Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:09 AM

In Book 5:6 Tertullian writes:

Quote:

and according to the document you share with us the evil spirit knew that he was the holy one of God and was named Jesus and had come to destroy them

But we already saw that the Marcionites denied both of these premises - i.e. (a) that Jesus was the Holy One of God and (b) he was named Jesus. After all, Tertullian notes, Jesus rebuked the demon.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:10 AM

All in all very, very few references to 'Jesus' in Tertullian's Against Marcion and almost all of them contentious ones. 3 in Book 1, none in Book 2, 1 in Book Three and a handful in the rest.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:25 AM

Irenaeus seems to imply that Moses was called 'the man of God' but was wrongly identified by the heretics as 'the god of this world':

Quote:

And Moses himself, being a man of God, was indeed given as a god before Pharaoh; but he is not properly termed Lord, nor is called God by the prophets, but is spoken of by the Spirit as "Moses, the faithful minister and servant of God," which also he was. As to their affirming that Paul said plainly in the Second [Epistle] to the Corinthians, "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not," and maintaining that there is indeed one god of this world, but another who is beyond all principality, and beginning, and power, we are not to blame if they, who give out that they do themselves know mysteries beyond God, know not how to read Paul. For if any one read the passage thus--according to Paul's custom, as I show elsewhere, and by many examples, that he uses transposition of words --"In whom God," then pointing it off, and making a slight interval, and at the same time read also the rest [of the sentence] in one [clause], "hath blinded the minds of them of this world that believe not," he shall find out the true [sense]; that it is contained in the expression, "God hath blinded the minds of the unbelievers of this world." And this is shown by means of the little interval [between the clause]. For Paul does not say, "the God of this world," as if recognising any other beyond Him; but he confessed God as indeed God. And he says, "the unbelievers of this world," because they shall not inherit the future age of incorruption. I shall show from Paul himself, how it is that God has blinded the minds of them that believe not, in the course of this work, that we may not just at present distract our mind from the matter in hand, [by wandering] at large. From many other instances also, we may discover that the apostle frequently uses a transposed order in his sentences, due to the rapidity of his discourses, and the impetus of the Spirit which is in him ...[Against Heresies 4:6 - 7]

The fact that Moses might be the god of this world might be implied by the context of the two statements in 2 Corinthians:

Quote:

Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!

Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate[a] the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. 2 Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,”[a] made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ.

spin · 06-10-2013, 12:30 AM

Sorry, run the Isu and Irenaeus stuff past me again as briefly and factually as possible. I couldn't find anything in AH 2.22, though the phrase two and a half letters is in 2.24, though it regards the name Baruch. So, exact details would be helpful: I don't want to waste more time getting nowhere, looking for what you have clear in your mind.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:32 AM

Baruch = 4 letters בָּרוּךְ

Sloppy reading spin:

Soter is a Greek word of five letters; but, on the other hand, in the Hebrew tongue, Jesus contains only two letters and a half. The total which they reckon up, viz., eight hundred and eighty-eight, therefore falls to the ground. And throughout, the Hebrew letters do not correspond in number with the Greek, although these especially, as being the more ancient and unchanging, ought to uphold the reckoning connected with the names. For these ancient, original, and generally called sacred letters(10) of the Hebrews are ten in number (but they are written by means of fifteen(11)), the last letter being joined to the first. And thus they write some of these letters according to their natural sequence, just as we do, but others in a reverse direction, from the right hand towards the left, thus tracing the letters backwards. The name Christ, too, ought to be capable of being reckoned up in harmony with the Aeons of their Pleroma, inasmuch as, according to their statements, He was produced for the establishment and rectification of their Pleroma. The Father, too, in the same way, ought, both by means of letters and numerical value, to contain the number of those Aeons who were produced by Him; Bythus, in like manner, and not less Monogenes; but pre- eminently the name which is above all others, by which God is called, and which in the Hebrew tongue is expressed by Baruch,(1) [a word] which also contains two and a half letters.

Harvey explicitly identifies the name as yeshu p. 334 http://archive.org/stream/sanctiiren.../n556/mode/2up

spin · 06-10-2013, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Baruch = 4 letters בָּרוּךְ

Sloppy reading spin:

I didn't actually read at all, after finding nothing at the reference, AH 2.22, you gave. I just searched for "two and a half letters".

