tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.comments2024-03-10T06:20:10.198+00:00Markus Vinzent's BlogProfessor Markus Vinzenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18207418071078727708noreply@blogger.comBlogger303125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-27579271435662030072024-02-29T06:55:09.544+00:002024-02-29T06:55:09.544+00:00Dating and authentication in biblical studies is t...Dating and authentication in biblical studies is the weakest element of the process. Here we have Paul's letters, dated by content to 40-63CE. The problem is that the lists are known only from the Corpus Pauline which, according to consensus, was created around 100 CE (G. Zuntz's famous hand-drawn diagram). It contains 10 letters written by 2-3 ghostwriters and subjected to intensive editing. Is Paul as an author a historical or invented figure? No biblical scholar can answer this. This alternative has no solution. The text itself makes it impossible to distinguish historical tradition from invented tradition. No way out.<br />Gospels. Klinghardt and Vinzent tried to prioritize *Ev by introducing another ghostwriter as author. This was not convincing due to the problematic linguistic solutions required. Gramaglia claims that the author of *Ev is ghostwriter Luke. Gramaglia claims that *Ev itself is already a compilation of texts. Klinghardt dates *Ev to 90 CE, Vinzent dates it to 140 CE based on Tertullian.<br />Klinghardt abandoned Marek's priority in favor of *Ev after several years of research. Mark's precedence leads to the theory of many of Burkett's or Boismard's hypothetical sources. Theoretically they are right, but there is no evidence to prove it. They are practically drawing the wrong conclusion. The Gospels were created in parallel by a group of writers and editors working together in one scriptorium. Their first product commercially used on a large scale was *Ev. There was no theological conflict in the church. Marcion's problem is a classic corporate power struggle. Historical Jesus is the product of a group of writers from one scriptorium. End of storyJarekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09290613521451551691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-59536811516513876052024-02-25T15:15:16.036+00:002024-02-25T15:15:16.036+00:00Genau so, wie ich in der inzwischen abgeschlossene...Genau so, wie ich in der inzwischen abgeschlossenen und bald bei Narr/Francke zu publizierenden Rekonstruktion der ältesten paulinischen Briefsammlung zeigen werde: Markion hat die drei Pseudopaulinen *Laod/ *Kol / *2Thess gründlich überarbeitet und dennoch bleibt ein eigener Wortschatz, im Vergleich zu anderen Quellen, die Markion bearbeitet hat, den man identifizieren kann.<br />Und Sie werden bald sehen, wie deutlich sich die beiden Briefsammlungen unterscheiden. Nicht nur im Umfang (10 Briefe, während die kanonische Ausgabe 14 besitzt), sondern auch der Sprache und dem Inhalt nach, gerade auch, was die Person des Paulus selbst betrifft.Professor Markus Vinzenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18207418071078727708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-27067731723876960122024-01-15T18:07:01.795+00:002024-01-15T18:07:01.795+00:00Hi prof Vinzent,
congratulations for your book! I...Hi prof Vinzent, <br />congratulations for your book! I have appreciated especially the point where you show that Mark, by introducing the Parable of the Vineyards, has dissipated the halo of ambiguity about the identity of the true father of Jesus (the previous episode of the pharisees questioning the autority of Jesus). I have found another point where Mark exorcises this ambiguity:<br /><br />The episode of Bartimaeus is found in both Mark and *Ev. It may be strumentalized in a marcionite way along the following lines: Bartimaeus gives up to hail Jesus as davidic only <i>after</i>, not before, he gains the sight (just as Adam and Eve realize the salvific function of the Serpent only <i>after</i> their act of disobedience). Realizing the danger of the marcionite interpretation, Mark adds the episode of the blind of Bethsaida that is exactly simmetrical to the Bartimaeus episode: Marcion has only the <i>rapid</i> healing