Bernard Muller

Jake,
I am not mining this thread. Everything on my blog is my own stuff. Many times, I write my blog post first, then I post it on FRDB.
I consider myself a critical thinker also. Why would critical thinking mean obligatorily a fabricated Paul and gnostic Marcion starting Christianity?
All of that can happen with only wording written long after their disappearance.

Cordially, Bernard

aa5874

Paul was NOT used by any groups in the 1st and 2nd century. It was the author of the short gMark whose story was used by many groups.

No author of the Canon used a single ten-word phrase from the Pauline writings but the short gMark was copied by other authors virtually word-for-word.

The author of the long gMark story used so much of the short gMark that it was named the Gospel according to Mark.

The author of gMatthew did use virtually all of the short gMark but invented additional "details".

Even, the author of gLuke used the short gMark word-for-word in some instances.

The pattern is extremely clear.

The short Markan Jesus story was the story that had the most influence on the Canonised authors.

The supposed Paul wrote 13 books and preached all over in major cities of the the Roman Empire and had ZERO influence on all the authors of the Canon.

The author of the short gMark is unknown and wrote ONLY 16 chapters but authors of the Canon used virtually the Entire story of the short gMark.

Duvduv

AA, I guess you can move on to some discussion about the short GLuke and the history not only of interpolation in the NT, but also of the assorted patristic writings, etc. to describe how this movement emerged after Constantine.

Heck, we might as well take a re-examination as to whether the so-called Nicaean Council ever existed in the first place, or if it was what old Eusebius said it was. How do we know that in 325 it wasn't simply a meeting of clergy of various religions (later described as "Christian" bishops) trying to work out something to be offered as the religion of the new regime?!

Then there is the good old Sinaiticus. Has it been examined for changes, alterations, etc.? Isn't it funny how scholars will accept everything provided them by the Church as if it were empirical evidence of a Christian religion as more or less claimed by the Church?

jakejonesiv

Hey Bernard,

Fair enough. I have mischaracterized your position. My bad. You bring a valuable, more traditional, perspective to the discussion.

Jake

jakejonesiv

Dear aa5874, you are just like the rest of us. You choose to believe that the Sinaticus manuscript of gMark represents the earliest Christian writing. You malappropriately call it short GMark, blithely confusing the short ending of Mark (at 16:8) with the text of the entire gospel.

And please note you often qualify that as the earliest CANONIZED text. Why would you care if it were canonized unless you were a Churchman?

And what else do you believe? You believe in the writings of Justin Martyr even though they are known only from a single 14th century text.

Oh yes, sometimes you believe P46 and sometimes you do not depending on the argument of the moment.



Jake

jakejonesiv

:notworthy:I agree again.

aa5874

No, No, No, No!!!! I am certainly not like you and many others. I deal with the written statements from antiquity. It is the "witness statements" that are fundamental in any investigation.

Evidence from antiquity is primary. Expert opinion is secondary.

You understand exactly what I mean by short gMark.

The short gMark=the version of gMark that ends at the 8th verse of the 16th chapter.

There is absolutely no confusion because I have identified that the short gMark is found in the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codices.


Your statement is Absolutely irrelevant to the dating of Paul. It is a fact that the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codices are considered the earliest complete NT Canon.

What is the date of the manuscripts of Marcion's 10 Epistles that you believe he had? There is not even a manuscript.

And, again you do not understand what is meant by "hostile witnesses".

Again, you do not understand the difference between the "truth" and "evidence".

My argument is based on the PRESENT EXISTING evidence NOT on what I believe OR imagine to be the truth.

My argument may be modified or overturned with new DATA.

You have NO new Data.

The Pauline letters were composed LONG AFTER Marcion was dead or After c 180 CE based on the PRESENT Existing DATA.

jakejonesiv

The Pauline Christians imitated the entire cosmic drama of Christ's crucifixion death, burial, and resurrection. "I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" Gal. 2:20. The crucifixion was portrayed in public performance (Gal 3:1). Bill Storage suggested the scenes with a brick background on the Door Panels of Santa Sabina indicate a passion play performed in front of a city wall.


Paul bears the stigmata. "Henceforth let no man trouble me; for I bear on my body the marks (gk. stigmata) of Jesus." (Galatians 6:17, cf 4:13). Paul's authority, to be received as Christ Jesus himself (4:14), derives from the marks of Jesus (Gal. 6:17b) he bears in his body; the wounds of crucifixion. “Paul” himself is the "incarnation" of the heavenly Jesus Christ; God, it is claimed, had chosen him thusly, to reveal Christ in him from the womb. See Ensminger, Paul the Stigmatic.

