Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JoeWallack · 07-03-2008, 06:44 AM

JW:
Oh for Christ's sake Ben, this is the source of aa's confusion:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, who is that apostle of the heretics? Marcion or "Paul"?

In Against Marcion by Tertullian, who is referred to as the heretic? Marcion or "Paul"?

Paul.

Ben.

The ironic thing is after you said you would stop talking to me and bid me spend my time instead talking to aa, you have spent most of your time talking to aa.

Moving forward with the External evidence. Last, and least, Irenaeus of Lyons (yes "Lyons"):

The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus

Quote:

Chapter XXVII.—Doctrines of Cerdo and Marcion.

1. Cerdo was one who took his system from the followers of Simon, and came to live at Rome in the time of Hyginus, who held the ninth place in the episcopal succession from the apostles downwards. He taught that the God proclaimed by the law and the prophets was not the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the former was known, but the latter unknown; while the one also was righteous, but the other benevolent.

2. Marcion of Pontus succeeded him, and developed his doctrine. In so doing, he advanced the most daring blasphemy against Him who is proclaimed as God by the law and the prophets, declaring Him to be the author of evils, to take delight in war, to be infirm of purpose, and even to be contrary to Himself. But Jesus being derived from that father who is above the God that made the world, and coming into Judæa in the times of Pontius Pilate the governor, who was the procurator of Tiberius Cæsar, was manifested in the form of a man to those who were in Judæa, abolishing the prophets and the law, and all the works of that God who made the world, whom also he calls Cosmocrator. Besides this, he mutilates the Gospel which is according to Luke, removing all that is written respecting the generation of the Lord, and setting aside a great deal of the teaching of the Lord, in which the Lord is recorded as most dearly confessing that the Maker of this universe is His Father. He likewise persuaded his disciples that he himself was more worthy of credit than are those apostles who have handed down the Gospel to us, furnishing them not with the Gospel, but merely a fragment of it. In like manner, too, he dismembered the Epistles of Paul, removing all that is said by the apostle respecting that God who made the world, to the effect that He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and also those passages from the prophetical writings which the apostle quotes, in order to teach us that they announced beforehand the coming of the Lord.

3. Salvation will be the attainment only of those souls which had learned his doctrine; while the body, as having been taken from the earth, is incapable of sharing in salvation. In addition to his blasphemy against God Himself, he advanced this also, truly speaking as with the mouth of the devil, and saying all things in direct opposition to the truth,—that Cain, and those like him, and the Sodomites, and the Egyptians, and others like them, and, in fine, all the nations who walked in all sorts of abomination, were saved by the Lord, on His descending into Hades, and on their running unto Him, and that they welcomed Him into their kingdom. But the serpent29582958 [Comp. cap. xxv. 3.] which was in Marcion declared that Abel, and Enoch, and Noah, and those other righteous men who sprang29592959 We here follow the amended version proposed by the Benedictine editor. from the patriarch Abraham, with all the prophets, and those who were pleasing to God, did not partake in salvation. For since these men, he says, knew that their God was constantly tempting them, so now they suspected that He was tempting them, and did not run to Jesus, or believe His announcement: and for this reason he declared that their souls remained in Hades.

4. But since this man is the only one who has dared openly to mutilate the Scriptures, and unblushingly above all others to inveigh against God, I purpose specially to refute him, convicting 353 him out of his own writings; and, with the help of God, I shall overthrow him out of those29602960 A promise never fulfilled: comp. book iii. 12, and Euseb., Hist. Eccl., v. 8. discourses of the Lord and the apostles, which are of authority with him, and of which he makes use. At present, however, I have simply been led to mention him, that thou mightest know that all those who in any way corrupt the truth, and injuriously affect the preaching of the Church, are the disciples and successors of Simon Magus of Samaria. Although they do not confess the name of their master, in order all the more to seduce others, yet they do teach his doctrines. They set forth, indeed, the name of Christ Jesus as a sort of lure, but in various ways they introduce the impieties of Simon; and thus they destroy multitudes, wickedly disseminating their own doctrines by the use of a good name, and, through means of its sweetness and beauty, extending to their hearers the bitter and malignant poison of the serpent, the great author of apostasy.2961

JW:
Irenaeus indicates that Marcion's beliefs were inherited. Note that Irenaeus provides no direct evidence that Marcion thought there was any other Gospel. Again, if Marcion, in Rome, was aware of another Gospel, I can't help wondering if it was "Mark".

