WHO is this god: the "Father of Truth" ?

[billd89]

.. the usual rebuttal from the bankrupt ruins of Churchian academic

[mlinssen]

Took you a while

[billd89]

Translations can be mindlessly generic (typical) or delve deeper into the metaphysical meanings (rarely). Admitting my own status as a rank amateur, I find the academic standard desperately wanting clarity.

Heracleon, Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John, Fragment 20 on John 4:21:

"The mountain represents the Devil, or his world, since the Devil was one part of the whole of matter, but the world is the total mountain of evil, a deserted dwelling place of beasts, to which all who lived before the law and all Gentiles render worship. But Jerusalem represents the creation or the Creator whom the Jews worship. . . The mountain is the creation which the Gentiles worship, but Jerusalem is the creator whom the Jews serve. You then who are spiritual should worship neither the creation nor the Craftsman, but the Father of Truth. And he (Jesus) accepts her (the Samaritan woman) as one of the already faithful, and to be counted with those who worship in truth."

The Greek in Origen's Commentarii In Evangelium Joannis Book 13 Section|Fragment 95 (13.95):

εἰπὼν ὄρος μὲν τὸν διάβολον λέγεσθαι ἢ τὸν κόσμον αὐτοῦ, ἐπείπερ μέρος ἓν ὁ διάβολος ὅλης τῆς ὕλης, φησίν, φησίν, ὁ δὲ κόσμος τὸ σύμπαν τῆς κακίας ὄρος, ἔρημον οἰκητήριον θηρίων, ᾡ προσεκύνουν πάντες οἱ πρὸ νόμου καὶ οἱ ἐθνικοί· Ἱεροσόλυμα [*] [*] δὲ τὴν κτίσιν ἢ τὸν κτίστην, ᾡ προσεκύνουν Ἰουδαῖοι.

ἀλλὰ καὶ δευτέρως ὄρος μὲν ἐνόμισεν εἶναι τὴν κτίσιν ᾗ οἱ ἐθνικοὶ προσεκύνουν· Ἱεροσόλυμα δὲ τὸν ᾦ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ελάτρευον.

ὑμεῖς οὐν, φησίν, οἱονεὶ πνευματικοὶ ουτε τῇ κτίσει ουτε τῷ δημιουργῷ προσκυνήσετε, ἀλλὰ τῷ πατρὶ τῆς ἀληθείας· καὶ συμπαραλαμβάνει γε, φησίν, αὐτὴν ὡς ἤδη πιστὴν καὶ συναριθμουμένην τοῖς κατὰ ἀλήθειαν προσκυνηταῖς.

My first-stage translation:
#1

Having verily said that indeed Horos is designated the Accuser or ‘of His Cosmos’, since the lot assigned the Accuser is the All-Matter (said again emphatically): the Cosmos is the whole of the Horos of Error -- desolate abode of beasts -- what all before the Law and the Gentiles have worshipped; ‘Jerusalem’ and Creation or the Creator is what Jews worship.

But also the Second Horos is otherwise customarily the Creation or worshipped as such by the Gentiles; ‘Jerusalem’ is that which the Jews serve.

You then, it is said, as if Pneumatikoi -- and not there to worship Creation nor the Demiurge, but are unto the Father of Truth and to be taken along with {Him} in fact (as said) -- are already faithful and numbered among worshippers of the Truth.

My second-stage interpretations explore different meanings of the metaphysical and religious symbolism:
#2a.

Having verily said that indeed The Wasteland {= ὄρος} is designated the Accuser {διάβολος} or 'of His World', since the lot assigned the Accuser is the All-Matter (said again emphatically): the Cosmos is entirely 'the Boundary of Error' {= κακίας ὄρος} -- the forsaken home {ἔρημον οἰκητήριον} of brutes {θηρίων} -- which all before the Law and the Gentiles have worshipped; ‘Jerusalem’ and Creation or the Creator is what Jews worship.

Accordingly, the Second Horos is acknowledged to be 'Creation', what Gentiles worship; ‘Jerusalem’ is that which the Jews serve.

O ye that are said to be Pneumatikoi -- we worship not The Work {or The Ordinance = κτίσις}, nor the Demiurge {= Δημιουργός}, but are
{instead} unto the Father of Truth {πατήρ ἀληθείας} and to be taken along with {Him} in fact (as said) -- O ye that so worship, assume you are already faithful and being counted with they who worship Truth.

#2b.

Having verily said that indeed The Boundary is called 'Horon', 'Cosmos', or 'of His World', since Horon is in all Matter, (said again emphatically): yet the Cosmos is completely 'the Limit of Evil' -- forlorn abode of the bestial -- which all before the Law and the Gentiles have worshipped. ‘Jerusalem’ and Creation or the Creator is what Jews worship.

It is acknowledged accordingly the Second Horos is The Work that Gentiles worship, and 'Jerusalem' is what the Jews serve.

