Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 10:48 AM

Yeah but citing the Church Father's in this way is like taking the testimony of the ghetto wife at face value that her husband's other woman is a hoe. You're allowing our understanding to be defined by the enemies of “heresy.” Maybe Simonians (whatever the fuck that means) or a Simonian said something like what you are saying in the right or wrong circumstance in the same way that a husband or wife say certain things in a heated exchange. This doesn't mean that any of this represents anything “real” or essential to the genesis of the “heresies.”

My point is that we have to start with what is possible within Judaism and Samaritanism rather than the inflamed testimony of the biased Fathers

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 01:15 PM

Ephrem on the Son not being the Stranger, not being the unknown Father.

Quote:

Well, then, according to thy reasoning, because the Father of Isu is not humbled together with Isu who was humbled, the Stranger also, who was not humbled, is strange to His son who was humbled. And if the Stranger who was not humbled is not strange to His son who was humbled, then it is not because one was humbled and the other was not humbled that the Strangeness arises but because Strangeness consists in Strangeness to the nature (of some one). But if Isu who was humbled resembles the Stranger who was not humbled, how much more will Isu who was humbled resemble the Maker who was humbled ! For in what consists the fact that Isu was humbled ? Is it not in this that he was manifested to men and taught them to do what is good ? If this is not also (found) in the case of the Maker, they (i.e. the Marcionites) speak truly. And if not even this was lacking to Him, why do they utter blasphemy by means of the Strangeness which they introduce ? Did He not enter into the abode of Abraham and eat ? And if it was right that we should say that He ate and that He was manifested to Moses and to Elijah and to Isaiah and to Daniel and the rest of the prophets — and that thou mightest not say |xxxvii that He was manifested only to righteous men, whereas the Stranger (was manifested) to sinners—lo, He was manifested to the whole People without exception! And if thou sayest that they were righteous, (I answer) Lo, on account of their iniquity they all fell in the wilderness and, except in the case of two, they did not enter into the land of promise. [Against Marcion Book 1]

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 01:30 PM

Another passage from Book One of Ephrem which argues against Jesus being the Son of the Creator - a position the Marcionites did not likely hold in the first place:

Quote:

For if the voice (in the Transfiguration narrative) had come from the heaven of the Stranger perhaps it would have been reasonable for us to think that in order that mankind might not be mistaken, owing to the mountain and the cloud and Moses, etc., on that account the voice was coming to them from the heaven of the Stranger, so as to overthrow the opinion which they had concerning Isu. But if even the voice |lxiv which came was from the heaven of the Maker, it did not by any means disown him (by asserting) that he was not the Son of the Maker, but it actually confirmed it that he is the Son of the Maker, and the servants of his Father's house, who had come to do him honour, were witnesses (thereto).

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 02:05 PM

Here is another interesting reference from Book Three:

Quote:

These are two things from which the Marcionites have deflected, for they are not willing to call our Lord 'the Maker,' nor (do they admit) that He was (sent) by the Maker. But His active power itself deprives those who deprive Him of active power, especially because that active power of His was repairing the work of the Creator. But it is clearly seen that this is a thing learnt from Him, (I mean) that primeval Teacher who is the Architect of the creation. But this active power was sent as to the first of creatures, in order that it might be known that by this same active power the creatures had been created. For the repair of a work can only be wrought by means of that workmanship which set it in order

.

At first glance you read this and you go down the checklist - not the Maker, not the son of the Maker etc. But then you have to take into account that it doesn't say that Jesus wasn't formerly the Creator but rather that they don't call him (now) the Maker. It is a fundamental principle of the Pauline tradition that what is old (= man) is transformed into a wholly new creation. I am not so sure this isn't the case here too.

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 02:13 PM

Here is something interesting I picked from CAL. The word Ephrem uses to denote the 'strangeness' of the Marcionite god (= nwkry) has several meanings in Aramaic/Syriac:

Quote:

1 foreign, alien Palm, Jud, CPA, Syr, JBA, Man. --(a) not a member of one's immediate family Syr. --(b) fem. as substantive : prostitute CPA.
2 strange, unusual Syr.
3 sublime Man.

