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.
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. » Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:50 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:29 am
the Marcion's Christ was NOT the Christ of the Jews. To have an idea about the Marcionite Christ, read proto-John, idiot.
Then why did Paul equate Jesus with the prophets, and why was Jesus called Isu Christus by the Marcionites? Even the Marcionite system agrees with Judaism, in that YHWH and the prophets were who they said they were, only there was a higher god above them.

Also, you want me to read a text that is strictly in the realm of speculation? Can you lend me your copy?


this is your stupid phantasy. I prefer George R. Martin. Irenaeus is clear about the spiritual Christ laughing about the carnal Jesus (or Simon or how you want to call the victim).


No, that's what the Basilidains themselves (according to Irenaeus) believed: that Jesus took the form of Simon, while Simon took the form of Jesus.

GRRM sucks, btw.
I boast for not knowing what you claim to know.
And that's why no one on this forum thinks you have anything worthwhile to say or contribute and wish you would just fuck off.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6613
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 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:45 am

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:50 am
Then why did Paul equate Jesus with the prophets, and why was Jesus called Isu Christus by the Marcionites?
Because Paul adored YHWH while Marcion hated YHWH. From this POV, Marcion betrayed Paul. Period.
Even the Marcionite system agrees with Judaism
this is the idiocy sown by only a modern judaizer in all the world. And you are so idiot you follow him.
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. » Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:05 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:45 am
Because Paul adored YHWH while Marcion hated YHWH. From this POV, Marcion betrayed Paul. Period.
That doesn't make any sense. Why would Marcion (whom I am nearly positive is Paul, or at least composed nearly all of the "authentic" Pauline epistles himself) adore Paul, claim that he was the sole Apostle whom Christ had revealed himself to, and publish his texts and agree with him on everything, yet reject Paul's adoration for the god of the Israelites?

Why would Paul "adore" YHWH, but make such claims as to the Law being a curse that Christ had lifted his followers from?

It's instances like this that make me realize that much of what you say is ad hoc on the spot and you don't actually think any of this through.
this is the idiocy sown by only a modern judaizer in all the world. And you are so idiot you follow him.
That is in no way an argument.

But wait. Isn't Paul an adorer of YHWH? So of course he would have Jewish trappings in his texts. But then why do you make such a fuse over "judiazers"?

Do you not realize how ridiculous and idiotic you sound?

Giuseppe
Posts: 6613
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 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 8:04 am

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:05 am
That doesn't make any sense. Why would Marcion (whom I am nearly positive is Paul, or at least composed nearly all of the "authentic" Pauline epistles himself) adore Paul, claim that he was the sole Apostle whom Christ had revealed himself to, and publish his texts and agree with him on everything, yet reject Paul's adoration for the god of the Israelites?
For the simple reason that Marcion was a de-ethnicizer. Paul had to cease to be Jew to become a gentile just as Marcion from Sinope. By adoring a gentile God, the Unknown Father of the Jesus preached by Marcion.

It's instances like this that make me realize that much of what you say is ad hoc on the spot and you don't actually think any of this through.
The consensus is with me about this view of the relation between Paul and Marcion. Ask Ben, for example, about this point.
this is the idiocy sown by only a modern judaizer in all the world. And you are so idiot you follow him.
That is in no way an argument.
You believe that that judaizer is a Genius. I think and believe that he (in addition to be not very polite) is only a modern judaizer, an apologist who is visibly embarrassed in seeing that a Marcion hated the tribal god of the Jews. But since Marcion is the hero of modern scholarship, then Marcion has to be judaized. Absurd.

But wait. Isn't Paul an adorer of YHWH? So of course he would have Jewish trappings in his texts. But then why do you make such a fuse over "judiazers"?
Bravo. Finally you start to understand me. The Pillars adored YHWH. Paul adored YHWH. The author of Revelation adored YHWH.
A Gospel Jesus was still not invented, in whiletime. And the Christians were still all Jews.

Then the gentile Gnostics became Christian Gnostics and started to do what any Gnostic did: to de-ethnicize local heroes and deities.

A gentile gnostic sect invented the Gospel Jesus (something of very similar to proto-John).

The Jewish-Christians heard about that strange story about apparently their same hero, but they were scandalized by the fact that this hero was enemy of the Law and of the creator. Hence they judaized the first gospel by writing the Gospel of the Hebrews, Mark, Matthew, Luke, etc.

