Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 05:24 PM

I have always wondered about the name 'Paul.' The Marcionites didn't accept the Catholic narratives which provide a 'biography' of the Apostle (i.e. Acts and the beginning and ends of the epistles which tell us about his former life as a Jew). Then Irenaeus and Tertullian hint that the Marcionites didn't even accept his identity as our familiar 'Paul.' Then the story in Acts only presents 'Paul' as a name he assumed after his conversion (i.e. it wasn't his birth name).

The place to start is an obscure phrase in Ruth chapter 4:1 (פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי) which scholars really don't even know what it means. The original is שבה פה פלני אלמני shebah poh, peloni almoni! which is usually translated "Hark ye, Mr. Such-a-one of such a place! come and sit down here." This is used when the person of the individual is known, and his name and residence unknown. אלמני almoni comes from אלם alam, to be silent or hidden, hence the Septuagint render it by κρυφε thou unknown person: פלני peloni comes from פלה palah, to sever or distinguish; you of such a particular place.

The earliest rabbinic traditions speak of Jesus as the peloni. I wonder whether the later writer mistook the Marcionite Christ or Paraclete for Jesus (once the Catholics assumed control of Christianity). I want to see if all of this somehow leads to 'Paul' being derived from the one of 'blotted out name' or an individual whose real name was withheld (i.e. 'blank space'). There are similar saying associated with R Meir about the gospel being 'blank spaces.' I wonder where all this might lead ...

Sorry I wrote this lying on my back stuffed with Thanksgiving dinner

Toto · 11-24-2011, 05:50 PM

http://targuman.org/blog/2011/06/07/peloni-almoni/

J-D · 11-24-2011, 05:57 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placeho...nguages#Hebrew

'Ploni Almoni' is apparently still used by the Israeli postal authorities in their addressing guidelines as a 'placeholder name' (like the English-speakers' 'John Doe' in legal and quasi-legal contexts, or 'Tom, Dick, and Harry' for a group, or 'John Q Public', 'Joe Blow', and other such in various parts of the English-speaking world).

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 06:00 PM

Genesius's Hebrew Dictionary traces pala back to pela (= wonderful) which is also the root of pele (not only the name of the greatest foolballer of all time but) a name of the messiah according to the Jews and one of the names of God according to the Samaritans

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 06:40 PM

Another possibility is that the name could refer to one “set apart” because of his holiness (cf Gal 1:15; Rom 1:1 etc)

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 09:10 PM

I think there are very powerful reason for suspecting that 'Paul' might have developed from a heretical interest in the concept of 'being set apart' or 'separated.' Origen refers to those who cite Paul's words that he was set apart from birth and concludes that we are saved by nature:

Quote:

The third point to notice is the phrase "separated unto the Gospel of God";599 and in the Epistle to the Galatians the Apostle says the same thing about himself: "When it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me even from my mother's womb, to reveal his son in me." 600 They who do not understand that any one who is predestined through the foreknowledge of God is the cause of the events foreknown, take hold of such expressions as these, and think they can by them establish their doctrine that men are so constituted by nature that they must be saved. [Philocalia 25.1]

and more again later:

Quote:

If, however, we observe the steps by which we approach predestination in the argument of the epistle which we are examining, we shall, once we have disposed of what inclines the simpler sort of readers to justify the charge of injustice brought against God's decree, be able to defend Him Who separated from his mother's womb, and separated unto the Gospel of God, Paul the servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an Apostle. The words stand thus: "We know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose. For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren: and whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."602

