Freethought & Rationalism Archive

show_no_mercy · 02-02-2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Now, just for fun, whose god do Christians actually worship?

The Jewish God or Marcion's?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1 John 4

8 God is love

Marcion called the god of Jesus, god the father, the good god - the god of goodness. 1 John is closer to Marcionism than Judaism. There's nothing in Jewish scripture that says that YHWH is love. If anything, he's the god of justice:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isaiah 30:18

YHWH is a God of justice.

Again, what Marcion said he was.

dog-on · 02-03-2010, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Now, just for fun, whose god do Christians actually worship?

The Jewish God or Marcion's?

Marcion called the god of Jesus, god the father, the good god - the god of goodness. 1 John is closer to Marcionism than Judaism. There's nothing in Jewish scripture that says that YHWH is love. If anything, he's the god of justice:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isaiah 30:18

YHWH is a God of justice.

Again, what Marcion said he was.

Indeed. Wonder why that is...

storytime · 02-03-2010, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

With an open mind and lots of speculation, consider that there were many "Christs" that people followed "the signs of his coming", in the stars. How many groups or sects existed as followers of "the Christ" [sign] in the constallations? Before the days of Jesus, did non Jews follow astrological "signs" of "the Christ" who was supposed to come? Why think this astrological charting of the stars existed only in the Jewish tradition? In the NT story itself, Jesus warns his disciples of the many "Christs" who would come in his name. Jesus thought himself the only one his disciples should trust and follow. But if there were other non Jewish "Christs" in the astrological "star" gazers, then Marcion could have easily denied Jesus his claim to fame.

You can trace the star watching stuff from Canaanite mythology on to passages in the Old Testament and then on to passages in the New Testament.

Begin with Isaiah 14:12-14.

Look how you have fallen from the sky,
Helel son of Shahar!
You have been cut down to the ground,
To weaken the nations!
You said to yourself,
“I will climb up to the sky.
Above the stars of El,
I will set up my throne.
I will rule on the mountain of assembly
on the remote slopes of Zaphon.
I will climb up to the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High!”

That passage is rich in Canaanite imagery. It mentions Shahar (a son of El) and the stars of El - who were also divinities, and it says that the Most High god controls from above the clouds.

Now look at how that imagery is carried over in Daniel 7:13-14.

And upon the clouds of the heavens
one like a son of man was approaching.
He went up to the Ancient of Days
and was escorted before him.
To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty.
All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him.
His authority is eternal and will not pass away.
His kingdom will not be destroyed.

The Ancient of Days and the Most High are both epithets for El. Both passages describe an environment where lesser gods (Helel in Isaiah, and Baal/Yahweh in Daniel) take the keys to the kingdom. In Isaiah Helel gets them, whereas in Daniel Ball/Yahweh gets them.

These passages are related. They both draw from the Baal Epic where Baal is presumed dead and Anat convinces the father god El to let a midget god named Ashtar rule from Baal’s throne. Unfortunately Ashtar is to short to mount the throne and so he is ousted – and just in the nick of time Baal (the rider of the clouds) returns from the dead to take his seat on the throne that El rightfully gave him after he conquered Yam. Helel is an epithet for Ashtar. They are the same midget god. I’m not kidding.

Now that I have established a link between the Stars of El and the Son of Man lets take a look at Job 1:6.

Now the day came when the sons of God came to present themselves before Yahweh ….

And Job 38:7

… when the morning stars sang in together,
and all the sons of God shouted for joy …

These are the same divinities. They are the sons of God. They are the sons of El. They are the stars of El; and they are the morning stars.

Now fast-forward to the New Testament and look at 2 Peter 1:19

We have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

Bingo. There’s a morning star. We have a morning star.

Now the icing on the cake (Revelation 22:16).

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

See?

Jesus said that he was a morning star. He was identifying himself with the group of divinities who sang together in Job 38:7. They were sons of God, and so was Jesus.

My point is that you don’t need an external source (astrology) to explain the fascination with the stars. All you need is an Old Testament and an understanding of Canaanite mythology.

It’s all ‘Jewish’.

