I think that the Cerinthians wrote Mark

[Giuseppe]

Ebion is identified with a follower of Cerinthus, just as Matthew follows Mark. Matthew is a Cerinthus's Gospel that has been Ebionitized.

Not coincidentially, the ebionites used Matthew, while Mark is connected with the Cerinthians.

Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103311.htm

Irenaeus, Haer. 1.26.2:

Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God; but their opinions with respect to the Lord are similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law. As to the prophetical writings, they endeavour to expound them in a somewhat singular manner: they practise circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life, that they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God.

(Ps-)Hippolytus, Haer. 10.17-18;

Cerinthus, however, himself having been trained in Egypt, determined that the world was not made by the first God, but by a certain angelic power. And this power was far separated and distant from that sovereignty which is above the entire circle of existence, and it knows not the God (that is) above all things. And he says that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but that He sprang from Joseph and Mary as their son, similar to the rest of men; and that He excelled in justice, and prudence, and understanding above all the rest of mankind. And Cerinthus maintains that, after Jesus' baptism, Christ came down in the form of a dove upon Him from the sovereignty that is above the whole circle of existence, and that then He proceeded to preach the unknown Father, and to work miracles. And he asserts that, at the conclusion of the passion, Christ flew away from Jesus, but that Jesus suffered, and that Christ remained incapable of suffering, being a spirit of the Lord.

But the Ebionaeans assert that the world is made by the true God, and they speak of Christ in a similar manner with Cerinthus. They live, however, in all respects according to the law of Moses, alleging that they are thus justified.

Ps-Tertullian, _[Schaff],_EN.pdf]Haer. 3.

After him brake out the heretic Cerinthus, teaching similarly. For he, too, says that the world was originated by those angels; and sets forth Christ as born of the seed of Joseph, contending that He was merely human, without divinity; affirming also that the Law was given by angels; representing the God of the Jews as not the Lord, but an angel. His successor was Ebion, not agreeing with Cerinthus in every point; in that he affirms the world to have been made by God, not by angels; and because it is written, “No disciple above his master, nor servant above his lord,” sets forth likewise the law as binding, of course for the purpose of excluding the gospel and vindicating Judaism.

[mlinssen]

Ebion is identified with a follower of Cerinthus, just as Matthew follows Mark. Matthew is a Cerinthus's Gospel that has been Ebionitized.

Not coincidentially, the ebionites used Matthew, while Mark is connected with the Cerinthians.

Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103311.htm

Irenaeus, Haer. 1.26.2:

Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God; but their opinions with respect to the Lord are similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law. As to the prophetical writings, they endeavour to expound them in a somewhat singular manner: they practise circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life, that they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God.

(Ps-)Hippolytus, Haer. 10.17-18;

Cerinthus, however, himself having been trained in Egypt, determined that the world was not made by the first God, but by a certain angelic power. And this power was far separated and distant from that sovereignty which is above the entire circle of existence, and it knows not the God (that is) above all things. And he says that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but that He sprang from Joseph and Mary as their son, similar to the rest of men; and that He excelled in justice, and prudence, and understanding above all the rest of mankind. And Cerinthus maintains that, after Jesus' baptism, Christ came down in the form of a dove upon Him from the sovereignty that is above the whole circle of existence, and that then He proceeded to preach the unknown Father, and to work miracles. And he asserts that, at the conclusion of the passion, Christ flew away from Jesus, but that Jesus suffered, and that Christ remained incapable of suffering, being a spirit of the Lord.

But the Ebionaeans assert that the world is made by the true God, and they speak of Christ in a similar manner with Cerinthus. They live, however, in all respects according to the law of Moses, alleging that they are thus justified.

Ps-Tertullian, _[Schaff],_EN.pdf]Haer. 3.