Let us, then, attend to the order of these statements. God first calls, and then justifies, and He does not justify those whom He did not call; and He calls, having before the calling foreordained, and He does not call whom He did not foreordain;603 and the foreordaining is not the origin of His calling and justifying; for if it were the origin of all that follows they who bring in by a side wind the absurd doctrine of souls being "naturally constituted" 604 |210 might very plausibly have claimed the victory; but the foreknowledge comes before the foreordaining, for "whom he did foreknow," says the Apostle, "he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son." 605 So then, God first surveyed the long series of events, and perceiving the will of certain men to be inclined to godliness, and also their efforts to attain thereto when their will was so inclined, and further, how they would wholly give themselves up to a virtuous life, He foreknew them, for He knows the present and foreknows the future; and whom He thus foreknew, He foreordained to be conformed to the image of His Son. Now we know there is a Person, Who is the image of the invisible God,606 and it is His image which is called the image of the Son of God; and we think that this image is the human 607 soul which the Son of God assumed, and which for its merit became the image of the image of God. And it was to this, which we think is the image of the image of the Son of God, that God foreordained those to be conformed, whom, on account of His foreknowledge of them, He did foreordain. We must not therefore suppose that the foreknowledge of God is the cause of future events; but inasmuch as these events would follow the agent's own impulses, on this account He foreknew, for He knoweth all things before they be:608 and inasmuch as He knoweth all things before they be, He foreknew certain individuals and foreordained them to be conformed to the image of His Son; but others He saw |211 estranged. And if any one objects, and asks whether what God foreknows might possibly not occur, we shall say it possibly might not; but granting this possibility, there is no necessity that it should occur, or not occur; and the events will not in the least be necessitated, but there is also the possibility of their not occurring. The subject of possibilities, however, belongs to the science of the skilled logician; so that if a man will cleanse the eye of his mind, he may thus be able to follow the subtle arguments, and may understand how, even in the course of ordinary events, there is nothing to prevent the possibility of a given circumstance issuing many ways, though, in fact, there will be only one out of the many, and that not necessitated; and the foreknowledge of it means that it will be, but will not of necessity be; for though it may possibly not occur, the prediction of it will not be conjecture but real foreknowledge.

and again:

Quote:

And let no one think that we have said nothing about the phrase "according to his purpose," because it may seem to hamper our argument; for Paul says, "We know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose." 609 The critic should observe that the Apostle also at once gave the reason for their being culled according to His purpose, saying, "Whom he did foreknow, them he also foreordained to bo conformed to the image of his Son." And who more fitting to be included in the justifying calling by the purpose of God, than those who love Him? And that the cause of the purpose and foreknowledge lies in our Free Will is clearly shown by the words, "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God"; for Paul all but said that if all things work together for good, the reason is that they who love God are worthy of their working together. And here let us ask our opponents a question, and let them give us an answer. Just for a moment let us assume that we have some measure of Free Will,----and we will tell them that this is a fact, though they |212 seek to destroy Free Will,----until on that assumption we can prove the unsoundness of their view. If Free Will is indeed a reality, will God, when He considers the chain of future events, foreknow what will be done by each possessor of Free Will through the exercise of that Free Will, or will He not foreknow? To say that He will not foreknow, is worthy of a man who knows nothing of the omniscience and majesty of God. But if they will admit His foreknowledge, let us ask them another question: Is His knowing the cause of future occurrences, assuming that men have Free Will? Or does He foreknow because the events will come to pass? And is it the truth that His foreknowledge is by no means the cause of what will result from man's Free Will? It is then possible for a man created free, under given circumstances, not to do one thing and to do another.

and again in the conclusion of the section:

Quote:

But even supposing that the words "Separated unto the gospel of God," 614 and "He that separated me from my mother's womb," 615 imply some necessity, how could the Apostle reasonably say, "I buffet my body and bring it into bondage, lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be |213 rejected." 616 And further, "Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel." 617 For he clearly shows hereby that if he did not buffet his body and bring it into bondage as much as he could, he would be rejected after preaching to others, and that woe might have been unto him if he did not preach the Gospel. Perhaps, then, it was under these conditions that God separated him from his mother's womb: God saw the cause of the just separation, viz. that Paul would buffet his body, and bring it into bondage, because he feared lest having preached to others he himself might be rejected, and that, knowing there would be woe to him unless he preached the Gospel, being moved with fear towards God so that he might not be in woe, he would not hold his peace but would preach the Gospel. And this He also saw Who separated him from his mother's womb, and separated him unto His own Gospel, viz. that he would be in labours more abundantly,618 in prisons more frequently, in stripes above measure, in death oft; that of the Jews he would five times receive forty stripes save one, that he would be thrice beaten with rods, once be stoned; and that he would suffer all this rejoicing in tribulations, and that, knowing that tribulation worketh endurance,619 he would endure. For these reasons it was meet that he should be separated unto the Gospel of God, as it was foreknown that he would be, and that he should be separated from his mother's womb. And he was separated unto the Gospel of God not because his nature was specially endowed and by its constitution surpassed the natures of men unlike him, but on account of his actions, first foreknown, but afterwards realised, every one of them, through his apostolic fitness and apostolic purpose. This is not the time to discuss the passage in the psalm, for it was a digression; so, God willing, it shall be discussed in its proper place, whenever we interpret the psalm. The foregoing will abundantly suffice for the term "separated."

