Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
davidmartin
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Epiphanius believed the Didascalia to be truly Apostolic

Post by davidmartin »

RandyHelzerman wrote: Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:26 pm I'm afraid that the Didache, even if it is as super-early as I think it is, *still* is downstream of Paul. The Lord's prayer, as quoted, is from canonical Matthew, which in turn is derived from Mark, which in turn was based on Paul. Sure the Didache is layered, and surely preserves even pre-christian Jewish practices.

But then again, so are the Pauline epistles. As worked over as the Pauline letter collection is, even in the Marcionite recension (which probably has at least two pseudonymous letters) it remains the earliest window we have into Christianity.

Both the Didache and the Pauline letters--as well as anything else we've got--has been worked and re-worked over, by generation of folk who--let's face it--deliberately *didn't* want us to know what early Christianity was like.
Ode 14 preserves an earlier formation of the Lord's prayer, these poems show almost no signs of being re-worked maybe 1 place
I'm not saying this Ode is the earlier form of the Lord's prayer, it could be, but these Odes are the earliest window I think
Stretch out to me my Lord always your right hand and be my guide till the end according to your will
I will be beautiful before you because of your glory and because of your Name I will be saved from evil and your Rest, Lord, will abide with me and the fruits of your love
Teach me songs of your Truth so I bear fruits by you and the harp of your Holy Spirit open to me that with every note, Lord, I may praise you
In the richness of your kindnesses give unto me and swiftly grant our prayers, for you are there to draw on for all our needs
davidmartin
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Epiphanius believed the Didascalia to be truly Apostolic

Post by davidmartin »

ebion wrote: Mon Nov 06, 2023 8:34 pm Let me make a suggestion: pull together the research and citations to argue that the Odes should be in the Ebionaen Canon, and submit it to the thread. I've seen enough to support that to add it into the apocrypha. Then let's us look at them in relation to the Didache and the Clementines.
Well, they're early and Jewish-Christian. I'd be interested in what you thought of them getting feedback is really hard
One citation I can give you is a review I read by a Pauline Christian who said they were about "some other Jesus". He didn't recognise Jesus in them he got from the epistles for some strange reason :)

I also doubt the portrayal of Simon in the church literature. It's as if they thought, damn Paul and Peter didn't get along but hey if we make Simon the baddie we can say, no it was Simon that Peter was opposing not Paul. Switching off the story mode, this means historically church factions were following different 'apostles' till orthodoxy came along and suddenly all 12+1 are agreeing with each other and always did. I think the tendancy is to ignore the factions to make the problem simpler when its the factionalism that makes sense of the problem
RandyHelzerman
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2023 10:31 am

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by RandyHelzerman »

davidmartin wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 9:55 pm Proxy baptism sounds cultish and like what would emerge from a cult!
Any more cultish than baptism itself?
davidmartin
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by davidmartin »

RandyHelzerman wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 6:33 am
davidmartin wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 9:55 pm Proxy baptism sounds cultish and like what would emerge from a cult!
Any more cultish than baptism itself?
it sure is! probably the devotees became worried about unbaptised family members who passed on so they came up with this, i'm sympathetic but it shows baptism going from a symbol to life or death. there's wonkiness afoot here. the epistles are changing something, see the Odes!
lsayre
Posts: 764
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by lsayre »

Paul clearly preached proxy baptism for the dead. Though evangelical, fundamentalist, and even Catholic churches will apologetically jump through hoops to deny this.
RandyHelzerman
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2023 10:31 am

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by RandyHelzerman »

davidmartin wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 8:20 am it sure is!
I mean, you get immersed in water, and your sins are forgiven? Really? You don't have to pay any fines, restitution, suffer punishment of any kind, no matter how heinous the crime? It seems hardly less credulous for the person being dunked than for somebody dunking by proxy, no?
davidmartin
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by davidmartin »

RandyHelzerman wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:23 am
davidmartin wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 8:20 am it sure is!
I mean, you get immersed in water, and your sins are forgiven? Really? You don't have to pay any fines, restitution, suffer punishment of any kind, no matter how heinous the crime? It seems hardly less credulous for the person being dunked than for somebody dunking by proxy, no?
heh, it seems it's more like an initiation rite than about sins what we see in the epistles is a belief system and its this that forgives the sins (and no other belief system can). the last thing wanted is the belief the actual water baptism (or, ahem, God) does all the work, no need for the beliefs then!
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2780
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Are Faul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by andrewcriddle »

ebion wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 3:18 pm ......................
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 5:14 am
ebion wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2023 5:25 am I'm following Detering in the reference I cited, and you provide nothing to contradict him:
Proxy baptism for the dead has not been confirmed earlier than among the Marcionites in the second century.
What Detering said is not evidence, the 2nd century Marcionites may have had such a practice but the earliest unambiguous evidence is much later.
What you say is not evidence, but what you're saying meets my description of MarcionOrLater.