of the blind called Bartimaeus while Mark has added the <i>delayed</i> healing of the blind of Bethsaida. The delay is explained by the vision of “men as tree walking”, i.e. blind people want a king-messiah for themselves (the allusion is to Judges 9:8-15). The inference is that Bartimaeus is healed rapidly just because he recognized Jesus as <i>already</i> the davidic Messiah <i>and didn’t wish one yet to come</i>. In this way the <i>initial</i> recognition of Jesus as davidic messiah by Bartimaeus is not seen more in (Marcionite) <i>antithesis</i> to his <i>secondary</i> recognition of Jesus as son of god (the unknown Father).Giuseppe Ferrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00587305319405093702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-3388411540215607632023-10-14T10:52:00.769+01:002023-10-14T10:52:00.769+01:00Do you think that Justin Martyr not citing the nam...Do you think that Justin Martyr not citing the name of the gospel/s that he mentions in his writings especially the Dialogue with Trypho is one good reason to doubt the conventional dating of the canonical gospels somewhere post 70 to 100 AD/CE?Jonathan, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10897242031203584922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-76921907428211681932023-08-31T08:46:08.626+01:002023-08-31T08:46:08.626+01:00Lieber Herr Vinzent
Besten Dank für Ihre Ausführun...Lieber Herr Vinzent<br />Besten Dank für Ihre Ausführungen. <br /><br />Ihre Antwort zu meiner ersten Frage kann ich nachvollziehen. Erstaunlich ist für mich folgendes: Die Zeit, in der Jesus lebte, war anscheinend eine Zeit, in der viele Personen unterschiedlichste Offenbarungen hatten und diese auch beschrieben und weitererzählten. Es gab auch viele Scharlatane und es war eine Herausforderung herauszufinden, welche Offenbarungen nun «echt» waren und welche nicht. Wieso pickte dann Markion ausgerechnet Paulus, der die Begegnung mit dem auferstandenen Geistwesen Christus hatte, heraus und nicht eine andere einer anderen Person? <br />Für die frühe Christenheit war das ja ein Problem. Welche Offenbarung(en) passt(e) und welche nicht? Das gleiche Problem hatte ja Irenäus auch, als er einen Vorschlag für das kanonische NT machte und Entscheidungen traf. Was passt ins Bild und was nicht. Die Offb zu kanonisieren gehört ins gleiche Kapitel. Wieso gerade diese Offenbarung?<br /><br />Ihre Antwort zu meiner zweiten Frage kann ich teilweise nachvollziehen. Ich frage mich aber folgendes: Sie schreiben, dass sich «auffallenderweise die drei Pseudopaulinen 2Thess, Eph/Laod, Kol mit einem eigenen Wortschatz unterscheiden» und «Markion scheint demnach bei seiner Suche nach Materialien v.a. mündlich Kunde von Jesusmaterial und Paulusmaterial erhalten haben und dabei auch auf die wohl schriftliche Vorlage der drei Pseudopaulinen gestoßen zu sein, die er wie das Jesus- und Paulusmaterial gründlich bearbeitet hatte». – D.h. Markion hatte Kenntnis einer schriftlichen Vorlage der drei Pseudopaulinen, hat sie gründlich überarbeitet und dennoch bleibt ein eigener Wortschatz, im Vergleich zu anderen mündlichen Quellen, die Markion bearbeitet hat? Heisst das aber auch, dass die 10 Paulusbriefe, die Markion in seine Sammlung aufnahm und die kanonischen Paulusbriefe nicht übereinstimmen, resp. andere Aussagen beinhalten? Und wenn ja, wieder meine Frage: Wie sicher ist die Aussage, dass die markionitische Version die erste war?cottonandmudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08398095964332178397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-6127343516213532612023-08-29T16:42:50.064+01:002023-08-29T16:42:50.064+01:00Lieber Herr Vinzent