And Clement use of the term in the Stromata

Quote:

"For the minds of those even who are deemed grave, pleasure makes waxen," according to Plato; since "each pleasure and pain nails to the body the soul" of the man, that does not sever and crucify himself from the passions (μὴ ἀφορίζοντος καὶ ἀποσταυροῦντος ἑαυτὸν τῶν παθῶν). "He that loses his life," says the Lord, "shall save it;" either giving it up by exposing it to danger for the Lord's sake, as He did for us, or loosing it from fellowship with its habitual life. For if you would loose, and withdraw, and separate (ἀφορίσα) - for this is what the cross means - your soul from the delight and pleasure that is in this life, you will possess it, found and resting in the looked-for hope. And this would be the exercise of death, if we would be content with those desires which are measured according to nature alone, which do not pass the limit of those which are in accordance with nature -- by going to excess, or going against nature -- in which the possibility of sinning arises. [Stromata 2.20.108]

"‘So come out from among them and put a barrier between you (ἀφορίσθητε),’ says the Lord. ‘Do not touch impurity. I shall receive you. I shall be a father to you. You will be sons and daughters to me,’ says the almighty Lord." He is prophetic in telling us to put up a barrier to separate us (ἀφορισθῆναι) not from the married, as they assert, but from the gentiles who are still living immorally, and also from the heresies of which we have been speaking, which believe in neither chastity nor God. That is why Paul too speaks strongly against a similar group to those mentioned in the words, "Beloved, you possess these promises. Let us purify our hearts from everything which might stain flesh or spirit, aiming at the goal of holiness in the fear of God." [ibid 3.73, 74.1]

They say, then, that Hipparchus the Pythagorean, being guilty of writing the tenets of Pythagoras in plain language, was expelled from the school, and a pillar raised for him as if he had been dead. Wherefore also in the Barbarian philosophy they call those dead who have fallen away from the dogmas, and have placed the mind in subjection to carnal passions. "For what fellowship hath righteousness and iniquity?" according to the divine apostle. "Or what communion hath light with darkness? or what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what portion hath the believer with the unbeliever?" For the honours of the Olympians and of mortals lie apart. "Wherefore also go forth from the midst of them, and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be to you for a Father, and ye shall be my sons and daughters." It was not only the Pythagoreans and Plato then, that concealed many things; but the Epicureans too say that they have things that may not be uttered, and do not allow all to peruse those writings. [ibid 5.9]

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 10:22 PM

And then I took a second look at the only reference to these lines employed by the heretics to prove that everything is preordained and - lo and behold - Clement seems to argue a similar position to Origen's adversaries:

Quote:

But the very hairs of your head are all numbered, says the Lord; Matthew 10:30 those on the chin, too, are numbered, and those on the whole body. There must be therefore no plucking out, contrary to God's appointment, which has counted them in according to His will. Do you not know yourselves, says the apostle, that Christ Jesus is in you? 2 Corinthians 13:5 Whom, had we known as dwelling in us, I know not how we could have dared to dishonour. But the using of pitch to pluck out hair (I shrink from even mentioning the shamelessness connected with this process), and in the act of bending back and bending down, the violence done to nature's modesty by stepping out and bending backwards in shameful postures, yet the doers not ashamed of themselves, but conducting themselves without shame in the midst of the youth, and in the gymnasium, where the prowess of man is tried; the following of this unnatural practice, is it not the extreme of licentiousness? For those who engage in such practices in public will scarcely behave with modesty to any at home. Their want of shame in public attests their unbridled licentiousness in private. For he who in the light of day denies his manhood, will prove himself manifestly a woman by night. There shall not be, said the Word by Moses, a harlot of the daughters of Israel; there shall not be a fornicator of the sons of Israel. Deuteronomy 23:17

But the pitch does good, it is said. Nay, it defames, say I. No one who entertains right sentiments would wish to appear a fornicator, were he not the victim of that vice, and study to defame the beauty of his form. No one would, I say, voluntarily choose to do this. For if God foreknew those who are called, according to His purpose, to be conformed to the image of His Son, for whose sake, according to the blessed apostle, He has appointed Him to be the first-born among many brethren, Romans 8:28-29 are they not godless who treat with indignity the body which is of like form with the Lord?

Compare with Origen's statement about his adversaries as cited in the Philocalia:

Quote:

We must not therefore suppose that the foreknowledge of God is the cause of future events; but inasmuch as these events would follow the agent's own impulses, on this account He foreknew, for He knoweth all things before they be: and inasmuch as He knoweth all things before they be, He foreknew certain individuals and foreordained them to be conformed to the image of His Son; but others He saw |211 estranged. And if any one objects, and asks whether what God foreknows might possibly not occur, we shall say it possibly might not

Like I have always said in this forum - Origen and Clement's silence about the other isn't accidental. There are many reasons to think the 'heretics' or 'Marcionites' referenced by Origen in his writings include Clement.