I agree that the story of Jesus as the Christ is all Jewish. Their claim to fame. However, I'm guessing that Jesus was in competition with other non Jewish Christs. Other peoples had their own "anointed" men did they not? Also, both Canaanite and Egyptian mythology plays the "sign" of a coming hero predicted by following the stars. So if we look outside the Jewish story what do we see? Lots of "Christs" and followers of the "sign" in their own culture?

How many non-Jewish Christ groups did Paul compete with in the city of Antioch? How long were they teaching about their Christ before the story of Jesus the Jew came along? Maybe there was a Christ group from ancient Egyptian belief which disagreed with Pauls gospel? Why do we assume there was only one group of Jewish people teaching a Christ mythology?

How many religious groups today are looking at the "signs" other than Christianity?

aa5874 · 02-03-2010, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

Now fast-forward to the New Testament and look at 2 Peter 1:19

We have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

Bingo. There’s a morning star. We have a morning star.

Now the icing on the cake (Revelation 22:16).

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

See?

Jesus said that he was a morning star. He was identifying himself with the group of divinities who sang together in Job 38:7. They were sons of God, and so was Jesus.

My point is that you don’t need an external source (astrology) to explain the fascination with the stars. All you need is an Old Testament and an understanding of Canaanite mythology.

It’s all ‘Jewish’.

Now, fast forward to Simon BarCochebas the Messiah.

We have another star.

This is Eusebius on the "star" in Church History 4.6.2

Quote:

2. The leader of the Jews at this time was a man by the name of Barcocheba (which signifies a star), who possessed the character of a robber and a murderer, but nevertheless, relying upon his name, boasted to them, as if they were slaves, that he possessed wonderful powers; and he pretended that he was a star that had come down to them out of heaven to bring them light in the midst of their misfortunes.

And to view picture with coin of Simon BarCocheba with the "star" See http://www.livius.org/ja-jn/jewish_wars/jwar07.html

maryhelena · 02-04-2010, 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

You can trace the star watching stuff from Canaanite mythology on to passages in the Old Testament and then on to passages in the New Testament.

Begin with Isaiah 14:12-14.

Look how you have fallen from the sky,
Helel son of Shahar!
You have been cut down to the ground,
To weaken the nations!
You said to yourself,
“I will climb up to the sky.
Above the stars of El,
I will set up my throne.
I will rule on the mountain of assembly
on the remote slopes of Zaphon.
I will climb up to the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High!”

That passage is rich in Canaanite imagery. It mentions Shahar (a son of El) and the stars of El - who were also divinities, and it says that the Most High god controls from above the clouds.

Now look at how that imagery is carried over in Daniel 7:13-14.

And upon the clouds of the heavens
one like a son of man was approaching.
He went up to the Ancient of Days
and was escorted before him.
To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty.
All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him.
His authority is eternal and will not pass away.
His kingdom will not be destroyed.

The Ancient of Days and the Most High are both epithets for El. Both passages describe an environment where lesser gods (Helel in Isaiah, and Baal/Yahweh in Daniel) take the keys to the kingdom. In Isaiah Helel gets them, whereas in Daniel Ball/Yahweh gets them.

These passages are related. They both draw from the Baal Epic where Baal is presumed dead and Anat convinces the father god El to let a midget god named Ashtar rule from Baal’s throne. Unfortunately Ashtar is to short to mount the throne and so he is ousted – and just in the nick of time Baal (the rider of the clouds) returns from the dead to take his seat on the throne that El rightfully gave him after he conquered Yam. Helel is an epithet for Ashtar. They are the same midget god. I’m not kidding.

Now that I have established a link between the Stars of El and the Son of Man lets take a look at Job 1:6.

Now the day came when the sons of God came to present themselves before Yahweh ….

And Job 38:7

… when the morning stars sang in together,
and all the sons of God shouted for joy …

These are the same divinities. They are the sons of God. They are the sons of El. They are the stars of El; and they are the morning stars.

Now fast-forward to the New Testament and look at 2 Peter 1:19

We have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

Bingo. There’s a morning star. We have a morning star.

Now the icing on the cake (Revelation 22:16).