Besten Dank für Ihre Ausführun...Lieber Herr Vinzent<br />Besten Dank für Ihre Ausführungen. <br />Ihre Antwort zu meiner ersten Frage kann ich nachvollziehen. Erstaunlich ist für mich folgendes: Die Zeit, in der Jesus lebte, war anscheinend eine Zeit, in der viele Personen unterschiedlichste Offenbarungen hatten und diese auch beschrieben und weitererzählten. Es gab auch viele Scharlatane und es war eine Herausforderung herauszufinden, welche Offenbarungen nun «echt» waren und welche nicht. Wieso pickte dann Markion ausgerechnet Paulus, der die Begegnung mit dem auferstandenen Geistwesen Christus hatte, heraus und nicht eine andere einer anderen Person? <br />Für die frühe Christenheit war das ja ein Problem. Welche Offenbarung(en) passt(e) und welche nicht? Das gleiche Problem hatte ja Irenäus auch, als er einen Vorschlag für das kanonische NT machte und Entscheidungen traf. Was passt ins Bild und was nicht. Die Offb zu kanonisieren, gehört ins gleiche Kapitel. Wieso gerade diese Offenbarung?<br /><br />Ihre Antwort zu meiner zweiten Frage kann ich teilweise nachvollziehen. Ich frage mich aber folgendes: Sie schreiben, dass sich «auffallenderweise die drei Pseudopaulinen 2Thess, Eph/Laod, Kol mit einem eigenen Wortschatz unterscheiden» und «Markion scheint demnach bei seiner Suche nach Materialien v.a. mündlich Kunde von Jesusmaterial und Paulusmaterial erhalten haben und dabei auch auf die wohl schriftliche Vorlage der drei Pseudopaulinen gestoßen zu sein, die er wie das Jesus- und Paulusmaterial gründlich bearbeitet hatte». – D.h. Markion hatte Kenntnis einer schriftlichen Vorlage der drei Pseudopaulinen, hat sie gründlich überarbeitet und dennoch bleibt ein eigener Wortschatz, im Vergleich zu anderen mündlichen Quellen, die Markion bearbeitet hat? Heisst das aber auch, dass die 10 Paulusbriefe, die Markion in seine Sammlung aufnahm und die kanonischen Paulusbriefe nicht übereinstimmen, resp. andere Aussagen beinhalten? Und wenn ja, wieder meine Frage: Wie sicher ist die Aussage, dass die markionitische Version die erste war?cottonandmudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08398095964332178397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-62008553889187139192023-08-22T11:30:19.433+01:002023-08-22T11:30:19.433+01:00Lieber Herr Dumont, ganz herzlichen Dank für Ihren...Lieber Herr Dumont, ganz herzlichen Dank für Ihren Kommentar - ich habe etwas ausführlicher hier in meinem Blog darauf geantwortet und bin schon gespannt, ob Sie meine Antwort überzeugt hat.Professor Markus Vinzenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18207418071078727708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-74893490702746887382023-07-24T19:57:33.561+01:002023-07-24T19:57:33.561+01:00Guten Tag Herr Vinzent
Ich habe mir grossem Intere...Guten Tag Herr Vinzent<br />Ich habe mir grossem Interesse Ihr Buch «Christi Thora» gelesen.<br />Was mich erstaunt ist, dass Markion Paulus als einzigen Apostel anerkannt hat, obwohl der mit Christus nie in Kontakt war und seine Schriften erst in der Mitte des 1. Jh erschienen. Wissen Sie eine Antwort auf die Frage?<br />Und wenn Ihre These stimmt, das Markion das 1. Evangelium war, vor den Synoptikern, woher nahm Markion seine Ideen und Texte?<br /><br />Raymond Dumont, Dr. phil. nat. Chemiker in Ruhestand, Schweiz<br />cottonandmudhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08398095964332178397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-23800263728965429902023-07-13T13:53:59.720+01:002023-07-13T13:53:59.720+01:00Hi Markus, Occurrance is a rather great nuisance g...Hi Markus, Occurrance is a rather great nuisance given its frequencyMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-24385841325101700522023-06-16T08:58:09.637+01:002023-06-16T08:58:09.637+01:00Dear Markus, I must congratulate you on having bec...Dear Markus, I must congratulate you on having become native English, given your "who’s founders" ;-)<br /><br />As usual, you present an interesting, clear and compelling view - and you touch upon important topics, and sensitive ones as well. We usually don't think of the offspring of criminals and murderers as victims - and perhaps that's an ambivalent word, yet it is evident that your life has also been greatly negatively impacted by Nazism. A grandfather of mine (whom I never got to know of course) got executed out of retaliation, and people would generally regard me as more of a victim than you - but I am quite sure that it is very much the other way around.<br />So thank you for sharing some of your private life here, that is very valuable<br /><br />I would like to offer a word on your reference to the family of Jesus however, as the pivotal word there is 'outside' alone, and nothing else.