Aspirin99

Good points. Thanks.

Kenny

guy_683930

Docetism seems to go back at least to Paul's letters.

Romans 8:3 : "For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,..."

Philippians 2:7-8 : "but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man..."

The term used is homoioma, which means similar to, but not identical. The Christological hymn of Philippians 2:6-11 seems to predate Paul so perhaps docetism in some form or another goes back to the earliest christianity. Although Paul seemed to think his flesh was perhaps real enough to feel pain, it is still only the likeness of flesh and a man, which is technically docetic.

jakejonesiv

Hi,

Thanks for the good observations. In the so-called Pre-Pauline Hymn of Phillipians, we read:

Phillipians 2
5 For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God,
7 but did empty himself, taking the form of a servant, in the likeness of men having been made,
8 and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- [death even of a cross]

God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh Romans 8:3


I think there are indications that the conception of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark was docetic.
" ... about the fourth watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them. But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out..." Mark 6:48-49.

In the Gospel of Peter, it appears that almost every sentence of the passion narrative was composed on the basis of Scriptural references in the Old Testament rather than based on cannonical gospels. Thus GPeter may (or may not) predate Mark.

IV. 10 And they brought two malefactors, and crucified the 11 Lord between them. But he kept silence, as one feeling no pain. And when they set the cross upright, they wrote 12 thereon: This is the King of Israel. And they laid his garments before him, and divided them among themselves and 13 cast the lot upon them. But one of those malefactors reproached them, saying: We have thus suffered for the evils which we have done; but this man which hath become the 14 saviour of men, wherein hath he injured you? And they were wroth with him, and commanded that his legs should not be broken, that so he might die in torment.
V. 15 Now it was noonday, and darkness prevailed over all Judaea: and they were troubled and in an agony lest the sun should have set, for that he yet lived: for it is written for them that the sun should not set upon him that hath been 16 slain (murdered). And one of them said: Give ye him to drink gall with vinegar: and they mingled it and gave him 17 to drink: and they fulfilled all things and accomplished 18 their sins upon their own heads. And many went about with 19 lamps, supposing that it was night: and some fell. And the Lord cried out aloud saying: My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me. And when he had so said, he was taken up.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...r-mrjames.html

We find docetism in the Gospel of Marcion.
3:1/4:31
In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar,
Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea,
Jesus descended [out of heaven] into Capernaum, a city in Galilee,
and was teaching [in the synagogue] on the Sabbath days;
And they were astonished at his doctrine,

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius(19) (for such is Marcion's proposition) he "came down to the Galilean city of Capernaum," of course meaning(20) from the heaven of the Creator, to which he had previously descended from his own.
Adv.Marc.iv.7 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Itha...ert1.html#AM71

"In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar" the beginning of Marcion's gospel.
Panarion 42 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827/Epip1.html

In 2 Clem. 9:5 we read, that “Christ the Lord who saved us, being first spirit� and in 2 Clem. 14:2 the church appears be considered as his body. :rolling:

Jake Jones

jakejonesiv

That is quite a question, and in order to answer it, I will need to give some background.

Christianity grew from at least two distinctive sources, both of which were somewhat docetic and gnostic. The Pauline component arises through Marcion; and the Petrine component arising through Justin Martyr (and others) from Alexandrian Logos Christianity. These two groups were in conflict over identity of the creator, God the Father or Demiurge. The Pauline and Petrine views were later combined in Acts (late 2nd century) and harmonizing passages (i.e. Gal. 2:7-8 http://tinyurl.com/7m67s) inserted into earlier works. The legendary, and largely fictional Apostles, Peter and Paul were made into a kind of Dynamic Duo to paper over the disharmonious origins of Christianity.

