From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by andrewcriddle » Thu May 18, 2017 11:44 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Now son of the most high God is almost certainly original being found in Mark Luke's source.
Ok, but I would like to resolve a question of method. Why do you think that Mark is before Mcn if I can interpret ''son of the most High God'' as an anti-marcionite reaction even in Mark, just as, according to you, ''the repeated reference in the Odes to God being without envy, is directed against Gnostics and/or Marcionites who attributed envy to the world creator'' ?
If we accept the normal dating of Marcion and regard the passage in Papias as a reference to canonical Mark then Mark is almost certainly before Marcion.

Further to my original post:
Peter Head agrees that Marcion probably read son of God in Luke 8:28.
Roth questions whether Marcion in Luke 6:35 read sons of God instead of sons of the most High

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 7652
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by Giuseppe » Thu May 18, 2017 11:52 am

Ok, therefore about Marcion you are right insofar you have other evidence in addition to decide who comes before, between Marcion and Mark.

But about the Odes, why do you think that is sufficient the references to a god without "envy" to push the Odes after Marcion?

There is no need of additional evidence in support of this so strong claim?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by andrewcriddle » Thu May 18, 2017 11:59 am

Giuseppe wrote:Ok, therefore about Marcion you are right insofar you have other evidence in addition to decide who comes before, between Marcion and Mark.

But about the Odes, why do you think that is sufficient the references to a god without "envy" to push the Odes after Marcion?

There is no need of additional evidence in support of this so strong claim?
The reference to without envy is repeated several times in the Odes. It is a prominent theme. The most obvious explanation is that the Odes are opposing Marcion or someone similar who did attribute envy to the Creator.

I agree it is not a conclusive argument, but it may be strong enough to put the burden of proof on anyone proposing a date before 100 CE for the Odes.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 7652
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by Giuseppe » Mon May 29, 2017 1:50 am

andrewcriddle wrote:
I agree it is not a conclusive argument, but it may be strong enough to put the burden of proof on anyone proposing a date before 100 CE for the Odes.

Andrew Criddle

Rylands mentions this particular Ode:
Ode 6

As the wind glides through the harp and the strings speak,
So the Spirit of the Lord speaks through my members, and I speak through His love.
For He destroys whatever is alien, and everything is of the Lord.
For thus it was from the beginning, and will be until the end.
So that nothing shall be contrary, and nothing shall rise up against Him.
The Lord has multiplied his knowledge, and He was zealous that those things should be known which through His grace have been given to us.
And His praise He gave us on account of His name, our spirits praise His Holy Spirit.
For there went forth a stream, and it became a river great and broad; indeed it carried away everything, and it shattered and brought it to the Temple.
And the barriers which were built by men were not able to restrain it, nor even the arts of them who habitually restrain water.
For it spread over the surface of all the earth, and it filled everything.
Then all the thirsty upon the earth drank, and thirst was relieved and quenched;
For from the Most High the drink was given.
Blessed, therefore, are the ministers of that drink, who have been entrusted with His water.
They have refreshed the parched lips, and have aroused the paralyzed will.
Even living persons who were about to expire, they have held back from death.
And limbs which have collapsed, they have restored and set up.
They gave strength for their coming, and light for their eyes.
Because everyone recognized them as the Lord's, and lived by the living water of eternity.
Hallelujah.
The reference to Temple is a clear evidence that the Odes were written when the Temple was still existing in Jerusalem.

The Odist was hoping that the people of all the earth will go to the phisical Temple of Jerusalem as place of worship.

To think otherwise would mean to assume (rather ad hoc) that :

1) the interpolator inserted the reference to Temple when the Temple is already destroyed
2) ...well knowing in advance that the reader would search for possible reference to Temple!

Note that also the same Andrew used the reference to Temple as evidence of pauline authenticity in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3052#p68095

therefore raising a problem of par condicio.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by andrewcriddle » Mon May 29, 2017 2:10 am

Giuseppe wrote:

Rylands mentions this particular Ode:
Ode 6

As the wind glides through the harp and the strings speak,
So the Spirit of the Lord speaks through my members, and I speak through His love.
For He destroys whatever is alien, and everything is of the Lord.
For thus it was from the beginning, and will be until the end.
So that nothing shall be contrary, and nothing shall rise up against Him.
The Lord has multiplied his knowledge, and He was zealous that those things should be known which through His grace have been given to us.
And His praise He gave us on account of His name, our spirits praise His Holy Spirit.
For there went forth a stream, and it became a river great and broad; indeed it carried away everything, and it shattered and brought it to the Temple.
And the barriers which were built by men were not able to restrain it, nor even the arts of them who habitually restrain water.
For it spread over the surface of all the earth, and it filled everything.
Then all the thirsty upon the earth drank, and thirst was relieved and quenched;
For from the Most High the drink was given.
Blessed, therefore, are the ministers of that drink, who have been entrusted with His water.
They have refreshed the parched lips, and have aroused the paralyzed will.
Even living persons who were about to expire, they have held back from death.
And limbs which have collapsed, they have restored and set up.
They gave strength for their coming, and light for their eyes.
Because everyone recognized them as the Lord's, and lived by the living water of eternity.
Hallelujah.
The reference to Temple is a clear evidence that the Odes were written when the Temple was still existing in Jerusalem.

