Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:50 am

Mmm... My explanation is quasi perfect if was not for this damned particular. I want to be persuaded that carpenter = demiurge and brothers = patriarchs and Mary =the lost Sophia.

So who did the people of Nazaret allegorize? People who hated YHWH or who adored him?

And especially: why was the stupid Peter so eager to combat in the name of the Jewish Christ (believing Jesus the Jewish Christ)? While the people of Nazaret rejected Jesus just because he was the Jewish Christ?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:02 am

A solution of the enigma may be that, by rejecting the 'carpenter' and brother of James, Simon, etc., as such (i.e., just for the his being 'carpenter' and brother of these guys), these Jewish-Christians (believers in YHWH) would have had to reject coherently their same god (the creator) and the same patriarchs, as such (i.e., just in virtue of being himself).

This doesn't mean that the episode was invented by an enemy of Marcion. A gnostic could have invented it to give the irony of Jewish-Christians who reject (wrongly) the Gnostic Alien Christ for the same reasons the gnostics would have rejected (rightly) the Jewish god:

1) to be the craftsman of this world ('carpenter'),

2) to be the bastard son of the lost Sophia ('Mary'),

3) to be friend of the OT patriarchs ('brother of James, Simon, Joseph, Judas'), i.e. the OT god.


In this way the author attacked the Jewish-Christians called Nazarenes, the Christians with relations to the essene world.

:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:31 am

So this gnostic attack against the Jewish-Christians was used as source by 'Mark' (redactor), who adds as anti-Gnostic corrective the clear stress on the reality of Jesus's provenance from Nazaret.

4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home.” 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them. 6 He was amazed at their lack of faith.

(Mark 6:4-6)

In this way it is made clear that Jesus is really the Jewish Christ, since he is really from Nazaret.


Not coincidentially, in Luke (the catholic redaction of Mcn), we have the reference to the presumed Jewihness of Jesus:

All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” they asked.

(4:22)

...but we don't have in the sequel a confirmation that Jesus was really from Nazaret.


In Matthew 13:53-58 the Gnostic irony is even more evident and striking:

53 And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there, 54 and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? 55 Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” 57 And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household.” 58 And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.


The gnostic irony is: just because Jesus is not the demiurge, he could 'get this wisdom and these mighty works' .

Note that the reading 'carpenter's son' is probably a later reading than the markan 'carpenter': the demiurge was the bastard son of Sophia ('Mary'), and not the his Christ.

Now, 'Joseph' was only one of the brothers of the carpenter, in the original source. He became the name of the father of the carpenter only in Luke, who had already introduced (knowing it from Matthew), the story of the putative father of Jesus named Joseph.

So, in definitive, I think that the (hypothetical) original marcionite reading was the following:

All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” they asked.

:cheers:
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:25 am

Now, the mother of the 'carpenter' (demiurge), Mary, is a substitute for the discredited figure of Sophia. The use of the her name (the common name 'Mary' rather than the greek 'Sophia') foreshadows the later catholic deification of the Virgin Mary. Her mother had to be Perfectly Virgin to eclipse the previous decay of the original Sophia who, by her fall out of Pleroma, gave rise to the bastard demiurge (aka 'carpenter'), according to the Gnostic myth of the creation (that was really a Fall).

Which is the evidence that Mary is just the gnostic Sophia, in addition to her being the mother of the carpenter/demiurge?

The evidence of the link between 'Sophia' and 'Mary' is Mary Magdalene, identified clearly with the gnostic Sophia in the Gospel of Philip:

As for the Wisdom who is called "the barren," she is the mother of the angels. And the companion of the [...] Mary Magdalene. [...] loved her more than all the disciples, and used to kiss her often on her mouth. The rest of the disciples [...]. They said to him "Why do you love her more than all of us?"

