Separationism in Mark 9:39: in the name of Christ not of Jesus

[Giuseppe]

The Cerinthus's separationism is in action also in the following passage:

38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”

39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.

(Mark 9)

The name by which the independent exorcist works is not "Jesus", since the separationists cursed the name of Jesus, being the name of the mere man suffering on the cross. The magical name is therefore "Christ". Hence only if the independent exorcist works in the name of the spiritual Christ (as distinct from the mere man Jesus) then he can "say anything bad about Jesus" (I.e. he can curse Jesus) but not about the spiritual Christ.

Hence the words of Jesus are neither an approval nor a excommunication of the independent exorcist.

But if the Pillar John means to say:

we saw someone driving out demons in your name (=Jesus) and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us

...then Jesus is denying that the independent exorcisms were made in the name of Jesus, insofar the name of Jesus (and not the name of Christ) is cursed.

[Giuseppe]

Really, the clues of Cerinthian separationism are so many in Mark that the following case is made: Mark was written against the Pillars as polemical target, the Pillars being (in Mark's weltanschauung) those who preached the identity between Christ and Jesus (probably to put in a positive light the god of the Jews, the same god of the man Jesus crucified in the place of the Christ of a higher god).

[Giuseppe]

This explains why Mark can't be used as mythicist evidence: the his author assumes the existence of a man Jesus but the his point is that Jesus was not the spiritual Christ. What was necessary for Mark(=Cerinthus) invent the his story was:

• A previous Jewish sect that claimed that the man Jesus was the davidic Christ.

• The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, confirming the failure of this sect and of the god of the Jews (adored by this sect).

Hence the question: was this previous sect historicist or mythicist?