aa5874

Tertullian's "On the Flesh of Christ" contradicts the reconstructed Marcion's Gospel. Please, note, the reconstructed version of Marcion's Gospel may have been been based on erroneous or incredible information.

Garbage in Garbage out.

Tertullian in " On The flesh of Christ" clearly show that Marcion's Jesus was described as a phantom and did NOThave a physical body.

Tertullian's "On The Flesh of Christ" Marcion's Jesus was imaginary.

How could an imaginary being be captured and crucified?

angelo

No historians of the time mention Jesus. Suetonius (65-135) does not. Pliny the Younger only mentions Christians (Paulists) with no comment of Jesus himself. Tacitus mentions a Jesus, but it is likely that after a century of Christian preaching Tacitus was just reacting to these rumours, or probably talking about one of the many other Messiah's of the time. Josephus, a methodical, accurate and dedicated historian of the time mentions John the Baptist, Herod, Pilate and many aspects of Jewish life but does not mention Jesus. (The Testimonium Flavianum has been shown to be a third century Christian fraud). He once mentions a Jesus, but gives no information other than that he is a brother of a James. Jesus was not an unusual name, either. Justus, another Jewish historian who lived in Tiberias (near Kapernaum, a place Jesus frequented) did not mention Jesus nor any of his miracles. It is only in the evidence of later writers, writing about earlier times, that we find a Jesus. What is more surprising (Jesus could simply have been unknown to local historians) is that academics note that the gospels themselves do not allude to first-hand historical sources, either!

Source Google.

mod note: Google is not the source. This is from http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/chri...y_nojesus.html - Vexen Crabtree

Littlejohn

..read in an italian forum:


First user:

".. Potreste indicarmi una serie di accademici che negano l'esistenza storica di Gesù Cristo?
Grazie anticipatamente"

Could you tell me a number of academics who deny the historical existence of Jesus Christ?
Thanks in advance

..............

Second user:

".. Viventi credo nessuno.
Cordiali Saluti,"

I think anyone living.
Respectful greetings

..................

Third user:

".. 'Viventi credo nessuno'.

Infatti se ci provano vengono accoppati sul posto! "

'I think anyone living'

Indeed, if they trying are suppressed on the place!

.............

Fourth user:

".. Ed aggiungo che se dovessero sopravvivere, perderebbero il posto... "

And I add that if they survive, would lose the 'work's place'...



Thus go on the things in "quiet" Italy....sigh..


Littlejohn
.

andrewcriddle

There may be a real issue as to whether Marcion's position is entirely consistent. However I don't think you can argue from the claim that Marcion, in order to be fully consistent, should have denied the reality of Jesus' death to the claim that Marcion did deny the reality of Jesus' death.

Given the centrality of Paul's letters to Marcion's thought, the death of Jesus should be expected to also be important to him.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

Not maybe. There are real issues.

I can argue that Marcion's Jesus was imaginary based on Tertullian's "On the Flesh of Christ" and "Against Marcion"

And, the letters of Paul were used against Marcion in "Against Marcion by Tertullian.

In the letters the writer called Paul claimed Jesus died and was bodily resurrected, and was seen by over 500 people.

There is no indication anywhere that Marcion's imaginary Jeus was crucified, died or resurrected.

Look at "Against Marcion" 3.8

LogicandReason

Interesting line there! Roger, if you are still on the thread, I would enjoy your explanation of this valid criticism.

angelo

“The four Gospels that eventually made it into the New Testament, for example, are all anonymous, written in the third person about Jesus and his companions. None of them contains a first-person narrative ("One day, when Jesus and I went into Capernaum..."), or claims to be written by an eyewitness or companion of an eyewitness. Why then do we call them Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Because sometime in the second century, when proto-orthodox Christians recognized the need for apostolic authorities, they attributed these books to apostles (Matthew and John) and close companions of apostles (Mark, the secretary of Peter; and Luke, the travelling companion of Paul). Most scholars today have abandoned these identifications, and recognize that the books were written by otherwise unknown but relatively well-educated Greek-speaking (and writing) Christians during the second half of the first century.”

Source still from............ http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/chri...y_nojesus.html

angelo

Futher........

God-Man myths were very popular and pre-dated the God-Man of Jesus by thousands of years. They all shared a common format which (or "vegetation myths") is that the Son of God has 12 disciples, and is betrayed and killed by a traitor. Popular myths such as the virgin birth, miracles, curing the blind and ill are also familiar and common aspects of these myths. As such, such events were assumed to be true of the historical Jesus. These myths became interwoven amongst the stories of someone who might have been real. Many Jewish sayings became attributed to this character, and sayings of John the Baptist too. Stories about the disciples were assumed to be true and not simply symbolic stories as the original gnostic Christians believed. Once people wrote pseudipigraphically under the names of the disciples people accepted them as true too. The rest is history, but initially is based on mistaken pseudo-historical accounts.

from same source.

angelo

All the above references are similar to Freke and Gandy's work of The Jesus Mysteries 1999. published by element. www.thorsonselement.com

IamJoseph

The problem here is - Paul and Jesus never met, Paul himself says his info is not derived by man but a revelation he experienced alone [read: no proof], we have no contemporary writings of Paul [read: subject to doctorings in Europe]; and the writings are in Latin [Jews used only greek, aramaic and Hebrew]. Paul was expelled for his views by the early Nazerites - a group which followed Jesus as a revered figure. Christianity spread like wild fire - in Europe - with no questions asked and none allowed to!