According to G.J.P.J. Bolland the urGospel originated in Alexandria. http://www.radikalkritik.de/Bolland_Jozua.htm Through an allegorical reading of the Septuagint, one could read of Iesous(Joshua/Jesus) before there ever was a New Testament, very much as the Alexandrian Jew Apollos is alleged to do in Acts 18:24 ff. This was the ultimate source of J. Martyr's "Memoir's of the Apostles" and conceivably GPeter. The Gospel of Mark was derived in Rome from the urGospel. Matthew is the Judaized extract, and Luke the Hellenized extract. (The four gospels were not named until c. 180 CE, Irenaeus Adv. Haer. 3.1.1)

--- see also Robert A. Kraft, _ WAS THERE A "MESSIAH-JOSHUA" TRADITION AT THE TURN OF THE ERA?_
http://tinyurl.com/5cuc3) ---

Irenaeus Adv. Haer, 3:1:2 is pure fiction, “…that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul “ Pure fiction, as are the twelve legendary popes that lead up to Eleutherius of Irenaeus’ time (3:1:3), invented to create apostolic succession. 12 Popes, 12 Apostles. 12 signs of the Zodiac.

Now we turn to the perplexing problem of Paul. Paul is mentioned in Acts, but his epistles are not known. After one eliminates 1 Clement and the pseudo Ignatians (http://www.radikalkritik.de/index.htm, there is no Paul apparent before Marcion. He is not even interpolated into Josephus, by name that is! Paul is not mentioned in Justin Martyr or his student Tatian, but Marcion and a notable heretic are discussed extensively, Simon Magus.

There are a few passages where it is conceivable that Justin quotes Paul without attribution. Hermann Detering has suggested, these (e.g. Rom 1:28; 4:3.10f), are actually better understood to be interpolations of Justin into the Paulinics. In favor of this thesis is that Justin does not name any such Paul, he is presenting what appears to be his own arguments. And it is quite a lot of these such passages that are not in the Marcionite recension.


The Marcionites endorsed the teachings of Paul. They said Paul alone knew the truth, and that to him the mystery was manifested by revelation. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:13:1. http://tinyurl.com/4mzvc In Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:27:1-2 it is noted that Marcion developed his doctrine from Cerdo who took his system from the followers of Simon! http://tinyurl.com/6jnmh/ Paul is likely a mask of Simon, or vice versa.

The Docetics claimed that Christ did not suffer. This same claim is attributed to Simon Magus. "For since the angels ruled the world ill because each one of them coveted the principal power for himself, he had come to amend matters, and had descended, transfigured and assimilated to powers and principalities and angels, so that he might appear among men to be a man, while yet he was not a man; and that thus he was thought to have suffered in Judaea, when he had not suffered. " Against Heresies. Irenaeus, Book I, Chapter XXIII.-Doctrines and Practices of Simon Magus and Menander.

Other similarities between Marcion, Simon Magus, and Paul are to be found. Marcion allegedly came to Rome with a donation of two hundred thousand sesterces. Tertullian, The Prescription against Heretics (De Praescript), chapter XXX. This money was allegedly returned when Marcion was given the boot. Simon tried to buy his way in according to Acts chapter 8. He was refused and the money given back. "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money!" Acts 8:20. Paul allegedly took up a collection for Jerusalem (Acts 24:17).

Jake Jones

Amaleq13

Interestingly, I could only find one passage where Paul refers to Christ suffering:

"because, as the sufferings of the Christ do abound to us, so through the Christ doth abound also our comfort" (2 Cor 1:5, YLT)

Is this problematic for the idea you offer?

Chili

It is rather silly to think that Christ suffered if they crucified Jesus. Jesus was the first Adam who had come down from heaven to get a real life perspective on the world around him so he could amend matters in heaven as co-creator with the Father (that is how we color own own heaven while we are on earth and look for better places to get food and wisdom). Jesus was not a man but was the persona of man (and therefore thought to be a man), whom they justly crucified in effort to set the second Adam free who was the real man to start with. This second Adam is called Christ and not Jesus who, once again, was the usurper of man's original identity. In this sense was Jesus the Demuirge who became co-creator with the Father to change things for the better throughout the ages (but each generation anew).

Having said this I must add that it is wrong to call Jesus the first Adam (or Demuirge) because he wasn't. Jesus was the name given to Joseph after the Christ was reborn unto him which gave Jesus that distinct dual identity of which one had to die to set the other one free. Since one of these was the identity of an imposter (the first Adam) it is easy to see how and why there was no suffering involved and, in fact, that it was a pleasure in the mind of Joseph who just happened to have an empty tomb ready in his own garden patch for the corpse of this imposter.

