On the link between Capernaum and John the Baptist

[Giuseppe]

So the Gnostic Heracleon is an original gnostic insofar he recognizes that John is an agent of the demiurge, but he is already a judaizer insofar he assumes that this demiurge is already repented before the arrival of Jesus:

Fragment 8, on John 1:26 (In John 1:26-27, “John answered them, ‘I baptize with water; but there stands among you one whom you do not know, even he who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.’”) The words, "there stands among you” are equivalent to "He is already here, and he is in the world and among human beings, and he is already manifest to you all.” . . . The statement, "He who comes after me," shows John to be the forerunner of Christ, for he is in fact a kind of servant running before his master. In the words, “The thong of his sandal I am not worthy to untie,” the Baptist acknowledges that he is not worthy even of the lowliest service for Christ. . . (He means,) "I am not worthy that for my sake he should come down from the Greatness and should assume flesh as his sandal, concerning which I am not able to give any explanation or description, nor to unloose the arrangement of it." . . . The sandal means the world. . . Everything must be understood in relation to that person who was indicated through John, that is the Craftsman of the world, who acknowledges through these words that he is inferior to Christ.

Hence the Valentinians were going to judaize, differently from other Gnostics (as Marcion).

[Giuseppe]

This text is very 100% Gnostic. It preserves the core of the Earliest Gospel insofar it talks about Jesus coming to John the Baptist (described as a demon) to deceive him and destroy the "evil Darkness", i.e. the Sheol, where the original baptism happened:

For at that time the demon will also appear upon the river to baptize with an 25 imperfect baptism, and to trouble the world with a bondage of water. But it is necessary for me to appear in the members of the thought of Faith to 30 reveal the great things of my power. I shall separate it from the demon who is Soldas. And the light which he possesses from the Spirit I shall mix 35 with my in­vincible garment, as well as him whom I shall reveal 31 in the darkness for your sake and for the sake of your race which will be protected from the evil Darkness.

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/para_shem.html

Note how the words "who is Soldas" are meant to distinguish that demon from the demon baptizer, i.e. John the Baptist.

[Giuseppe]

This text is very 100% Gnostic. It preserves the core of the Earliest Gospel insofar it talks about Jesus coming to John the Baptist (described as a demon) to deceive him and destroy the "evil Darkness", i.e. the Sheol, where the original baptism happened:

For at that time the demon will also appear upon the river to baptize with an 25 imperfect baptism, and to trouble the world with a bondage of water. But it is necessary for me to appear in the members of the thought of Faith to 30 reveal the great things of my power. I shall separate it from the demon who is Soldas. And the light which he possesses from the Spirit I shall mix 35 with my in­vincible garment, as well as him whom I shall reveal 31 in the darkness for your sake and for the sake of your race which will be protected from the evil Darkness.

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/para_shem.html

Note how the words "who is Soldas" are meant to distinguish that demon from the demon baptizer, i.e. John the Baptist.

Hence the original SEPARATIONISM can be easily explained.

The original separationism was not, absolutely not, between the mere man Jesus and the spiritual Christ. That is an astute deception introduced by the judaizer "Mark" (=Apollos).

The original separationism, in the Earliest Gospel, was between the spiritual Jesus Christ and his soul descended in Sheol after the crucifixion of Jesus in outer space by hand of the Archons.

In the quote above, the soul of Jesus in Sheol is even described as a demon called Soldas. It was that soul/demon/corpse to be baptized by John in Sheol, to deceive John the archon gate-keeper of the Sheol.

Jesus was masked as a mere soul/demon/corpse when he descended in Sheol after the his death in outer space.

Hence "Mark" has merely replaced the soul/demon/corpse with a mere man Jesus coming from Nazareth to expiate his sins.

Hence only now we can know the true reason why Jesus is introduced ENIGMATICALLY as a sinner in need of a baptism for expiation of sins, in Mark.

