Et Barrabas quidem nocentissimus vita ut bonus (good) donatur, Christus vero iustissimus (just) ut homicida morti expostulatur
if these two men represent two powers it is worth noting that they reinforce the original Marcionite understanding of two powers - one 'just' and the other 'good.' Note: the Marcionite godhead is 'good' and 'just' not 'good' and 'evil.'
Marcion has laid down the position, that Christ who in the days of Tiberius was, by a previously unknown god, revealed for the salvation of all nations, is a different being from Him who was ordained by God the Creator for the restoration of the Jewish state, and who is yet to come. Between these he interposes the separation of146 a great and absolute difference----as great as lies between what is just and what is good;147 as great as lies between the law and the gospel; as great, (in short, ) as is the difference between Judaism and Christianity. (Inter hos magnam et omnem2 differentiam scindit, quantam inter iustum et bonum, quantam inter legem et evangelium, quantam inter Iudaismum et Christianismum) (6.3)
Note the consistent use of the Latin terminology throughout:
And now, too, as the destroyer also of the Creator, he would have desired nothing better than to be acknowledged by His spirits, and to be divulged for the sake of being feared: only that Marcion says219 that his god is not feared; maintaining that a good god (bonum) Is not an object of fear, but only a judicial god (iudicem), in whom reside the grounds of fear----anger, severity, judgments, vengeance, condemnation. ... Therefore they confessed that (Christ) was the Son of a God who was to be feared, because they would have an occasion of not submitting if there were none for fearing. Besides, He showed that He was to be feared, because He drave them out, not by persuasion like a good god (bonus), but by command and reproof (like a just god). Or else did he222 reprove them, because they were making him an object of fear, when all the while he did not want to be feared? And in what manner did he wish them to go forth, when they could not do so except with fear? So that he fell into the dilemma of having to conduct himself contrary to his nature, whereas he might in his simple goodness (bonus) have at once treated them with leniency. He fell, too, into another false position ----of prevarication, when he permitted himself to be feared by the demons as the Son of the Creator, that he might drive them out, not indeed by his own power, but by the authority of the Creator(4.8.7 - 9)
again:
Others, again, admit that the word implies a curse; but they will have it that Christ pronounced the woe, not as if it were His own genuine feeling, but because the woe is from the Creator, and He wanted to set forth to them the severity of the Creator in order that He might the more commend His own long-suffering in His beatitudes Just as if it were not competent to the Creator, in the pre-eminence of both His attributes as the good God and Judge (et bonum deum et iudicem), that, as He had made clemency the preamble of His benediction so He should place severity in the sequel of His curses; thus fully developing His discipline in both directions, both in following out the blessing and in providing against the curse.514 [5] He had already said of old, "Behold, I have set before you blessing and cursing." (4.15.3)
again:
If to Marcion's god there be ascribed the blessing of the poor, he must also have imputed to him the malediction of the rich; and thus will he become the Creator's equal,523 both good and judicial (tam bonus quam et iudex); nor will there be left any room for that distinction whereby two gods are made; and when this distinction is removed, there will remain the verity which pronounces the Creator to be the one only God. (4.15.7)
again:
He will further say to them, "Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."1240 But where? [5] Outside, no doubt, when they shall have been excluded with the door shut on them by Him. There will therefore be punishment inflicted by Him who excludes for punishment, when they shall behold the righteous entering the kingdom of God (iustos introeuntes in regnum dei), but themselves detained without. By whom detained outside? If by the Creator, who shall be within receiving the righteous into the kingdom? The good God.(Si a creatore, quis erit ergo intus recipiens iustos in regnum? Deus bonus?) What, therefore, is the Creator about,1241 that He should detain outside for punishment those whom His adversary shut out, when He ought rather to have kindly received them, if they must come into His hands,1242 for the greater irritation of His rival? [6] But when about to exclude the wicked, he must, of course, either be aware that the Creator would detain them for punishment, or not be aware. Consequently either the wicked will be detained by the Creator against the will of the excluder, in which case he will be inferior to the Creator, submitting to Him unwillingly; or else, if the process is carried out with his will, then he himself has judicially determined its execution; and then he who is the very originator of the Creator's infamy, will not prove to be one whit better than the Creator. Now, if these ideas be incompatible with reason----of one being supposed to punish, and the other to liberate----then to one only power will appertain both the judgment and the kingdom and while they both belong to one, He who executeth judgment can be none else than the Christ of the Creator. (4.30.5)
You see how the more you dig the more you come up with CHALLENGES your self-serving beliefs. IF Barabbas and Jesus were conceived in terms of two power THEN it follows that Marcion was not a dualist, his system WAS NOT based on two powers - one good, one evil - but rather the traditional Jewish understanding going back to Philo of two powers, one just one good.
With every new discovery inevitably comes the changing of your original position. Of course Giuseppe won't change. Because he is not interested in the truth.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote