Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 09-05-2011, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

DCH, same impression here. In fact, it sounds like the author simply regurgitated the Catholic encyclopedia.

I think the descriptions, both you and Stephan provide above, are much closer to the fact of the matter.

In the end, it was about being free of the law. The Catholics, however, needed sin, so they adjusted the original message in order to retain it.

The real facts are that there is an APOLOGETIC source that contradicts virtually everything Tertullian wrote about Marcion in "Against Marcion".

This fact is EXTREMELY significant.

Hippolytus claimed that Marcion did NOT use the Pauline writings or gMark but the writings of EMPEDOCLES.

The doctrine of Empedocles is NOTHING at all like the Pauline writings.

"Refutation of All Heresies"

Quote:

.....But Marcion, a native of Pontus, far more frantic than these (heretics), omitting the majority of the tenets of the greater number (of speculators), (and) advancing into a doctrine still more unabashed, supposed (the existence of) two originating causes of the universe, alleging one of them to be a certain good (principle), but the other an evil one.

And himself imagining that he was introducing some novel (opinion), founded a school full of folly, and attended by men of a sensual mode of life, inasmuch as he himself was one of lustful propensities.

This (heretic) having thought that the multitude would forget that he did not happen to be a disciple of Christ, but of Empedocles, who was far anterior to himself, framed and formed the same opinions—namely, that there are two causes of the universe, discord and friendship....

"Refutation of All Heresies" 18

Quote:

...When, therefore, Marcion or some one of his hounds barks against the Demiurge, and adduces reasons from a comparison of what is good and bad, we ought to say to them, that neither Paul the apostle nor Mark, he of the maimed finger, announced such (tenets). For none of these (doctrines) has been written in the Gospel according to Mark.

But (the real author of the system) is Empedocles, son of Meto, a native of Agrigentum.

And (Marcion) despoiled this (philosopher), and imagined that up to the present would pass undetected his transference, under the same expressions, of the arrangement of [u]his entire heresy[u] from Sicily into the evangelical narratives...

The implications of "Refutation of All Heresies" are that Tertullian's "Against Marcion" is FICTION with respect to Marcion's use of the Pauline writings.

Based on "Refutation of All Heresies" the REAL author of Marcion's gospel was EMPEDOCLES not "Paul".

dog-on · 09-06-2011, 12:15 AM

I am not sure you are reading that correctly, AA.

aa5874 · 09-06-2011, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

I am not sure you are reading that correctly, AA.

Well, why don't you say what you are SURE of? I have ZERO idea of what you are referring to.

It makes ZERO sense on a discussion board to just make some AMBIGUOUS statement.

"Refutation of All Heresies"

Quote:

....O Marcion: as you have instituted a comparison of what is good and evil, I also today will institute a comparison following up your own tenets, as you suppose them to be.

You affirm that the Demiurge of the world is evil— why not hide your countenance in shame, (as thus) teaching to the Church the doctrines of Empedocles?

You say that there is a good Deity who destroys the works of the Demiurge: then do not you plainly preach to your pupils, as the good Deity, the Friendship of Empedocles....

Hippolytus, an Apologetic source CONTRADICTS Tertullian and is claiming that Marcion did NOT use the writings of Paul but those of EMPEDOCLES.

I am NOT sure what you are reading or if you read anything.

But, in "Against Marcion" we learn that there are copies of "Against Marcion" that are "FULL of MISTAKES".

"Against Marcion" 1

Quote:

Whatever in times past we have wrought in opposition to Marcion, is from the present moment no longer to be accounted of. It is a new work which we are undertaking in lieu of the old one.

My original tract, as too hurriedly composed, I had subsequently superseded by a fuller treatise. This latter I lost, before it was completely published, by the fraud of a person who was then a brother, but became afterwards an apostate.

He, as it happened, had transcribed a portion of it, full of mistakes, and then published it....

Iskander · 09-07-2011, 05:56 PM

• This one is really [censored]

DCHindley · 09-07-2011, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

• This one is really [censored]

Your answer? Or my question?

DCH

aa5874 · 09-09-2011, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

...In the original story by "Paul," God's promise to Abram that he would produce a son by Sarah was believed by Abram even though it seemed impossible on account of their age and Sarah's apparent infertility....

Stop right there. I am NOT interested in your BELIEFS and IMAGINATION. If you don't have a credible source of antiquity for your "Original story" by "Paul" then you might as well go to the nearest Church and tell the congregation you story.

This is BCH. We need historical SOURCES not stories.

It is extremely easy to get carried away with your imagination and soon you may start believing what you have imagined is true.

Sources, Sources, Sources. Let's get your sources.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

...The interpolator, on the other hand, completely turns it around so that Ishmael = Abraham's physical descendants, "persecutes" those born "according to the spirit" (the group the interpolator identifies himself with)....

Your story is NOT a credible historical account when you have NO sources of antiquity for your story.

You know that there are apologetic sources that claim "Paul" was AWARE of gLUKE.