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 11:06 PM

And something else I just noticed about the passage in the Philocalia - it isn't just an encapsulation of a heretical argument about the Pauline usage of the term 'separated' or a heretical argument about the term separated in the Epistle to the Romans but specifically Romans chapter 8 as known to the Marcionites and Clement of Alexandria.

As I have noted many times here Tertullian tells us that the Marcionite material skips over most of the material in Romans chapter 9. The text basically goes from Romans chapter 8 to Romans chapter 10. I noted the same thing about Clement's citations of Romans save for the fact that he only cites Romans chapter 9 verse 14. Notice all the citations of Romans in Philocalia 25:

Quote:

1. The third point to notice is the phrase "separated unto the Gospel of God"; [Romans 1:1] and in the Epistle to the Galatians the Apostle says the same thing about himself: "When it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me even from my mother's womb, to reveal his son in me." They who do not understand that any one who is predestined through the foreknowledge of God is the cause of the events foreknown, take hold of such expressions as these, and think they can by them establish their doctrine that men are so constituted by nature that they must be saved. And some employ such passages to destroy man's Free Will, and also make use of the words in the Psalms, "The wicked are estranged from the womb." We may easily meet this by asking them to explain what comes next; for it is written, "The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a serpent." [Psalm 58:3] And we will ask those who insist on the clearness of the words, whether the wicked who were estranged from the womb, as soon as they were born went astray and erred from the way of salvation, and whether this was their own doing. And how could the wicked who were estranged from the womb, both go astray as soon as they were born and also speak lies? For our opponents, I suppose, will never be able to show that in the moment of birth they uttered an articulate cry, and told lies. If, however, we observe the steps by which we approach predestination in the argument of the epistle which we are examining, we shall, once we have disposed of what inclines the simpler sort of readers to justify the charge of injustice brought against God's decree [τοῦ ἀδικίαν κατηγοροῦντος κατὰ τοῦ θείου δόγματος καθελόντεςcf. Romans 9:14], be able to defend Him Who separated from his mother's womb, and separated unto the Gospel of God, Paul the servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an Apostle. [Romans 1:1] The words stand thus: "We know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose. For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren: and whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified." [Romans 8:28 - 30]

2. Let us, then, attend to the order of these statements. God first calls, and then justifies, and He does not justify those whom He did not call; and He calls, having before the calling foreordained, and He does not call whom He did not foreordain; and the foreordaining is not the origin of His calling and justifying; for if it were the origin of all that follows they who bring in by a side wind the absurd doctrine of souls being "naturally constituted" might very plausibly have claimed the victory; but the foreknowledge comes before the foreordaining, for "whom he did foreknow," says the Apostle, "he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son." [Romans 8:29] So then, God first surveyed the long series of events, and perceiving the will of certain men to be inclined to godliness, and also their efforts to attain thereto when their will was so inclined, and further, how they would wholly give themselves up to a virtuous life, He foreknew them, for He knows the present and foreknows the future; and whom He thus foreknew, He foreordained to be conformed to the image of His Son. Now we know there is a Person, Who is the image of the invisible God, and it is His image which is called the image of the Son of God; and we think that this image is the human 607 soul which the Son of God assumed, and which for its merit became the image of the image of God. And it was to this, which we think is the image of the image of the Son of God, that God foreordained those to be conformed, whom, on account of His foreknowledge of them, He did foreordain. We must not therefore suppose that the foreknowledge of God is the cause of future events; but inasmuch as these events would follow the agent's own impulses, on this account He foreknew, for He knoweth all things before they be:608 and inasmuch as He knoweth all things before they be, He foreknew certain individuals and foreordained them to be conformed to the image of His Son; but others He saw estranged. And if any one objects, and asks whether what God foreknows might possibly not occur, we shall say it possibly might not; but granting this possibility, there is no necessity that it should occur, or not occur; and the events will not in the least be necessitated, but there is also the possibility of their not occurring. The subject of possibilities, however, belongs to the science of the skilled logician; so that if a man will cleanse the eye of his mind, he may thus be able to follow the subtle arguments, and may understand how, even in the course of ordinary events, there is nothing to prevent the possibility of a given circumstance issuing many ways, though, in fact, there will be only one out of the many, and that not necessitated; and the foreknowledge of it means that it will be, but will not of necessity be; for though it may possibly not occur, the prediction of it will not be conjecture but real foreknowledge.

