Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 12:10 AM

Its severus' homily on st mark in French unpublished in english

maryhelena · 03-02-2012, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Avant lui, il est vrai, l'apôtre saint Paul avait paru dans Alexandrie , où il avait prêché la foi nouvelle, mais personne n'avait consenti à l'embrasser; au contraire, les infidèles l'ayant attaché à une colonne se mirent à le maltraiter, jusqu'au moment où, par la volonté de Dieu (soit-il loué!), la colonne, s'entrouvrant , reçut dans sa masse le corps du saint Apôtre, en sorte qu'il disparut à leurs yeux et qu'on ne le vit plus.

I tried to clean this up a bit:
Before him, it is true, the Apostle Paul had appeared in Alexandria, where he had preached the new faith, but nobody had embraced it; on the contrary, the infidels tied him to a column (cross?) and began to mistreat him, until, by the will of God (PBUH), the cross ???? the body of the holy Apostle, so he vanished from their eyes and we saw him no more.

Is this saying that the Alexandrians tried to crucify Paul (and Peter)?

Maybe it's that big mix-up re JC and 'Paul'. Mix-up re the parallels that Richard Pervo has outlined in 'The Mystery of Acts'. His chart re these parallels, I copied into the thread 'Paul as Jesus Reboot'.

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread....12#post7081912

Also from that thread:

Quote:

http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/7537_8226.pdf

Another feature of Paul in this material is that he can be represented as a savior figure in his own right (Acts of Paul, the Coptic Apocalypse, Acts, and Xanthippe and Polyxena). Many in this tradition sought to make Paul the subject of a biographical story and hence, according to Pervo, make him look a lot like Jesus (184–85).

The Making of Paul: Constructions of the Apostle in Early Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk) Richard Pervo

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 12:23 AM

No severus says elsewhere mark was christ

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 12:26 AM

une colonne = a column

Diogenes the Cynic · 03-02-2012, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I muddle my way through

The reason I ask is because Paul and Mark's writing styles are decidedly different. Paul is educated, erudite and articulate. Mark is noticably less educated, less grammatical, more primitive, blocky, basic. They don't sound anything alike.

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 12:32 AM

But our mark is a latinized version of the lost original. Severus mentions.the latinisms

maryhelena · 03-02-2012, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

No severus says elsewhere mark was christ

But you just wrote:

Quote:

I think St. Paul and St Mark were one and the same person.

So. 'Paul' = Mark and Mark = christ...:huh:

Stephan, once we get away from the idea that a messiah figure, an anointed figure, is a one time application - then - if some people, at sometime, decide that their leader, whoever, is some sort of salvation figure - then 'christ' would be the label available for reuse. Paul as Jesus Reboot = reuse of the messiah/anointed label. And if Mark/"Paul" = Agrippa (II) then, some people, at sometime, viewed this historical figure in that context. Which is, surely, what your whole theory is about?

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 12:36 AM

The latinisms (and barbarisms) presumably wouldnt have appeared on Clement's text of mark

tanya · 03-02-2012, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Its severus' homily on st mark in French unpublished in english

Severus of Al'Ashmunein was a Coptic bishop, living in the tenth century, best known, as Roger explained, for his work, published in Arabic, but he was fluent as well in Coptic. Was he also literate in Coptic, if so, why did he write his history/theological text in Arabic instead?

1. How did he come to write in French?

2. To my eye, this French does not look like that of the tenth century, but resembles more, to my way of thinking, the French of the 18-19 Century.

3. Any opinion of Severus, regarding purported second century authors, arrives on the scene about 8 centuries too late....We cannot even agree on whether Shakespeare or the Earl of Oxford wrote his plays, a mere four hundred years after the fact. If you watch only one movie per decade, make sure not to miss Anonymous.

4. Since Egypt in tenth century, i.e. one century prior to the first crusade, was ruled by Islam, how much distortion of "Christian" doctrine, in any theological text produced in that era, should we anticipate?

stephan huller · 03-02-2012, 01:02 AM

He wrote in Arabic. This is a French translation from the early 20th century. There is no reason to believe the Alexandrian tradition did not always venerate St Mark.

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

03-02-2012, 12:10 AM	#11
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Its severus' homily on st mark in French unpublished in english

03-02-2012, 12:23 AM	#13
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	No severus says elsewhere mark was christ

03-02-2012, 12:26 AM	#14
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	une colonne = a column

03-02-2012, 12:32 AM	#16
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	But our mark is a latinized version of the lost original. Severus mentions.the latinisms

03-02-2012, 12:36 AM	#18
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	The latinisms (and barbarisms) presumably wouldnt have appeared on Clement's text of mark

03-02-2012, 01:02 AM	#20
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	He wrote in Arabic. This is a French translation from the early 20th century. There is no reason to believe the Alexandrian tradition did not always venerate St Mark.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.