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gop.html

The point is that the mother of Jesus was not named in the Earliest Gospel. Her name appears the first time just in the Nazareth episode. Being named herself in that point precisely as the mother of the demiurge ('carpenter'), then there was already, before the invention of that Nazaret episode, a Gnostic tradition about the identity of these names: Sophia = Mary. Probably the same gnostic tradition according to which Mary Magdalene was possessed by seven demons (to mean her old bondage under the her same abominable abortion: the demiurge). :popcorn:
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:38 am

This explains also the proliferation of the characters named 'Mary'.

So the causal link is the following:

A) the gnostic Myth of Sophia mother of the demiurge

B) the legend of Mary: she allegorizes the lost and discredited Sophia. In other terms: the mythical Sophia is euhemerized in 'Mary'.

C) the Nazaret Episode: Mary allegorizes Sophia as mother of the demiurge.

D) Mary became catholicized as the Virgin Mother of Jesus, and to distinguish her from the defiled Mary (the discredited Sophia), the latter had as surname 'Magdalene' and a past as prostitute, in order to make the former another Mary, the Virgin Mary 'from Nazareth'.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:56 am

CONCLUSION:

The James mentioned in Mark 6:3 is not the literal brother of Jesus. He is the patriarch Jakob who was friend of the god who gave the Torah (the same god who was degraded to a mere demiurge by the Gnostics who invented the Nazaret episode).

So the James 'brother of the Demiurge' became famous as 'the brother of the Lord', being the Demiurge adored as 'Lord' by the Judeo-Christians. This is the origin of the title 'Brother of Lord': it served to refer to the friends of the Creator, in opposition to the Gnostic hatred of the demiurge.

Later, after the Mark's co-optation and correction of the Nazaret episode in the his Gospel, James was identified, by who read Mark 6:3 being unaware of the his original Gnostic reading, with a literal brother of Jesus, the son of the Creator.

Who interpolated Galatians 1:19, inserted at least the title 'brother of Lord' in connection with the James met by Paul, to make the anti-marcionite point that Paul was subjected to the worshippers of YHWH. But really that James was the son of Zebedee, not of Joseph.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

robert j
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by robert j » Mon Aug 20, 2018 11:14 am

As for Mark 6:1-6, I think the polemic was intended for those in the hometown of Jesus who wondered how a mere man --- one they apparently knew as a mere tekton (carpenter, mason, craftsmam/laborer) --- could have such wisdom and perform such miracles.

I think the author of GMark was chiding those who failed to recognize that the man Jesus was possessed and driven by the divine spirit of the tekton of Isaiah --- the Isaian tekton that crafted the foundations of the earth and set up heaven like a vault, as found in Isaiah 40:21-22. Surely Mark's Jesus --- possessed and driven by the spirit of the tekton of Isaiah --- could handle a few miracles.

The following table that I have previously posted on this forum provides the basis for this solution, with the book of Isaiah as Mark’s source material (and addendum of sorts), providing the broader interpretation and parallels to the passage in GMark (some additional highlighting and info added here) ---

robert j wrote:
Thu May 19, 2016 9:53 am
Mark clearly laid out the Isaian framework for his story in his opening line ---

Beginning of the announcement of the good news of Jesus Christ, as it has been written in Isaiah the prophet." (Mark 1:1-2a).

I’ve written before that Mark painted a picture worth a thousand words just with this opening line. The following example provides some of those words.

Mark 6:1-6
Isaiah 40:18-22 (LXX)
Interpretation
“... He came into his hometown … many hearing were astonished, saying, "From where has this man these things, and what is the wisdom having been given to Him, even the miracles such as are done by his hands?” (Mark 6:1-2) Mark inserts an astonished hometown crowd asking how Jesus could be so wise and perform such miracles.
“Is this not the tekton (τέκτων), the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? And are not his sisters here with us?" (Mark 6:3) To whom have you likened the Lorda tekton (τέκτων) chooses wood that will not rot … wisely … set up his image … that it will not topple …” (Isaiah 40:18-20)

“… Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not known the foundations of the earth?” (Isaiah 40:21)
Mark answers the questions from the crowd:

Jesus is like the tekton from Isaiah, in human form, in the flesh, with a mother and brothers and sisters even.