In the Earliest Gospel, in the place of a human sinner, there was the Son of the unknown Father ("Bar-Abbas") masked as a demon/soul/corpse to persuade the demiurgic John the Baptist to baptize him: the only way to enter in Sheol and to preach in it.

[Giuseppe]

Tertullian, De praescript. adv. haeret. 45

"Some said that Herod was the Christ"

Translated: some said that Herod was the Jewish Christ, hence agent of the Demiurge. The fool apologist Tertullian is so false here that he wants us believe that these Herodians were Jews, when really, according to a more correct Gnostic interpretation of the arrest of John the Baptist by Herod, the "Herod who arrests and kills John" is allegory of the demiurge who punishes John for two reasons:

• John, as all the OT prophets, believed that Jesus was a tempter sent by the demiurge and out of fear for the demiurge, they rejected him as a false Christ. Hence they continued to suffer in the Sheol.

• The demiurge is ungry against John because John had allowed Jesus, without knowing him, to enter in Sheol to preach to the souls of Sheol.

Hence, while in the our Judaizing interpolations (in Josephus, also), Herod fears John because he thinks that the preaching of John is seditious against king Herod, in the original story, the bastard demiurge fears Jesus because the latter preaches in the his (of the demiurge) Sheol against the demiurge, after the baptism of Jesus by the gate-keeper John: hence, the demiurge punishes John for his bad guard of his infernal domain.

ADDENDA:
Tertullian is so stupid here that he seems as prof Taylor, in his fool belief that Herodians existed really.

[Giuseppe]

Otherwise the readers would realized that Joseph served to replace John the Baptist as the burier of Jesus's corpse and the person who was frightened by Jesus's true identity.

Paul Nadim Tarazi had realized independently by me that Joseph of Arimathea is an evil character:

Tarazi comments:

The surname, Harimathaia in Greek, offers few clues. It may have derived from the Hebrew har-rimmat(h)aimi (mount of decay), in which case it would prepare for the subsequent play on the words “corpse” (ptoma) and “body” (soma). (p. 230)

Tarazi does not see this Joseph as a positive character in the Gospel of Mark. His role is to “take Jesus down from the cross” and bury him. This is not the act of faith, but the act of ignorance of the teaching of Jesus who said that he would rise from the dead.

https://vridar.org/2010/12/12/more-puns ... nd-places/

With equal right, for the Earliest Gospel, the role of John the Baptist is “take Jesus down from the cross” in outer space and bury him in Sheol, by giving his baptism of bondage. This is not the act of faith, but the act of ignorance of the real divinity of Jesus as Son of Father ("Bar-Abbas").

Hence, the following syllogism is true:

• 1) Joseph of Arimathea is a negative character because he buried the corpse of Jesus, per Tarazi

• 2) but who buried originally the corpse of Jesus in Sheol was John the Baptist.

• 3) therefore: John the Baptist is an evil character in the Earliest Gospel. □

[Giuseppe]

the interpolation in Antiquities 18.5.2 116-119	the his source in the Earliest Gospel
Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and was a very just punishment for what he did against John called the baptist. For Herod had him killed, although he was a good man and had urged the Jews to exert themselves to virtue, both as to justice toward one another and reverence towards God, and having done so join together in washing. For immersion in water, it was clear to him, could not be used for the forgiveness of sins, but as a sanctification of the body, and only if the soul was already thoroughly purified by right actions.	John is the Archon Gate-Keeper of the Sheol. The corpse of Jesus (or, alternatively, the soul of Jesus, or Jesus masked as a demon), by receiving his baptism, rises against the expectations of the same John.
And when others massed about him, for they were very greatly moved by his words,	For the Earliest Gospel, the risen Jesus started to preach in the Sheol and he emptied it of all the souls of the adorers of the unknown Father of Jesus, leaving in the Sheol the OT prophets and John the Baptist, slaves of the demiurge.
Herod, who feared that such strong influence over the people might carry to a revolt -- for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise -- believed it much better to move now than later have it raise a rebellion and engage him in actions he would regret. And so John, out of Herod's suspiciousness, was sent in chains to Machaerus, the fort previously mentioned, and there put to death; but it was the opinion of the Jews that out of retribution for John God willed the destruction of the army so as to afflict Herod.	the Demiurge couldn't kill Jesus, having the latter emptied half Sheol and ascended to heaven. Therefore he punished John, for his bad guard of the souls of Sheol. (In a second version of the Earliest Gospel, Jesus being ascended to earth and not directly to heaven from Sheol, the demiurge moved the Jews against Jesus on the earth, de facto crucifying him twice).

