Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Paradoxically this point may support the priority of VoI over Mark: the Vision of Isaiah adores YHWH as supreme god: no doubt about this. Hence his docetism is not anti-YHWH. Mark adores YHWH as supreme god, however Mark appears to be aware that docetism implies anti-demiurgism, since Mark opts for ...

So my point is that Mark developed "adoptionism" for in order to avoid having the Beloved reveal, by assuming the form, and only the form, of a man during his descent on earth, a so excessive rejection/repulsion of the world of the creator.

Note how the separationist Cerinthus rehabilitates the creation by having the human recipient described as a saint man: His system, as collected from the notices of Irenaeus, Caius, Dionysius, and Epiphanius, consisted of the following particulars: He taught that the world was created by angels, ove...

To see better my point above, think about this difference: 1) The spiritual Christ descends on a criminal named Jesus 2) The spiritual Christ descends on a pious adorer of YHWH named Jesus The place of residence of the spiritual Christ vehicles a message addressed to the creator: the high morality o...

Indeed the adoptionism, even in the variant of separationism, has always represented for me a way to raise the following objection against any form of docetism: "yes, the spiritual Christ descended from above, from a highest god (not the creator), even so, if the man Jesus was a pious obedient ...

@Giuseppe That doesn't seem to make sense to me. Unless there has been a lot more revision and interpolation or something. Belial is clearly the adversary. What would the role of Belial be if there was also an alien god? I report only what I have read: "foreign" in the place of "adve...

I am reading, from Norelli, only the Italian translation of AoI (as quoted in another book on angels), in particular I see that he translates the following passage: And after this the adversary envied Him and roused the children of Israel against Him, not knowing who He was, and they delivered Him t...

In this scenario, the first evangelist invented a life not for the the deity Jesus, but for the man (called by him as "Jesus") who would have been posseded by the deity Jesus precisely during the crucifixion. Why did he so? Because rival Simonians were going to preach that the name of the ...

Proto-Mark was edited (by becoming our current Gospel of Mark) to transpose the moment of the possession of Jesus by Christ from the crucifixion to the baptism. A trace of this displacement is that the editor has wanted to make it clear that during the crucifixion, far from working, in that precise ...

So Simonians would have seen new fertile ground when they learned about some Jesus who, it was claimed, had worked signs and wonders, and was now alive in heaven after having been crucified by the Romans. To the Simonian mind, Jesus obviously must have been Simon under another name. In the Vision o...