The Church has already prepared to give written evidence that "Paul" was AWARE of gLuke so the Pauline writings may NOT need an interpolator. "Paul" may have lived the same time as your ASSUMED interpolator.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

...But what about the interpolator's circle? Clearly it had something to do with those associated with a Jesus who was crucified by the Romans as "King of the Jews." Critics say that the "resurrection" experience of these followers made them believe he was now alive in heaven with God, ready one day to return and inaugurate the kingdom of God on earth. But what caused them to transform this Jesus into a divine redeemer? There are clues, such as the charge that Jews "pursued" them, but that they were ultimately enslaved, and there are several other "anti-semitic" statements in the Paulines, all of them in strata I would identify as "strata 2." ....

The Pauline writings DO not support your INTERPOLATION story that you just made up.

Once you claim that the Pauline writings were INTERPOLATED then you are DISCREDITING the Pauline writings.

You NOW need another source to show that there was an interpolator.

But, you have NOTHING but your imagination.

Sources, Sources, Sources. IF you don't have credible sources from antiquity I don't want to hear any more "original stories" WITHOUT original sources that was made up in the 21st century.

aa5874 · 09-10-2011, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Just to clarify where I intend to go with this thread, and why I split off the discussion about Sebastian Moll, I intend to compare Gal 4:21-31, and some other passages in Paul & the Gospels, to events in the Jewish War that show how both Jews and Gentiles, former neighbors and friends, were very cruel to one another, including killing of moderates from the other faction who had allied themselves with the other.

It is eerily reminiscent of the atrocities that erupted in Bosnia-Herzogovina and Rwanda in the last couple decades. This I think can explain why Christians (almost all Gentiles) developed a somewhat cynical or even antagonistic attitude towards Jews, but at the same time seemed to know a lot about their holy books.

DCH

Are you going to SUPPLY credible and reliable sources of antiquity for your claims?

So far, you have presented Galatians but the Pauline writings are DATED well outside of your TIME ZONE by at least 100 years.

Any attempt to use the Gospels and "Paul" as credible and reliable sources is like using KNOWN PERJURY to re-construct past events.

aa5874 · 09-10-2011, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

IMO it is possible that the context was the Jewish War. The gospel was clearly rooted in that historical event. So it seems only natural that the exegesis of that text would make reference to that event too. I just don't know how you would prove it.

I don't think I will have to "prove" it, since we are dealing with incomplete fragmented data the best we can do is present more or less probable explanations for that data....

Well, if you are attempting to use INCOMPLETE fragmented data for your probabilities then you are engaged in FUTILE speculations.

Please, you must be aware of GIGO (garbage in garbage out).

Input: Fragmented and incomplete data (garbage )

Output: Fragmented and incomplete conclusions (garbage)

Please, please, please I need CREDIBLE sources not Galatians and the Gospels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

.....Now I am not talking about direct references or allusions to events in that war, but to events in that war that might help illuminate the psychology of early Christianity. That is, to illustrate the events that seem to have driven them to remold Jesus into a divine redeemer, and their belief that God shifted his favor from the Jewish people to gentiles who believed in that redeemer.

DCH

Again, there is ZERO supporting corroborative evidence for the Pauline doctrine or teachings about Jesus Christ and ZERO corroborative evidence for the Jesus of the Gospels.

You cannot use your PRESUMPTIONS as the "probable" history of Jesus believers based on gabage (fragmented and incomplete data).

Non-apologetic sources suggests that the Jesus story was AFTER the writings of Josephus. Jesus was NOT remolded but INVENTED long after the Fall of the Jewish Temple.

DCHindley · 09-10-2011, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Well, if you are attempting to use INCOMPLETE fragmented data for your probabilities then you are engaged in FUTILE speculations.

The ONLY thing I am COMPLETELY sure of is that there is NO point in carrying on a DISCUSSION with you.

DCH

Iskander · 09-10-2011, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

In case it wasn't explicit enough “son of Abraham” is the term for proselyte in Judaism

Yes, but only after his circumcision.

There is an online article from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia which provides some background on Proselytes.

... a new name was given him; either he was named "Abraham the son of Abraham," or the Scriptures were opened at hazard, and the first name that was read was given to him. Thenceforth he had to put behind him all his past; even his marriage ties and those of kinship no longer held good (compare Yebham. 22a; Sanhedrin 58b).

Although he was thus juridically considered a new man, and one whose praises were sung in the Talmudical literature, he was yet on the whole looked down on as inferior to a born Jew (Kidd. 4 7; Shebhu`oth 10 9, et al.).

Rabbi Chelbo said:
"Proselytes are as injurious to Israel as a scab" (Yebham. 47b; Kidd. 70b; compare Philippians 3:5).

The fact that a circumcised proselyte was expected "to put behind him all his past; even his marriage ties and those of kinship no longer held good" does relate to the psychological pressure the strata 2 community of the interpolator experienced as a result of that war and its aftermath.

More on that later.

DCH

Preaching is bad manners. This post has nothing to do with Galatians

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

09-06-2011, 12:15 AM	#2
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	I am not sure you are reading that correctly, AA.

09-07-2011, 05:56 PM	#4
Iskander Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,619	• This one is really [censored]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.