<br />Thomasine logia, transliterated from 64 onwards:<br /><br />ⲛⲃⲟⲗ (of-outside) Adjective, 22, (40), (64), (89), (99). I'm skipping 22 as there's no context there<br /><br />>>><br />(40). IS said a vine of grape she was planted within the part of outside of the father and not made strong; she will be plucked out at her root and destroyed.<br /><br />(64). ... did he come viz. the slave did he say it to his slaveowner : those have you summon them to the Dinner did they Beg-off. Said the slaveowner to his slave: go to the part of-outside, to the paths; they-who you will fall to them, bring them in-order-that they will make-be Dine: the men-who buy with the traders they will go-inward not to the Places of my father<br /><br />(89). said IS : because-of what? do you wash~ the part of-outside of the Cup, you make-be Conceive not : he-who has created the part of-inside he also he-who has created the part of-outside<br /><br />(99). said the Disciples to him : your brothers with your mother are standing-on-foot their, on the part of-outside. Said he to them : they-who of these places who make-be the desire of my father - these-ones are my brothers with my mother; themselves are who will go-inward to the reign-of king of my father<br /><<<<br /><br />Logion 40 has one simple core argument: outside of the father.<br />Logion 64 places the proverbial paths on the outside, and logion 9 already demonstrated that The Path isn't fruitful - and the woman with the jar (97) is walking on a path as well, "being distant" for that very reason (and both the path as the woman are feminine, of course!) - yet 64 doesn't have that word in the NT:<br /><br />Luke 14:21 And the servant having come, reported these things to his master. Then the master of the house, having become angry, said to his servant, ‘Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.’<br /><br />Matthew 22:9 Therefore go into the thoroughfares of the highways, and invite to the wedding feast as many as you shall find.’ 10 And those servants, having gone out into the highways, brought together all, as many as they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall became full of those reclining.<br /><br />δι-έξ-οδος (yet another hapax legomenon) in Matthew does contain a shade of the adverb, however, and so does Luke's Ἔξ-ελθε.<br />Everything in Thomas that is outside is bad, and logion 3 - correctly translated - reads 'Rather, the reign of king is of your inside and she is of your eye'.<br /><br />Logion 89 is not so much a rejection of the outside as it points to neglection of the inside, yet logion 99 is the one: only those "of these places" who "make-be the desire of my father" are affirmed, and I have yet to Comment on this logion.<br /><br />You now (η καινή διαθήκη) know that *Ev alone contains 57 Thomasine parallels, 4 less than Luke - and that can't be coincidental. Hence why I won't comment on your chapter 3 that starts with 2 more copies of ThomasMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-56270998090358311132023-04-30T12:36:59.640+01:002023-04-30T12:36:59.640+01:00Ich würde nicht von Entstehung, sondern von "...Ich würde nicht von Entstehung, sondern von "Erfindung" des Christentum sprechen (ähnlich zur Erfrindund des jüdisehen Volkes)- Ich meine, man soll gleicham einen Poirot, auf die Spursuche, die Hauptgedanken der damaligen Juden-Christen suchen. Zum Beispiel, der Einfluss buddhistischen Ideen über den Erleuchteten. Buddha und Christus von meinem ehmaligen Bonner Professor Mensching zeigt mehrere Gedanken oder Vostellungen die in NT wiederzufinden sind:<br />Die Drei Versuchungen von Teufel z.B. De Vermehrung von Brot und Fisch, Das über Wasser gehen, Die Gabe der Wittwe,usw. In einem Sutra wird erklärt, dass niemand die Aschen des Erleuchten finden kann. Ich finde da der Ursprung des leehren Grabes. Auch die Geschichte von Maria die Sünderin, die im Thomas Evangelium als Hautschülerin Jesu dargestellt wird, zeigt Paralelle zur Geschichte von <br />Patacara, Preserver of the Vinaya, die der Erleuchtete aus der Prostitution befreite. Die Bezeichnung Gautama-Buddha wird also in die der Jesus-Chritus (der nach Paulus, in einen neuen Aeon übelebt) ist auch wichtig. Eigenlich die Bezeichnung als Cristen, nicht