dog-on

Of course not, Ben.

The fact that the first recorded acknowledgement of said work is in the hands of the man from Pontus just might...

dog-on

and Ben, why is it, do you think, that Paul shows such pure disdain for the Law of his God anyway?

Amaleq13

The fact that Marcion may have been from Pontus does absolutely nothing to support your suggestion.

Pointing out Marcion's suspected homeland doesn't provide any "logistical sense" to your suggestion.

You are the one making vague and unsubstantiated comments.

Ben C Smith

Just might what?

(Sorry. I could not follow the idea. In fact, I am utterly lost as to what your point about Pontus and Galatia is. I asked what the punchline, or point, was, and you said that some possibilities make logistical sense. I asked what location would be logistically infeasible, and you said Kansas. I then asked about the Roman empire as a whole, and you said of course not. I get the feeling something I am being diverted here. Nor am I at all certain what handwaving you were replying to.)

Ben.

Ben C Smith

What has this to do with Pontus and Galatia? Not trying to be evasive or anything; just struggling to understand your point.

Ben.

dog-on

Sorry Ben, you jumped in on a converstion I was having with Amaleq...

Started with my assertion that the "other gospel" Paul refers to in Galatians was the Judaized version....one thing lead to another....

So to clarify,

1. As it is in the hands of Marcion where we first encounter Galatians, and;

2. it seems that Marcion had a slight disdain for (what he considered to be) the Jewish demiurge (Yahweh) and;

3. that Marcion happened to be from Pontus, which happens to be a state that bordered Galatia and;

4. the fact that the writer of this epistle seems to display a loathing for the Laws of the Jewish God and;

5. the fact that it seems that Marcion preached a seperate deity from that of the Jews with regards to the advent of the Savior and;

6. that he, Marcion, had a similar loathing for the Laws of the God of Abraham, (to the extent where later apologists continued to accuse him of the most vile of heretical actions, for such a long time after his death, he who protests to much...) and;

7. that mysteriously a church, which seems to have lasted until possibly the fifth century, (that had enough of a presence that a certain writer needed to let people know that travelers needed to ensure that they were, in fact, entering the correct type of Christian church when venturing to a new town), has left us with a total of "0" extant texts, (when in fact this church probably had the first written and compiled Christian canon);

etc, etc, etc...

Well let's say that such a prima facia case (just had to slip that phrase in here... :Cheeky: ) could lead one to seriously question history as passed down to us by the orthodoxy.

Is this a little more clear?

Ben C Smith

Well, yes, I realized that from the start, but when I read back to see what Pontus and Galatia had to do with anything I found nothing.

Crystal clear (despite my disagreement with it), except for that number 3. I do not think it adds one whit of support to the rest of your case. It is not even a matter of every little bit helps; I think it counts as precisely zero.

Ben.

dog-on

Why don't you think that the fact that Marcion of Pontus, who one day appears in Rome with a group of writings, one of which being the Epistle to the Galatians, that was never previously mentioned by any extant evidence, adds "one whit of support" to my case, considering the proximity of Galatia to Pontus and the fact that this fellow had established churches, (later to be referred to as the Marcionites).

Ben C Smith

I have italicized the relative clauses and other subordinate clauses and boldfaced the independent (main) clause of your question. Something is missing.

If you are asking why I do not think the geographical proximity of Pontus and Galatia adds anything to your case, it is because I cannot follow your reasoning.

On my view, for example (which, at present, is that Paul wrote Galatians and Marcion later read and reused it), it is hardly surprising that somebody from Pontus might be exposed to an epistle originally addressed to Galatia (nor, however, is it surprising that somebody from Pontus might be exposed to an epistle originally addressed to Achaea or Macedonia!) and decide to reuse it.

On your view, on the other hand (which appears to be that Marcion composed Galatians basically from scratch; correct me if I am wrong)... I really have no idea what the proximity of Pontus to Galatia is supposed to mean. Are you assuming that the writer of a pseudonymous epistle (which is what, on your view, Galatians is) is more likely to address it to an adjacent region than either his own region or a nonadjacent region? If so, why? If not, then what exactly does the proximity of Galatia and Pontus have to do with Marcion of Pontus addressing his pseudonymous epistle to Galatia?

Ben.

dog-on

Simply convenience, Ben. Galatia being on the border of Pontus supplies a convenient logistical possibility.

Of course, my reasons for believing that all is not what appears to be re: Galatians is due to what the epistle addresses, not due to whom the epistle is addressed.

How was the mail system in the first or second century Roman Empire?