outhouse

marcion was a outcast relatively speaking and looked down upon for his limited collection and his oddball view of the movement.

early on the movement was far and wide defore it funneled into what we have today.


no reason for Justin to tarnisdh his name bringing up someone frowned upon by those in the know.

Duvduv

Excuse me, but you are reading into the events what is not there. Marcion was a bogeyman as much as any bogeyman condemned by heresiologist writings., Yet this Justin supposedly lived at the same time as this fellow who had an apparently large following and "Justin" cannot identify a single text or book used by this group of "heretics." Come on........

Toto

What on earth is this based on? The usual story of Marcion is that he was from a rich family, a bishop or the son of a bishop, a shipbuilder, a highly influential man who tried to make a large donation to the church. He made the first collection of Christian scripture, and the Catholic canon is generally felt to be a reaction to his canon. Rather than looking down on Marcion, his enemies appear to have been envious and tried to emulate him.

There may be many reasons for Justin to not mention Marcion's gospel, but this is not one of them.

outhouse

You may want to research a second century saying

"shame on Marcions eraser"




which has nothing to do with my statements

he was the first one we know about that put a a collection together that was criticised by the majority of members of this movement.


he had his own oddball sect with a very mythical jesus

Toto

The proto-orthodox church accused Marcion of removing text from the True Scripture. But it is as likely that they added stuff.


His collection was criticized by a faction that became dominant. But we don't have the statistics on whether that was a majority or not.

You call his sect "oddball" as if orthodox Christianity is somehow sane and normal. You might want to reconsider your choice of words.

Are you really a Christian apologist in disguise?

outhouse

So most modern scholarships are based on christian apologist?



putting words in mouth?

Toto

I'm getting tired of your constant claim that modern scholarship supports you. If you want anyone to take you seriously, give specific citations to specific scholars.

There are a lot of Christian apologists who claim to be "scholars" - but are not unbiased secular scholars.

I don't think so. "Oddball" was your word. What did you mean? That Tertullian was a normal guy? Can you support that?

Duvduv

However, honesty requires acknowledging that in fact nothing is really known. Nothing of any writings in the possession of Marcion remains. Not a single named text is identified in the writings ascribed to Justin who is supposed to have lived at the same time and in the same town as Marcion but who knew nothing of the texts that Marcion supposedly had.

Toto

Nothing is known with 100% certainty, but there are some more or less reasonable conclusions you can draw.

We seem to have lost the point of this thread.

Duvduv

It's not even a question of 100% certainty. Here we are talking about two "christians" living at the same time in the same city, where one of them allegedly left over a document in which coincidentally he happened to mention the OTHER GUY of whom nothing (wink wink) remains in his defense, and the same Justin condemns him briefly and yet does not mention a SINGLE book in the possession of the other guy (Marcion) who allegedly knew about the pauline epistles and had a "gospel," which "Justin" would have most certainly known about to condemn as well.

But it doesn't exist, and scholars have been building whole sand castles based only on the claims of heresiologists and proceed to take their word for it about this guy Marcion. This makes no sense at all. And posters act like everything claimed about Marcion is a GIVEN, is a fact of history, when in truth it is nothing of the sort, and is merely the unproven assertions of scholars and of the ancient heresiologists.

The whole Marcion story never made sense to me from the beginning and still doesn't. I am strongly inclined to believe there was not only no Justin in the second century but no Marcion either, and that both sides of this "conflict" existing in the creative writing world of the emerging church in the 4th and 5th centuries.

Indeed, the whole idea of gospels and epistles in the SECOND CENTURY revolves around this guy Justin and the alleged bogeyman Marcion, with a few other tidbits including the non-existent Irenaeus who knew about all the NT texts just 30 years after Justin who knew none of them. It's all Swiss Cheese.