als Jesuchristianer, wäre so ein Zeichen der Einfluss buddhistischen Ideen, die seit Alexander in Mittelmeer kamen. Mit dem Rabbiner Jakob Tauber sehe ich in Römerbrief die "politische" Motivation, nach Ende der alten Ordnungen nach dem zweiten Krige, wieder Macht im Reich zu erreichen.... und da zeigt sich klar, dass der Paulus, sogar gegen den Wunsch Jesu, ein Reich anderer Art zu suchen, seine Vorstelllungen über den neuen Glauen geschaffen hat. Dass in Johannes Evengelium oder in der Didache nichts von der Eucharistie als essen und trinken des Fleisches und Blutes Jesu ist eine Idee, die kein Jude, religiös-allergisch zu Blutt, vertreten konnte. Deswegen würde ich vorschlagen eine mehr systematische Analyse der ideologischen Linsen (idola Mentis) mit denen die verschiedenen Traditionen der Urchristen ihre Ideen über Jesus geschaffen haben.Jose RdeRiverahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03965723833922120645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-23167528878133510032023-03-29T07:34:45.071+01:002023-03-29T07:34:45.071+01:00The problems cited by the professor may prove that...The problems cited by the professor may prove that Marcion de facto chose existing writings from competing traditions.<br />The author of Galatians exalts his hero Paul, at the same time enclosing his competition between Cephas and James in a construct called the party of circumcision. All Gal is nothing but black PR and disinformation. Paul's author knew his character was just a talkative guy after an epiphany and had a poor chance with supposed eyewitnesses. Well, he arranged a meeting for them, which he described as we can see. And circumcision as a reminder to terrified Greek peasants appears more often in Paul's letters than in all the other books of the LXX and NT combined. *Ev, like Corpus Pauline, is a conscious choice of a religious leader for his own needs.Jarekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09290613521451551691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-36562141656670763892023-03-14T17:49:44.779+00:002023-03-14T17:49:44.779+00:00Hi Prof Vinzent, I like the fact that you are open...Hi Prof Vinzent, I like the fact that you are open to the concrete possibility that the Baptist Passage in Josephus may be a Christian interpolation (as argued recently by Rivka Nir). Assuming that is the case, then the possibility is equally concrete that Marcion fixed Jesus (beyond if Jesus existed or not) under Pilate because Marcion had fixed <i>already</i> John the Baptist under Pilate (and as you write, Marcion wanted to use John the Baptist "to mark the boundary between the time of Jewish prophetism and the novelty that was brought by Jesus"). If therefore the chronological marker for Jesus is John the Baptist (meant by Marcion as a human 'boundary' between old and new), then the chronological marker for John the Baptist was, right or wrong, Pilate. Why? I see that in the <i>Evangelion</i> John the Baptist is never connected with Herod, so the readers would have realized that he was beheaded probably by Pilate. Why did the late gospels (Mark <i>in primis</i>) make Herod, and not Pilate, the killer of John? Because they were embarrassed by the risk of a confusion between John the Baptist and the unnamed Samaritan false prophet killed by Pilate (which would be also the reason of the Christian interpolation of the Baptist Passage in Josephus). This same embarrassment by pro-John Christians explains why John the Baptist was placed by the anti-John Marcion just under Pilate: Marcion would have favored this confusion (right or wrong) between John the Baptist and the Samaritan prophet, by placing the former under Pilate, on imitation of the latter. Or, in alternative, John the Baptist was <i>really</i> the Samaritan Prophet killed by Pilate. Giuseppe Ferrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00587305319405093702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-74562195829014951992023-03-13T20:23:31.577+00:002023-03-13T20:23:31.577+00:00Regarding the wineskins, *Ev sticks to the order o...Regarding the wineskins, *Ev sticks to the order of Thomas yet deviously changes the old patch onto a new garment into a new patch