After him brake out the heretic Cerinthus, teaching similarly. For he, too, says that the world was originated by those angels; and sets forth Christ as born of the seed of Joseph, contending that He was merely human, without divinity; affirming also that the Law was given by angels; representing the God of the Jews as not the Lord, but an angel. His successor was Ebion, not agreeing with Cerinthus in every point; in that he affirms the world to have been made by God, not by angels; and because it is written, “No disciple above his master, nor servant above his lord,” sets forth likewise the law as binding, of course for the purpose of excluding the gospel and vindicating Judaism.

Fucking hell Giuseppe. Fuuuuuuuuuucking hell

after Jesus' baptism, Christ came down in the form of a dove upon Him from the sovereignty that is above the whole circle of existence blahblahblah blahblahblah blahblahblah blahblahblah blahblahblah blahblahblah

Gospel of Philip, loose translation:

(63) If one goes down to the water and comes up without taking anything and says “I am a Chrestian” then he has taken the name on loan. Yet if he takes the spirit which is pure, he has the gift of the name. He who has taken a gift doesn’t get her carried away from him – yet he who has taken on loan gets cut.
(72) Those who beget the name of the father, the child and the spirit which is pure don’t only beget them, but they are begotten to you. If one does not beget them, the other name will get carried away from him. Yet one takes them in the chrism of the […] of the power of the ⲥ⳨ⲟⲥ, which is what the apostles called “the right hand with the left hand” - this one Indeed is no longer a Chrestian, but an ΧΡΣ.

You become "a Chrestian" in Christianity after baptism, if you have received the holy spirit: you deserve to carry that name (63).
If, after that, you beget the names of the father, son and holy spirit "in the chrism" then you move up a step on the ladder: you become "a Christ" (72)

See for the literal and traceable translation my latest, https://www.academia.edu/89583617/From_ ... _the_grave

Irenaeus is taking about that which Philip is talking about, and attesting to Chrestianity.
And indeed those did very, very carefully distinguish between IS, IHS, XS and XRS

[Giuseppe]

How can the baptism be found in a Chrestian book when the baptism of Jesus by John has been introduced only after Marcion, with Mark?

As to Cerinthians, too much divine "coincidence", that:

• Cerinthus is connected with Mark

• Ebion is said to be follower of Cerinthus

• Ebion is connected with Matthew

• Matthew comes after Mark

No sorry, it is not a coincidence. The economical explanation is that Cerinthians wrote Mark, and the Ebionites judaized it.

Both were against Marcion.

[mlinssen]

How can the baptism be found in a Chrestian book when the baptism of Jesus by John has been introduced only after Marcion, with Mark?

As to Cerinthians, too much divine "coincidence", that:

• Cerinthus is connected with Mark

• Ebion is said to be follower of Cerinthus

• Ebion is connected with Matthew

• Matthew comes after Mark

No sorry, it is not a coincidence. The economical explanation is that Cerinthians wrote Mark, and the Ebionites judaized it.

Both were against Marcion.

I am talking about baptism in general, the Chrestian core ritual.
Of course there was no baptism of Jesus in there

You may notice that I struck through Jesus

[mlinssen]

Read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7725

And do notice the extreme absence of Christ in the gospels, save for the convenient beginning and endings, and a few interpolations in between.
Then stand in awe at the oceans of Christ in the letter ff

And naturally, "Jesus" came before "Christ", even before "Chrest". And what does BeDuhn restore regarding Christ?

9:20 Then he said to them: “But you, though, whom are you saying I am?” And Peter said in reply, “You are the Christos.”
20:41 Then he said to them, “How do they say that the Christos is David’s child?
21:8 And he said, . . . Many will come under my name, saying, ‘I am the Christos. . . .’ Do not follow them.
22:67 “If you are the Christos, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I should tell you, you would in no way trust (it).
23:3 So Pilate questioned him, saying, “Are you the Christos?” And in reply to him he said, “You are the one saying (it).”
24:26 that it was necessary for the Christos to suffer these things.”