3. And let no one think that we have said nothing about the phrase "according to his purpose," because it may seem to hamper our argument; for Paul says, "We know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose." [Romans 8:29] The critic should observe that the Apostle also at once gave the reason for their being culled according to His purpose, saying, "Whom he did foreknow, them he also foreordained to bo conformed to the image of his Son." And who more fitting to be included in the justifying calling by the purpose of God, than those who love Him? And that the cause of the purpose and foreknowledge lies in our Free Will is clearly shown by the words, "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God" [Romans 8:28]; for Paul all but said that if all things work together for good, the reason is that they who love God are worthy of their working together. And here let us ask our opponents a question, and let them give us an answer. Just for a moment let us assume that we have some measure of Free Will,----and we will tell them that this is a fact, though they seek to destroy Free Will,----until on that assumption we can prove the unsoundness of their view. If Free Will is indeed a reality, will God, when He considers the chain of future events, foreknow what will be done by each possessor of Free Will through the exercise of that Free Will, or will He not foreknow? To say that He will not foreknow, is worthy of a man who knows nothing of the omniscience and majesty of God. But if they will admit His foreknowledge, let us ask them another question: Is His knowing the cause of future occurrences, assuming that men have Free Will? Or does He foreknow because the events will come to pass? And is it the truth that His foreknowledge is by no means the cause of what will result from man's Free Will? It is then possible for a man created free, under given circumstances, not to do one thing and to do another.

4. For these reasons, and others like them which might be adduced, we uphold the words, "Well done, good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will set thee over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord," 610 and meaning attaches to all commendation. There is sound reason also in the words, "Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou oughtest to have put my money to the bankers." 611 Only thus can we maintain the justice of what is said to those on His right hand, "Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat," 612 and so on; and to those on the left hand, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat," 613 and so on. But even supposing that the words "Separated unto the gospel of God," [Romans 1:1] and "He that separated me from my mother's womb," 615 imply some necessity, how could the Apostle reasonably say, "I buffet my body and bring it into bondage, lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be |213 rejected." 616 And further, "Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel." 617 For he clearly shows hereby that if he did not buffet his body and bring it into bondage as much as he could, he would be rejected after preaching to others, and that woe might have been unto him if he did not preach the Gospel. Perhaps, then, it was under these conditions that God separated him from his mother's womb: God saw the cause of the just separation, viz. that Paul would buffet his body, and bring it into bondage, because he feared lest having preached to others he himself might be rejected, and that, knowing there would be woe to him unless he preached the Gospel, being moved with fear towards God so that he might not be in woe, he would not hold his peace but would preach the Gospel. And this He also saw Who separated him from his mother's womb, and separated him unto His own Gospel, viz. that he would be in labours more abundantly,618 in prisons more frequently, in stripes above measure, in death oft; that of the Jews he would five times receive forty stripes save one, that he would be thrice beaten with rods, once be stoned; and that he would suffer all this rejoicing in tribulations, and that, knowing that tribulation worketh endurance,619 he would endure. For these reasons it was meet that he should be separated unto the Gospel of God, as it was foreknown that he would be, and that he should be separated from his mother's womb. And he was separated unto the Gospel of God not because his nature was specially endowed and by its constitution surpassed the natures of men unlike him, but on account of his actions, first foreknown, but afterwards realised, every one of them, through his apostolic fitness and apostolic purpose. This is not the time to discuss the passage in the psalm, for it was a digression; so, God willing, it shall be discussed in its proper place, whenever we interpret the psalm. The foregoing will abundantly suffice for the term "separated."

The point here clearly is that Origen just happens to be citing a heretical interpretation of that concentrates on chapter 8 of Romans which just so happens - from the Alexandrian and Marcionite perspective at least - to have had major Catholic reworking done in chapter 9 (a third century addition) - in order to 'disprove' or interrupt the original doctrine of predestination.

stephan huller · 11-24-2011, 11:52 PM

While we might seem to be in a dead end (Clement only once refers to this line in Romans 8 and never to Galatians chapter 1) it is worth noting that Clement does cite at least one reference Origen says is used by his adversaries who preach an absolutely deterministic God - Psalm 58. While Clement does not cite the exact words cited by Origen the material that follows is referenced once in the Stromata and once in the Letter to Theodore. Both are quite interesting to take a close look at.

