Marcion and John the Baptist

[outhouse]

It would be great if we simply acknowledged that outside of recensions of texts preserved by the orthodox there is no evidence for the existence of "John the Baptist" near contemporary of Jesus.

So what, that does not give you credibility by throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

These text do contain historical evidence, and by using said methodology, you can and you do, often make the text say anything you imagine.

The Marcionite gospel is very important here

They are, but only in context, and only as a reflection of the later movement after 100 years of evolution from the beginning of the divorce from Judaism.

As Origen noyes the expectation of a resurrected John make little sense if John died during the gospel narrative as the orthodox texts have it.

No it makes perfect sense.

These people were combatting wild imaginative claims the same way your developing and I'm fighting against. Many viewed Jesus as a resurrected John, because Jesus took over Johns movement. And John was the popular teacher and the original gospel authors tried to bury this certainty, and there would have been many making light of this.

[Secret Alias]

I know you are not all that gifted with thinking but the discussion is entitled 'Marcion and John the Baptist.' Presumably - and I dare to presume that you can presume (= suppose that something is the case on the basis of probability) - we are supposed to limit our discussion to (a) what the gospel of the Marcionite community said about 'John' and (b) the fact that the gospel introduced 'John' without much of the biographical information contained in our canonical gospels.

In your history here at the forum you have demonstrated yourself to be incapable of the intellectual gifts to limit yourself to these sorts of hypothetical details. Instead you continue to insert your 'common sense' understandings about Jesus being a crucified Galilean peasant or this or that. You have know interest in Marcion, no interest in recovering what his gospel did or didn't say so why do you continue to stick your head into a discussion clearly outside your knowledge base or skill set?

[Secret Alias]

John outhouse should be forced to limit his participation in the forum to discussions about the historical Jesus. He's just not smart enough nor familiar enough or interested enough to discussion things related to very limited and specialized bits of knowledge.

[Secret Alias]

I think you come into these discussions to defend the status quo opinion about historicity. But surely these considerations have little relevance to a discussion about Marcionism and why the Marcionite gospel has a puzzling opening reference to 'John' (whomever that was). Do you think you have anything to add to this discussion of 'Marcion and John the Baptist' other than a consistent "fuck Marcion and the Marcionites, there really was a John the Baptist?" How does this advance our knowledge of Marcionism? Do you really care? If not, then why are you in this discussion?

[outhouse]

You have know interest in Marcion

I have no interest in perverting Marcion out of context.

Marcion does not in anyway, have anything to do with john the Baptist, or our understanding of him.


Now I know its your personal witch hunt, any chance you could use less ad hominem, and provide more direct evidence that has even the slightest chance of being correct?


Attacking me is a desperate move based on ego. Not the strength of your argument.

[outhouse]

How does this advance our knowledge of Marcionism?

One needs to keep into context who and what Marcion did and taught, and how he viewed John, and why.

Do you think you have anything to add to this discussion of 'Marcion and John the Baptist' other than a consistent "fuck Marcion and the Marcionites, there really was a John the Baptist?"

You sir took your own thread off topic. Don't blame others for following you down useless rabbit holes.

Understanding Marcion has its place and time, it can be a valuable tool for understanding the evolution of the movement and how this turn in the road was viewed as heretical.


But this thread is not about John, it is about you proselytizing your rhetoric, using this turn in the road to help you substantiate your general hypothesis, that has no traction at all.

[Secret Alias]

One needs to keep into context who and what Marcion did and taught, and how he viewed John, and why.

But do you have any knowledge about this topic? Have you studied Marcion and the Marcionite tradition? Do you even care to learn any of these details? Or - as I suspect - are you here principally to defend the historicity of John the Baptist as you have Jesus in other threads that really have nothing or little to do with historicity?

[Secret Alias]

You should just learn to keep out of threads that have little to do with your presuppositions. You don't care about Marcion. Stay out of discussions about 'what Marcion believed' or 'what Marcionites thought.' You just demonstrate your low intelligence and lack of intellectual curiosity. In case the former affects your ability to engage in the latter - intellectual curiosity is a term used to describe one's desire to invest time and energy into learning more about a person, place, thing or concept.

[Secret Alias]

I have no interest in perverting Marcion out of context.

But how would you know whether or not someone or something has been taken out of context when you've never read any of the related texts or studies? This is what I find so baffling. Why not just keep your fucking mouth shut about a topic you have little interest in. You must be bored. Try masturbating with your other hand.

[outhouse]

Stephen, I'm a strong atheist who holds a very minimal opinion on scholars.

If you cannot convince me, how the hell are you going to convince your peers?


Or are you just preying on the ignorant, hoping to convert blithering idiots to your wayward unsupported hypothesis?