I am seriously reconsidering my label of Chrestianity. And the real question is: where the hell does "Paul" get his Christ from?

[lclapshaw]

Read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7725

And do notice the extreme absence of Christ in the gospels, save for the convenient beginning and endings, and a few interpolations in between.
Then stand in awe at the oceans of Christ in the letter ff

And naturally, "Jesus" came before "Christ", even before "Chrest". And what does BeDuhn restore regarding Christ?

9:20 Then he said to them: “But you, though, whom are you saying I am?” And Peter said in reply, “You are the Christos.”
20:41 Then he said to them, “How do they say that the Christos is David’s child?
21:8 And he said, . . . Many will come under my name, saying, ‘I am the Christos. . . .’ Do not follow them.
22:67 “If you are the Christos, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I should tell you, you would in no way trust (it).
23:3 So Pilate questioned him, saying, “Are you the Christos?” And in reply to him he said, “You are the one saying (it).”
24:26 that it was necessary for the Christos to suffer these things.”

I am seriously reconsidering my label of Chrestianity. And the real question is: where the hell does "Paul" get his Christ from?

Why would "Paul" include IC XC in the letters at all? "He" talks about the kurios/master but why would the people who are receiving the letters be confused and need further information about the identity of the master that is being referred to? They know perfectly well who the master is. They would have to.

It makes no sense unless you consider that IC XC was added to the letters later. Probably, much later by an author speaking to a general audience instead of a specific group.

[mlinssen]

Read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7725

And do notice the extreme absence of Christ in the gospels, save for the convenient beginning and endings, and a few interpolations in between.
Then stand in awe at the oceans of Christ in the letter ff

And naturally, "Jesus" came before "Christ", even before "Chrest". And what does BeDuhn restore regarding Christ?

9:20 Then he said to them: “But you, though, whom are you saying I am?” And Peter said in reply, “You are the Christos.”
20:41 Then he said to them, “How do they say that the Christos is David’s child?
21:8 And he said, . . . Many will come under my name, saying, ‘I am the Christos. . . .’ Do not follow them.
22:67 “If you are the Christos, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I should tell you, you would in no way trust (it).
23:3 So Pilate questioned him, saying, “Are you the Christos?” And in reply to him he said, “You are the one saying (it).”
24:26 that it was necessary for the Christos to suffer these things.”

I am seriously reconsidering my label of Chrestianity. And the real question is: where the hell does "Paul" get his Christ from?

Why would "Paul" include IC XC in the letters at all? "He" talks about the kurios/master but why would the people who are receiving the letters be confused and need further information about the identity of the master that is being referred to? They know perfectly well who the master is. They would have to.

It makes no sense unless you consider that IC XC was added to the letters later. Probably, much later by an author speaking to a general audience instead of a specific group.

I'll agree that the epistles in their current form only serve as flyers, not as anything seriously "teachable"

I will happily argue that Christ is an interpolation in all of Mark and Matthew, but e.g. Romans? It is littered with Christ, Chrest, Chrestos IS, and so on.
The epistles are nothing but claiming to speak in the name of xyz, and there is tremendous name dropping all over the place - but IS seems to be the odd one out there, not XS.
The epistles serve the main goal of identifying the author as speaking from authority, as being an apostle

Look at 1 Cor, 2 Cor: a ton of Christ and a few convenient Christ Jesus and Jesus Christ at beginning and end, making those chapters obvious additions.
Romans is different, it's full of Christ Jesus as well as Jesus Christ, and it would seem to cunningly replace the former with the latter.
Thessalonians exists of Jesus Christ alone, and Timothy of Christ Jesus alone.
Peter, John, Jude, Revelations: no Christ Jesus whatsoever

I still have to line up the NHL on birth ligatures, yet there are a handful of IS the Xrhstos, and plenty of IS XS / IHS XRS but I haven't checked for XS IS yet

[lclapshaw]

Read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7725

And do notice the extreme absence of Christ in the gospels, save for the convenient beginning and endings, and a few interpolations in between.
Then stand in awe at the oceans of Christ in the letter ff

And naturally, "Jesus" came before "Christ", even before "Chrest". And what does BeDuhn restore regarding Christ?