We -- those who are The Spiritual {Race} -- worship not the Artifice, nor the Artificer, but {rather} Father of Truth and to be taken along with {Him} in fact (as said). You who do so worship are already faithful and being counted among they who worship in The Truth.

#2c

Having verily said that indeed The Mountain is called {Hor-On}, Cosmos, or 'His World' (since the Accuser is in all Matter), said again emphatically: the 'Mountain of Vice' is the solitary home of beasts, that which all before the Law and the Gentiles have worshipped. ‘Jerusalem’ and Creation or the Creator is what Jews worship.

The Second Horos is acknowledged accordingly to be 'The Creation' which Gentiles worship; and 'Jerusalem' is what the Jews serve.

We -- you that are The Spiritual Ones -- worship not the Ordained Creation, nor its Demiurge, but the Father of Truth: to be taken along with {Him} in fact (as said). And you that so worship {Him} may take it for granted, being already faithful, that you are being counted with they who worship in Truth.

Obviously, in replacing "Diabolos" =Accuser with "Horon" (Beelzeboul) I suspect the god's name was overwritten. Horon is Horus-of-Horizon, Prince-of-this-World, ergo 'the Devil.' Horon is also a God of the Mount. Heracleon's exegesis would therefore be directed not at Christians but at Horonic Sethians, i.e. since Horon is well attested to in Egypt, and in the Sethrum particularly, polytheistic 'Zeus Kasion', and 'Samaritans' in Egypt being shorthand for that relic faith which did not follow Jerusalem's authority, etc. these Judaic Egyptians were the largest audience c.35 AD.

Jews still serve Jerusalem? Before 70 AD, YES: I suspect this is an older Sethian doctrine borrowed by a later Valentinian. At any rate, 'Jesus said' must date before the Temple's Destruction, pre-70 AD. IF an Historical Jesus studied in Egypt (as some traditions believe), his Therapeutic paideia would date c.20 AD. That fits the purported Heracleon Fragment 20 into a conventional timeline for a Gnostic Jesus, but highlights the problem of the rabbis' assertion at Matthew 12:24 ; Mark 3:22 ; Luke 11:15 (Horon = Baal Zeboul).

Move over Gerizim -- Beth-Horon (abode of Baal Horon) is here:


What the Edelsteins wrote so cryptically, "Showing How We Got Out from Under" means 'How We (Aletheian Anthropoi) Escaped the Horos' (famously illustrated here). Yes, "the spheres really had their music" (and so many other traces) reveal a clever 1938 Judeo-Pythagorean reconstruction of Philo's Therapeutae, their Mystery God modelled after W.F. Albright's Hauron, from a 1936 paper.

[mlinssen]

Translations can be mindlessly generic (typical) or delve deeper into the metaphysical meanings (rarely). Admitting my own status as a rank amateur, I find the academic standard desperately wanting clarity.

I couldn't agree more - but ..

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... Aentry%3Do(%2Fros

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... Aentry%3Do)%2Fros

The spiritus asper and the spiritus lenis - dont ask me why my Greek teacher at Grammar school used Latin to label Greek diacritics but that's the way I was taught.
The thing is, and it is mysterious indeed, that the Greek that we know from 10th CE or earlier doesn't contain diacritics - and that way we can't know whether they meant to say horos or oros because those words are identical there

Other than that, I really appreciate your effort as well as translation!

In slightly related news, congrats on the avatar exploration (bis)

[billd89]

In slightly related news, congrats on the avatar exploration (bis)

Hahaha, I honestly hadn't noted that! (Obviously: I've seen the film. In fact, I had a delightful encounter with Graham Chapman once.)

No, I merely sensed you were 'requesting a shrubbery' - my mind was working at unconscious levels
(The Black Knight was a different scene, not the Knights of Lookie-lookie-flapzoiten.)

In 'related-to-that news', a site linked to King Arthur is currently being excavated in Little Britain:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-ne ... 180980362/

[mlinssen]

In slightly related news, congrats on the avatar exploration (bis)

Hahaha, I honestly hadn't noted that! (Obviously: I've seen the film. In fact, I had a delightful encounter with Graham Chapman once.)

No, I merely sensed you were 'requesting a shrubbery' - my mind was working at unconscious levels

In 'related-to-that news', a site linked to King Arthur is being excavated now in Little Britain:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-ne ... 180980362/

I love them, and now I envy you!
Did you solve John T's by accident then? Double congrats are in order f so, and you've gone from unconscious incompetence to unconscious competence in the blink of an eye!

A fair part of their subtleties is wasted on me to be frank, but nonetheless

[billd89]

Did you solve John T's by accident then?

No, I investigated the famous but poorly documented Flammarion Engraving about 5 years ago; it was part of my research ... and obviously, it's iconic in my lifetime, after the Print Mint's 1970 popularization. I have lots of those old underground comix (before my time)...

A fair part of their subtleties is wasted on me to be frank, but nonetheless

I'm an American: me too!