:wave:

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:43 AM

And I didn't want to bring this up initially but once I look at Irenaeus's idiotic interpretation of Hebrew, if Irenaeus was first responsible for rendering אישו as Ιησους then we should expect accuracy, rhyme or reason. There is no way to make baruch = 2 1/2 letters. sura ussar = Lord of heaven and earth? The opening lines of Genesis = 'a son in the beginning.' Anything goes apparently.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:46 AM

Yes there are only two references I ever use from Irenaeus Book 2.

2.22 = Isa 61.2
2.24 = yeshu

Most of the Patristic references I give are off the top of my head. I don't know if it is pathetic or impressive that I can know by heart (slightly inaccurately) where ideas appear in the various Fathers. Obviously I don't have a life.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 12:50 AM

I am going to bed but I think Marcus (Irenaeus 1.13 - 21) somewhere identifies Jesus as being made up of 4 letters or 4 things.

stephan huller · 06-10-2013, 07:57 AM

More from Philo

[On Abraham] For, indeed, his servants at all times steadfastly observed him, as subjects observe a ruler, looking with admiration at the universal greatness of his nature and disposition, which was more perfect than is customary to meet with in a man; for he did not use the same conversation as ordinary men, but, like one inspired, spoke in general in more dignified language. Whenever, therefore, he was possessed by the Holy Spirit he at once changed everything for the better, his eyes and his complexion, and his size and his appearance while standing, and his motions, and his voice; the Holy Spirit, which, being breathed into him from above, took up its lodging in his soul, clothing his body with extraordinary beauty, and investing his words with persuasiveness at the same time that it endowed his hearers with understanding. (218) Would not any one, then, be quite correct to say that this man who thus left his native land, who thus forsook all his relations and all his friends, was the most nobly related of all men, as aiming at making himself a kinsman of God, and labouring by every means in his power to become his disciple and friend? And that he was deservedly ranked in the very highest class among the prophets, because he trusted in no created being in preference to the uncreated God, the Father of all? And being honoured as king, as I have said before, by those who received him among them, not as having obtained his authority by warlike arms, or by armed hosts, as some persons have done, but having received his appointment from the all-righteous God, who honours the lovers of piety with independent authority, to the great advantage of all who are associated with them. [On the Virtues 217]

What is the man who was created? And how is that man distinguished who was made after the image of God? (#Ge 2:7). This man was created as perceptible to the senses, and in the similitude of a Being appreciable only by the intellect; but he who in respect of his form is intellectual and incorporeal, is the similitude of the archetypal model as to appearance, and he is the form of the principal character; but this is the word of God, the first beginning of all things, the original species or the archetypal idea, the first measure of the universe. Moreover, that man who was to be created as a vessel is formed by a potter, was formed out of dust and clay as far as his body was concerned; but he received his soul by God breathing the breath of life into his face, so that the temperament of his nature was combined of what was corruptible and of what was incorruptible. But the other man, he who is only so in form, is found to be unalloyed without any mixture proceeding from an invisible, simple, and transparent nature. [Questions and Answers in Genesis 4]

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

06-10-2013, 12:10 AM	#22
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	All in all very, very few references to 'Jesus' in Tertullian's Against Marcion and almost all of them contentious ones. 3 in Book 1, none in Book 2, 1 in Book Three and a handful in the rest.

06-10-2013, 12:30 AM	#24
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Sorry, run the Isu and Irenaeus stuff past me again as briefly and factually as possible. I couldn't find anything in AH 2.22, though the phrase two and a half letters is in 2.24, though it regards the name Baruch. So, exact details would be helpful: I don't want to waste more time getting nowhere, looking for what you have clear in your mind.