9:20 Then he said to them: “But you, though, whom are you saying I am?” And Peter said in reply, “You are the Christos.”
20:41 Then he said to them, “How do they say that the Christos is David’s child?
21:8 And he said, . . . Many will come under my name, saying, ‘I am the Christos. . . .’ Do not follow them.
22:67 “If you are the Christos, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I should tell you, you would in no way trust (it).
23:3 So Pilate questioned him, saying, “Are you the Christos?” And in reply to him he said, “You are the one saying (it).”
24:26 that it was necessary for the Christos to suffer these things.”

I am seriously reconsidering my label of Chrestianity. And the real question is: where the hell does "Paul" get his Christ from?

Why would "Paul" include IC XC in the letters at all? "He" talks about the kurios/master but why would the people who are receiving the letters be confused and need further information about the identity of the master that is being referred to? They know perfectly well who the master is. They would have to.

It makes no sense unless you consider that IC XC was added to the letters later. Probably, much later by an author speaking to a general audience instead of a specific group.

I'll agree that the epistles in their current form only serve as flyers, not as anything seriously "teachable"

I will happily argue that Christ is an interpolation in all of Mark and Matthew, but e.g. Romans? It is littered with Christ, Chrest, Chrestos IS, and so on.
The epistles are nothing but claiming to speak in the name of xyz, and there is tremendous name dropping all over the place - but IS seems to be the odd one out there, not XS.
The epistles serve the main goal of identifying the author as speaking from authority, as being an apostle

Look at 1 Cor, 2 Cor: a ton of Christ and a few convenient Christ Jesus and Jesus Christ at beginning and end, making those chapters obvious additions.
Romans is different, it's full of Christ Jesus as well as Jesus Christ, and it would seem to cunningly replace the former with the latter.
Thessalonians exists of Jesus Christ alone, and Timothy of Christ Jesus alone.
Peter, John, Jude, Revelations: no Christ Jesus whatsoever

I still have to line up the NHL on birth ligatures, yet there are a handful of IS the Xrhstos, and plenty of IS XS / IHS XRS but I haven't checked for XS IS yet

Doesn't the inconsistent use of IC XC tell us something though?

And XC? An actual letter writer to people who know who the master is has no reason to include it in the text. It's superfluous.

[rgprice]

I doubt that Mark or Luke or even Marcion's Gospel were written by sectarians. Rather I think these stories were written without any such distinguishing doctrines in mind, and the interpretations of these stories gave rise to these various sects.

[MrMacSon]

(Ps-)Hippolytus, Haer. 10.17-18;

Cerinthus, however, himself having been trained in Egypt, determined that the world was not made by the first God, but by a certain angelic power. And this power was far separated and distant from that sovereignty which is above the entire circle of existence, and it knows not the God (that is) above all things. And he says that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but that He sprang from Joseph and Mary as their son, similar to the rest of men; and that He excelled in justice, and prudence, and understanding above all the rest of mankind. And Cerinthus maintains that, after Jesus' baptism, Christ came down in the form of a dove upon Him from the sovereignty that is above the whole circle of existence, and that then He proceeded to preach the unknown Father, and to work miracles. And he asserts that, at the conclusion of the passion, Christ flew away from Jesus, but that Jesus suffered, and that Christ remained incapable of suffering, being a spirit of the Lord.

But the Ebionaeans assert that the world is made by the true God, and they speak of Christ in a similar manner [as] with Cerinthus. They live, however, in all respects according to the law of Moses, alleging that they are thus justified.

fwiw, M David Litwa's version has:

21.1. Kerinthos was trained in Egypt.64 He also decided that the world originated not by means of the primal God but by an angelic power far separate and distant from the Supreme Divine Power and ignorant of the God above all.⁶⁵ 2. He claims that Jesus was not born from a virgin but was born the son of Joseph and Mary just like all other human beings. Still, Jesus excelled other people by his righteousness, moderation, and insight.

