you are talking with one who accepts the traditional reading of Paul, sorry.
I can easily quote the words of the Father of Church X to make the point that Marcion hated YHWH, but I will quote Luke 6:43-45:What proof do you have that he hated YHWH? From everything I've found it seems that he merely relegated him to a lower position to an even higher god, that he was a just god as a opposed to the merciful Good God.
two trees allegorizes two gods. YHWH is a bastard god because the his creation is evil.
This is dualism, not ditheism, sorry.
and so you can't imagine that a good Jesus is disguised behind the visibly bastard Barabbas.And?in our narratives as they stand now, there is no way by which Barabbas can be rehabilitated from a moral point of view, or by seeing him as a recipient of a god who escapes the death in a disguised form. He is clearly execrated as bastard and criminal.
in the original narrative there was only Jesus Son of Father before Pilate. And the Jewish crowd cried : "Kill him!" Not : "release him!". Trace of this cry you can hear still in GPeter.According to you Marcion thought that YHWH was yet Jews worship him anyway. Don't project your own expectations onto the texts.
no, in a Jewish gospel the Jews know that the father of Jesus is Joseph, not YHWH.And that applies just as easily to the Jewish Gospel, wherein Jesus's father was unknown.
And YHWH can't be an unknown god. The Romans respected YHWH just because he was not a new deity. He was known from the day 8 of the his creation.
the price you pay to question my conclusion is to have a view about Marcion that is virtually marginalized/ignored/denied by all the scholars living on the planet Earth. Even the author of this book:And I've tried looking into your definition and so far the only things coming up are questionable.
...denies that Marcion was a ditheist.
.The Unknown Father of the Jesus of Marcion.
the father of Bar Kokhba was known. He was not a bastard.If anything, Barabbas could be a mocking allegory for bar Kochba. At least he is more fitting of the role.
the Jesus who calls himself "Son of Father" in Proto-John accused the OT prophets of being robbers and thiefs.But Marcion's Christ wasn't a thief or a murderer, so how does that apply to him?
And Tertullian accused the marcionite Christ of being a thief of the property of the creator.
In the original narrative Pilate could be innocent. I don't know. But the Jews are not. They cried: "Kill Jesus the Son of God". And Pilate conceded them Jesus.And you still refuse to acknowledge Pilate's own sympathy for handing Christ over to the Jews. That blows whatever claim you make about it out of the water.