A marcionite reading of Son of Man in Mark

[Giuseppe]

55 The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus so that they could put him to death, but they did not find any. 56 Many testified falsely against him, but their statements did not agree.

57 Then some stood up and gave this false testimony against him: 58 “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with human hands and in three days will build another, not made with hands.’” 59 Yet even then their testimony did not agree.

60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

(Mark 14:52-62)

This is the only point where Jesus seems to break the Messianic Secret about his identity. But is really so?

''Son of Man'' doesn't appear in Paul. An hypothetical marcionite (dualistic) reading of Mark may explain why even in this episode there is still the Messianic Secret at work.

Jesus is saying that yes, he is the Christ, the Son of God, but he means the Son of an Alien God, not the same god of the Jews.

Therefore when Jesus says:

“And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

...he is meaning: and you, who don't believe in the good news of the Son of a Stranger God and don't recognized him as such, will are condemned to see the vindictive Christ of the Creator God, i.e. the Son of Man.

Therefore it is not Jesus that who is threathening a condemnation of scribes and pharisees, but simply the Creator God, who will send his Messiah to fulfill, in a future day, his scriptures & predictions.

[Giuseppe]

So the parallel section in Tertullian Adversus Marcionem:

So when they had led him to Pilate they began
to accuse him of saying he was Christ a King, meaning no doubt
the Son of God, who was to sit at God's right hand. Surely they
would have arraigned him under some other charge, being in
doubt whether he had said he was the Son of God, if he had not
by the statement Ye say it, indicated that he was what they said.
Also when Pilate asked, Art thou the Christ? he answered again
Thou sayest it, so that he might not seem, through fear of the au-
thority, to have refused to answer.

Tertullian has good play ''to win a point'' against Marcion since he believes wrongly that Jesus is meaning really the Creator God when he answered that he was the ''Christ Son of the Blessed One''. But really it was not so. Jesus was answering ''Tho sayest it'' to Pilate meaning the Christ of a Stranger God.

Therefore this is a case where proto-Mark shows clearly a Gnostic nature.

I think that proto-Mark was precisely the Mcn used by Marcion and marcionites.

[Giuseppe]

Now we see if my interpretation of ''Son of Man'' in Mark (=Messiah of the Demiurge) works when applied to:


Mark 2:1-12

2 A few days later, when Jesus again entered Capernaum, the people heard that he had come home. 2 They gathered in such large numbers that there was no room left, not even outside the door, and he preached the word to them. 3 Some men came, bringing to him a paralyzed man, carried by four of them. 4 Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus by digging through it and then lowered the mat the man was lying on. 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’? 10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the man, 11 “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this!”

In this case Jesus is saying:

But I want you to know that the Christ of the Demiurge has authority on earth to forgive sins

...raising a comparison (indeed, an antithesis) between two Christs with the authority to forgive sins: the Christ of the Demiurge can forgive but he de facto doesn't forgive (as he is a cruel deity) while the Christ of the Alien God can forgive and de facto he forgives, in that particular case.

[Giuseppe]

Lastly, we see the occurrence of Son of Man in the following three predictions of the Passion.

The first:

31 He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. “Get behind me, Satan!” he said. “You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

(Mark 8:31-33)

In this point it seems clearly that Jesus identifies himself with the Messiah of the Demiurge. It is a fact. But we read what comes immediately before that episode:

27 Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, “Who do people say I am?”
28 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets.”
29 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
Peter answered, “You are the Messiah.”
30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.

Marcion interpreted the command of secrecy by Jesus addressed to Peter at the same level of the command to silence addressed to the demons. Therefore Jesus is denying that he is the Messiah of the Demiurge. But since now he is among disciples who believe that he is the Messiah of the Creator God, then he has to talk in an enigmatic way about himself as the Messiah of the Demiurge (i.e., ''Son of Man''). Hence the apparent (but not real) paradox: the ''Messiah of the Demiurge'' will suffer.

[Giuseppe]

34 Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? 37 Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.”
9 And he said to them, “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power.”

(Mark 8:34-9:1)
Here there is ambiguity about what Jesus means by 'Son of Man' (if himself -- following the false assumption of the his disciples that he is really the Son of Man, i.e. the Messiah of the Demiurge -- or the Christ of the Creator).
It is possible that he means in 9:1 the destruction provoked by the Demiurge after the his departure from this world. The ''Kingdom of God'' would be then the anger of the Demiurge that will fall on his people in 70 CE.

A clue that Jesus is lying to his disciples about his identification with the ''Son of Man'' (=the Messiah of the Demiurge) is given by:

 

As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus gave them orders not to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen from the dead.

(Mark 9:9)
Jesus (and the reader) knows already that after the Resurrection the women don't inform Peter and the disciples about his Resurrection, with the result that Peter will not ''tell anyone what they had seen''.

Therefore, since Jesus is not really the Christ of the Demiurge (='Son of Man'), then Elijiah is not still came to precede the Messiah of the Creator,as per scriptures.
So Jesus has to lie to disciples about the identity of Elijiah:

11 And they asked him, “Why do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?”
12 Jesus replied, “To be sure, Elijah does come first, and restores all things. Why then is it written that the Son of Man must suffer much and be rejected? 13 But I tell you, Elijah has come, and they have done to him everything they wished, just as it is written about him.”

Now the disciples are totally deceived: they believe that Jesus is the Son of Man, and that Elijiah is John. But they recognize the great contradiction: can the Messiah of the Demiurge be killed?

[Giuseppe]

30 They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to know where they were, 31 because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.” 32 But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.

Note the problem of the disciples: they would want to believe that Jesus says the truth about the his identity with the Son of Man (=Messiah of the Demiurge) but they continue to have some doubt about that identity, since Jesus says that the Messiah of the Demiurge will suffer (!). Just in virtue of that possible identity, they ''were afraid to ask him about it''. After all, he would be the Christ of the Creator!

Now the disciples are entirely blind: from this moment on they wish only the first places.

42 Jesus called them together and said, “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Note the great contradiction: just the Christ of the Creator (!!!) will ''give his life as a ransom for many''. Jesus was impersonating the Messiah of the Creator (=Son of Man) when really he was the messiah of the alien God: in this way, the disciples are induced to follow him, albeit reluctantly.

[Giuseppe]

Later Marcionites (Dialogue of Adamantius) confirm that "Son of Man" was only a false title for Jesus but a real title for the Christ of the Demiurge:

Ad. What then does it say of Christ who is the son of man? If he is the son of man, according to you he will not be your son of God.
Meg. He is God's son.
Ad. But explain the scriptures in such a way as to be intelligible, as the scriptures are. In what way is he the son of God, who declared himself the son of man?
Meg. He made use of a parable, in saying that he was the son of man.
Eutr. It was to be understood as a spiritual parable, -can that be historical?
Meg. Spiritual.
Eutr. In what way does he say that - is the scripture not spiritual? Thus it is spiritual, and not plain and historical.
Meg. A certain thing he intends as spiritual, while he may speak simply in another.
Eutr. This opinion seems inconsistent to me.
Meg. In places there are scriptures that are parables, those that are spiritual, others that are certainly historical.
Ad. Show then from the scriptures where the son of man is a "parable"? ...

[Giuseppe]

I wonder: was the Gospel itself the "parable" by which Jesus said that he was "the son of man" ? The entire sense of the use of "Son of Man" is, after all, to deceive the Jews by showing Jesus as the human messiah of the Demiurge.