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

See?

Jesus said that he was a morning star. He was identifying himself with the group of divinities who sang together in Job 38:7. They were sons of God, and so was Jesus.

My point is that you don’t need an external source (astrology) to explain the fascination with the stars. All you need is an Old Testament and an understanding of Canaanite mythology.

It’s all ‘Jewish’.

I agree that the story of Jesus as the Christ is all Jewish. Their claim to fame. However, I'm guessing that Jesus was in competition with other non Jewish Christs. Other peoples had their own "anointed" men did they not? Also, both Canaanite and Egyptian mythology plays the "sign" of a coming hero predicted by following the stars. So if we look outside the Jewish story what do we see? Lots of "Christs" and followers of the "sign" in their own culture?

How many non-Jewish Christ groups did Paul compete with in the city of Antioch? How long were they teaching about their Christ before the story of Jesus the Jew came along? Maybe there was a Christ group from ancient Egyptian belief which disagreed with Pauls gospel? Why do we assume there was only one group of Jewish people teaching a Christ mythology?

How many religious groups today are looking at the "signs" other than Christianity?

I think the main point re Marcoin is that he was considered a Christian - albeit later a heretical Christian. He does not seem to have rejected the gospel storyline re Jesus - his heresy seems to have been that he considered the gospel storyline re Jesus to have reference to a historical figure who was not Jewish. In which case, it matters not at all how many other christ figures were around and about - its a question of what is the historical core to the gospel Jesus story. Is it a Jewish historical itinerant preacher - or is that historical core a non-Jewish historical figure. A non-Jewish historical figure that was 'adopted' in the gospel storyline by the OT god to become his anointed son ie the baptism story in the gospel of Mark.

If the gospel of Mark is dated early - as done by James Crossley - around late 30s to middle 40 ce - then this heresy by Marcoin does raise some serious questions re just what is the historical core behind the gospel storyline re Jesus. And if Crossley's early date can be maintained - then the reliance upon the apostle Paul for information re the early beginnings of Christianity might be a case of putting the cart before the horse - ultimately, standing still instead of advancing the investigation into early christian beginnings...

One can dismiss Marcoin of course - the christian church has been doing that for a very long time - but if its getting to grips with what early christianity was trying to do - then Marcoin's heresy needs to be re-examined....

dog-on · 02-04-2010, 06:29 AM

I don't think Marcion was actually dismissed. I think he was assimilated, regardless of the later apologetics.

maryhelena · 02-04-2010, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

I don't think Marcion was actually dismissed. I think he was assimilated, regardless of the later apologetics.

Where would one find Marcion's non-Jewish Jesus in Christianity as we know it today? Or do you mean that his followers were later re-converted back to the one true faith - thus admitting the error of their ways, their heresy was just a flight of fancy anyway? Or did it not really matter anyway - the important thing was the gospel walking on water, rising from the dead Jesus - any historical core, a non-Jewish figure or a Jewish figure, of no lasting importance anyway? Perhaps - but its just us crazy folks today that want the finer details re the historical beginnings of the Christian idea...Especially of course, us of little faith - that want the historicity and not the mountain of theology that has covered up whatever happened on the ground...

dog-on · 02-04-2010, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

I don't think Marcion was actually dismissed. I think he was assimilated, regardless of the later apologetics.

Where would one find Marcion's non-Jewish Jesus in Christianity as we know it today? Or do you mean that his followers were later re-converted back to the one true faith - thus admitting the error of their ways, their heresy was just a flight of fancy anyway? Or did it not really matter anyway - the important thing was the gospel walking on water, rising from the dead Jesus - any historical core, a non-Jewish figure or a Jewish figure, of no lasting importance anyway? Perhaps - but its just us crazy folks today that want the finer details re the historical beginnings of the Christian idea...Especially of course, us of little faith - that want the historicity and not the mountain of theology that has covered up whatever happened on the ground...

Why do you continue saying that Marcion promoted a non-Jewish Jesus. Marcion promoted a non-Human Jesus.