Would you agree to rephrasing Detering:
Proxy baptism for the dead has not been confirmed earlier than among the Marcionites in the second century, but the earliest unambiguous evidence is much later, i.e. the date of Marcion Or Later.
That's sufficient to my purposes: "Paul could not have written 1Cor., and it dates to MarcionOrLater."

BTW, what would you point to as the "much later unambiguous evidence"?
Chrysostom in the late 4th century and There is a passage in Epiphanius similar to Chrysostom and of roughly the same date.
ebion wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 3:18 pm ...........................
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Nov 04, 2023 5:14 am The early Valentinians (mid 2nd century CE) had a text of 1 Corinthians with this verse. It is IMO unlikely that their text is dependent on Marcion.
As I said above, having the text isn't what is interesting to me: I'm looking for evidence of practicing the rite, and the date of practicing the rite. Applying Occam's razor, it's easiest to ascribe proxy baptism, and 1Cor., to Marcion'; I see no evidence to the contrary. FWIW I reason that the date of practicing the rite would be been when the Marcionite church (which was a big one) was well established.

Do you have a reference to the Valentinians? I will happily substitute Marcionites with Valentinians in the above if there is evidence of them practicing the rite. But AFAIK, the Valentinians never were a large international church like the Marcionites: they didn't rate 5 books out of Tertullian. And Proxy baptism for the dead smells to me of large church.

Thanks for the input and feedback; back to the OP topic at hand:
I didn't mean they practiced proxy baptism they interpreted the verse allegorically
Theodotus according to Clement Excerpta
And when the Apostle said, “Else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?” . . . For, he says, the angels of whom we are portions were baptised for us. But we are dead, who are deadened by this existence, but the males are alive who did not participate in this existence.

“If the dead rise not why, then, are we baptised?” Therefore we are raised up “equal to angels,” and restored to unity with the males, member for member. Now they say “those who are baptised for us, the dead,” are the angels who are baptised for us, in order that when we, too, have the Name, we may not be hindered and kept back by the Limit and the Cross from entering the Pleroma. Wherefore, at the laying on of hands they say at the end, “for the angelic redemption” that is, for the one which the angels also have, in order that the person who has received the redemption may, be baptised in the same Name in which his angel had been baptised before him. Now the angels were baptised in the beginning, in the redemption of the Name which descended upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. And redemption was necessary even for Jesus, in order that, approaching through Wisdom, he might not be detained by the Notion of the Deficiency in which he was inserted, as Theodotus says.
Andrew Criddle
ebion
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2023 11:32 am

Re: Are Faul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by ebion »

andrewcriddle wrote: Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:26 am Chrysostom in the late 4th century and There is a passage in Epiphanius similar to Chrysostom and of roughly the same date.
Chrysostom is always fun to read, but again it's just a homily on 1Cor., that assumes 1Cor. is wriiten by Paul. The good bit is:
Or will you that I should first mention how they who are infected with the Marcionite heresy pervert this expression?

which to me says Chrysostom associates proxy baptism with the Marcions, before Detering.

On that I'll rest my case: Paul could not have written 1Cor., and it dates to MarcionOrLater.

But do you know any simple text that I could read to get a history of the Marcionite church? it's breadth, duration, expanse. It's something I know nothing about. I'm told the Marcionite church was a big one, and was well established.
andrewcriddle wrote: Wed Nov 08, 2023 9:26 am I didn't mean they practiced proxy baptism they interpreted the verse allegorically
Theodotus according to Clement Excerpta
And when the Apostle said, “Else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?” . . . For, he says, the angels of whom we are portions were baptised for us. But we are dead, who are deadened by this existence, but the males are alive who did not participate in this existence...
I defy anyone to make theological sense of that practice, which makes it so bizarre to find in the Faulines!
That and Romans 7 are my hallmarks of MarcionOrLater in the Faulines.

Thanks for the input and feedback.
Last edited by ebion on Fri Nov 10, 2023 10:49 am, edited 2 times in total.
ebion
Posts: 396
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2023 11:32 am

Re: Paul's letters all derived from Marcion?

Post by ebion »

lsayre wrote: Tue Nov 07, 2023 9:05 am Paul clearly preached proxy baptism for the dead. Though evangelical, fundamentalist, and even Catholic churches will apologetically jump through hoops to deny this.
Paul in Acts clearly did not preach proxy baptism for the dead, nor did any of the Jamesian church.

There is a question about the practice of it raised by MarcionOrLater in the Faulines 1Cor., but it is not by any stretch of the imagination preaching it. They question could even have been raised by someone who had heard of the practice, even though the practice didn't actually take place.

PS: I can find no evidence of the ritual for it, or accounts of it taking place. Chrysostom in the late 4th century is the first citation I can find of the practice being attributed to Marcion, in his Homily 40 on First Corinthians.
Post Reply