Duvduv

....And what IF "Paulus" was not an actual individual person but a pseudonym for any writer as "The Small One"?????

Chili

. . . "but born of a woman' and 'born under the law" are the most simple of all concepts and it would be typical of Marcion to delete them as with a wooden head and wooden heart he could not listen to the music of words. 'Born of a woman' only means that 'this woman' was 'not human' and so 'not female' either as all females are 'both woman and human' but perhaps more woman than human as opposed to males who are more human than woman. Such a woman is therefore also without sin and most enigmatic until conceived and then first becomes known in the Tree of Knowledge (read her canticle) as heretofore she only ruled over the Tree of Life, or soul, where she was said to be imprisoned by the integrity of human as Joseph-the-upright-Jew..

And then nessessarily her liberation was a direct result from Joseph being "under the law" . . . whereof 'the [swaddling ] cloth to bind and retain the child is in evidence as the law was writ upon the human heart as if in stone so that sin would clash like a hamer on an anvil (sure Nietzsche's anvil, why not), to say not born from just a 'one night stand' as it was for Joseph in Matthew as so really was an Egyption with no cloth to retain.

So you see that the unspoken word conveyed in the Gosples is where the music is at, again, and so is why I suggested that analytic criticism is good only to reinforce unbelieve while missing the message meant to convey . . . which then is also why reading the KJV wherein the lyric message is subdued as much as possible is the wrong version to read.

Let me add here that the Law of Moses was not to stop sin but to convict sinners (humans) of sin so the inner man could 'do his thing.'

A better way to read the Gospels is as if it was Poetry and Prose but without the poetry and so is Gnostic prose only and should never be subjected to analytic criticism as that does not allow for induction of lyric direction.

Please understand that the missing swaddling cloth in Matthew is missing on purpose and so is the absense of the manger and abviously Joseph himself when wisdom (Magi) entered who followed the star of Bethlehem 'inside a mind' as from 'back East' they came where the light of common day is not known nor the lesser lights of the night.

I then here go back to my idea that 'one' (as in each and everyone), is either Gnostic or agnostic with the believer in between and they can be divided between mystic as enriched believer and atheist as impoverished believer.

jakejonesiv

Hi aa5874,

Your asserttion that the epistle to the Galatians had been written 100 years before the time of Marcion, and just happened to have exactly the same text we find in our Bibles today is naive. You are going to need to back up that assertion with some evidence. Please tell me what is the earliest external confirmation that names the epistle "To the Galatians?"

According to the Marcionites, the truth was revealed exclusively to Paul. "With regard to those (the Marcionites) who allege that Paul alone knew the truth, and that to him the mystery was manifested by revelation, ..." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:13:1. This accords quite well with statements in the Pauline epistles, for example Galatians chapter 1. Some believed Paul sits at his right hand of Christ and Marcion at his left in heaven. Origen, Homilies 25.4-5

AA, you should now by now that Marcion's doctrine was dualistic. And it turns out, on closer examination, that this is perfectly in accord with the Marcionite Recension of the Pauline epistles.

Marcion taught that Christianity was a completely new, unanticipated religion; the "Sudden Christ" (Suddenly a Son, suddenly Sent, and suddenly Christ! AM 3.2)
Marcion’s Ephesian/Laodiceans 3:9 does not have εν before τω Θεω. The Creator/Demiurge is ignorant of the administration of the Mystery of Christ. Thus the Marcionite text would translate “which from the beginning of the world has been hidden from the god who created all things.” Tertullian, AM 5.18.1.

Indeed, every time you read the term “God the Father” it is itself a hint toward dualism, since it can only with difficulty be derived from the Jewish scriptures.
Col. 1:13 is explicitly dualistic with opposing "kingdom of darkness" verses the "Kingdom of the Son."

2 Corinthians 4:4 is also explicitly dualistic.

"In whom the god (theos) of this world has blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of the [good] God, should shine unto them." 2 Corinthians 4:4.

We should understand that for the Marcionites, God the Father is wholly wise, benevolent and good, like Ahura Mazda. Evil is produced by the “god of this world”
(think of Angra Mainyu). Indeed, the Jewish scriptures declare that Yahweh produces evil.


The Ten Commandments of Moses were “ the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones” 2 Cor. 3:7. These were given by untrustworthy angels (Gal 1:8;3:19), not the Father of Jesus. The God of this world (2 Cor. 4:4) had screwed things up so badly with laws and decrees (Col. 2:12) that Jesus had to do away with them by nailing them to the cross. “Paul” concluded that “… a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Romans 3:28.


The good God does not judge or punish anyone. “A better god has been discovered, who never takes offence, is never angry, never inflicts punishment, who has prepared no fire in hell, no gnashing of teeth in the outer darkness! He is purely and simply good. “ Tertullian AM 1.27.2. Punishing the souls of men of this flawed world would be like blaming the victim. God the Father of Jesus had compassion for the poor souls previously cast into hell by the jealous god Yahweh who had also ordered the flood and then repented of it.


