Freethought & Rationalism Archive

arnoldo · 05-01-2009, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

. . See a treatment of Galatians here for example:

http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/eysingsp.html

I read the article. . . was there something in particular in it you found interesting? Do you agree with G.A van den Bergh van Eysinga's statement below.

Quote:

. For the oldest traces of the formation of a Canon are to be found in the heretic Marcion. . . . According to Tertullian, Marcion in his conflict with the Right of his own days appealed to one Gospel and a collection of ton Pauline letters. The Gnostics more than any one needed a new sacred book, because they did not recognise the Old Testament as a revelation. . .

The Catholics followed the example of the heretics and took over their canon, but they attached it to the Old Testament and modified the contents both of the Gospel and Epistles. If Marcion had used a single anonymous Gospel, the Church recognised no less than four, under the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the first certain traces of which are to be found in Irenaeus (c 180 A.D.). . . And whereas the opponents of the heretics have always maintained that Marcion mutilated and curtailed the Apostle's letters, it appears from more than one passage that, on the contrary, he possessed a more original reading of the letters than that which stands in our own canonical edition. . .

Everything, therefore, points to the origin of Paulinism in Gnostic sources. It does not emanate from Palestine. .
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/eysingsp.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

And the Dutch Radical approach in general here:
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/detering.html

Do you agree with Herman Detering's parroting of G.A van den Bergh van Eysinga's statement?

Quote:

Because of the factors already mentioned I am of the opinion that accepting a "Marcionite School" as the cradle of the "Pauline Epistles" is preferable to accepting a Pauline one. Contrary to the latter, the former is undoubtedly a historical fact. The un-Marcionite passages in the Pauline Epistles can as a rule be accounted for as Catholic revisions. In my opinion it is quite conceivable that Marcion and his pupils tried to solve the problems in their congregations on the basis of documents which obtained their authority from the legendary Marcionite parish patron Paul.
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/detering.html

And if so what is your opinion on the relationship between Marcion and the Pauline writings?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Take two radical readings and call me in the morning.

The writings were "radical" only in their lack of understanding.

rlogan · 05-01-2009, 11:40 PM

Golly gee - do you think I would generally agree with the papers I cited? Well, no - I picked them randomly from a hat. I didn't actually agree with the stuff you quoted here and I am shocked that I have associated myself with it. Maybe I should read the papers I cite as references in the future.

What do you think of my new idea? Or should I have you read them for me and tell me about them?

**********************

Lack of understanding what? You don't get free blustering on this site, champ.

Cheers. It was a silly post.

Toto · 05-02-2009, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
....

What do you object to about this statement? It is recognized by everyone that the heretic Marcion was the first to try to put together a canon, that the Marcionites and the Gnostics did not recognize the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures or the LXX.

It may be that Marcion used a more original version of Paul's letters, and the orthodox church added to them; or the orthodox had a more original version and Marcion substracted what he did not agree with; or some combination. Do you think that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of one of these options?

Solo · 05-02-2009, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Another possibility is that the text of Paul's letter or letters could have been changed to eliminate the idea that he was married.

Perhaps then, as I was explaining just the other day, Paul's letters as we know them today are mutilated journals and manuals for bee-keepers.

Quote:

1 Cr 7:7-8 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.

......

1 Cr 7:34 There is difference [also] between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please [her] husband.

1 Cr 7:37 Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well.

Do not be fooled by the twists of the later International Hierarchical Brotherhood of Pedophiles, aka the Roman Catholic Church, which have only one purpose: to create theology out of beeswax optimizing the opportunities to molest altar boys.

Jiri

arnoldo · 05-02-2009, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Golly gee - do you think I would generally agree with the papers I cited? Well, no - I picked them randomly from a hat. I didn't actually agree with the stuff you quoted here and I am shocked that I have associated myself with it. Maybe I should read the papers I cite as references in the future.

What do you think of my new idea? Or should I have you read them for me and tell me about them?

**********************

Lack of understanding what? You don't get free blustering on this site, champ.

Cheers. It was a silly post.

Fine, since you earlier made the profound statment;

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

There was no Paul . . Take two radical readings and call me in the morning.

And the "radical readings' simply state that Marcion invented the Pauline letters can you prove that Marcion actually existed?

arnoldo · 05-02-2009, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

. . .
It may be that Marcion used a more original version of Paul's letters, and the orthodox church added to them; or the orthodox had a more original version and Marcion substracted what he did not agree with; or some combination. Do you think that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of one of these options?

According to the following source neither of you options is entirely correct. .

Quote:

The first two publications which prompted me to return to Marcion was John J Clabeaux's 1983 dissertation. . .Clabeaux established that Marcion revised only lightly the authoritative, pre-Marcionite Greek text of Paul used and accepted by the ancient Catholic congregation of Rome.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1584829

Huon · 05-02-2009, 08:49 AM

"Was Paul married ?" asks also the question "can a priest be married ?", at least to the RCC. Here is an answer :
1 Timothy 3 NIV
Overseers and Deacons
1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer [a], he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.
8 Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.
11 In the same way, their wives [b] are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
12A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus.