First the whole section in Psalm 58 (red is used by Origen's enemies in the Philocalia, black material used by Clement in the Stromata, blue in the Letter to Theodore):

Quote:

3 Even from birth the wicked go astray;
from the womb they are wayward, spreading lies.
4 Their venom is like the venom of a snake,
like that of a cobra that has stopped its ears,
5 that will not heed the tune of the charmer,
however skillful the enchanter may be.
6 Break the teeth in their mouths, O God;
LORD, tear out the fangs of those lions!
7 Let them vanish like water that flows away;
when they draw the bow, let their arrows fall short.
8 May they be like a slug that melts away as it moves along,
like a stillborn child that never sees the sun.

Origen's opponents use Psalm 58:3 to prove that even the Jews believed in God establishing good and evil in men's souls. Now notice that Clement uses Psalm 58:4 as part of a discussion of God being the real cause of the determining force of astrology and idolatry. Clement writes:

Quote:

If, then, none of these, nor of the images formed by human hands, and destitute of feeling, is held to be a God, while a providence exercised about us is evidently the result of a divine power, it remains only to acknowledge this, that He alone who is truly God, only truly is and subsists. But those who are insensible to this are like men who have drunk mandrake or some other drug. May God grant that you may at length awake from this slumber, and know God; and that neither Gold, nor Stone, nor Tree, nor Action, nor Suffering, nor Disease, nor Fear, may appear in your eyes as a god. For there are, in sooth, “on the fruitful earth thrice ten thousand” demons, not immortal, nor indeed mortal; for they are not endowed with sensation, so as to render them capable of death, but only things of wood and stone, that hold despotic sway over men insulting and violating life through the force of custom. “The earth is the Lord’s,” it is said, “and the fulness thereof.”993993 [Ps. xxiv. 1; 1 Cor. x. 26, 28] Then why darest thou, while luxuriating in the bounties of the Lord, to ignore the Sovereign Ruler? “Leave my earth,” the Lord will say to thee. “Touch not the water which I bestow. Partake not of the fruits of the earth produced by my husbandry.”

Give to God recompense for your sustenance; acknowledge thy Master. Thou art God’s creature. What belongs to Him, how can it with justice be alienated? For that which is alienated, being deprived of the properties that belonged to it, is also deprived of truth. For, after the fashion of Niobe, or, to express myself more mystically, like the Hebrew woman called by the ancients Lot’s wife, are ye not turned into a state of insensibility? This woman, we have heard, was turned into stone for her love of Sodom. And those who are godless, addicted to impiety, hard-hearted and foolish, are Sodomites. Believe that these utterances are addressed to you from God. For think not that stones, and stocks, and birds, and serpents are sacred things, and men are not; but, on the contrary, regard men as truly sacred, [1 Pet. ii. 17. This appeal in behalf of the sanctity of man as man, shows the workings of the apostolic precept.] and take beasts and stones for what they are. For there are miserable wretches of human kind, who consider that God utters His voice by the raven and the jackdaw, but says nothing by man; and honour the raven as a messenger of God.

But the man of God, who croaks not, nor chatters, but speaks rationally and instructs lovingly, alas, they persecute; and while he is inviting them to cultivate righteousness, they try inhumanly to slay him, neither welcoming the grace which comes from above, nor fearing the penalty. For they believe not God, nor understand His power, whose love to man is ineffable; and His hatred of evil is inconceivable. His anger augments punishment against sin; His love bestows blessings on repentance. It is the height of wretchedness to be deprived of the help which comes from God. Hence this blindness of eyes and dulness of hearing are more grievous than other inflictions of the evil one; for the one deprives them of heavenly vision, the other robs them of divine instruction. But ye, thus maimed as respects the truth, blind in mind, deaf in understanding, are not grieved, are not pained, have had no desire to see heaven and the Maker of heaven, nor, by fixing your choice on salvation, have sought to hear the Creator of the universe, and to learn of Him; for no hindrance stands in the way of him who is bent on the knowledge of God. Neither childlessness, nor poverty, nor obscurity, nor want, can hinder him who eagerly strives after the knowledge of God; nor does any one who has conquered by brass or iron the true wisdom for himself choose to exchange it, for it is vastly preferred to everything else.