onto an old garment. He selectively drops the beginning of Thomas, and also the "other sides of the coin" that the so very balanced Thomas has:<br /><br />47.1. IS said: there is not strength of a human to be mounted on two horses and to stretch two bows,<br />47.2. and there is not strength of a slave to serve two slaveowners, Or he will make be Honour the one and the other one he will make be "Hubrize" him;<br />47.3a. not usually a human drinks old wine and<br />47.3b. within the hour he Desires to drink new wine, and<br />47.4. not usually they cast new wine to old Wineskin in order that they will not split; and<br />47.5. not usually they cast old wine to new Wineskin So that he will not destroy him;<br />47.6. not usually they glue~ old rag old to new* garment Since therefore a split will come to be.<br /><br /> , glue~, is unattested hence the ~. New* is one of two words that are not uniqe in my fully normalised Thomas Translation; this c/should say 'fresh' instead of new, and I am convinced that Marcion got his entire idea for and source of η καινή διαθήκη - and Mark betrays himself with his variant of “Τί ἐστιν τοῦτο, διδαχὴ καινή κατ’ ἐξουσία?" - "what is this, fresh teaching with authority?!".<br />Evidently Matthew must add καὶ ἀμφότεροι συντηροῦνται, but that highly likely isn't in *Ev, and it certainly isn't in either Mark or Luke.<br />You are reading too much into the tearing apart of the Jewish tradition, I think: μεῖζον γὰρ σχίσμα γενήσεται - the schism will become greater; that's not too bad, or is it?<br /><br />The trick in Thomas is that the old patch onto the new garment will result in a split: oddly, that occurs also when NEW wine is poured into OLD wineskins, which is the exact reverse - hence this elaboration by Thomas; the patch-garment comes as a surprise. By swapping old with new, *Ev ruins this aspect and in essence the wine(skins) add nothing to the patch-garment. It is evident why Mark/Matthew changes the new patch into an unshrunk one, in order to at least make it appear as both are different situationsMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-56339067299460853492023-03-13T15:08:23.680+00:002023-03-13T15:08:23.680+00:00Dear Markus, a Concordance is an incredibly powerf...Dear Markus, a Concordance is an incredibly powerful tool!<br />Mine has taught me so much about the text of Thomas, about the relation between verbs and nouns. I do hope that you have picked up the challenge of normalising and translating the Greek, although I think that would be a few years work. And index (word count per sub-text) is invaluable enough<br /><br />Still, a Concordance will be nothing short of a nuclear bomb - and it will demonstrate to all that the word καινή (διαθήκη) comes from logion 47, from the patch alone, and that it gets spread to the winse(skins) in the canonicals alone because only those invert the order. And even Horner attests to all of it, yet reserves the word for the patch alone:<br /><br />https://www.stepbible.org/?q=version=BSB%7Cversion=THGNT%7Cversion=CopSahHorner%7Creference=Matt.9.16-Matt.9.17%20Mark.2.21-Mark.2.22%20Luke.5.36-Luke.5.39&options=GNVUVH&display=INTERLEAVED<br /><br />ϣⲁⲓ̈ is the word in Coptic. And Marcion swapped the old patch onto new garment, of course - but you know that alreadyMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-84717977122548376262023-03-12T14:26:16.326+00:002023-03-12T14:26:16.326+00:00I think if we refrain from conflating anti-Torah w...I think if we refrain from conflating anti-Torah with anti-Semitic, Marcion could not be accused of antisemitism. After all he himself was a Jew as were certainly many of his followers. Pumpkin Patchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04670504286659448887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-47705494967015933012023-01-30T11:08:23.452+00:002023-01-30T11:08:23.452+00:00More than 10 years ago I was surprised by articles...More than 10 years ago I was surprised by articles from Hermann Detering about the Dutch Radicals, Marcion and the Pauline literature. What could be the reason that I find his name so absent in discussions about Marcion's gospel priority? Is his name connected to a sort of 'tabu' like those of the late Dutch radicals and the 'minimalists' of today? AlbertWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15767647674085042316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-27216891805828537132022-12-25T12:04:00.356+00:002022-12-25T12:04:00.356+00:00Dear Professor
Historians assume that Marcion made...Dear Professor<br />Historians assume that Marcion made a donation to the Roman community, which was returned after his exclusion. The source of this information are two quotations from Tertullian. This information is unreliable for two reasons. Donations are not returned to anyone because this activity is not subject to any conditions. Especially not after a few years. The donation was widely known and everyone knew that Marcion had made it. Tertullian's information is for internal use to deny previous collaboration between Marcion and the Roman commune. In general, from the point of view of the art of PR, Tertullian should have kept quiet, but he mistakenly felt he had to write about it.<br />A similar situation is with Marcion's book collection. In the anti-Marcian introduction to the Gospel of John, there is mention of letters and writings that he gave to the community from the orthodox brethren of Pontus. In this way, the author refuted accusations of appropriating part of Marcion's book collection.<br />It was first noticed by Jan Wierusz-Kowalski, church historian.<br />Merry Christmas<br />Jarek StolarzJarekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09290613521451551691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-7018123657238043442022-12-08T17:41:25.035+00:002022-12-08T17:41:25.035+00:00What a great talk Markus, brilliant. I especially ...What a great talk Markus, brilliant. I especially loved the motive for Marcion, which puts him in the generally assumed timeframe of early 2nd CE.<br />Regarding the resurrection: the million dollar question is what the Patristics would have done if there was no resurrection in Marcion, but where he ended at let's say Mark 15:37-38: a giant smack in the face of the Judeans who killed his hero, leaving the audience in uproar, enraged, ready for a kill.<br />Would they have bit the bullet? Would it have advanced their case to point it out, or would it only have hurt them?<br />I honestly can't oversee any of that, it certainly isn't my territory<br /><br />It is evident to me that Mark 15:40-16:8 serves only one purpose, and that is to explain why nobody had ever heard of the resurrection - and he blames three Thomasine / Marcionite women for it, two of which make a cameo appearance especially for this.<br />I mean look at Mark: it is a weak and feeble ending unless it is a goal in stead of a means: and the goal is to announce that Jesus lives <br /><br />https://www.academia.edu/76105160/The_inevitable_emergence_of_Christianity for my full story on it - and at that point I wasn't sure about John, but now I am: Thomas, John, Marcion - and then Mark to counter it all. When Christianity / Marcion persisted, Matthew redacted *Ev into Luke while writing his own on the side.<br />Which would solve most of the Synoptic Problem, wouldn't itMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-49463374499613962712022-12-08T12:48:34.261+00:002022-12-08T12:48:34.261+00:00That makes two of us. I'm on Mastodon now, it ...That makes two of us. I'm on Mastodon now, it is very agreeable really.<br />I left my 52k tweets in the bin<br /><br />@mlinssen@mastodon.onlineMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-48022954177092126482022-11-18T11:18:15.314+00:002022-11-18T11:18:15.314+00:00Hallo Prof. Vinzent!
Das Warten hat bald ein Ende!...Hallo Prof. Vinzent!<br />Das Warten hat bald ein Ende! Ich hoffe, dass ich meine Bibliothek dazu überreden kann, bereits die englische Version zu erwerben. Wird es auch eine deutsche Version geben? Werden Sie das Buch in History Valley vorstellen? Ich bin auf jeden Fall sehr gespannt!<br />Grüße vom Rhein,<br />Peter GerkenPumpkin Patchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04670504286659448887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-5574756306648277812022-11-18T11:16:40.810+00:002022-11-18T11:16:40.810+00:00Hallo Prof. Vinzent!