The Odist was hoping that the people of all the earth will go to the phisical Temple of Jerusalem as place of worship.

To think otherwise would mean to assume (rather ad hoc) that :

1) the interpolator inserted the reference to Temple when the Temple is already destroyed
2) ...well knowing in advance that the reader would search for possible reference to Temple!

Note that also the same Andrew used the reference to Temple as evidence of pauline authenticity in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3052#p68095

therefore raising a problem of par condicio.
indeed it carried away everything, and it shattered and brought it to the Temple. can be translated indeed it carried away everything, and it shattered and carried away the Temple
See Pseudepigrapha in this case the Ode would be referring to the destruction of the Temple.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 7652
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by Giuseppe » Mon May 29, 2017 2:29 am

andrewcriddle wrote:in this case the Ode would be referring to the destruction of the Temple.

Andrew Criddle
But the context supports the former reading:

1) the destination of ''everything'' overwhelmed by the river is the temple as final place of worship of the One God.

2) Moreover, someone named Solomon, builder of the Temple, can be seen as prophetizing that eschatological event.


3) There is a reference to the Temple also in Ode 4 :

Ode 4

No man can pervert Your holy place, O my God; nor can he change it, and put it in another place.
Because he has no power over it; for Your sanctuary You designed before You made special places.

The ancient one shall not be perverted by those which are inferior to it. You have given Your heart, O Lord, to Your believers.
Never will You be idle, nor will You be without fruits;
For one hour of Your faith is more excellent than all days and years.
For who shall put on Your grace and be rejected?
Because Your seal is known; and Your creatures are known to it.
And Your hosts possess it, and the elect archangels are clothed with it.
You have given to us Your fellowship, not that You were in need of us, but that we are always in need of You.
Shower upon us Your gentle rain, and open Your bountiful springs which abundantly supply us with milk and honey.
For there is no regret with You; that You should regret anything which You have promised;
Since the result was manifest to You.
For that which You gave, You gave freely, so that no longer will You draw back and take them again.
For all was manifest to You as God, and was set in order from the beginning before You.
And You, O Lord, have made all.
Hallelujah.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by andrewcriddle » Mon May 29, 2017 3:22 am

Giuseppe wrote:
andrewcriddle wrote:in this case the Ode would be referring to the destruction of the Temple.

Andrew Criddle
But the context supports the former reading:

1) the destination of ''everything'' overwhelmed by the river is the temple as final place of worship of the One God.

2) Moreover, someone named Solomon, builder of the Temple, can be seen as prophetizing that eschatological event.
The Syriac of the passage is difficult see https://archive.org/stream/odespsalmsof ... 2/mode/2up (which translates as carried away the temple) and the discussion on the following pages.
If one believes that the reader is meant to take seriously the attribution to Solomon then references to the temple as still standing might occur even if at the (real) time of writing the temple had been destroyed.
Giuseppe wrote: 3) There is a reference to the Temple also in Ode 4 :

Ode 4

No man can pervert Your holy place, O my God; nor can he change it, and put it in another place.
Because he has no power over it; for Your sanctuary You designed before You made special places.

The ancient one shall not be perverted by those which are inferior to it. You have given Your heart, O Lord, to Your believers.
Never will You be idle, nor will You be without fruits;
For one hour of Your faith is more excellent than all days and years.
For who shall put on Your grace and be rejected?
Because Your seal is known; and Your creatures are known to it.
And Your hosts possess it, and the elect archangels are clothed with it.
You have given to us Your fellowship, not that You were in need of us, but that we are always in need of You.
Shower upon us Your gentle rain, and open Your bountiful springs which abundantly supply us with milk and honey.
For there is no regret with You; that You should regret anything which You have promised;
Since the result was manifest to You.
For that which You gave, You gave freely, so that no longer will You draw back and take them again.
For all was manifest to You as God, and was set in order from the beginning before You.
And You, O Lord, have made all.
Hallelujah.
I am not certain that the references to the holy place/sanctuary in this ode refer to the physical temple in Jerusalem. If they do, (as is I agree probable), then the need to defend the continued sanctity of the temple site at Jerusalem may imply that the Odist is responding to (? Gnostic) Christians who claim that the destruction of the temple shows that the site is no longer God's holy place.

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 7652
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by Giuseppe » Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 am

andrewcriddle wrote: If one believes that the reader is meant to take seriously the attribution to Solomon then references to the temple as still standing might occur even if at the (real) time of writing the temple had been destroyed.
Good point. It seems that "Solomon" was a late addition to the Odes.

I am not certain that the references to the holy place/sanctuary in this ode refer to the physical temple in Jerusalem. If they do, (as is I agree probable), then the need to defend the continued sanctity of the temple site at Jerusalem may imply that the Odist is responding to (? Gnostic) Christians who claim that the destruction of the temple shows that the site is no longer God's holy place.