[a] Traditionally bishop
[b] Or way, deaconesses

Note the shyness of the translation : an over-seer is in greek epi-scopos -> a bishop !

1 Corinthians 9 NIV
The Rights of an Apostle
5 Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas ?

Luke 4, 38-39 :
4:38 And he rose up from the synagogue, and entered into the house of Simon. And Simon’s wife’s mother was holden with a great fever; and they besought him for her. 4:39 And he stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her: and immediately she rose up and ministered unto them.

Here, Simon is Peter. He has a wife.

rlogan · 05-02-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Golly gee - do you think I would generally agree with the papers I cited? Well, no - I picked them randomly from a hat. I didn't actually agree with the stuff you quoted here and I am shocked that I have associated myself with it. Maybe I should read the papers I cite as references in the future.

What do you think of my new idea? Or should I have you read them for me and tell me about them?

**********************

Lack of understanding what? You don't get free blustering on this site, champ.

Cheers. It was a silly post.

Fine, since you earlier made the profound statment;

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

There was no Paul . . Take two radical readings and call me in the morning.

And the "radical readings' simply state that Marcion invented the Pauline letters can you prove that Marcion actually existed?

Sorry, Kid -

You are the one coming out blustering about the papers I cited having no understanding.

Still waiting on you to back that up. Nobody elected you (other than yourself) to some kind of throne where I need to grovel at your feet.

So when you have something constructive to add or question specifically - by all means I will engage. But at the moment you are so full of yourself there isn't much point in it, is there?

Now you have a nice day. This isn't meant in a mean spirit - just frankness.

arnoldo · 05-02-2009, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Sorry, Kid -

You are the one coming out blustering about the papers I cited having no understanding.

You cited the papers for a reason, right? So if a person actually takes time to read them and then points out that the papers basically state that Paul didn't exist since Marcion wrote Paul's letters how is that blustering (and not merely projecting)? Maybe I overlooked a part in the papers which states that Marcion existed due to his name being mentioned by another author in the second, third, or fourth century?:huh:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Still waiting on you to back that up. Nobody elected you (other than yourself) to some kind of throne where I need to grovel at your feet.

Again, please stop projecting these negative sentiments, as I have no desire to sit on a throne and have people grovel at my feet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

So when you have something constructive to add or question specifically - by all means I will engage. But at the moment you are so full of yourself there isn't much point in it, is there?

I simply asked you how the papers you cited accepted the fact that Marcion was a historical person? Was it based on textual, archaelogical and/or a consensus of historians that he existed?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlogan

Now you have a nice day. This isn't meant in a mean spirit - just frankness.

I also frankly wish you to have a nice day.

Toto · 05-02-2009, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

. . .
It may be that Marcion used a more original version of Paul's letters, and the orthodox church added to them; or the orthodox had a more original version and Marcion substracted what he did not agree with; or some combination. Do you think that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of one of these options?

According to the following source neither of you options is entirely correct. .

Quote:

The first two publications which prompted me to return to Marcion was John J Clabeaux's 1983 dissertation. . .Clabeaux established that Marcion revised only lightly the authoritative, pre-Marcionite Greek text of Paul used and accepted by the ancient Catholic congregation of Rome.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1584829

I gave 3 options that cover all possibilities. :constern02:

I don't have access to that full article right now, (there is a brief summary here) but the quote indicates that option 1 is mostly correct.

Are you aware that this is compatible with rlogan's position? If Marcion had the earliest copies, he might have written them himself, or written them under "inspiration" from Paul's "spirit," which seems to have been an acceptable practice then. Are you following the arguement?

How do we know Marcion existed? His enemies spent a lot of time attacking him. We only know so much about him through their condemnation.

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

05-01-2009, 11:40 PM	#12
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	Golly gee - do you think I would generally agree with the papers I cited? Well, no - I picked them randomly from a hat. I didn't actually agree with the stuff you quoted here and I am shocked that I have associated myself with it. Maybe I should read the papers I cite as references in the future. What do you think of my new idea? Or should I have you read them for me and tell me about them? ********************** Lack of understanding what? You don't get free blustering on this site, champ. Cheers. It was a silly post.

05-02-2009, 08:49 AM	#17
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	"Was Paul married ?" asks also the question "can a priest be married ?", at least to the RCC. Here is an answer : 1 Timothy 3 NIV Overseers and Deacons 1 Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer [a], he desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7 He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap. 8 Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9 They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons. 11 In the same way, their wives [b] are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything. 12A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well. 13Those who have served well gain an excellent standing and great assurance in their faith in Christ Jesus. [a] Traditionally bishop [b] Or way, deaconesses Note the shyness of the translation : an over-seer is in greek epi-scopos -> a bishop ! 1 Corinthians 9 NIV The Rights of an Apostle 5 Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas ? Luke 4, 38-39 : 4:38 And he rose up from the synagogue, and entered into the house of Simon. And Simon’s wife’s mother was holden with a great fever; and they besought him for her. 4:39 And he stood over her, and rebuked the fever; and it left her: and immediately she rose up and ministered unto them. Here, Simon is Peter. He has a wife.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.