Marcion was only a late comer. He could even have corrupted Luke, by accepting Barabbas velim nolim as corollary.

The Barabbas episode is the smoking gun that proves that even our dear gentilizer Mark was really a judaizer, insofar he despises the gnostic alien Son of Father under the form of a bastard criminal named Bar-Abbas (lit.: the "son of an unknown father").

Do you understand now the importance of the Barabbas episode? What I have written above is simply the mere conclusion inferred by a such great finding of Couchoud/Stahl (note that Stahl was historicist).
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. » Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:54 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 8:04 am
For the simple reason that Marcion was a de-ethnicizer. Paul had to cease to be Jew to become a gentile just as Marcion from Sinope. By adoring a gentile God, the Unknown Father of the Jesus preached by Marcion.
That makes even less sense and is antithetical to Paul's own writings. He is clearly a Jewish proponent who invokes Jewish themes and history. He calls Jesus the Heavenly Adam for cryin out loud!

The Unknown God isn't a gentile god. It was the higher god above YHWH, but not known to gentiles. Nor was it "unknown" in the stricter sense, as it was the god above YHWH, the god of Genesis 1.
The consensus is with me about this view of the relation between Paul and Marcion. Ask Ben, for example, about this point.
What do you care about consensus when the consensus in academia is that Jesus was historical?

I've never seen Ben make that point so I'll withhold my judgement on that. Be that as it may, even if so then I would disagree with him on that matter.

You see, Giuseppe? You can disagree with someone and not think that they are being intellectually dishonest. But your dogmatic approach to, for lack of a batter word, fringe theories, makes you utterly contemptible to honest study.
You believe that that judaizer is a Genius. I think and believe that he (in addition to be not very polite) is only a modern judaizer, an apologist who is visibly embarrassed in seeing that a Marcion hated the tribal god of the Jews. But since Marcion is the hero of modern scholarship, then Marcion has to be judaized. Absurd.
Again that is not an argument. You argue as if your ideas are axiomatic and 100% confirmed, and not solely just your own ideas.

Marcion/Paul utilizes Jewish terms, history, texts, and ideas. So it would stand to reason that they are themselves heavily Jewish.

Marcion isn't the hero of modern scholarship. That just proved to me that you know very little about scholarship and think that the few books you read represent the whole circumference of academia. Marcion is still an obscure figure in New Testament studies and the idea that he influenced modern Christianity in any significant way is still rejected by the mainstream.

Marcion has become of sorts a hero on this forum, but not to me. If anything I think he's been overblown.
Bravo. Finally you start to understand me. The Pillars adored YHWH. Paul adored YHWH. The author of Revelation adored YHWH.
A Gospel Jesus was still not invented, in whiletime. And the Christians were still all Jews.
No one understands you because you speak in vagueness and subterfuge.

Paul didn't adore YHWH. If he did then why did he deem his Law a curse? No. Paul, like Marcion, preached the god above YHWH.
Then the gentile Gnostics became Christian Gnostics and started to do what any Gnostic did: to de-ethnicize local heroes and deities.
This goes along with your complete lack of understanding what gnosticism is. Gnosticism doesn't mean anything. It was a term used as a pejorative by the Orthodoxy against anyone and everyone else. Nor was there one form of gnosticism. Mithraism was gnostic. Judaism was gnostic. Hinduism was gnostic. And even in Christianity there wasn't one version of gnosticism.

The gnostics were completely ethnocentric. That's why the vilified local gods below their higher god.
A gentile gnostic sect invented the Gospel Jesus (something of very similar to proto-John).
Proof please.
The Jewish-Christians heard about that strange story about apparently their same hero, but they were scandalized by the fact that this hero was enemy of the Law and of the creator. Hence they judaized the first gospel by writing the Gospel of the Hebrews, Mark, Matthew, Luke, etc.
Then why did the supposed original author, Paul, add Judaism into his own texts and beliefs?

You just refuse to see Christianity as a Jewish sub-sect don't you? Even though all Christians in one way or another incorporated Judaism into their system.