Christ is able to save in every place. For he that is fired with ardour and admiration for righteousness, being the lover of One who needs nothing, needs himself but little, having treasured up his bliss in nothing but himself and God, where is neither moth, robber, nor pirate, but the eternal Giver of good. With justice, then, have you been compared to those serpents who shut their ears against the charmers. For “their mind,” says the Scripture, “is like the serpent, like the deaf adder, which stoppeth her ear, and will not hear the voice of the charmers.”997997 Ps. lviii. 4, 5. [It was supposed that adders deafened themselves by laying one ear on the earth, and closing the other with the tail.] But allow yourselves to feel the influence of the charming strains of sanctity, and receive that mild word of ours, and reject the deadly poison, that it may be granted to you to divest yourselves as much as possible of destruction, as they have been divested of old age. Hear me, and do not stop your ears; do not block up the avenues of hearing, but lay to heart what is said. Excellent is the medicine of immortality! Stop at length your grovelling reptile motions. [Ps. lviii. 4, 5] “For the enemies of the Lord,” says Scripture, “shall lick the dust.” [Ps. lxxii. 9] Raise your eyes from earth to the skies, look up to heaven, admire the sight, cease watching with outstretched head the heel of the righteous, and hindering the way of truth. Be wise and harmless. Perchance the Lord will endow you with the wing of simplicity (for He has resolved to give wings to those that are earth-born), that you may leave your holes and dwell in heaven.[Exhortation 10]

While the specific line - "The wicked are estranged from the womb. The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of a serpent" [Psalm 58:3] - is not explicitly referenced, the idea clearly pervades the whole discussion. In fact, I am surprised at how depressing the vision of human salvation is.

In a very similar manner to the Marcionite understanding of redemption, Clement essentially only sees humanity as being the slaves of this world or the slaves of the true God. It is very much like the opening lines of the Acts of Judas Thomas where the disciple is sold into slavery as a metaphor for his enslavement by God. In this original understanding of Christianity there is no human freedom. Forget about 'freedom of will' completely. All of human behavior is determined by some unseen power. All one can hope for is to be redeemed from enslavement to the world. But how you ask? By the erotic appeal of love for Jesus.

Just look again at the description here - we haven't even started to look at to Theodore yet. The description here is lifted from the Phaedrus where homosexual intercourse is condemned but not homosexual desire. Plato imagined that this kind of desire seized the individual possessively. One was 'enslaved' to its powers no less than other kinds of servitude. But the end result there no less than here it "causes the wings to grow," Phaedrus 255d.

The point again is that here no less than in other places in Clement's writings the Christian's desire for Christ is what draws him away from the slavery to powers of this world. This is what 'love' means in the Pauline writings too according to Clement. It is the sublimated erotic love of the Phaedrus directed at Jesus. Before we move on to the Letter to Theodore's use of the same passage from Psalm 58 let's look at another example from the Stromata to see how Clement imagines humanity to be 'redeemed' from the world by another means of possession.

In Stromata Book Seven he uses the imagery from Psalm 58 to again says that Christ's hold on the individual is like the enchantment of a seductive tune:

Quote:

But if, like the deaf serpents, (Psalm 58:4 LXX) they listen not to the song (Psalm 58:5 LXX) called new, though very old, may they be chastised by God, (Psalm 58:6 LXX) and undergo paternal admonition (Psalm 58:7 LXX) previous to the Judgment (Psalm 58:11 LXX), till they become ashamed and repent, but not rush through headlong unbelief, and precipitate themselves into judgment. For there are partial corrections, which are called chastisements, which many of us who have been in transgression incur, by falling away from the Lord's people (τοῦ λαοῦ τοῦ κυριακοῦ). But as children are by their teacher, or their father, so are we pruned by Forethought (τῆς προνοίας κολαζόμεθα). But God does not punish, for punishment is retaliation for evil. He prunes (κολάζει), however, for good (τὸ χρήσιμον) to those who are pruned, collectively and individually (καὶ κοινῇ καὶ ἰδίᾳ τοῖς κολαζομένοις).

Clement immediately goes on here to say that the heretics are those who can't be hypnotized by the spell of divine enchantment:

Quote:

I have served up (παρεθέμην) these things from a wish (βουλόμενος) to avert those (ἀποτρέψαι), who are eager to learn (εὐεμπτωσίας τοὺς φιλομαθοῦντας), from the liability to fall into heresies, and out of a desire to stop them (ἀποπαῦσαι) from superficiality (ἐπιπολαζούσης), or ignorance (ἀμαθίας), or stupidity (ἀβελτερίας) or bad disposition (καχεξίας εἴθ), or whatever it should be called. And in the attempt to persuade and lead to the truth (καὶ προσαγαγεῖν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ) those who are not entirely incurable (μὴ παντάπασιν ἀνιάτους), I have made use of these words (τοῖσδε συνεχρησάμην τοῖς λόγοις). For there are some who cannot bear at all to hearken (ἐπακοῦσαι) to those who exhort them to turn to the truth (τῶν πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν προτρεπόντων); and they attempt to play the fool (φλυαρεῖν), pouring out blasphemies against the truth (βλασφήμους τῆς ἀληθείας καταχέοντες λόγους), claiming for themselves the knowledge of the greatest things (σφίσιν αὐτοῖς τὰ μέγιστα τῶν ὄντων ἐγνωκέναι συγχωροῦντες), without having learned, or inquired, or laboured, or discovered the path to follow (τὴν ἀκολουθίαν), -- whom one should pity (ἐλεήσειεν) rather than hate for such perversity (τῆς τοιαύτης διαστροφῆς). But if one is curable, able to bear (like fire or steel) the outspokenness of the truth, which cuts away and burns their false opinions.