Das Warten hat bald ein Ende!...Hallo Prof. Vinzent!<br />Das Warten hat bald ein Ende! Ich hoffe, dass ich meine Bibliothek dazu überreden kann, bereits die englische Version zu erwerben. Wird es auch eine deutsche Version geben? Werden Sie das Buch in History Valley vorstellen? Ich bin auf jeden Fall sehr gespannt!<br />Grüße vom Rhein,<br />Peter GerkenPumpkin Patchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04670504286659448887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-38365448641300755782022-06-10T08:58:52.793+01:002022-06-10T08:58:52.793+01:00Ich fand Mr. Wells Open Letter interessant, habe a...Ich fand Mr. Wells Open Letter interessant, habe aber eine eingehende Behandlung Ihres Buches "Christi Thora" vermisst. Stattdessen hat Mr. Wells im Wesentlichen nur von seinem Buch "Sorting Out Paul" abgeschrieben. Obwohl ich seine Prämisse, dass wir eher mit Symbolik als mit Geschichte im "Neuen Testament" zu tun haben teile, finde ich, dass er zu sehr von Annahmen und Behauptungen ausgeht, ohne sie im Detail zu belegen. Ich bin gespannt auf Ihre Antwort. Pumpkin Patchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04670504286659448887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-87279320142174752342022-04-02T13:43:14.742+01:002022-04-02T13:43:14.742+01:00A very interesting coincidence!
That "new, a...A very interesting coincidence!<br /><br />That "new, and serious (non-Christian) investigation of the gospel of Thomas" is already here, and demonstrates that Thomas precedes the NT<br /><br />https://www.academia.edu/46974146/<br /><br />600 pages on Thomas alone.<br />I am working on deepening my work on the Thomas-NT parallels by taking Marcion into account and aim to finish they later this year.<br />My current position on Marcion is that "his" Chrestianity came into existence around 0 CE; when we follow the anti-Judaism on history we can see where it blossomed. The +/- 50 CE being of Judaics from Rome is essential, but so are the Kitos wars that stretched out from 60-130 CE.<br />After that the Romans were left with no other choice than to rewrite the narrative: to combat its anti-Judaic nature they fused it with Judaism - with devastating results<br /><br />Regarding the reconstruction, I have developed an alternative view:<br /><br />Marcion ends at Mark 15:39, the centurion proclaiming Jesus to be the son of God.<br />Mark has to mitigate the "fact" that Romans killed Jesus at the instigation of Judaics but can't undo it, so he adds up till 16:8 in order to suggest that Jesus lived; the women are put on the scene immediately in 15:40 with the sole goal of their sole role: to take the brunt for no one knowing that "in fact" Jesus did arise from the grave. A pathetically feeble story but at least he tries to make it plausible by conjuring an impartial aid to the scene: Joseph "the disciplest", an allegedly trustworthy source who isn't one of the Twelve nor one of the Judaics.<br />Then naturally the story develops that the disciples faked his resurrection by hiding his body: Matthew 28:11-15, and by incorporating it into his own gospel Matthew successfully p0wns that.<br />Matthew then adds an incredibly lengthy narrative to his *Ev copy, Luke, but can't resist letting Peter take credit for being the first to discover the risen Christ by letting him find the bindings - while the women were still unbelieving, Peter isn't! Matthew sticks to the Markan story in his own gospel though, he often uses Luke to go an extra mile while keeping his own narrative pristineMartijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-78098995157069042292022-02-21T19:35:27.275+00:002022-02-21T19:35:27.275+00:00"Wenn wir uns fragen, warum Tiberius und Pila..."Wenn wir uns fragen, warum Tiberius und Pilatus zu Beginn des *Ev Erwähnung finden, so scheint dies nicht nur historiographische und politische, sondern auch sozio-religiöse Gründe gehabt zu haben und sich mit einem theologischen Bekenntnis zu verbinden"<br /><br />Meiner Meinung nach wird Marcion auch gebraucht um die Geschichte des Christentums zu bestätigen: ich sehe überhaupt keinen Grund warum Marcion das hier nennen würde - aber es ist mir deutlich daß die Kirchvater das hier sehr gerne "lesen möchten"<br /><br />Ich frage mich überhaupt ob eine Person wie Marcion wirklich bestehen habe; ist es nicht ganz bequem wie die ganze Vorlage zum Christentum personifiziert werden kann (und dabei natürlich in ein negatives Licht dargestellt)?<br />Sehr wichtig ist das natürlich nicht, es handelt sich hier um *Ev und das ist die Hauptsache. Aber ein Datum von *Ev möchte ich lieber ablehnen...Martijn Linssenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16460950790934803390noreply@blogger.com