Joseph

FAITH, n.
Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Ben C Smith · 07-03-2008, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

Oh for Christ's sake Ben, this is the source of aa's confusion....

My sincere thanks for pointing this out. I left more of his wording in the quote box than I intended. This is the exchange as it should have been:

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, who is that apostle of the heretics? Marcion or "Paul"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben

Paul.

Hope that helps, though this is aa5874 we are talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

The ironic thing is after you said you would stop talking to me and bid me spend my time instead talking to aa, you have spent most of your time talking to aa.

1. His posts are clear; clearly mistaken most of the time, but clear. Yours are unclear. Even those whose views most closely match your own (Neil Godfrey, for example) have a trouble parsing you.

2. His demeanor is consistent, even, and predictable. You flare up in weird ways at the silliest provocations.

3. The expressions in his posts are the kinds of expressions that most people use, and his capitalization is either conventional or used for emphasis. Your expressions are usually your own inventions, and your capitalization is almost Germanic. Your posts, in short, are almost painful to read, even when I agree with their contents.

4. He does not know any better. You do.

Ben.

aa5874 · 07-03-2008, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Marcion rejected Paul.

Incorrect, as has been shown you before.

You are spouting nonsense. Let's deal with the facts as presented and not your imagination.

Marcion rejected Paul, according to Tertullian, and I will give the passage so everyone can see that you are erroneous.

Tertullian in Against Marcion

Quote:

Now, since the Acts of the Apostles thus AGREE with Paul, it becomes apparent why you REJECT them.

It is because they declare no other God than the Creator, and prove Christ to belong to no other God than the Creator, whilst the promise of the Holy Ghost is shown to have been fulfilled in no other document than the Acts of the Apostles.

Marcion rejected Paul, according to Tertullian.

And Paul could NOT be an apostle of Marcion, if you claim Paul was before Marcion.

Quote:

Paul was not regarded as a Marcionite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Correct. Paul came before Marcion, and therefore could not have been a Marcionite.

Ben.

You cannot SHOW that Paul came before Marcion.

Your assertion is worthless.

It is of very little use to use the words of Paul to verify or confirm Paul's own whereabouts.

The Church writers ALL failed to recognise that the Paul in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus was different to the Paul in other Epistles.

The history of Paul is not credible as given by Church writers, it would appear they really could not determine or confirm the AUTHENTICITY of the Pauline Epistles.

dog-on · 07-03-2008, 07:54 AM

AA, maybe Marcion is Paul and wrote the some of the Epistles himself, (especially Galatians

).

aa5874 · 07-03-2008, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

AA, maybe Marcion is Paul and wrote the some of the Epistles himself, (especially Galatians

).

No way. Paul was fabricated by the Church writers to distort the history of Jesus believers.

Paul is fiction.

The authors of the Pauline Epistles were never converted to Christianity by a bright light after being blinded. These authors never had any revelations from a dead and resurrected Jesus.

These authors did not die during the time of Nero, THEY were ALL alive probably from Titus and maybe up to CONSTANTINE.

Ben C Smith · 07-03-2008, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Marcion rejected Paul, according to Tertullian, and I will give the passage so everyone can see that you are erroneous.

Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.2.7:

Now if even to this degree the Acts of the Apostles [apostolorum acta, neuter plural] are in agreement with Paul [Paulo, masculine singular], it becomes evident why you reject them [ea, neuter plural].

Your reading of this passage is impossible. The neuter plural pronoun for them cannot refer back to the masculine singular noun for Paul; it has to refer back to the neuter plural noun for acts.

You can check this with any Latinist you trust.

Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.1.2:

So then, shipmaster out of Pontus, ...will you please tell us under what bill of lading you accepted Paul as an apostle [apostolum Paulum]?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And Paul could NOT be an apostle of Marcion.

