Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by mlinssen »

Ken Olson wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:52 am
Peter Kirby wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 8:50 am I may be able to recap the argument at some point.
Peter,

Thanks; yes, I know that was an awfully big request.

Best,

Ken
I've traversed the first 300 pages now, of Klinghardt's "Marcion", and let's start with the first things: he knows very well how to demonstrate that Tertullian is purposely obfuscating things when it suits him.
An interesting point that the raises is the fact that the 3 witnesses contradict one another so very often, but the best is demonstrating how Harnack as well as Roth so very conveniently look away when the going gets tough.
In essence, each of these two should have caught the errors in their own theories, but they just happily hop across giant omissions in the tradition, for instance the fact that Jesus does not read Isaiah in the synagogue in chapter 4

Another failure on Roth's part is that he pretends to not care about editorial intent, while each and every time he bases his decision on the presumption of Lukan priority.
Klinghardt is decent and smart enough to disclose his agenda, so that we get an insight into his thesis and can justify the choices he makes, based on those

Buy the book Ken, honestly, it's more than worth it and not expensive: it's got the same price tag per page as Goodacre's Thomas and the gospels, and that was a grand disappointment whereas this is the finest piece of research that I've read in years.
You can buy 5 books of 275 pages, or this one, and the total price won't differ much

Klinghardt is very convincing, and Marcionite priority solves quite a few issues that are caused by the inconsistency and disagreement across and between the 3 main witnesses. Other than that, as I found out myself, holding a real "Q" in your hands works wonders for the SP!

It's going to be a very, very busy next 12 months for me but I am really going to enjoy them; these are tremendously exciting times.
You better start liking the inevitable outcome :D
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by Giuseppe »

Mlinssen, what do you think about John the Baptist in Marcion? Do you think, as Stuart, that Marcion was too much embarrassed by a previous story about John baptizing Jesus therefore he knew a previous gospel different from his own? Or do you think that John the Baptist has a different origin from a previous connection with Jesus?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark) - the baptism joke and hoax

Post by mlinssen »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Oct 10, 2021 8:49 pm Mlinssen, what do you think about John the Baptist in Marcion? Do you think, as Stuart, that Marcion was too much embarrassed by a previous story about John baptizing Jesus therefore he knew a previous gospel different from his own? Or do you think that John the Baptist has a different origin from a previous connection with Jesus?
Dear Giuseppe,

Johannes the Immerser is what got me here in the first place!
It is a Thomasine invention / creation just like all other characters and the most detailed explanation of that is in my

https://www.academia.edu/40695711/Absol ... ory_manner

The most concise version of that on this forum is

viewtopic.php?p=115718#p115718

They all are wordplay, Giuseppe: Simon the monotheistic Rock, Mat-thaios the most disciple-ese disciple, IS the helping hand Iusaas, Salome the Peace between Samaritans and Judeans, and Thomas the twin playing the part of IS as a prompter.

Mariham the Mari-ham is the witness to need, I think. She doesn't give me anything to go on, she just asks one question and that is it.
None of them ever existed, they all are only literary characters. Look at my ATP quoted above, which cites ALL instances of baptism in ALL of the NT: they had no idea what it meant, what to do with it, and as such they just toyed aground with it, contradicting themselves as usual

viewtopic.php?p=122994#p122994
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by mlinssen »

Having said that, such is what Thomas had in mind.
It is likely that Marcion did not understand it as such, although it is just as likely that he did, as we don't have his text, nor have we agreed upon a reconstruction

And here we have one of the follies of "Jesus research": it is a large pile of disorganised questions and answers back and forth without continuously referring to its confines, assumptions, theories

According to Klinghardt, there is no baptism in Marcion, and I can only agree: it is the Romans who try (desperately) to employ John the Baptist, to give him a place, and it is one of the cardinal sins of Mark that he has his John baptise Jesus: there is no way back now, it is really written now, and everyone who comes afterwards grudgingly has to live with the "fact"

It all started with Thomas, Marcion took that into a narrative and "religion", and Mark had the first try out at hijacking that.
Tertullian highly likely first supported Marcion, hence his feeble story about the lost 1st and 2nd copy, but after Marcion disallowed his movement to be hijacked by them, they turned hostile and made up all the allegations and accusations - with success in the final and bitter end, many centuries later

