andrewcriddle

I don't think that there is any evidence to support an important Platonic influence on Marcion.

The question of Gnostic influence on Marcion depends partly on how seriously one takes the picture of Marcion as a disciple of Cerdo

It is noticeable that Eastern Christian accounts of Marcionite teaching, eg the accounts of Ephraim Syrus and Eznik of Kolb, depict it as more 'Gnostic' in character than do the Greek and Latin accounts.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller

For Clement Marcion is a Platonist (especially Stromata Book Three). He is one of the few Church Fathers who doesn't recycle stuff he doesn't understand (a la Tertullian). Some of the reporting in Irenaeus and Tertullian makes Marcion seem Philonic (which is Jewish Platonism). Gregory Nazianzus cite Pythagorean influences on Marcion.

It's deceptive to stick to the portrait of Marcion in a few sources for the sake of “clarity”

Marcion appears to be a true chameleon in Patristic texts. Sometimes Jewish, other times anti-Jewish, an incredibly wealthy ascetic seducer of women who hated the Jewish scriptures so much that his disciples commissioned Greek translations (Theodotian) and extensive interpretations of Jewish scriptural material (especially the book of Daniel)

Irenaeus and Tertullian will make it seem Luke was their gospel but Tertullian's source in Book Four says he removed things from his gospel that were never in Luke. The Philosophumena reports that some say Mark was the Marcionite gospel while Ephrem assumes the Marcionites corrupted the Diaressaron (never mentions Luke)

Casey notices the same “Marcionite Diatessaron” in Eznik's reporting. I see it in Tertullian's original source for Book Four (Theophilus?)

Never trust the standard account of Marcion. It's superficial at best

TedM

Here's a view that says that the idea that Irenaeus thought Jesus was 50 years old is pure baloney. This view says all Irenaeus was saying was that Jesus had entered the period approaching older age--30 to 50 years old, and that he relies on the Gospels account (which never says Jesus was 50) for his viewpoint:

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a38.htm

concluding remarks:

aa5874

This thread is NOT about Marcion. We are dealing with a writer called Irenaeus who mentioned the baptism of Jesus and that "Irenaeus" is NOT credible.

The claims about the authorship, dating and chronology of gMatthew by "Irenaeus" has been rejected by Scholars.

aa5874

Well, please have a look at "The Proof of Apostolic Preaching" attributed to Irenaeus.

It is CLEAR that "Irenaeus" is NOT a credible source. "Irenaeus" is pure baloney.

stephan huller

Drijvers also felt that Irenaeus and Tertullian may in fact be unrepresentative in their emphasis on Marcion's use of Scripture:

The point is that the evidence for a Platonic influence on Marcion extends beyond Clement of Alexandria.

maryhelena

Baloney? Well, that’s what the Jews were saying in gJohn 8.57: ie that JC was not yet fifty years old...

I think a lot of this type of controversy re what these early writers were saying boils down to our still thinking in the mindset of a historical gospel JC. Once that mindset is rejected then other avenues open up for trying to make some sense out of what the gospel writers are saying.

The gospel story is not history. It is an interpretation of history, a salvation interpretation of history. It’s full of allegory and symbolism and midrash type storytelling from the OT. In a sense the JC figure is the brand name behind which lies a complex web of historical interpretations of a specific period of Jewish history.

Here is an idea how that ‘not yet fifty years’ of gJohn could have been taken from a historical figure:

Antigonus, bound to a cross, crucified, flogged and beheaded in 37 b.c. If he was not yet 50 years old at his death, he would have been born just after 87 b.c. That would put his birth in the time of his grandfather, Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 b.c.) and his grandmother, Salome Alexandra (76-67 b.c.).

Also:

http://www.gnosis.org/library/grs-me..._100/ch19.html

What all of this is saying is that we do need to get the relevant history on the table. With history in view then the gospel interpretation of that history, the gospel writers searching for meaning within that history, is more easily observed. Working just with the gospel JC story is to be working in the dark. It’s history that can throw some light....

andrewcriddle

Hi Stephan

Thanks for bringing up Clement's teaching about Marcion in Stromateis Book 3.

You are quite right. Clement does link Marcion's ideas to those of Plato (and Pythagoras). However, I am not sure how far this is real evidence for the origin of Marcion's ideas and how far it is polemic.

Clement says for example. The claim that although your opponents claim their views are original, they are really a distortion and misunderstanding of earlier views, is not necessarily reliable information about the true origin of the views in question.

FWIW Hippolytus derived Marcion's views from the Greek philosopher Empedocles.

Andrew Criddle

aa5874

This thread is NOT about Marcion. We are dealing with Origen's statement about the baptism of Jesus in gLuke and other Gospels.

Philosopher Jay has effectively highlighted that NOT only the Gospels are unreliable sources but that Christian writers were also unreliable sources.

Instead of INTERNAL corroboration of the baptism story by Christian writers, we have INTERNAL confusion and contradictions.

According to the Church, "Origen" was in charged of a catechetical school since he was 18 years old.

"Church History" 6.3 The fact that Christian writers are NOT credible does not help at all in the reconstruction of the Baptism story.

TedM

This only helps his point. No one was saying he was fifty years old. That's why the Jews were objecting -- he seemed to be representing himself as a wise teacher, a role generally reserved for those who were older than Jesus was.

I"m not interested in discussing it any further, having not really studied Irenaeus, and only having quickly read the apologist answer. Not sure if anyone here buys that argument or not, but I hadn't heard it before so thought I'd share.

I don't understand the rest of your post, but am too pre-occupied at the moment to pursue it.