But notice that it means sublime in Mandaean Aramaic. Interesting also is that it can also mean 'not a member of one's immediate family' = alien. This is certainly the assumption of Marcionite baptism. As Ephrem notes a Marcionite saying somewhere, who adopts children who are not their own?

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 02:32 PM

Interestingly the beloved Mandaean god Anus-Uthra also applies the epithet 'nukraya' to himself and - at least according to Burkitt developed from a Christian interest of the healing of Mary Magdalene:

Quote:

I took a bodily form and appeared in Jerusalem. I spoke with my voice and preached, and became a Healer for Miriai (= Mary): a Healer for Miriai I became, and healed her from head to foot. I was called Healer of the Truth (kushta), who heals and takes no fee' (GR 331 f).

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ph8...ndaean&f=false

DCHindley · 12-14-2011, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

Just a curious thought. How much do we know about Epiphanius, and from what sources?

I ask, because the bits of writings of him that I've glanced through are so weird they make me wonder if Epiphanius' intention wasn't what we think it is.

I wonder if his intention was actually to preserve knowledge of the heresies (i.e. if he himself was a heretic of some sort, disguising himself as orthodox).

From what I have read, we know quite a lot about him, and I do not think there is any uncertainty about the man or his history or his beliefs. Where he came by them ... well, that's another matter. He was a monk who personally practiced asceticism, but who loved to learn new things and above all subject it to analysis. It appears he was only fully acquainted with Greek.

Unfortunately, he used much of his brain power and his unusual ability to go incredibly long periods without sleep to produce apologetic material that is, at best, written towards the popular level of apologetics. He became incredibly popular among the inhabitants that he was elected bishop of Salamis, and he is said to have founded several monasteries. His thoughts weren't that deep, though. Folks far and wide would write to him to ask questions, and he'd send back these long treatises that probably generated a lot of laughs as someone read them to the the men lounging about after the eucharist each Sunday. Laughs as in funny, as he had this tendency to make what many considered clever little digs at the heretics he skewered in them.

As all the descriptions of the man's writings indicate, he was known to quote works he approved of verbatim (The entire first book of Irenaeus' Against Heresies is contained in one of them) and this appears to be what he does with most of the works he doesn't approve of as well. However, what is not known is what form those works came to him. Were they in summaries by other writers like Irenaeus or Justin or others, and if so, how accurate were the summaries? IIRC, he had a low opinion of Eusebius ("damn closet Arian").

DCH

stephan huller · 12-14-2011, 09:27 PM

It's funny when Epiphanius speculates how Origen castrated himself. I think he says Origen poured some sort of potion on his genitals to make his private parts shrivel. I wonder where on earth did he get this information?

mountainman · 12-14-2011, 11:52 PM

Eusebius.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Quote:

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

Just a curious thought. How much do we know about Epiphanius, and from what sources?

From what I have read, we know quite a lot about him, and I do not think there is any uncertainty about the man or his history or his beliefs.

They were later 4th century Christian beliefs.

BTW since this thread is (indirectly) about Marcion are there any Marcionite inscriptions and/or "house churches"? Has the Meggido Prison archaelogical dig been associated to Marcion or the Marcionites? They must have coexisted with the Manichaeans in the 3rd and possibly 4th centuries.

stephan huller · 12-15-2011, 12:47 AM

Can't you just stand in front of an x-ray machine for a few days

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

12-14-2011, 10:48 AM	#31
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Yeah but citing the Church Father's in this way is like taking the testimony of the ghetto wife at face value that her husband's other woman is a hoe. You're allowing our understanding to be defined by the enemies of “heresy.” Maybe Simonians (whatever the fuck that means) or a Simonian said something like what you are saying in the right or wrong circumstance in the same way that a husband or wife say certain things in a heated exchange. This doesn't mean that any of this represents anything “real” or essential to the genesis of the “heresies.” My point is that we have to start with what is possible within Judaism and Samaritanism rather than the inflamed testimony of the biased Fathers

12-14-2011, 09:27 PM	#38
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	It's funny when Epiphanius speculates how Origen castrated himself. I think he says Origen poured some sort of potion on his genitals to make his private parts shrivel. I wonder where on earth did he get this information?

12-15-2011, 12:47 AM	#40
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Can't you just stand in front of an x-ray machine for a few days

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.