Graham Chapman performed at my uni c.1987, and his one man show was rather dry, disappointing. However, he had ushers pass around index cards, for audience questions (Q&A) at the end of the show, ~15 minutes.

I wrote on ~8 cards. All sorts of old Python bits (from my own recollection - but also familiar to many watching that show), melded to weirdness of my uni life: things that only his audience that one night would know. The first card received gales of laughter, so he used all my material and began prefacing cards "Oh, I know you'll like this next one ..."

I spoke with him afterwards, and he thanked me for the support: writing that night's best jokes. (I was in quite a psychedelic state, I should add.)

He died 2 years later, sadly.

[gryan]

@billd89

Thanks for sharing your careful work on translating Heracleon, Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John, Fragment 20 on John 4:21!

Jews still serve Jerusalem? Before 70 AD, YES: I suspect this is an older Sethian doctrine borrowed by a later Valentinian. At any rate, 'Jesus said' must date before the Temple's Destruction, pre-70 AD. IF an Historical Jesus studied in Egypt (as some traditions believe), his Therapeutic paideia would date c.20 AD. That fits the purported Heracleon Fragment 20 into a conventional timeline for a Gnostic Jesus, but highlights the problem of the rabbis' assertion at Matthew 12:24 ; Mark 3:22 ; Luke 11:15 (Horon = Baal Zeboul).

How important is this dating scenario in your motivation to study this text (I doubt I understand your argument)? What of the possibility that "historical Jesus" said no such thing?

Would you be open to the idea that Paul's letter to the Galatians influenced the author of John, who wrote his Gospel subsequent to Mk, Matt and Lk?

I find this standard text of Galatians 4:25 (or even Carlson's critical text of 4:25) to be a possible influence on the author of John:

Gal 4:24-25
24 ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα · αὗται γάρ εἰσιν δύο διαθήκαι, μία μὲν
ἀπὸ ὄρους Σινᾶ εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα, ἥτις ἐστιν Ἁγάρ.
25 [[τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβιᾳ ·]] συστοιχεῖ δὲ τῇ νῦν Ἰερουσαλήμ, δουλεύει γὰρ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς.

24 These things may be treated as an allegory, for these women represent two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai bearing children for slavery; this is Hagar.
25 [[For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia]] and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.

"...the textual evidence indicates that the earliest form of the marginal note on
the text of Gal 4:25 reads τὸ γὰρ Σινᾶ ὄρος ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ Ἀραβίᾳ ('for Sinai is a mountain in
Arabia'). Critical editions should reflect that wording."

--Stephen C. Carlson (The Text of Galatians and Its History)

[billd89]

@billd89

Thanks for sharing your careful work on translating Heracleon, Fragments from his Commentary on the Gospel of John, Fragment 20 on John 4:21!

Jews still serve Jerusalem? Before 70 AD, YES: I suspect this is an older Sethian doctrine borrowed by a later Valentinian. At any rate, 'Jesus said' must date before the Temple's Destruction, pre-70 AD. IF an Historical Jesus studied in Egypt (as some traditions believe), his Therapeutic paideia would date c.20 AD. That fits the purported Heracleon Fragment 20 into a conventional timeline for a Gnostic Jesus, but highlights the problem of the rabbis' assertion at Matthew 12:24 ; Mark 3:22 ; Luke 11:15 (Horon = Baal Zeboul).

How important is this dating scenario in your motivation to study this text (I doubt I understand your argument)? What of the possibility that "historical Jesus" said no such thing?

Would you be open to the idea that Paul's letter to the Galatians influenced the author of John, who wrote his Gospel subsequent to Mk, Matt and Lk?

I wonder if a Gnostic Jesus (an historical personnage) may have lived, well-versed in (Egyptian) 'Sethian' myths. Or that JCers grafted on to a relic (Sethian) Gnostic cult relatively early on, c.50 AD?

I suspect that Gnostic material in John originates from Egypt. That could include: a Jewish Gnostic writer (or small Diaspora network) who carried Sethian/Therapeut ideas away from Alexandria 38-75 AD.

I also suppose this fragment's philosophy is OLDER than the JC bits tacked on to it, that a Samaritan Woman & the Sethian Guru Myth was co-opted by John, from the older cult. It may have been a local Egyptian myth, worked-over and exported by 90 AD, before John's plagiarism. There were communities of 'Samaritans' (or Semites, so-called) in Egypt for hundreds of years; not in Turkey.

I think that Jerusalem still existed when this myth first appeared. It is proto-Valentinian but ascribed to a later teacher-author who may well have copied it from a source 175yrs older, adding bits. We cannot be sure WHEN.

Everything canonical was heavily worked-over, so 1 anachronism may be telling but not conclusive. Overwriting has made a muddle of the NT. That's just my two cents: I've no opinion on your particulars, sorry gryan.

** minor edits for clarity **

[Leucius Charinus]

FWIW this translation of Against Celsus, Books VI-VIII twice mentions "Father of Truth"
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/librar ... lsou-11397