Now compare the context of these statements with the opening reference to Psalm 58 in to Theodore clearly demonstrating that Clement wrote this letter too:

Quote:

You did well in shutting the mouth (= ἐπιστομίσας cf. Psalm 58:6) of the unspeakable teachings of the Carpocratians. For these are the "wandering stars" referred to in the prophecy, who wander from the narrow road of the commandments into a boundless abyss of the carnal and bodily sins. For, priding themselves in knowledge, as they say, "of the deep things of Satan," they do not know that they are casting themselves away into "the nether world of the darkness" of falsity, and, boasting that they are free, they have become slaves of servile desires. Such men are to be opposed in all ways and altogether. For, even if they should say something true, one who loves the truth should not, even so, agree with them. For not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith.

I don't want to belabor the point any more than I have to. I won't cite the familiar reference to the youth loving Jesus and (at least implicitly) being 'enchanted by desire' so as to grow wings to fly up to heaven (cf. Irenaeus's description of the Gospel of Mark in AH 3.11.7). The real point that everyone misses is that to Theodore might well be directed against Origen and his breakaway sectarian association. Of course this could never be proved but I have always wondered whether Origen (= born of Osiris) is some how related to the elusive term Carpocrates = Harpocrates = 'Horus the child' (of Osiris).

11-24-2011, 05:24 PM	#1
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Did “Paul” Mean the Apostle's Real Name Had Been Blotted Out? I have always wondered about the name 'Paul.' The Marcionites didn't accept the Catholic narratives which provide a 'biography' of the Apostle (i.e. Acts and the beginning and ends of the epistles which tell us about his former life as a Jew). Then Irenaeus and Tertullian hint that the Marcionites didn't even accept his identity as our familiar 'Paul.' Then the story in Acts only presents 'Paul' as a name he assumed after his conversion (i.e. it wasn't his birth name). The place to start is an obscure phrase in Ruth chapter 4:1 (פְּלֹנִי אַלְמֹנִי) which scholars really don't even know what it means. The original is שבה פה פלני אלמני shebah poh, peloni almoni! which is usually translated "Hark ye, Mr. Such-a-one of such a place! come and sit down here." This is used when the person of the individual is known, and his name and residence unknown. אלמני almoni comes from אלם alam, to be silent or hidden, hence the Septuagint render it by κρυφε thou unknown person: פלני peloni comes from פלה palah, to sever or distinguish; you of such a particular place. The earliest rabbinic traditions speak of Jesus as the peloni. I wonder whether the later writer mistook the Marcionite Christ or Paraclete for Jesus (once the Catholics assumed control of Christianity). I want to see if all of this somehow leads to 'Paul' being derived from the one of 'blotted out name' or an individual whose real name was withheld (i.e. 'blank space'). There are similar saying associated with R Meir about the gospel being 'blank spaces.' I wonder where all this might lead ... Sorry I wrote this lying on my back stuffed with Thanksgiving dinner

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

11-24-2011, 05:50 PM	#2
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	http://targuman.org/blog/2011/06/07/peloni-almoni/

11-24-2011, 05:57 PM	#3
J-D Moderator - General Religious Discussions Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: New South Wales Posts: 27,330	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placeho...nguages#Hebrew 'Ploni Almoni' is apparently still used by the Israeli postal authorities in their addressing guidelines as a 'placeholder name' (like the English-speakers' 'John Doe' in legal and quasi-legal contexts, or 'Tom, Dick, and Harry' for a group, or 'John Q Public', 'Joe Blow', and other such in various parts of the English-speaking world).

11-24-2011, 06:00 PM	#4
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Genesius's Hebrew Dictionary traces pala back to pela (= wonderful) which is also the root of pele (not only the name of the greatest foolballer of all time but) a name of the messiah according to the Jews and one of the names of God according to the Samaritans

11-24-2011, 06:40 PM	#5
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Another possibility is that the name could refer to one “set apart” because of his holiness (cf Gal 1:15; Rom 1:1 etc)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.