06-10-2013, 12:32 AM	#25
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Baruch = 4 letters בָּרוּךְ Sloppy reading spin: Soter is a Greek word of five letters; but, on the other hand, in the Hebrew tongue, Jesus contains only two letters and a half. The total which they reckon up, viz., eight hundred and eighty-eight, therefore falls to the ground. And throughout, the Hebrew letters do not correspond in number with the Greek, although these especially, as being the more ancient and unchanging, ought to uphold the reckoning connected with the names. For these ancient, original, and generally called sacred letters(10) of the Hebrews are ten in number (but they are written by means of fifteen(11)), the last letter being joined to the first. And thus they write some of these letters according to their natural sequence, just as we do, but others in a reverse direction, from the right hand towards the left, thus tracing the letters backwards. The name Christ, too, ought to be capable of being reckoned up in harmony with the Aeons of their Pleroma, inasmuch as, according to their statements, He was produced for the establishment and rectification of their Pleroma. The Father, too, in the same way, ought, both by means of letters and numerical value, to contain the number of those Aeons who were produced by Him; Bythus, in like manner, and not less Monogenes; but pre- eminently the name which is above all others, by which God is called, and which in the Hebrew tongue is expressed by Baruch,(1) [a word] which also contains two and a half letters. Harvey explicitly identifies the name as yeshu p. 334 http://archive.org/stream/sanctiiren.../n556/mode/2up

06-10-2013, 12:43 AM	#27
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	And I didn't want to bring this up initially but once I look at Irenaeus's idiotic interpretation of Hebrew, if Irenaeus was first responsible for rendering אישו as Ιησους then we should expect accuracy, rhyme or reason. There is no way to make baruch = 2 1/2 letters. sura ussar = Lord of heaven and earth? The opening lines of Genesis = 'a son in the beginning.' Anything goes apparently.

06-10-2013, 12:46 AM	#28
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Yes there are only two references I ever use from Irenaeus Book 2. 2.22 = Isa 61.2 2.24 = yeshu Most of the Patristic references I give are off the top of my head. I don't know if it is pathetic or impressive that I can know by heart (slightly inaccurately) where ideas appear in the various Fathers. Obviously I don't have a life.

06-10-2013, 12:50 AM	#29
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I am going to bed but I think Marcus (Irenaeus 1.13 - 21) somewhere identifies Jesus as being made up of 4 letters or 4 things.

06-10-2013, 07:57 AM	#30
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	More from Philo [On Abraham] For, indeed, his servants at all times steadfastly observed him, as subjects observe a ruler, looking with admiration at the universal greatness of his nature and disposition, which was more perfect than is customary to meet with in a man; for he did not use the same conversation as ordinary men, but, like one inspired, spoke in general in more dignified language. Whenever, therefore, he was possessed by the Holy Spirit he at once changed everything for the better, his eyes and his complexion, and his size and his appearance while standing, and his motions, and his voice; the Holy Spirit, which, being breathed into him from above, took up its lodging in his soul, clothing his body with extraordinary beauty, and investing his words with persuasiveness at the same time that it endowed his hearers with understanding. (218) Would not any one, then, be quite correct to say that this man who thus left his native land, who thus forsook all his relations and all his friends, was the most nobly related of all men, as aiming at making himself a kinsman of God, and labouring by every means in his power to become his disciple and friend? And that he was deservedly ranked in the very highest class among the prophets, because he trusted in no created being in preference to the uncreated God, the Father of all? And being honoured as king, as I have said before, by those who received him among them, not as having obtained his authority by warlike arms, or by armed hosts, as some persons have done, but having received his appointment from the all-righteous God, who honours the lovers of piety with independent authority, to the great advantage of all who are associated with them. [On the Virtues 217] What is the man who was created? And how is that man distinguished who was made after the image of God? (#Ge 2:7). This man was created as perceptible to the senses, and in the similitude of a Being appreciable only by the intellect; but he who in respect of his form is intellectual and incorporeal, is the similitude of the archetypal model as to appearance, and he is the form of the principal character; but this is the word of God, the first beginning of all things, the original species or the archetypal idea, the first measure of the universe. Moreover, that man who was to be created as a vessel is formed by a potter, was formed out of dust and clay as far as his body was concerned; but he received his soul by God breathing the breath of life into his face, so that the temperament of his nature was combined of what was corruptible and of what was incorruptible. But the other man, he who is only so in form, is found to be unalloyed without any mixture proceeding from an invisible, simple, and transparent nature. [Questions and Answers in Genesis 4]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.