Jesus crafts images that will never rot and never topple --- crafting the very foundations of the earth.
“And they took offense at Him.” (Mark 6:3)

"... And He was amazed because of their unbelief." (Mark 6:6)
“… Will you not know? Will you not hear? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not known the foundations of the earth?” (Isaiah 40:21) By pairing his work with the passage in Isaiah --- Mark chided the non-believers --- reinforcing his polemic against those failing to understand the significance of Jesus being like the tekton of Isaiah --- those applying a common connotation rather than a spiritual one.
“It is he who holds the circle of the earth, and those who dwell in it are like grasshoppers, who has set up heaven like a vault and stretched it out like a tent to live in …” (Isaiah 40:22) The tekton of Isaiah, and of Mark, at work on the foundations of the earth --- and of heaven.

Just prior to the above verses about the tekton in Isaiah (40:18-22), are these passages in Isaiah (LXX):

A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God. (Isaiah 40:3)

Then the glory of the Lord shall appear, and all flesh shall see the salvation of God, because the Lord has spoken.” (Isaiah 40:5)

… the word of our God remains forever. Go up on a high mountain, you who bring good news to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you who bring good tidings to Jerusalem; lift it up; do not fear; say to the cities of Judah, “See, your God!” See, the Lord comes with strength, and his arm with authority; see, his reward is with him, and his work before him. He will tend his flock like a shepherd and gather lambs with his arm and comfort those that are with young. Who has measured the water with his hand and heaven with a span and all the earth by handful? Who has weighed the mountains with a scale and the forests with a balance? Who has known the mind of the Lord… (Isaiah 40:8-13). (Most LXX from NETS)

One can see the tekton in Isaiah at work in this last passage --- measuring heaven and earth and weighing the mountains and the forests --- crafting the very foundations of the earth.

Surely Mark's Jesus --- possessed and driven by the spirit of the tekton of Isaiah --- could handle a few miracles.

...

robert j

Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:30 pm

Your solution suffers of a little problem: it doesn't explain why the father of Jesus is not mentioned but only his mother and his brothers.

The reason may be that given by the my theory: the father is not mentioned because the demiurge ('carpenter'), is without father, being the son of the only Sophia ("Mary").
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

robert j
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by robert j » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:37 am

Regarding Mark 6:3 ---
Giuseppe wrote:
Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:30 pm
Your solution suffers of a little problem: it doesn't explain why the father of Jesus is not mentioned but only his mother and his brothers.

The reason may be that given by the my theory: the father is not mentioned because the demiurge ('carpenter'), is without father, being the son of the only Sophia ("Mary").
I suspect the author of GMark did not want to muck-up his story by introducing a human father.

Mark’s tale is primarily about Jesus while possessed by the heavenly spirit. That possessed Jesus already had a much more important father ----

Immediately coming up out of the water, He saw the heavens opening, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon Him; and a voice came out of the heavens: "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased." (Mark 1:10-11, NASB)

That passage was apparently constructed from the Jewish scriptures --- first the Masoretic, then the LXX ---

"I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. (Psalm 2:7, NASB)

"Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights. I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1, NASB)


The Lord said to me, ‘My son you are; today I have begotten you.’ (Psalm 2:7, LXX, NETS)

Jacob is my servant; I will lay hold of him; Israel is my chosen; my soul has accepted him; I have put my spirit upon him; he will bring forth judgement to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1, LXX, NETS)


Giuseppe
Posts: 4502
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: Was James the 'brother of the Demiurge'?

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:52 am

robert j wrote:
Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:37 am
That possessed Jesus already had a much more important father
only, a father not known by the people of Nazaret, so they could well mention the earthly father of this possessed Jesus (given the fact that even Matthew mentioned him - by making him the 'carpenter' and not the son - , and surely the Matthean Jesus was not possessed: he was fully Jesus Christ) but they didn't. Why? The problem in the your interpretation remains.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply