Page 8 of 14

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2020 10:48 pm
by Giuseppe

χλευάζει δύο εἰσάγων υἱοὺς θεῶν, τοῦ δημιουργοῦ ἕνα καὶ τοῦ κατὰ Μαρκίωνα θεοῦ ἕτερον, καὶ ἀναζωγραφεῖ αὐτῶν μονομαχίας

introducing two sons of God, one the son of the Creator, and the other the son of Marcion's God; and he portrays their single combats,

if you have already conceded that Celsus "portrays" by his own words "their single combats", then accordingly you have to concede that Celsus was "introducing" (χλευάζει) "two sons of God, ... the son of Marcion's God" by his own words, too.

There is no reason to argue that the name "Marcion" was introduced only by Origen, here. It figured very probably in the words of Celsus.

In addition, Celsus claims, against Origen, that he is perfectly able to distinguish between Marcionites and Catholics:

Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came.


Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:29 pm
by Joseph D. L.

On the present occasion, however, it is not our object to enter into an explanation of the subject of intelligent and sensible beings, nor of the manner in which the different kinds of days were allotted to both sorts, nor to investigate the details which belong to the subject, for we should need whole treatises for the exposition of the Mosaic cosmogony; and that work we had already performed, to the best of our ability, a considerable time before the commencement of this answer to Celsus, when we discussed with such measure of capacity as we then possessed the question of the Mosaic cosmogony of the six days. We must keep in mind, however, that the Word promises to the righteous through the mouth of Isaiah, that days will come when not the sun, but the Lord Himself, will be to them an everlasting light, and God will be their glory. And it is from misunderstanding, I think, some pestilent heresy which gave an erroneous interpretation to the words, Let there be light, as if they were the expression of a wish merely on the part of the Creator, that Celsus made the remark: The Creator did not borrow light from above, like those persons who kindle their lamps at those of their neighbours. Misunderstanding, moreover, another impious heresy, he has said: If, indeed, there did exist an accursed god opposed to the great God, who did this contrary to his approval, why did he lend him the light? So far are we from offering a defense of such puerilities, that we desire, on the contrary, distinctly to arraign the statements of these heretics as erroneous, and to undertake to refute, not those of their opinions with which we are unacquainted, as Celsus does, but those of which we have attained an accurate knowledge, derived in part from the statements of their own adherents, and partly from a careful perusal of their writings.

Origen claims that Celsus does not properly understand the heresies, and it’s easy to see why. Celsus conflates heretics, “Christians”, and Jews, as belonging to the same superstition, so he doesn’t care about the subtle differences. As far as he [Celsus] is concerned, the idea that their respective ideas of God “oppose” one another is because they, the believers, oppose one another. That’s it. Origen nowhere insinuates that Celsus said the Marcionites hate YHWH as a theological position, but that Celsus says that all of their gods hate each other, because the heretics, the Christians, and the Jews hate one another. Why single out Marcionites? When Celsus says that the Gods are in a combat, that applies to all of them, not just the one or the other.

End of discussion.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:35 pm
by Giuseppe
Joseph D. L. wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:29 pm
Misunderstanding, moreover, another impious heresy, he has said: If, indeed, there did exist an accursed god opposed to the great God, who did this contrary to his approval, why did he lend him the light?

you are doing my same case, thank you. Origen accuses a misunderstanding in action, but frankly we are interested here to Celsus's view, pace Origen (and pace Joseph D.L, and pace any friend of the apologist Origen).

Once we have the same words of Celsus denying explicitly that he is confusing catholics and marcionites:

Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came.

my (and Carrier's) argument wins.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:17 am
by Joseph D. L.

Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came.

I'm not impressed. It's about s meaningful as you calling yourself a genius. Nor does he single out Marcionites, in fact never mentions them in the context of the quoted passage. You're just reading into it what you want, because you're too dishonest to admit you're wrong.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:21 am
by Giuseppe
Joseph D. L. wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:17 amNor does he single out Marcionites
the content is the same of the other passage, where he mentions "the Son of Marcion's God":


introducing two sons of God, one the son of the Creator, and the other the son of Marcion's God; and he portrays their single combats,


Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that some of them will concede that their God is the same as that of the Jews, while others will maintain that he is a different one, to whom the latter is in opposition, and that it was from the former that the Son came


I have the moral certainty that I am correct, here. Also I can say you, worthy heir of the apologist Origen: Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that Celsus knew independently that Marcionites hated YHWH.

