stephan huller

agreed

MCalavera

I see more speculations and less evidence.

I'd rather less speculations and more evidence please.

ph2ter

I would like the same from you.

ph2ter

The goat sent into the wilderness was according to the epistle of Barnabas driven to „a shrub which is called Rachia“. Rachia is a thorn bush with sweet fruits. The author of the epistle reasons along the two Christs paradigm:
„Give good heed. [You see] "one upon the altar, and the other accursed; "and why [do you behold] the one that is accursed crowned? Because they shall see Him then in that day having a scarlet robe about his body down to his feet; and they shall say, Is not this He whom we once despised, and pierced, and mocked, and crucified? Truly this is He who then declared Himself to be the Son of God. For how like is He to Him. „

Jesus was declared to be the Son of God at the scene of baptism and transfiguration, and the epistle of Barnabas places that event after crucifixion!

The mentioned epistle is consistent with the two Christs also when it says:
„Behold, then the type of Jesus who was to suffer. But why is it that they place the wool in the midst of thorns? It is a type of Jesus set before the view of the Church.“

Also:
„Hearken how the priests of the people gave previous indications of this. His commandment having been written, the Lord enjoined, that whosoever did not keep the fast should be put to death, because He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished.“

'The vessel of the Spirit' is flesh-like Christ, and 'the Spirit' is the other. The author also appeals to the sacrifice of Isaac. Here we also can detect the ritual of the two goats. The first goat is equivalent to Isaac, and the second goat is equivalent to the ram caught in a thicket (which is again equivalent to a shrub called Rachia).

Regarding the Marcionite interpretation it is interesting, for the sake of an experiment, to change the name of Abraham with [Yahweh], and the name of Isaac with [Jesus]. Look what we then get from Genesis 22:

1Some time later Elohim tested [Yahweh]. He said to him, “[Yahweh]!” “Here I am,” he replied. 2Then Elohim said, “Take your son, your only son, [Jesus], whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah (Jerusalem). Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about.” 3Early the next morning [Yahweh] got up and saddled his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son [Jesus]. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place Elohim had told him about. 4On the third day [Yahweh] looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.” 6[Yahweh] took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son [Jesus], and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7[Jesus] spoke up and said to his father [Yahweh], “Father?” “Yes, my son?” [Yahweh] replied. “The fire and wood are here,” [Jesus] said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” 8[Yahweh] answered, “Elohim himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together. 9When they reached the place Elohim had told him about, [Yahweh] built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son [Jesus] and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. 10Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. 11But the angel of the Yahweh called out to him from heaven, “[Yahweh]! [Yahweh]!” “Here I am,” he replied. 12“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear Elohim, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” 13[Yahweh] looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son.”

Genesis 22:10 got its reflection in Ascension of Isaiah 9:14 where Abraham is compared to "the God of that world":
„the Lord, who will be called Christ, will descend into the world... the God of that world will stretch forth his hand against the Son, and they will lay hands on him and crucify him on a tree, without knowing who he is“

Echo is heard also in Paul:
2 Cor 4:4:
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

stephan huller

MC, first you actually have to read a book on the subject of the Marcionite gospel. It is not my job to educate those who don't want to be educated. The books exist. You choose not to read them for whatever reason. I can't be responsible for the ignorance of other people.

MCalavera

So you admit no evidence for you to post in this thread.

stephan huller

Only the evidence which everyone agrees upon who has ever read Against Marcion Book Four by Tertullian. If you're too lazy to read things which might contradict your presuppositions why should I do the work for you? You are obviously not motivated to go and read the material yourself.

Here's what you do. Go to tertullian.org and click on any copy of Against Marcion Book Four. Then do a fucking browser search for the name 'John.' You'll see it (the book runs basically parallel to the narrative in Luke). After that I can continue this debate with someone who actually bothered to read the material.

This isn't like finding some lost manuscript in a monastery. Having an informed opinion about the Marcionites should be a pre-requisite for developing theories about early Christianity. They prohibit brothers and sisters from copulating. There should be a law against this too.

MCalavera

I don't have a problem reading books when I have the time and motivation, but you reject Josephus' account of John the Baptist and I still don't see what exactly is special about whatever it is you're recommending to me.

What are you trying to prove by rejecting/questioning the historical existence of John the Baptist?

Toto

Off topic remarks by Iskander have been spit.

stephan huller

The thread is called 'the reason why Jesus had to be baptized although he never sinned.' The fact that all Christians believe Jesus was without sin and underwent a purification ritual is strange enough. Then we have to take into account that many early Christians including the Marcionites did not believe Jesus was a man but wholly divine. The fact that the Marcionite gospel did not make reference to this contradictory - and indeed baffling - narrative IMO demonstrates that it is much more sensible and probably more original.

The idea of a sin baptism also contradicts Paul's notion of a 'death baptism.' Many traditions went so far as to identify these as literally separate baptism (i.e. that there were two). The discovery of the Letter to Theodore by Clement adds more support to the idea that the Marcionites had another baptism narrative which was edited out of the existing narrative.