Definitive Evidence that Barabbas is a Judaizing parody of the Marcion's UNKNOWN Son of Father

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 6597
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Definitive Evidence that Barabbas is a Judaizing parody of the Marcion's UNKNOWN Son of Father

Post by Giuseppe » Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:45 am

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:09 am
It doesn't get any more blatent then that, Giuseppe. Paul is unambiguously implying Philo's concept of the dichotomy of Genesis, chapters 1 and 2.
you are talking with one who accepts the traditional reading of Paul, sorry.
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.
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:
"For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh."

two trees allegorizes two gods. YHWH is a bastard god because the his creation is evil.
This is dualism, not ditheism, sorry.
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.
And?
and so you can't imagine that a good Jesus is disguised behind the visibly bastard Barabbas.
According to you Marcion thought that YHWH was yet Jews worship him anyway. Don't project your own expectations onto the texts.
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.
And that applies just as easily to the Jewish Gospel, wherein Jesus's father was unknown.
no, in a Jewish gospel the Jews know that the father of Jesus is Joseph, not YHWH.

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.
And I've tried looking into your definition and so far the only things coming up are questionable.
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:

Image

...denies that Marcion was a ditheist.
The Unknown Father of the Jesus of Marcion.
.
If anything, Barabbas could be a mocking allegory for bar Kochba. At least he is more fitting of the role.
the father of Bar Kokhba was known. He was not a bastard.
But Marcion's Christ wasn't a thief or a murderer, so how does that apply to him?
the Jesus who calls himself "Son of Father" in Proto-John accused the OT prophets of being robbers and thiefs.

All who have come before me are thieves and robbers

(John 10:8)

And Tertullian accused the marcionite Christ of being a thief of the property of the creator.
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.
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.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6597
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Definitive Evidence that Barabbas is a Judaizing parody of the Marcion's UNKNOWN Son of Father

Post by Giuseppe » Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:14 am

Obviously, Joseph D. L. has totally failed to confute the DEFINITIVE evidence that Barabbas is a judaizing parody of the proto-marcionite Christ.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Joseph D. L.
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Definitive Evidence that Barabbas is a Judaizing parody of the Marcion's UNKNOWN Son of Father

Post by Joseph D. L. » Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:06 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:14 am
Obviously, Joseph D. L. has totally failed to confute the DEFINITIVE evidence that Barabbas is a judaizing parody of the proto-marcionite Christ.
Whereas you have failed to provide definitive evidence as opposed to someone's tenuous definition of Bar-Abbas and your presupposed interpretation.

I have no interest in following this thread any further as you have shown yourself to be utterly incapable of either civil discourse or providing "definitive" evidence, or any evidence other than baseless conjectures you take to be absolute.

I am thankful that no one here takes this fool seriously and see him as a joke.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6597
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Definitive Evidence that Barabbas is a Judaizing parody of the Marcion's UNKNOWN Son of Father

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:37 am

I insist: Joseph D. L. has totally failed to confute the DEFINITIVE evidence that Barabbas is a judaizing parody of the proto-marcionite Christ.
Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:06 pm
I have no interest in following this thread any further as you have shown yourself to be utterly incapable of either civil discourse or providing "definitive" evidence, or any evidence other than baseless conjectures you take to be absolute.
this your reaction is expected per the Aesopian fable about the fox and the grapes.
I am thankful that no one here takes this fool seriously and see him as a joke.
That silence is strongly expected by who is totally embarrassed by the corollary of this great finding in the field of the Gospel exegesis.

That the Barabbas Episode shows, already by the time of GMark, the existence of rival Christians there out who denied strongly and zealously that Jesus was the son and the messiah of the bastard demiurge.

And note, idiot of a Joseph D.L., that the intrinsic beauty of this thesis is that it is Falsifiable (as any rational thesis). If you want to confute this my view, then you should give simply evidence of a rival sect distinct from the Marcionite sect (and precursors or derived) where a Jesus was adored as Son of Father and where the his being called NOT the Jewish Christ was someway disturbing for "Mark" (author).

If you show me that:
  • this rival sect existed
  • They were not gnostics or proto-marcionites or marcionites
Only then you would have succeed to confute me. But you are totally unable to do so, because you don't even realize this last point. You are essentially a modern Judaizer of old de-ethnicizers. I don't talk with ideologues. End of a "discussion" that never really started.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply