Toto

This is false. You must have missed some prior posts from Stephan Huller

I have tried to explain to you that all ancient history is based on probability. The scholars who study Marcion (there are not very many) consider that the heresiologists are testifying against their interest and have no motive to invent a character like Marcion. There is no mythic archetype involved here. It is possible that there was no Marcion, but that there was a Marcionite movement, and Marcion was invented to personify it - but what difference would that make?

But you have not come up with a coherent response to these points. Do you understand how ancient history is done? Why do you think the reports of Marcion are all completely unreliable? What would it mean if there were a concerted effort to invent a heretic?

At least say something interesting instead of just playing that broken record.

The Jesus mythicist position does not rely on this. Doherty's particular theory relies on the Pauline letters originating in the first century, but other mythcist theories do not. Even Doherty's theory would not be weakened if the Pauline letters were patchwork compositions.

I imagine that it feeds your ego to see yourself as the lone prophet preaching the Truth to the unwashed masses, who would never see the obvious otherwise. But you really don't know what you are talking about, so your attempts are not going to be successful.

mountainman

Ephrem the Syrian was an orthodox heresiological profile who, on the basis of his production of pseudo-historical polemic in "Against Mani", cant be trusted as a source of history.

Marcion is huller's hobby horse. He keeps riding this hobbyhorse as if we hadn't heard, and as if no one has replied.

How convenient. Of course these people could be very wrong.

Duvduv

What evidence is there to say that "Marcion" was nothing more than a bogeyman in the empire no different than a Ron Paul is against the Republican Party, and was turned into the Big Bad Guy in utter confusion?!

Duvduv

The issue, Toto, is not what YOU personally feel, but rather how the conventional wisdom thinks. And the conventional wisdom talks about Marcion as if his existence in the 2nd century is a foregone conclusion - when it isn't.........

aa5874

Ephrem's Three Proses "Against Marcion" contradicts the very history of the Church attributed to Eusebius, Irenaeus and Tertullian and you say that Ephrem cannot be trusted.

How is it all of a sudden you don't trust writings that contradict Eusebius, Irenaeus and Tertullian??

Writings that contradict those attributed to Eusebius, Irenaeus and Tertullian are for more likely to be credible.

If you believe the Roman Church wrote "Against Heresies" attributed to Irenaeus and "Against Marcion" attributed to Tertullian then it is highly likely that the Church did NOT write "Against Marcion" attributed to Ephrem.

outhouse

Why does there have to be a need to find a conspiracy here?


We have people writing about how they disliked him, why would someone fabricate such a extensive persona?

Duvduv

Outhouse, it is simply a question of evidence. If you want to take on faith the uncorroborated claims of the winners who established the system, or the monks in monasteries who were the exclusive repositories of all sorts of manuscripts, that's your prerogative.
The conventional wisdom does that and so can you.
Alternatively there is a critical examination of the context and content of the writings of apologists, which is in ahort supply.
For all the ink spilled on this or that epistle, and interpolations etc., virtually nothing similar is done in challenging the conventional wisdom about a Justin, Irenaeus or a Eusebius in terms of context and content.

aa5874

You will also take on faith your uncorroborated sources for your arguments.

Jaybees

I can think of no better evidence for the existence of a cult leader (and the cult) than by the fact that the writings about him are all hostile.

If there were a single, authentic, contemporary writing about Jesus by his enmies that would go far toward proving that a Jesus actually existed.

outhouse

When much of this written, there was no system. They were not the winners yet.



Just out of curiosity, do you claim Marcion was fabricated 150 CE or much later. he was never a Bishop who had such a strange view of teh OT god, they bad mouthed him for years?