In a nutshell, that's the story. Do read Klinghardt, it will forever change everything. And while it's only the beginning, it's the beginning of the end.
And similar to my thesis about Coptic Thomas being the source to all of Christianity, his thesis doesn't get successfully refuted in any which way either

Imagine what would happen if these two were to get combined? That Coptic Thomas is the source to Marcion which is the source to Christianity?
It would all become so beautifully traceable, verifiable and logical...
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by Giuseppe »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:39 amDo read Klinghardt, it will forever change everything. And while it's only the beginning, it's the beginning of the end.
I have already read Klinghardt, and I share your enthusiasm for his proof. Indeed, Mark's baptism of John in the incipit is pure anti-marcionism. In Marcion, there is total cold war between Jesus and John.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by mlinssen »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 3:25 am
mlinssen wrote: Mon Oct 11, 2021 2:39 amDo read Klinghardt, it will forever change everything. And while it's only the beginning, it's the beginning of the end.
I have already read Klinghardt, and I share your enthusiasm for his proof. Indeed, Mark's baptism of John in the incipit is pure anti-marcionism. In Marcion, there is total cold war between Jesus and John.
Excellent!
It is always difficult to distinguish between the labels put on Marcion by the Church Fathers, out rather, it isn't.
When one presumes Marcionite Priority, everything that the Church Fathers say is perceived as a lie, a falsehood - and then it becomes something debatable, a shaky foundation, a moving target

It is best to see everything in their light, that of the "Church Fathers", these propaganda makes and evangelists of the Church, instead: the entire John scene, yes even the entire figure of John, so evidently clad in Elijah's clothes, is the Tanakh come alive, a promise kept, a prophesy fulfilled

I am quite sure that John didn't even exist in Marcion, but here we enter dangerous grounds: needless to say, the CF's took the opportunity to cement their own lies and falsehoods in some "truth" by letting parts of their own story exist in Marcion's - only to debate over nitty-gritty aspects of them! - so it would seem that they were "historical".
It is the same trick that they pulled with the birth narrative: tell two fairly different ones albeit that they share the same core, and the very fact that they differ "demonstrates the veracity of their core"

So the question is: why would John exist in Marcion, what would he do? What is his role, his purpose?
Within my theory that Thomas precedes Marcion and creates John out of thin air (as a pointer to Zedekiah shattering the Israeli dream), even if Marcion did not get the message, all he had was one lousy logion.
You have been programmed with entire volumes of what John would be, none of which can be traced back to the NT or anything else, exactly because it is entirely devoid of baptism and John the Baptist - but still, you can't get your head around the simple fact that Marcion precedes the John the Baptist of the NT, and that the John the Baptist in your head never existed in anyone's imagination and is only a creation of the Church

"Cold war"? Over what?!
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by Giuseppe »

mlinssen wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:03 am You have been programmed with entire volumes of what John would be, none of which can be traced back to the NT or anything else, exactly because it is entirely devoid of baptism and John the Baptist - but still, you can't get your head around the simple fact that Marcion precedes the John the Baptist of the NT, and that the John the Baptist in your head never existed in anyone's imagination and is only a creation of the Church

"Cold war"? Over what?!
Just reading now this passage of Klinghardt, p. 643:
Tertullian senses the uneasiness regarding John's apparent lack of faith and elucidates the ratio scandali, which appears contrived only at first sight. Since the 'Lord of hosts' worked and preached on earth by the word and spirit of the Father, it was ineluctable that part of the spirit (enabled John's prophetic preparation of the way of the Lord) withdrew from John and left him 'an ordinary man' (communis iam homo, 4,18,15). That justification is based on the concept that the old prophecy was fulfilled in John and thus it ended.