It is incredible how very close to my view is the Celsus's view about Marcion.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:43 am
by Joseph D. L.
Giuseppe wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:21 am the content is the same of the other passage, where he mentions "the Son of Marcion's God".


No it isn't and Origen makes it clear that Celsus is mocking both Jews and the Marcionites. "He next proceeds to jest, and, as his custom is, to pour ridicule upon the subject." Celsus doesn't care about their theological disputes. They're all idiots as far as he is concerned.
I have the moral certainty that I am correct, here.
What an absurd statement to make.
Also I can say you, worthy heir of the apologist Origen: Let no one suppose that I am ignorant that Celsus knew independently that Marcionites hated YHWH.
Quote the passage where Celsus says that Marcion hated YHWH.
It is incredible how very close to my view is the Celsus's view about Marcion.
Incredible? How? Because you read him and say to yourself, "I agree with this"? Never mind that you don't know how to read Celsus, continue to twist his words, nor do you possess an intact copy of his book, you smug piece of shit.

Why am I even talking to you? Vai a farti fottere frocio.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:46 am
by Joseph D. L.
Learn to fucking read you mook. He next proceeds to jest, and, as his custom is, to pour ridicule upon the subject, introducing two sons of God, one the son of the Creator, and the other the son of Marcion's God; and he portrays their single combats, saying that the Theomachies of the Fathers are like the battles between quails; or that the Fathers, becoming useless through age, and falling into their dotage do not meddle at all with one another, but leave their sons to fight it out, is not Celsus. It's Origen paraphrasing him.

Nowhere does Celsus say Marcionites hate YHWH. You're a filthy liar.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 6:06 am
by Giuseppe
Joseph D. L. wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:46 am is not Celsus. It's Origen paraphrasing him.
In any critical reconstruction of Celsus's words, that paraphrasis of Celsus's original words by Origen appear as words of Celsus.
For example, take prof Hoffmann's reconstruction of On the True Doctrine: A Discourse Against the Christians. He reports the original words of Celsus:

But many Christians deny that his death was foretold.[170] These same Christians speak of two divine sons, locked in combat with one another. They fight like quails, the two sons, since their fathers are in their dotage and too tired to fight.

(6:110, p. 105)

Marcion is not named. But prof Hoffman is ready to report in the note 170 of p. 141:

Celsus refers to sects like the Marcionites, which denied the predictive character of Hebrew prophecy.

(my bold)

If prof Hoffman has the right of seeing Marcionites behind that passage, so I have, too. But I fear that the arrogant Joseph D.L. is so not very polite that he doesn't recognize this my right.


Prof Hoffmann writes:

Celsus must certainly have known of Marcionite teaching (Against Celsus, 5.62)

(p. 131, n. 32, my bold)

That Celsus knew of the Marcionites suggests the prominence of Marcionite Christianity in the closing decades of the second century.

(p. 137, n.111)


The case is definitely closed. It is a good criticism of Huller's mythicist theory. All here. I don't know if it is the only criticism.

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:19 am
by Secret Alias
The facts are still the facts - never does "Marcion" and Marcionism appear as terms in any cited passage from Celsus. We have to keep aware of facts and let our interpretation follow from the facts

Re: Carrier on "gnosticism"

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2020 7:25 am
by Giuseppe
For completeness: Celsus even names him as founder of the Marcionites:

There are Christian sects named after Marcellina, Harpocratian Christians who trace themselves to Salome, some who follow Mariamne and others who follow Martha, and still others who call themselves Marcionites after their leader, Marcion. Pretty clearly, some put their faith in one god, others in another; but all in all they walk around in a fog, so evil and murky that it rivals the feasts of Antinous in Egypt.

(Hoffmann, ibid., p. 91)