3. After Jesus’s baptism, Christ, from the Supreme Divine Power over all, descended upon him in the form of a dove. After that, Jesus preached the unknown Father and performed miracles. At the end of his suffering, the Christ flew away from Jesus.⁶⁶ Jesus suffered, but Christ remained without suffering, existing as the Spirit of the Lord.

22.1. The Ebionites say that the world originated from the true God but hold the same views about Christ as Kerinthos.⁶⁷ They live in all respects according to the Law of Moses, claiming that in this way they are made righteous.

---

64. cf. the overlapping report in Ref. 7.33.1–2; Theodoret, Haer. fab. 2.3 (PG 83:389–92). Our author here omits a summary of Karpokrates, who was linked to Kerinthos in the main report. By placing Kerinthos after Markion and Apelles, Kerinthos is significantly postponed.

65. Diverging from his main account (Ref. 7.33.1), our author has Kerinthos affirm that the world was created not just by a certain power but by an angelic power. This addition makes Kerinthos sound more like Satorneilos. Pseudo-Tertullian affirms the same in Adv. omn. haer. 3 (mundum institutum esse ab angelis dicit [“He says that the world is founded by angels”]).

66. “Jesus” ( Ἰησοῦ) is R. Scott’s emendation for P’s υἱοῦ (“Son”).

67. cf. the overlapping report in Ref. 7.34.1.

Litwa, (2016) Refutation of all Heresies, SBL Press, pp. 730-3.

21.1 Κήρινθος δέ, ὁ ἐν τῇ Αἰγύπτῳ ἀσκηθείς, αὐτὸς οὐχ ὑπὸ τοῦ πρώτου θεοῦ τὸν κόσμον γεγονέναι ἠθέλησεν, ἀλλ’ ὑπὸ δυνάμεώς τινος ἀγγελικῆς, πολὺ εχωρισμένης καὶ διεστώσης τῆς ὑπὲρ τὰ ὅλα αὐθεντίας καὶ ἀγνοούσης τὸν ὑπὲρ πάντα θεόν. 2. τὸν δὲ Ἰησοῦν λέγει μὴ ἐκ παρθένου γεγεν<ν>ῆσθαι, γεγονέναι δὲ αὐτὸν ἐξ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Μαρίας υἱόν, ὁμοίως τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀνθρώποις, καὶ δι(ε)νηνοχέναι ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ σωφροσύνῃ καὶ συνέσει ὑπὲρ πάντας τοὺς λοιπούς.

3. καὶ μετὰ τὸ βάπτισμα κατεληλυθέναι εἰς αὐτὸν ἐκ τῆς ὑπὲρ τὰ ὅλα αὐθεντίας τὸν Χριστὸν ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς· καὶ τότε κηρῦξαι τὸν ἄγνωστον πατέρα καὶ δυνάμεις ἐπιτελέσαι. πρὸς δὲ τῷ τέλει τοῦ πάθους ἀποπτῆναι τὸν Χριστὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ <Ἰησοῦ>· πεπονθέναι τὸν Ἰησοῦν, τὸν δὲ Χριστὸν ἀπαθῆ μεμενηκέναι, πνεῦμα κυρίου ὑπάρχοντα.

22.1. Ἐβιωναῖοι δὲ τὸν μὲν κόσμον ὑπὸ τοῦ ὄντως θεοῦ γεγονέναι λέγουσι, τὰ δὲ <περὶ τὸν> Χριστὸν ὁμοίως Κηρίνθῳ. ζῶσι δὲ πάντα κατὰ νόμον Μωϋσῆ, οὕτω φάσκον(τ)ες δικαιοῦσθαι.