It is a comedy, I'd say, but a divine comedy and therefore real. No fiction is part of it because the mind wherein only fiction can be conceived to exist just got crucified and therefore Marcion did not belong in Rome where truth alone must add up before it can be counted.

Peter is the faith of Judah that got defrocked when his twin by the name of Thomas (= doubt) called Jesus-the-Christ my "Lord and my God," which speaks of full atonement of the Demuirge with God as one unit in charge of its own destiny. Paul takes this to Rome as the manifestation of Peter and therefore the body of Christ in Rome who's new cloak (faith) came from the other side of the boat and that does not include Marcion who was not a 'fish- feeder' (believer) himself.

Aspirin99

This is good stuff, folks. Thanks for the info. I'll study it again today. I must say, though, that the "Paul from Marcion" idea seems to stretch our argument-from-silence to a tenuous point.

jakejonesiv

There is other evidence that points in the same direction.

A recent study of Romans by Dr. Hermann Deterring (Berlin, August 2005) claims that the linguistic evidence, the theological evidence, and the Marcionite reconstruction from the church fathers all agree. The Paulusbriefe consists of two layers, an earlier Macionite layer and a later catholic recension. http://www.radikalkritik.de/

Radical dating departs significantly from the traditional dating.

http://www.radikalkritik.de/images/Zeitleiste.gif

I think the biggest challenge in New Testament studies is that, even for those who have begun to doubt a Historical Jesus, the old chronology is still largely assumed.

Jake Jones

Aspirin99

Very cool timeline. Thanks again. I will probably study this longer than I should today.

jakejonesiv

No, I don't think it is problematic. here is part of a previous message posted on another list that touches on the issue of Christ's suffering.

In Gal. 2:20 alleged Paul states that "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me:"

This is often interpreted figuratively, but it is likely to be literal. Just as at the Baptism, when the Christ spirit is said to have first possessed Jesus, the Christ spirit could presumably hop from person to person, and now inhabited Paul. And much more, Paul had literally been
crucified.

"Henceforth let no man trouble me; for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus." (Galatians 6:17). Paul the Stigmatic, Charles Ensminger
http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/PaulStigmatic.html.
Paul is claiming that he is, in fact, the personification and/or incarnation of the Christ. (Ensminger's article also describes the docetic conception of the Pauline Christ).

These are not just any old wounds, these are wounds that confer undisputable authority, the marks of crucifixtion. the hands, feet, and perhaps side. Paul taught that "Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." Gal. 3:1. This was probably in a passion play, in which Paul was actually being nailed up.

We see hints here of an early rite in which others take the place of Jesus on the cross.

The characters of Paul and Simon Magus (the negative image of Simon Peter) had certain traits in common. Being dogged and disputed with by Peter, buying the good will of other apostles with money, etc. Both claimed to be inhabited by the Christ spirit.

Paul's presumed alter-ego, Simon claimed to have appeared in Samaria as the Father, in Judea as the Son, and among the heathen as the Holy Ghost, a manifestation of the Eternal. (Irenaeus, Adv. haer 1.23.1).

Could the legend of a certain Simon being crucified be a reflection of Simon Magus' claims? "And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross." Matt. 27:32.

"He appeared, then, on earth as a man, to the nations of these powers, and wrought miracles. Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead; so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them." Irenaeus (Adv. haer. 1.24.4)

For since the angels ruled the world ill because each one of them coveted the principal power for himself, he (Simon Magus) had come to amend matters, and had descended, transfigured and assimilated to powers and principalities and angels, so that he might appear among men
to be a man, while yet he was not a man; and that thus he was thought to have suffered in Judaea, when he had not suffered. Irenaeus, Adv. haer, 1:23:3.

In The Second Treatise of the Great Seth, it is stated "They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder. I was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory. And I was laughing
at their ignorance."
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/2seth.html

Jake Jones IV