Now take a look at fully god/fully man and I thnk it is kinda self evident.

maryhelena · 02-04-2010, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Where would one find Marcion's non-Jewish Jesus in Christianity as we know it today? Or do you mean that his followers were later re-converted back to the one true faith - thus admitting the error of their ways, their heresy was just a flight of fancy anyway? Or did it not really matter anyway - the important thing was the gospel walking on water, rising from the dead Jesus - any historical core, a non-Jewish figure or a Jewish figure, of no lasting importance anyway? Perhaps - but its just us crazy folks today that want the finer details re the historical beginnings of the Christian idea...Especially of course, us of little faith - that want the historicity and not the mountain of theology that has covered up whatever happened on the ground...

Why do you continue saying that Marcion promoted a non-Jewish Jesus. Marcion promoted a non-Human Jesus.

Now take a look at fully god/fully man and I thnk it is kinda self evident.

The following quote is taken from the OP. Marcion, seemingly, used the gospel of Luke, minus the birth narratives, and upheld the idea that the Christ who was in the days of Tiberius was not a Jewish Christ.

Sure, the gospel Jesus storyline is mythological and not historical. However, that fact does not eliminate the very real possibility that there is a historical core to the gospel storyline ie that a historical figure was relevant to the developing ideas of early christians. No, not Jesus minus the mythological elements - that exercise produces a phantom - nothing there at all. It is what is behind that mythological Jesus figure that is relevant for early christian beginnings. Marcion's heresy - a non-Jewish Jesus - or more accurately, a non-Jewish historical core to the gospel Jesus storyline - is a heresy that might well contribute to an investigation into early christian beginnings...

Quote:

Marcion has laid down the position, that Christ who in the days of Tiberius was, by a previously unknown god, revealed for the salvation of all nations, is a different being from Him who was ordained by God the Creator for the restoration of the Jewish state, and who is yet to come.

Marcion must even expunge from the Gospel, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel;" and, "It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs,"--in order, forsooth, that Christ may not appear to be an Israelite.

show_no_mercy · 02-04-2010, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Why do you continue saying that Marcion promoted a non-Jewish Jesus. Marcion promoted a non-Human Jesus.

Now take a look at fully god/fully man and I thnk it is kinda self evident.

The following quote is taken from the OP. Marcion, seemingly, used the gospel of Luke, minus the birth narratives, and upheld the idea that the Christ who was in the days of Tiberius was not a Jewish Christ.

Sure, the gospel Jesus storyline is mythological and not historical. However, that fact does not eliminate the very real possibility that there is a historical core to the gospel storyline ie that a historical figure was relevant to the developing ideas of early christians. No, not Jesus minus the mythological elements - that exercise produces a phantom - nothing there at all. It is what is behind that mythological Jesus figure that is relevant for early christian beginnings. Marcion's heresy - a non-Jewish Jesus - or more accurately, a non-Jewish historical core to the gospel Jesus storyline - is a heresy that might well contribute to an investigation into early christian beginnings...

Quote:

Marcion has laid down the position, that Christ who in the days of Tiberius was, by a previously unknown god, revealed for the salvation of all nations, is a different being from Him who was ordained by God the Creator for the restoration of the Jewish state, and who is yet to come.

Marcion must even expunge from the Gospel, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel;" and, "It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs,"--in order, forsooth, that Christ may not appear to be an Israelite.

Well, as has already been established in this thread, Tertullian is misattributing to Luke what's in Matthew. But that's besides the point.

What we have to establish in order to find the answer to your question is what exactly did Jesus teach? How do we determine that any sort of historical Jesus taught that the Torah was no longer valid? Paul taught the same thing - does this mean that Paul wasn't Jewish? Some (like the Ebionites) claim that Paul was never Jewish. What if some later, Paul influenced Christians, simply attributed their anti-Torah teachings to their "historical" founder, and Marcion simply followed that to its logical conclusion? That only a god superior to the god of the Jews could nullify the Torah - and thus makes sense of Paul's revelation?

Marcion's Jesus was 0% human and 100% god.

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

02-04-2010, 06:29 AM	#56
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	I don't think Marcion was actually dismissed. I think he was assimilated, regardless of the later apologetics.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.