Helpmabob

"Paul" thought he was the incarnation of the heavenly Christ.

Paul was using same language as Jesus: e.g. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing [John 15:5]. There are more instances in John that could be given. Paul acknowledged that he could do nothing without God’s strength. It is much the same with many Christians today.

jakejonesiv

Hi ynquirer,

Wow, what a plot! :notworthy:

Jake Jones IV

ynquirer

Sorry, it was just an unsuccessful attempt to render Marcion’s role in early Christianity, according to your theory, intelligible.

There are two notions I don’t understand if you put them together. On the one hand, there is a mythic notion that a savior could suffer crucifixion in the flesh of the practitioners of a forgotten mystery cult that self-crucified. On the other, there is a Docetic notion that the savior could not suffer crucifixion and was substituted for on the cross by a mortal man. The sole detail they share is a mortal man nailed up on a cross, but even the purpose and outcome in both notions are different: in the mystery cult the savior self-sacrifices in the flesh of man, who survives the sacrifice; in the Docetic interpretation of Passion, the savior laughs at those that have crucified the man believing that they crucified the savior, but the man dies. One notion seems quite the reverse of the other.

I wonder how you think that Marcion tied up both ends of the string.

jakejonesiv

No need to be sorry. Books have been written and careers made on less than your plot.

OK, I will offer an opinion. Ritual reenactment of portions of the myth seem to be a common point in the mystery religions.
Christ was crucified in the myth. This was portrayed in the ritual reenactment of the ordeal of the cult figure; his myth of life, death at the cross, and rebirth as a miraculous illusion.

Jake Jones IV

ynquirer

Hi Jake Jones IV

I must confess that mentions to the cross and crucifixion in Galatians are somewhat intriguing. This is apparently the starting point for your argument. You cannot reach far as regard the big picture of early Christianity, though, since you for the most part base it on an outsider like Marcion.

On the other hand, I think your theory shares with Doherty’s more details than you are ready to admit. For where was Jesus’ crucifixion to be performed other than in a sub-lunar sphere? The man’s crucifixion was perforce an ecstatic moment for witnesses – allegedly the Galatians – at which both spheres, namely, sub-lunar and earthly coupled.

Yet the problem is that all that is sheer speculation. Doherty had to re-construe Paul as a historical character – allegedly a Middle-Platonist – in order to de-construe Jesus as such one. You now de-construe Paul (and not the whole Paul as far as I see but only “Paul” of Galatians) so as to over-construe the historical Marcion as a central character in the creation of the church, which he never was. He at his best was a local leader that attempted to take over the Roman church, without success. It is perhaps true that the Roman church grew much stronger as an outcome of his tour de force, so rising to a central position that had been disputed by the Jerusalem church so far; still the 135 CE Jewish rebellion contributed as much. And you clearly overstate your case by suggesting that Marcion might have shaped the church by providing it with its most undisputed literature, the Pauline epistles.

In 140-150 CE we find the church steadily established in both the eastern and the western parts of the Empire and spreading throughout, and there is hardly any evidence that it could possibly have reached that position almost overnight from a number of mystery cults, wandering preachers, and mythical heroes disconnected among each other so far.

jakejonesiv

Hi ynquirer,

I understand where you are coming from. Through the lens of the orthodox paradim, this doesn't make much sense. I thought the same thing. And then one morning, I woke up and "Everything I knew was wrong."

The bewildering variety of Redeemers and Christs in the early centuries CE tells against a radiation from a single historical founder. The heretics were already there. It is somewhat difficult to distinguish the origins of gnosticism
from the origins of Christianity, since any first century CE development of both is obscure.

Digression: We do not have any historical data from the late 20s first century about Jesus. We do not have a single eye witness account or artifact from anyone who could have had personal experience of alleged Jesus.
We have no primary evidence and precious little that can be argued to
be secondary evidence.

In fact, we do not have any Christian artifacts or extant writings at all from the first century.

There simply are no artifacts. The James Ossuary proved to be a miserable fake. The Alexamenos Graffito is sometimes alleged to be a first century depiction of the crucifiction of Jesus. However, this is a pagan artifact that depicts the crucifiction of a ass-headed god, and can be dated as late as the third century. This would be IMHO the asinine Lucan inducted into the mysteries of Isis/Osirus.

.


The Nag Hammadi documents provides evidence that myths (e.g. Derdekeas Paraphrase of Shem and the Illuminator Apocalypse of Adam) of the "The Nag Hammadi texts have shown us what breadth of variation we must assume in the redeemer conception of Gnosis. They have also finally taught us that we must depart from the theory of a Christian origin of Gnostic soteriology (which is admittedly very difficult for some scholars, especially theologians)." Gnosis, Kurt Rudolph, page 131. (Emphasis added).

That he has come in the flesh means only that he has entered into the
earthly human sphere. This is a mythological transformation (A. von
Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschite, Tubingen, 1931, page 211).

Here are the broad outlines of the Redeemer myth.
The divine emanated downward from the pure realm into the denser realms. At some point, Sophia peered into the inchoate darkness and was incited to lust and commited an impure act from which was born the Demiurge. This flawed being was ignorant of the higher orders above him, and created a world of seven heavens, and a host of Archons, Principalities, Powers, and Demons to populated it. The highest Father sent a messenger to investigate what was going on below. This messenger (angel) became entrapped in the lower order and, like a coyote chewing asunder his own leg, escaped by leaving behind part of his divine essence.

The sparks of divinity that had become trapped in the lower kingdoms of matter were destined to be reunited to their former unity. However, these sparks which had become the souls of men could not redeem themselves, being made drunken by matter. They must have the call to awaken by a redeemer. Here we begin to find congruence with the Christ myth. "Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light" (Ephesians 5;14).

Those who were "in Christ" (the pnuematic in late Gnostic terminology) in the beginning (Eph. 1:4) are those redeemed. The Marvelous Redeemer, (Christos/Chrestos), descends incognito throught the spheres, and fools the archons by taking on the appearance of the beings appropriate to each realm, and gains passage through each Archonic gate by means of secret passswords. When he emerges from the last gate, he begins to preach, and is put to death in ignorance by the demiurge and his minions (1 Cor. 2:8).

Those united with the descended god were deemed to have participated in the cosmic drama of suffering (Rom 8:17), crucifixion, death (Gal. 2:20; Rev 13:8), burial (Romans 6:4), resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6). The Christ cult initiates acted out the divine drama in secret rites, possibly enhanced by drugs. It is this shared experience (myth acted out in rites) instead of an historical founder, that form the common basis of understanding among the earliest Christians.

Jake Jones IV