Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
- Posts: 7207
- Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
- Location: Italy
These texts and others, as the episode of Beelzebuth - according to which the Jewish exorcists, and not Jesus, expell the demons (Luke 11:15ss; Mt 12:24ss) and who is therefore the god of the OT -, or the discourse where Jesus considers the father of the Jews - the god of the OT - as killer and liar (John 8:44) have been conserved by the evangelists only because the god of the OT has been hidden with prudence under one of the names of the Devil. Marcion was rejected by the Church of Rome because he preached that "Jesus came from the Father who is above the god who made the world … to abolish the prophets and the Law and all the works of that god who made the world" (Ireneus, Adv. H. 1:27, 2), at the point that the text of 1 Epistle of John (3:8) have become canonical, one that says precisely the same thing replacing "the god (of the OT) who made the world" with "the Devil": "The Son of God has appeared in order to destroy the works of the Devil", and the text of Matthew (5:17) who tried to justify the rejection of the Law by the Christians by making Jesus say: "I have come not to destroy the Law and the prophets but to perfect them (or to fulfill them)". The Church of Marcion, isolated in the Pontus, was not sufficiently re-judaized.
(Jean Magne, Sacrifice et sacerdoce
, p. 133-134, my translation, my bold)
Marcion was himself a Judaizer insofar he considered the demiurge as the Just One.
A true original gnostic could only consider the demiurge as an evil god, one not even just.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.