No, it wasn't incorporated. It was an outgrowth of Judaism from the start.
Marcion was only a late comer. He could even have corrupted Luke, by accepting Barabbas velim nolim as corollary.
If anything Marcion was one of the first on the scene. He didn't corrupt Luke I'm actually shocked that you think that.
The Barabbas episode is the smoking gun that proves that even our dear gentilizer Mark was really a judaizer, insofar he despises the gnostic alien Son of Father under the form of a bastard criminal named Bar-Abbas (lit.: the "son of an unknown father").
Despite Barabbas not being applicable to Marcion's idea of Christ?

Paul's/Marcion's "unknown" god was only unknown to the later church because they didn't understand Judaism or realize that Marcion was fully Jewish. Jews for the last two and a half centuries before then had understood that there were two powers in their religion.
Do you understand now the importance of the Barabbas episode? What I have written above is simply the mere conclusion inferred by a such great finding of Couchoud/Stahl (note that Stahl was historicist).
Yeah. I do understand the importance of Barabbas. As an allegory for the transmigration Christ from one host to another, with the previous host being condemned to die, and the new one being released.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6613
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 3:37 am

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:54 pm
The Unknown God isn't a gentile god. It was the higher god above YHWH, but not known to gentiles. Nor was it "unknown" in the stricter sense, as it was the god above YHWH, the god of Genesis 1.
the source of all your errors is there. What you argues for Marcion is ditheism, adoration of two gods. But Marcion was dualist: he hated YHWH and adored the Unknown God. The evidence for gnostics and marcionites hating YHWH is strong. A Christian who hates YHWH can't be Jewish.

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.

Bastard == son of an unknown father.

The Unknown Father of the Jesus of Marcion.

Who invented Barabbas, by definition, hated the Gnostics who adored an unknown god distinct from the Jewish god.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 6613
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 4:14 am

Joseph D. L. wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:54 pm
A gentile gnostic sect invented the Gospel Jesus (something of very similar to proto-John).
Proof please.
the definitive proof is just Barabbas. If x insults y, then the concept of y has to exist already in the eyes of x.

If Mark, by the Barabbas episode insults the Unknown Son of Father adored by the Gnostics, then these Gnostics who hated YHWH existed before Mark.

Hence the Barabbas episode in Mark is definitive evidence that there was already, when "Mark" (author) wrote, a gospel where the hero was a Jesus Son of Father who destroyed the power of the demiurge.
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 5:09 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 3:37 am
the source of all your errors is there. What you argues for Marcion is ditheism, adoration of two gods. But Marcion was dualist: he hated YHWH and adored the Unknown God. The evidence for gnostics and marcionites hating YHWH is strong. A Christian who hates YHWH can't be Jewish.

Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.

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.

And it is ditheism, because YHWH, demiurge or not, is still a creative power. "Ditheism" and "dualism" is just your attempt at semantics.

"He hated YHWH and adored the Unknown God"

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.
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? According to you Marcion thought that YHWH was yet Jews worship him anyway. Don't project your own expectations onto the texts.
Bastard == son of an unknown father.
And that applies just as easily to the Jewish Gospel, wherein Jesus's father was unknown.

And I've tried looking into your definition and so far the only things coming up are questionable.
The Unknown Father of the Jesus of Marcion.
Who was the God of Genesis 1.
Who invented Barabbas, by definition, hated the Gnostics who adored an unknown god distinct from the Jewish god.
Which doesn't make any strategic sense.

If anything, Barabbas could be a mocking allegory for bar Kochba. At least he is more fitting of the role. But Marcon's Christ wasn't a thief or a murderer, so how does that apply to him?

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.

You're just incompetent man. Deal with it.

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 5:10 am

Giuseppe wrote:
Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:14 am
the definitive proof is just Barabbas. If x insults y, then the concept of y has to exist already in the eyes of x.

If Mark, by the Barabbas episode insults the Unknown Son of Father adored by the Gnostics, then these Gnostics who hated YHWH existed before Mark.

Hence the Barabbas episode in Mark is definitive evidence that there was already, when "Mark" (author) wrote, a gospel where the hero was a Jesus Son of Father who destroyed the power of the demiurge.
Then why is Pilate, a Marcionite proxy, sympathetic to Jesus?

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 5:14 am

Also, just a brief aside to anyone interested, apparently I'm not the first to think Barabbas was the new Christ. A man much smarter than myself realized this possibility over a century ago. The distinguishable Dr. sir James George Frazier thought that as well:

https://books.google.com/books?id=E9EnA ... as&f=false

Not that it matters really, but I thought that was really interesting.

Post Reply