[Giuseppe]

The Risen Jesus was euhemerized before the "historical Jesus", in the moment when, after the resurrection (by baptism) in Sheol and before the ascension to heaven, a short interval of preaching on earth was invented as Second Earliest Gospel. Still, there was no earthly crucifixion in this Second gospel (despite of the presence of the Archon Pylatis), since the previous visit in Sheol (="Capernaum") implied already per se a crucifixion in outer space by Archons.

A trace of the link preaching/Resurrection is preserved in Mark 16:7-8, where the Risen Jesus ascends to Galilee, place par excellence of the preaching of Jesus.

Another trace is in Paul, when he sees the Risen Jesus out of Judea (=hence, eo ipso, in "Galilee of Gentiles"). It was a vision (for us), but for Paul was a real "physical" contact.The Risen Christ met him.

The same Logia read by Papias were a collection of sayings and acts of the Risen Jesus, interpreted wrongly by the fool Papias as acts and sayings of the Gospel Jesus.

[Giuseppe]

The incipit of the Earliest Gospel is the only fragment of it really preserved, that has allowed the chain of inferences in this thread based on the remaining evidence of background:

The year 15 of the principate of Tiberius, the son of the Father Good (=Chrestos) appeared in the place of desolation...

It was suddenly corrupted by the Judaizers as:

The year 15 of the principate of Tiberius, Jesus Christ the son of God appeared in Capernaum...

ADDENDA
Note as the suetonian impulsore Chresto was euhemerized by the same Suetonius as a seditious, a mere riotous Barabbas, when really he was the Unknown God of which the Son had to be parodied as Bar-Abbas in the gospels of the Judaizers.

[Giuseppe]

So dr. Carrier

The first recorded myth of a crucified and resurrected deity, that of the Sumerian goddess Innana, relates that after her naked, murdered corpse is nailed up, her minions come to feed her the food and water of life and she is raised back to life “after three days.”

(my bold)

In the Earliest Gospel, John the Baptist, in Sheol, had done on the Jesus's corpse exactly what "her minions" did on Innana's corpse, in Sheol. Note a strange ambiguity about "her minions": were they evil characters in the myth? Same ambiguity with John the Baptist in Sheol: was he aware that, baptizing the Jesus's corpse, he would have given life again to him?

[Nasruddin]

So dr. Carrier

The first recorded myth of a crucified and resurrected deity, that of the Sumerian goddess Innana, relates that after her naked, murdered corpse is nailed up, her minions come to feed her the food and water of life and she is raised back to life “after three days.”

(my bold)

In the Earliest Gospel, John the Baptist, in Sheol, had done on the Jesus's corpse exactly what "her minions" did on Innana's corpse, in Sheol. Note a strange ambiguity about "her minions": were they evil characters in the myth? Same ambiguity with John the Baptist in Sheol: was he aware that, baptizing the Jesus's corpse, he would have given life again to him?

Richard Carrier is simplifying the story of Innana to force a point. She was not 'nailed up', but was hung from a hook. And there were no 'her minions' but two beings (gala-tura and kur-jara) created by the god Enki and sent by him to the Underworld with express instructions to rescue Innana.

However, if you really want to find a Sumerian image that parallels the baptism of Jesus/rising from Sheol, then take a look at that of Utu rising from the Eastern mountains;
https://inews.co.uk/images-i.jpimedia.u ... &width=640
Here you have all the elements of Jesus rising up as a divine creature anoints him and a bird descends upon him, with John the Baptist in a river standing above a lamb like creature.