If the Jews wished to worship their god, that was their affair. But the God who smote and slaughtered Israel's enemies, threatened his own worshipers with dire punishment if they were disobedient, prescribed circumcision for males and odd laws for the governance of daily life, and described himself as jealous, could not be the God of Marcionites.

Marcion and his followers were in agreement with the Jews that there was absolutely no prophecy of Jesus in the Jewish scriptures. Marcion advocated a very literal reading of the Jewish scriptures that ruled out the allegorical and figurative methods by which the proto-catholics found types and prophecies of
Jesus. (For example, Marcion's interpretation of Isaiah 7:14; 8:4 ruled out Jesus because his name was not Emmanuel and he was not warlike, AM 3.14-15).


As Tertullian phrased it, "Our heretic [Marcion] will now have the fullest opportunity of learning the clue of his errors along with the Jew himself, from whom he has borrowed his guidance in this discussion. Since, however, the blind leads the blind, they fall into the ditch together." AM 3.8.1. Who is the anti-Semite here? Tertullian!


Marcion taught that the Jews had their own Messiah, yet to come, but it was not Jesus. For this reason, Marcion with perhaps the aid of Valentinus wrote his own Psalms to be used in liturgy rather than the Davidic psalms of the OT. Marcion's version of Luke 23:2 was "We found this fellow [Jesus] perverting the nation and destroying the law and the prophets". The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis. The Judaic Christ would gather out of dispersion the people of Israel. AM 3.21. In this, he and the Jews agreed. Marcion advocated that Judaism and Christianity had nothing in common. The opponents of Marcion (and his legendary Apostle Paul) were not Jews, but Judaizers.


Now here is a thought to ponder. Paul, the Apostle of the heretics, is the more original. The Paul we find in the canon today is the result of the proto-orthodox appropriating and Judaizing the Paul of the Marcionites.

Jake

aa5874

I really don't understand why you are asking me for evidence when you make claims about Marcion WITHOUT a shred of evidence. You have ZERO confirmation about Marcion and use the writings of Tertullian's "Against Marcion".

Well, in the same "Against Marcion" Tertullian was arguing that the Pauline Epistles were written 100 years earlier.

"Against Marcion" 4.5 Surely you must understand that Tertullian was arguing that ALL the Pauline writings were authentic and written before Paul was supposedly MARTYRED 100 years before Marcion.

You can confirm NOTHING you say about Marcion. You cannot provide a single document written by Marcion when you know that Tertullian used an ANONYMOUS writing and claimed it was written by Marcion.

You should know that at the very same time of writing "Against Marcion" Tertullian was using ANONYMOUS writings thet were wrongly atrributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.


Please CONFIRM what you say about the Marcionites because Tertullian argued in "Against Marcion" that the Pauline writings were authentic and were written before Paul was Martyred 100 years BEFORE Marcion.

jakejonesiv

Dear aa5874
Do you believe Jesus existed? You must, because Tertullian said he did.

Where and when was Paul martyred? How do you know the Pauline epistles are authentic, and that they flowed from the pen of the alleged first century apostle in exactly the form we have them now? Did Tertullian tell you?

When was Paul in Galatia and who SAW him?

But then you wrote that you didn't believe anything Tertullian wrote, so that makes you talk out of both sides of your mouth.

The only consistent thing I can see in your messages is that you will argue for anything in an abrasive manner that will disrupt the normal flow of conversation.

Jake

aa5874

Well, you Believe Tertullian. You actually Believe writings attributed to Tertullian for your evidence of Marcion.

I use the written statements of Tertullian to show he was a Fiction writer or made a lot of mistakes.

Where and when did Marcion find the Epistle to the Galatians? Did Tertullian tell you? How do you know "Against Marcion" is authentic? How do you know what Marcion wrote?

I will not tolerate your unsubstantiated claims about Marcion. You BELIEVE Tertullian but still REFUSE to accept the very same author when he ARGUED that the Pauline writings were written 100 years BEFORE Marcion.


It is you who have a double standard.

I have pointed out to you that there are apologetic sources like Justin Martyr and Hippolytus that CONTRADICT Tertullian's "Against Marcion's" and that it is either ridiculous fiction or Full of Mistakes.

Again, based on Justin Martyr and Hippolytus, Tertullian's claim that Marcion used Galatians is not credible.

stephan huller

aa is a unique personality. It's amazing how seriously I will start taking a discussion and then along comes Mr. Erratic Capitals, and I will be quite upset for a second. And then I think - it's all maya anyway ...

Chili

. . . like a tall reed blowing in the wind or a high-[hobby]-horse rider coming in. Hmmm, reminds me of Paul here who once rode one of those too and could even do 'tricks' on it.

Iskander

I like that one, Chili. It is such a precise summing up.. :thumbs:

Chili

I saw a nice Renaissance painting once of Paul riding his high horse in broad daylight under the high-noon sun when a little streak of light from the side knocked him off the horse that he was riding on. Very expressive, and I should be able to find that and I tried but with no success. But I like Paul and he is my friend.