Again: Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.14.9:

If Marcion has of set purpose cut out these passages, what is this exclamation his apostle [apostolus eius] makes?

Ben.

dog-on · 07-03-2008, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

AA, maybe Marcion is Paul and wrote the some of the Epistles himself, (especially Galatians

).

No way. Paul was fabricated by the Church writers to distort the history of Jesus believers.

Paul is fiction.

The authors of the Pauline Epistles were never converted to Christianity by a bright light after being blinded. These authors never had any revelations from a dead and resurrected Jesus.

These authors did not die during the time of Nero, THEY were ALL alive probably from Titus and maybe up to CONSTANTINE.

None of this precludes the possibility that Marcion wrote some of the Epistles though, does it?

aa5874 · 07-03-2008, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Marcion rejected Paul, according to Tertullian, and I will give the passage so everyone can see that you are erroneous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.2.7:

Now if even to this degree the Acts of the Apostles [apostolorum acta, neuter plural] are in agreement with Paul [Paulo, masculine singular], it becomes evident why you reject them [ea, neuter plural].

Your reading of this passage is impossible. The neuter plural pronoun for them cannot refer back to the masculine singular noun for Paul; it has to refer back to the neuter plural noun for acts.

Complete nonsense.

Acts of the Apostles AGREE with Paul.

Marcion REJECTED THEM.

Marcion REJECTED Acts of the Apostles and Paul.

Acts of the Apostles and Paul declare no other God than the Creator.

Marcion declared another God greater than the Creator.

Acts of the Apostles and Paul show that Christ belong to no other God but the Creator.

Marcion declared that Christ belonged to another God greater than the Creator.

Marcion rejected Acts of the Apostles and Paul.

Marcion's Christ was a phantom, according to Tertullian

The Christ of Acts of the Apostles and Paul was of the seed of David.

Marcion rejected Acts of the Apostles and Paul.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Tertullian, Against Marcion 5.1.2:

So then, shipmaster out of Pontus, ...will you please tell us under what bill of lading you accepted Paul as an apostle [apostolum Paulum]?

But Tertullian continued in the same book to confound you.

Against Marcion 5.1

Quote:

I deny him, to compel you to the proof of him, I deny him to convince you that HE IS MINE.

Marcion rejected Paul. Tertullian accepted Paul.

And Tertullian clearly indicates the the aim of Marcion in Against Macion 5.21

Quote:

To this epistle alone did its brevity avail to protect it against the falsifying hands of Marcion.

I wonder, however, when he did received (into his Apostolicon) this letter which was written but to one man, that he REJECTED the two epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus, which all treat of ecclesiastical discipline.

His aim, I suppose, to carry out his INTERPOLATING process even to the number of (ST.PAUL'S) epistles.

Marcion REJECTED Paul and either discarded or interpolated his epistles, according to Tertullian.

Ben C Smith · 07-03-2008, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Complete nonsense.

Have you consulted a trusted Latinist yet? The text is very clear.

Quote:

Marcion rejected Paul. Tertullian accepted Paul.

Both Marcion and Tertullian accepted Paul, according to Tertullian. They disagreed on interpreting Paul, and on the exact contents of his epistles.

Ben.

Ben C Smith · 07-03-2008, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

And Tertullian clearly indicates the the aim of Marcion in Against Macion 5.21

Quote:

To this epistle alone did its brevity avail to protect it against the falsifying hands of Marcion.

I wonder, however, when he did received (into his Apostolicon) this letter which was written but to one man, that he REJECTED the two epistles to Timothy and the one to Titus, which all treat of ecclesiastical discipline.

His aim, I suppose, to carry out his INTERPOLATING process even to the number of (ST.PAUL'S) epistles.

You just proved that, according to Tertullian, Marcion accepted the Pauline epistle to Philemon. That is what I mean when I say that Marcion accepted Paul. Obviously he did not accept him into his clubhouse, into his yacht, or into his Ferrari. He accepted (some of) the Pauline epistles, and their author as an apostle.

Ben.

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

07-03-2008, 07:54 AM	#94
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	AA, maybe Marcion is Paul and wrote the some of the Epistles himself, (especially Galatians ).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.