Alfred Loisy (Les Mystères payens et le mystère chrétien, Paris, 1930) concluded that mythe et rite (myth and rite) correspond; adherents of the Greek Mysteries (e.g. The Eleusinian Mysteries) and Pauline Christianity both participated in cultic re-enactments of the core myths of the respective mysteries. This is a very important observation, and agrees with observations already made from examining the Pauline corpus itself.

Marcion compared Jesus to the Theophany of God that appeared to Abraham. Obviously, neither one was a literal human being. To see Tertullian’s absurd rebuttal, see Adv. Marc. Book 3, chap IX.

Marcion's Docetic opinions were countered by Tertullian's Reductio ad Absurdum.

"Indeed, if it was not flesh (upon the cross), but a phantom of flesh (and a phantom is but spirit, and so the spirit breathed its own self out, and departed as it did so), no doubt the phantom departed, when the spirit which was the phantom departed: and so the phantom and the spirit disappeared together, and were nowhere to be seen. Nothing therefore remained upon the cross, nothing hung there, after "the giving up of the ghost;" Tertullian: Against Marcion Book. 4, chapter 42."

It is a conception of Jesus as existing in the spiritual world just outside our own, un ordre symbolique. Jesus interacts in our world, but not fully. Jesus is plain and comprehensible only to those of insight. Ritual reenactment of portions of the myth seems to be a common point in the mystery religions. Christ was crucified in the myth. This was portrayed in the ritual reenactment of the ordeal of the cult figure; his myth of life, death at the cross, and rebirth as a miraculous illusion.

Those who were "in Christ" (the pnuematic in late Gnostic terminology) in the beginning (Eph. 1:4) are those redeemed. The Redeemer in Gnostic myth, (Christos/Chrestos), descends incognito through the spheres, and fools the archons by taking on the appearance of the beings appropriate to each realm, and gains passage through each Archonic gate by means of secret passwords. When he emerges from the last gate, he begins to preach, and is put to death in ignorance by the demiurge and his minions (cf. 1 Cor. 2:8).

Those united with the descended god were deemed to have participated in the cosmic drama of suffering (Rom 8:17), crucifixion, death (Gal. 2:20; Rev 13:8), burial (Romans 6:4), resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6). The Christ cult initiates acted out the divine drama in rites. It is this shared experience (myth acted out in rites) instead of an historical founder, that form the common basis of understanding among the Pauline Christians.

We know that many of the pagan and mystery religions acted out their myths. And vice versa, the rites of the cult, as acted out by the initiates, were attributed to the gods. Think of it as a feedback loop.

A few examples: we know from Aristophenes, The Frog, and the Homeric Hymn to Demeter that the initiates of the Eleusian mysteries enacted Demeter's search for Persephone by torchlight and the shared the bitter draught of Barley groats.

Another example: According to Apuleius, The Golden Ass (Metamorphoses), Book 11, when Lucius, after being saved from his assine condition, is initiated into the Mysteries of Isis. He undergoes a nocturnal death experience:

"I approached the confines of death. I trod the threshold of Proserpine; and borne through the elements I returned. At midnight I saw the Sun shining in all his glory. I approached the gods below and the gods above, and I stood beside them, and I worshipped them." 11.23.

Lucian experiences the direct manifestation of the Regina Caeli (Queen of Heaven).

Isis promises him "You shall live blessed. You shall live glorious under my guidance; and when you have traveled you full length of time, and you go down into death, there also, on that hidden side of earth, you shall dwell in the Elysian Fields and frequently adore my favors."

Now, if the Mithraic initiates share a cultic meal, and they say that Mithras also shares a meal with the Sun before ascending in his fiery chariot, is this not the intersection of myth and rite?

Is Christ really present in the wafer and the wine of Mass? The answer is from a rational perspective, no. But for the people who, even today, really believe in it, the boundaries between heaven (where Jesus is believed to sit at the right hand of God) and earth (where the “real” presence of Jesus is believed to manifest itself in the Eucharist) are blurred. Within the cultus, the distinction between the logical and illogical vanishes, even the evidence of the senses are irrelevant (still looks and tastes like wafer and wine). Has not the recipient of the sacraments entered a world of myth?

Jake Jones IV

jakejonesiv

Only a infallible person or an ultracrepidarian could make such a statement.

aa5874

What absolute illogical statement of yours!! You appear not to know the meaning of "infallible"

It is universally accepted at all levels that ordinary persons, non-experts, can examine written statements for credibility and historical accuracy.


It is universally accepted that ordinary persons, non-experts, can detect false statements and can draw logical conclusions based on data.

One does not have to be an expert to read what people wrote yesterday about Paul and the Pauline letters.

It is a product of imagination that Marcion had 10 Epistles.

The Epistles were composed long AFTER Marcion was dead.

Even, a 3rd century writer, Arnobius, when writing "Against the Heathens" seem completely unaware of Paul and the Pauline letters.