDESERT C., PLASSART A., 2e éd., SC 2 (1949). 65 § 4 (p.130, l.13) BP1

Gal 4.9 For he is conscious of the boon he has received, having become worthy of obtaining it; and is translated from slavery to adoption, as the consequence of knowledge; knowing God, or rather known of Him, for the end, he puts forth energies corresponding to the worth of grace. For works follow knowledge, as the shadow the body. Clemens Alexandrinus Stromata STAEHLIN O., FRUECHTEL L., 3e éd., GCS 52 (1960) pour les livres 1-6 ; STAEHLIN O., FRUECHTEL L., TREU U., 2e éd., GCS 17 (1970), 3-102 pour les livres 7-8. 7 82 § 7 (p.59, l.9) BP1

stephan huller · 11-09-2011, 02:15 PM

Origen makes repeated reference in his writings to the 'correctness' of the four gospels because they represent the 'four stoichiea' of the world. Could it be the gospel was artificially established to 'four elements' in order to force Christianity to accept worldly principles?

Kent F · 11-11-2011, 07:26 AM

Quote:

aa5874 wrote: Now, it is simply illogical that you can know Clement had a different ending to 1 Corinthians when he did NOT state that 1 Cor. ended at chapter 15 or have found an epistle to the Corinthians with Only 15 chapters.

And please do NOT digress. The title of OP clearly states 1 Cor 14, 15 and 16 are Fakes.

Please present the Fake passages. I have limited time.

The fake passages have already been presented. Clement cites only a few verses from chapters 14 and 15, and none from chapter 16. How then can those chapters be genuine? Why is it that Clement had such different versions of 1 Cor and other epistles?

You have argued for a long time that ALL of the Pauline epistles are fake, that they were fabricated by the early Roman church. If Clement of Alexandria had epistles which read different from the Roman versions, "our versions", then your theory goes up in smoke, does it not? That's your agenda in this thread, to protect your theory.

Your number of posts are approaching 13,000 but you can't "waste time" to go to Stephan Huller's blog and read all his evidence for yourself? Why is that? Perhaps you simply don't dare to challenge your own theory by going there.

Sheshbazzar · 11-11-2011, 08:19 AM

As has long been been illustrated in thousands of threads, aa5874's monomaniacal ego never allows for him to support or to accept any ideas or opinions except his own.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-09-2011, 02:15 PM	#138
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Origen makes repeated reference in his writings to the 'correctness' of the four gospels because they represent the 'four stoichiea' of the world. Could it be the gospel was artificially established to 'four elements' in order to force Christianity to accept worldly principles?

11-11-2011, 08:19 AM	#140
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	As has long been been illustrated in thousands of threads, aa5874's monomaniacal ego never allows for him to support or to accept any ideas or opinions except his own.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.