(my bold)

Klinghardt is surely right to point out the 'justification' in the eyes of Tertullian. However, I am aware also that Mark is separationist in his Christology, hence I wonder if the fact that John was abandoned by the 'spirit of the Father' is really an old trace of the original separationism of Mark, where also the carnal Jesus is abandoned on the cross by the spiritual Christ. Hence we have in evidence that:
  • for Mark, the carnal Jesus is abandoned by the spiritual Christ
  • for Tertullian, John the Baptist hated (=doubted about) Jesus because the 'spirit of the Father' had abandoned definitely John the Baptist to go entirely on Jesus Christ.
  • the people around Jesus believed that the carnal Jesus was invoking Elijah, i.e. the same spirit of the Father who talked via John the Baptist for all the time of the latter's spiritual possession by it.
My point here is that Marcion and Mark witness independently a rival tradition where John the Baptist, and not Jesus at all, was possessed spiritually by the 'spirit of the Father'.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by mlinssen »

Giuseppe wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 6:42 am
mlinssen wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:03 am You have been programmed with entire volumes of what John would be, none of which can be traced back to the NT or anything else, exactly because it is entirely devoid of baptism and John the Baptist - but still, you can't get your head around the simple fact that Marcion precedes the John the Baptist of the NT, and that the John the Baptist in your head never existed in anyone's imagination and is only a creation of the Church

"Cold war"? Over what?!
Just reading now this passage of Klinghardt, p. 643:
Tertullian senses the uneasiness regarding John's apparent lack of faith and elucidates the ratio scandali, which appears contrived only at first sight. Since the 'Lord of hosts' worked and preached on earth by the word and spirit of the Father, it was ineluctable that part of the spirit (enabled John's prophetic preparation of the way of the Lord) withdrew from John and left him 'an ordinary man' (communis iam homo, 4,18,15). That justification is based on the concept that the old prophecy was fulfilled in John and thus it ended.

(my bold)

Klinghardt is surely right to point out the 'justification' in the eyes of Tertullian. However, I am aware also that Mark is separationist in his Christology, hence I wonder if the fact that John was abandoned by the 'spirit of the Father' is really an old trace of the original separationism of Mark, where also the carnal Jesus is abandoned on the cross by the spiritual Christ. Hence we have in evidence that:
  • for Mark, the carnal Jesus is abandoned by the spiritual Christ
  • for Tertullian, John the Baptist hated (=doubted about) Jesus because the 'spirit of the Father' had abandoned definitely John the Baptist to go entirely on Jesus Christ.
  • the people around Jesus believed that the carnal Jesus was invoking Elijah, i.e. the same spirit of the Father who talked via John the Baptist for all the time of the latter's spiritual possession by it.
My point here is that Marcion and Mark witness independently a rival tradition where John the Baptist, and not Jesus at all, was possessed spiritually by the 'spirit of the Father'.
Right. So the meagre 6 verses that John the Baptist gets in Mark, the sum total of his entire ministry, this ministry of this Prophet Of Most High, the only Prophet ever to not only accurately predict the messiah, yet also to be alive when said messiah finally did show up for once, that prophet that also not only was related to that messiah BUT EVEN MET HIM AND DIDN'T SAY A GODDAMN WORD - that Prophet, that lousy no good for nothing misfit, that prophet indeed... you believe that prophet to actually have "been in a tradition", which is bad English for having existed?

If his role in Mark is as infinitely flimsy as it is, then how much flimsier was it in *Ev?
davidmartin
Posts: 1588
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by davidmartin »

there 2 John the Baptists. Whether they are two historical characters, two literary inventions or one was real and the other wasn't - that's fun to think about
One is a pious Jewish prophet with a baptism of repentance. Nice and simple
The other is someone thought to be Christ and is a teacher who actually says something mystical in John's gospel unlike the synoptics
I just find it a bit crazy that John baptises people with the spirit that's how Jesus received it but it's said he only did a simple water baptism with nothing happening. John is doing what Jesus is said to do 'baptise in the spirit' but never actually does baptise anyone!
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Dogs remain dogs (in Mark)

Post by andrewcriddle »

mlinssen wrote: Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:04 pm ...........................

Right. So the meagre 6 verses that John the Baptist gets in Mark, the sum total of his entire ministry, this ministry of this Prophet Of Most High, the only Prophet ever to not only accurately predict the messiah, yet also to be alive when said messiah finally did show up for once, that prophet that also not only was related to that messiah BUT EVEN MET HIM AND DIDN'T SAY A GODDAMN WORD - that Prophet, that lousy no good for nothing misfit, that prophet indeed... you believe that prophet to actually have "been in a tradition", which is bad English for having existed?

If his role in Mark is as infinitely flimsy as it is, then how much flimsier was it in *Ev?
John the Baptist is mentioned in several places in Mark after chapter 1, his death is described in chapter 6 but there are a number of other references.

Andrew Criddle
Post Reply