Andrew Criddle
It seems that some critics (among them also Rylands) consider this "holy place" in opposition to any earthly place insofar the celestial temple cannot be placed on the earth.
This remembers the celestial temple of Hebrews and the polemic of that epistle against the sacrificial system based on the temple of Jerusalem (that therefore is still active).
An indication of this can be seen particularly in Odes 38, where the idea of "planting" has clearly been suggested by Ps. xcii 13-15. But the expressions "house of the Lord" and "courts of our God" are carefully avoided as signifying the temple of Yahveh at Jerusalem. The writer subtitutes "hand of the Lord".
(Beginning of gnostic Christianity, p. 35)
Harnack thought that there is a reference to the Temple in Ode IV :—
No man, O my God, changeth thy holy place, and it is not
possible that he should change it and put it into another
place . . . for thy sanctuary thou hast designed before thou didst make places
.
It does not seem possible to reconcile Harnack's opinion
with the attitude of the Odist as exhibited in some verses
previously quoted, to which the following may be added
from Ode XX :—
I
am a priest of the Lord, and to him I do priestly service ; and to him I offer the sacrifice of his thought. . . . The sacrifice of the Lord is righteousness and purity of heart and lips.
[2 A comparison of these verses with Ps. 1, 14, 23, seems to throw light on the meaning of " sacrifice " in Ode VII]
Here we see a repudiation not merely of sacrifices, but also of a priestly order, carrying with it a complete rejection of the Temple ritual. The Odist, moreover, is not protesting against a change of place ; he says it is not possible that anyone should change it; which, as applied to a material building, would not be true. Nor would the idea that God could need or desire a material habitation be consistent with his metaphysical doctrine. The "
sanctuary " of which he wrote may with far better reason be supposed to have been a habitation not made with hands ; in which case the change of which he denies the possibility would be the removal of God's "holy place" from Heaven to earth, actually involving the denial that the Temple at Jerusalem was God's holy place. The statement that God had designed his sanctuary before he made places—i.e., before the creation of the world —applies better to a heavenly sanctuary than to a building. Since the conception of a heavenly temple was already given in the Psalms, there should be no doubt about the meaning of the phrases in the Ode. The relevant passages are Ps. xi, 4, and xxxiii, 13 and 14 :—
Jehovah is in his holy temple, Jehovah's throne is in Heaven. Jehovah looketh from Heaven. . . . From the
place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants
of the earth.
Zahn understood these verses of Ode IV correctly. If
now the purpose of the Odist was to deny the sanctity of the Temple at Jerusalem, we could infer that it was still standing when the Ode was composed.
(ibid. p. 64-65, my bold)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1823
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by andrewcriddle » Tue May 30, 2017 8:10 pm

I've been reading Drijvers on the Odes of Solomon He translates the passage in Ode 19 The Holy Spirit opened Her bosom, and mixed the milk of the two breasts of the Father. as The Holy Spirit opened Her womb, and mixed the milk of the two breasts of the Father. (The Syriac can mean either) and sees it as dependent on the very ancient Syriac (Diatessaron and Old Syriac) translation of John 1:18 the only begotten Son which is from the womb of his Father. See Incarnate one for this very ancient Syriac tradition.

Andrew Criddle

EDITED TO ADD

As an example of this tradition see Ephrem Syrus
This is He Who was begotten from the Godhead according to His nature, and from manhood not after His nature, and from baptism not after His custom; that we might be begotten from manhood according to our nature, and from Godhead not after our nature, and by the Spirit not after our custom. He then was begotten from the Godhead, He that came to a second birth; in order to bring us to the birth that is discoursed of, even His generation from the Father:-not that it should be searched out, but that it should be believed;-and His birth froth the woman, not that it should be despised, but that it should be exalted. Now His death on the cross witnesses to His birth from the woman. For He that died was also born. And the Annunciation of Gabriel declares His generation by the Father, namely [the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee]. If then it was the power of the Highest, it is plain that it was not the seed of mortal man. So then His conception in the womb is bound up with His death on the cross; and His first generation is bound up with the declaration of the Angel; in order that whose denies His birth may be confuted by His crucifixion, and whose supposes that His beginning was from Mary, may be admonished that His Godhead is before all; so that whoever has concluded His beginning to be corporeal,[may be proved to err hereby that His issuing forth from the Father is narrated]. The Father begat Him, and through Him created the creatures. Flesh bare Him and through Him slew lusts. Baptism brought him forth, that through Him it might wash away stains. Sheol brought Him forth, that through Him its treasures might be emptied out. He came to us from beside His Father by the way of them that are born: and by the way of them that die, He went forth to go to His Father; so that by His coming through birth, His advent might be seen; and by His returning through resurrection, His departure might be confirmed.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 7652
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: From a dying Christ to Jesus Christ

Post by Giuseppe » Wed May 31, 2017 6:20 am

According to prof Stevan Davies, this talks about the inverse direction of dependence, i.e. from Odes to John.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply