TheInvisibleDan

I hope the lord doesn't have the same words for me..

My sentiment as well. But then, I don't have "prophet" in my resume, nor the desire to pull rabbits out of a hat.

My music is pretty grungy though. That might lose me a few flier miles.

People with whom I would like to share a few hits:

David Lynch

Roger Roger (French composer)

Bernard Herrmann

Joseph Turmel (theologian)

Ed Wood

Robert Crumb

Jesus Christ

Angelina Jolie

Beyonce

Where I can:

QUOTE (TheInvisibleDan @ Jan 22 2007, 01:18 PM)

. . .

long to pour forth my bowels upon you once again, that our innards might rejoice in the unity, mercy and righteousness of our Creator and his Firstborn Offspring, who is before all.

. . .

Have ye not heard-

"In the beginning was the Turd, and the Turd [was] with him, and then [it] wasn't."

-St. John Thomas the Crapper, 1:1

Hi Dot,

I hope everything is going well, and continues to get better for you.

Best wishes,

Dan

It is simply because they lied. It also set a precedent simply because also the Jews also sometimes thought that God could not SEE or HEAR what they were doing, thus is set the stage for the continuity between OT and NT.

That one intent for the presence of this section might have been to "set the stage for the continuity between OT and NT" is on the money.

Those USB flash-stick thingies are really good.

Have been using one 4 gig Kingston stick to back up all the music I've been working on.

And they're cheap enough.

This record is one that I think nearly all explanations for have to stretch juuuuuust a little to get to make any sense. I don't think all the information is there to completely understand it without filling in some blanks, and that's a crap shoot. But I'd agree to the extent that it may not have happened the way we're reading it, and that the reasons and background of what was going on isn't understood from what's written.

Socks -

Well stated.

Though if this section in Acts didn't personally strike me as so absurd, I'de think it funny. Then again, maybe it actually was intended as a dark-humored parable of sorts.

For example, what of those unnamed "young men" loitering about in the wings, on call for when the bodies hit the floor -unceremoniously stepping in, carrying out, wrapping and burying them? ( one wonders how often their services were actually required). And all without the common courtesy of notifying a spouse or next-of-kin to the deceased? Very odd.

I respect honest scepticism a lot more than a false teacher who just lies to the suckers like TWI and my former splinter group did.

It sounds to me like you won't be presuming to teach anyone the Bible if they believe these things to be true like I do TheInvisibleDan.

But if I ever know of someone who thinks like you do but acts like they are a believer I will be happy to expose them as frauds.

But is it possible in spite of your honest skepticism that the intended lesson is more like I've shared it and less like you believe?

My view of this scripture comes from just trieing to figure out where I stood while being goaded into following a scum-sucking false teacher and false prophet.

Where does your skepticism come from TheInvisibleDan?

Hi Jeff,

In my case perhaps from getting old.

I have no disagreement with anything you wrote, and in fact, your experiences recalls some of my own when I left twi eons ago.

I've been of the personal opinion that biblatry was a major ingredient which compelled many of us to stick with the organization longer than we might have otherwise (and such a problem being hardly limited to one group or splinter, or religion for that matter).

Good to meet you.

It never happened. Nonetheless there's something more to this fiction of "Ananias & Sapphirra" that we're not told.

What it was - I won't even begin to speculate. But people generally don't drop dead for seeking tax shelters.

Just as many of you have not turned into "Greasespots" by midnight.

I mean, if the "Holy Spirit" here wanted more money, why not pack his briefcase and run off to Wall Street?

The message seems clear here though - "fork over the dough" - in this case, to the figure of Peter.

Wow. What else can I say Geisha. You’ve “knocked my socks off” with your recent fine posts.

I think had we met and discussed this topic about 4-5 years ago, I would have engaged in a far more spirited discussion from my side. Truth be told, my active interest in this subject has been on the wane, supplanted by other concerns in life.

I appreciate your impressive grasp of Christian literature and church history, and your enthusiasm as well the time you took in presenting your side of “the orthodox perspective”, which, I would tend to agree with others here, perhaps has not really been as thoroughly represented in these forums as they ought to have been over the years.

In any event, very well done.

Danny

Hi Geisha,

I have enjoyed our exchanges very much, as I do appreciate your rich perspective and insight, which I do contemplate throughout the day. Unfortunately my time on

the home computer (with my wife on vacation and my kids home from school) prevents me from responding more fully some of the points you've raised in the course

of our discussion. So the brevity and perhaps at times bluntness of my replies, for which I apologize to you, as well as to Lindy and to Abi and to anyone else I haven't had

opportunity to respond. I'll try to swing by here Saturday night. :)

Penworks,

I daresay I agree with you.

I caught this on TV years ago and it was an excellent program.

We're talking about an ancient church that was once upon a time, Catholicism's most serious and powerful contender during the first three to four centuries of Christianity, before dying out by the tenth. A church which by the middle of the second century, according to Justin Martyr, had spread throughout every part of the then known world - an extraordinary feat if Marcion's Church had actually began at about the time Justin wrote this(!)(?) But also according to Justin - "Marcion is still with us" - suggesting a very aged man.

Add to this the curious tale, preserved in ancient church paintings and statues and in some editions of the old Latin gospel prologues, of Marcion having worked as a scribe for the Apostle John (!) We're not talking about a cornfield cult here, but a well organized church comprising of ministers and priests and deacons (which, much to the horror of his orthodox opponents, included women in those offices), and churches so numerous that the warning was issued to their parishioners that when going through any village, to avoid walking into a Marcionite Church by mistake. In many respects the Marcionite and Catholic churches were identical in their appearances and practices. Yes, the Marcionites practiced celibacy, as was also a practice among orthodox Christians of the time, despite what their reasonings might have been (the practice still survives in the Catholic Church today). As far as history is concerned, the founder of the Marcionites published the earliest known New Testament canon. As I recall, John Knox suggested a dating of 130 AD, and according to the Catholic scholar John Clabeaux, may have been compiled in Marcion's native Sinope, from whence he brought it with him to Rome.

Our knowledge of the Syrian Cerdo, who is said to have introduced to Marcion the antithesis between the Old and New Testament gods, is unfortunately scant.

Marcion's alleged rape of "the Virgin" (=the Great Church?) and expulsion by his father, his recanting of his views on his deathbed - ?

But being that they came out about 75 years after his death (Tertullian) and in another case about 300 years (Epiphanius), might give one pause to be cautious here.

Because yes, for all we know - Marcion may have been every bit the rotten human being as these writers made him out to be - but lest we forget, these writers were also just as human, their words and their deeds comprising just as much a mix of wheat and tares. I am not perfect. Neither are you. And neither were the writers of old.

In fact, I think it somewhat even cruel to the writers themselves to entirely "deify" them through their works, attributing a certain godship to their every jot and tittle, and in the process giving blind eye to those things which make them human, both the good (love, hope, faith, joy, patience)- and the bad (hatred, anger, prejudice, intolerance).

These attributes inevitably find their way into any set of sacred scriptures, because one cannot entirely nor sucessfully extract human nature from the process.

I sent one of your apostles off to a cave. You sent mine off to the garbage heap. How human we are indeed.

:)

This "son of Satan" also shared your noble love and "care about complete strangers":

"One work is sufficient for our God: He has delivered man by His supreme and most excellent goodness, which is preferable to the creation of all the locusts. A primary and perfect goodness is shed voluntarily and freely upon strangers without any obligation of friendship, on the principle that we are bidden to love our enemies, who as such on that very account are strangers to us."

I am thankful to Tertullian for preserving this statement from "the antichrist", and that not everything on this topic has been lost to the "garbage heap of history".

On the other hand, the excavation of ancient garbage heaps have yielded fantastic discoveries, as of course, have also caves.

Danny

Geisha,

With all due respect, I liked your morning post far better.

How often has it turned out to be the case that the advice a person metes out to another

is precisely what one should heeding themselves?

Well, it beats "volcano god"

Geisha,

Far from assuming that the "Church Fathers" are "bad", I've derived considerable pleasure and learning from their works. Tertullian can be a blowhard at times, but he had a sharp sense of humor, besides the fact he is an indispensable source in reconstructing the texts and views of his opponents. St. Ephraem was very eloquent, even when discussing his rivals. Likewise the same with the Armenian Eznik de Kolb.

Epiphanius of Salamis - would never have beer with - extremely nasty and mean-spirited. Heck, let alone me, he would have found sufficient reason to burn even you at the stake as well.

All in all, one cannot study early Christian history without the writings of the Church Fathers. The works however weren’t always written from a “fair and balanced” perspective. The writers naturally stood for their [version of] faith over against other versions. I can’t fault them for that.

The reason I jokingly referred to "St. Clement" earlier was because having read his 1st epistle, I was struck with the stylistic similarities his work shared with those of the Pastorals, and assumed him (as have other scholars) as a possible candidate for having actually produced the Pastoral material.

FYI, most standard introductions on the New Testament - from Goodspeed to Kummel to the more recent works of Bart Ehrman - all categorize the Pastoral epistles as Pseudo-Pauline (the same questions also persist on the authorship of Ephesians and Colossians).

Kummel's volume is good because he does address the different theories behind the Pastorals that have been set forth over the years.

The accusations no doubt flew back and forth between the different Christian movements and churches. They were as nasty toward one another as political candidates running for office in our own country, where one candidate will often resort to exaggerating the “badness” of their opponents, and vice versa. It’s a shame that more literature from the heretics didn’t survive, to provide us the benefit of a “widescreen” version of church history, rather than the “pan & scan” output of only one side. But given the scientific advances that have been made in studying ancient manuscripts, where a mss. may x-rayed to reveal any underwriting, this situation may improve considerably. Not to overlook how much our understanding of early Christian and Jewish history has been enhanced with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi Library the past century.

FYI, as obscure as the topic may be, more works on the Marcionites are still forthcoming. I see a more recent work released on Amazon, entitled Marcion and Luke-Acts: A Defining Struggle . Someone recently informed me of another newer work that proposes the theory that a disciple of Marcion wrote the Gospel of John, picking up once again the investigation begun by Joseph Turmel and Robert Eisler many years ago.

And I've still yet to release my reconstruction of the Apostolikon.

But there's generally been far more interest in the subject overseas than there has been in the US. But that's all gradually changing.

Geisha,

Thank you for your very thoughtful reply.

I regard my opinions and "knowledge" on the subject of Marcion as neither "secret" nor particularly "special" .

But I do think this information may be invaluable for deepening our understanding of Christian history, its beliefs, its literature,

and how all this stuff might even effect us today.

The information relating to this topic is readily accessible to anyone with a few questions and a library card.

There is no reason for anyone to remain uninformed as to this particular chapter of Christian history, whether

or not they like the subject under consideration, or agree or disagree with the doctrines held by a person or movement.

The unbiased historians and textual scholars would inquire: what role - if any - did this particular person or movement play in Christian history, and

did his activity affect the outcome of that version of the NT that's come down to us?

The caricature of "Gnosticism" and any movements placed beneath that unbrella term by the Church Fathers does not render justice to the subject.

Not all "gnostics" subscribed to the idea of salvation via a secret knowledge. The so-called "gnostics" were no more homogenous in their views

than Christians today. And while there were some gnostics which went out their way to avoid persecution, others like the Marcionites accounted for

just as many- if not more - martyrs which sacrificed their lives for their Savior.

The material of the New Testament - depite the homogenity the "orthodox" editors attempted to impose upon it -is essentially an amalgam composed of elements

derived from the different Christian/gnostic movements. That's one reason why many centuries later, -especially among those who derive their beliefs

from an ultra-literal reading and interpretation of the material in the NT - Marcionism will rear its "ugly head" so to speak. This is especially startling

to observe occurring among Christians who know little or even nothing about the topic of Marcionism. How could this be, if the seeds of Marcionism

wasn't already present in some form in the "field" of the New Testament writings?

How did it happen that the Way International - as you so aptly pointed out - arrived to the position of Paul being "the Apostle" for the present church,

a position identical to an ancient heretic's view?

We know that the ultra-literalist Bullinger and his view of dispensationalism was the source here. Without expressing or betraying even an awareness on

the subject of Marcion in his studies (if someone knows otherwise, by all means please let me know), to a remarkable degree, Bullinger "re-created" the doctrines

of Marcion. How would this have been possible if Marcionism or traces thereof wasn't already present within the texts of our NT?

Note the anti-environmentalist positions oft taken by "Bible believing Christians" in our country today, which might be summed in the lyrics, "This world

is not my home - I'm just a passing through" - reflecting the anti-cosmic attitudes of the so-called ancient "gnostics" . These same "Bible-believers"

support anti-environmentalist political figures (like Bush) and neglect this "evil material world" as transient even while the north pole melts away.

Like it or not, such unhealthy "memes" and inclinations are present in the psychology of a many of today's "Bible believing" Christians.

Where did they come from?

Let me also note that the passages I alluded to earlier in this thread- of Jesus railing against his disciples for their lack of believing and perception - might also

be seen as a literary contribution in our NT originating from the Marcionites, which viewed the original disciples as having been blind and unteachable, necessitating

the role of Paul and his "special revelation" in the views of early Christian/gnostics.

Danny

Dan if you are interested I would like to answer you soon as well. Geisha

Would be delighted. I'm enjoying everyone's discussion here.

I would like to briefly touch on the first example you cited - Luke 3:1.

This in itself is a re-working of material from Marcion's earlier gospel, which began (minus the virgin birth material of the preceding

two chapters),

"In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius, during the time of Pilate in Judea,

He descended from heaven, and appeared at Capernaum, a village of Galilee..."

Marcion's gospel set the Capernaum episode before Nazareth, whereas "Luke" sets

Nazareth before Capernaum.

But "Luke" let slip by the passage (ch.4): "Whatever things we heard you accomplish at Capernaum -

do likewise here!" -providing internal evidence in support of the arrangement of material of Marcion's text having

antedated the arrangement of our version of "Luke".

"Luke" was consciously playing the role of a Christian Josephus, writing against contemporaries "who had undertaken to draw up an account".

= the many gospels and writings in circulation of the various Christian movements at the time.

I think we're already in the second century here.

For me, the straw that broke the back of my belief of an “infallible word” was the dubious authenticity of the “Pastoral Epistles” (1 & 2 Tim., Titus), given the irony that these were written for one reason (among others) to underscore the authority of the sacred literature of proto-orthodoxy against the literature and ideas of their main Christian rivals and competitors.

The date of writing for the Pastorals was traditionally assumed between 60 and 70 AD.

But issues relating to its quite, un-Pauline grammar and writing style ( addressed in an old study by P.J. Harrison, “The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles”) as well as consideration of details betraying the identity of the rivals under attack points to a later date –somewhere in the middle of the second century.

Of course at that time, Paul was long dead. But through the long standing, magical ancient practice of writing under pseudonyms, “Paul” could be conveniently raised back to life (as after all had been done with other legends, Christian and non-Christian), to address some critical issues of the day for the current community. Our writer ( we’ll call him “Clement” ) might trek out to a cave, light a lantern and pop some of (Geo's Dead Sea Scroll scholar) John Allegro’s spotted red-capped mushrooms in preparation for channeling the spirit of Paul to write some new revelations, and upon completion of his journey, could bury this fresh corpus in a floor at his friend Demetrius’ house, from whence these startling new “lost” letters of Paul would emerge to startle once again the then flat world.

Unfortunately, that batch of shrooms was bad. These letters sound nothing like Paul. But no matter. His name was on there so it must be.

And all the more this particular church rejoiced with great jubilation that this fresh material attacked the beliefs and positions of their opponents! Hurray!

One of the main opponent(s) under question apparently “forbid to marry”, “abstain from certain foods”, do not believe “everything created by God is good”, use water instead of wine at their feasts and communions, cause “shipwreck” to the faith of many and whose “Antithesis” (“Contradictions”) ought be avoided. A dead ringer for the founder of the Marcionite church (also a ship captain) and his teachings, even alluding to the title of one of his major works “Antithesis”, which posited the contradictions between the “Just” demiurge of Judaism and the new God introduced by Christ, through contrast of Jesus’ sayings with “the law” of the “Old Testament” material.

It’s funny thinking back to the time many years ago when I began to read up on the beliefs of the so-called ancient Christian Gnostics, my introduction being Hans Jonas’ “The Gnostic Religion”, in which there was a chapter devoted to Marcion. Still clinging onto the notion at the time of the Bible being “the God-breathed Word”, my initial reaction to reading 1 Tim. Ch. 4 was, “Wow, Paul sure foresaw the coming of that heretic Marcion.”

But there was much I didn't know then.. I would learn more about the diversity of early Christian movements and their ideas, the controversies which occurred among all these movements, and the effect these controversies would actually have had on the form and content of NT material as its come down to us.

I won’t even touch on “Acts” here, except to mention that there were apparently even different “versions” of Paul’s life outside the figure depicted in the orthodox presentation.

It was held among the Marcionites that Paul was actually a witness at the crucifixion of Christ (Dialogue of Adamantius), possibly regarded as having been among the second wave of disciples - “the 70” in Luke 10. A life of Paul which unfortunately did not survive for us.

Thanks Excy for reminding me that "The Twilight Zone" marathon is still going.

I wonder if bin Laden has actually been dead for years.

Perhaps buried in some bunker in Afghanistan.

Or in a freezer in Dick Cheney's basement.

It was quite convenient that a bin Laden video was released on the eve of our last presidential elections.

Should have been ended with "I'm George Bush, and I approve this ad."

I expect Osama be will be pulled from the fridge and propped up in another ad for McCain.

I vote Obama as the new "Antichrist".

By all means, Christians should vote for him to bring to past the Apocalypse.

Lindy,

Wow! Well, I'll just gather up my minion of demon buddies and head over to Fox news.

Geisha,

I meant to thank you for your posts here so far, and I certainly thank you for your last one, for reminding me (despite my opinions here regarding imperfections) of

one of the most loftiest and challenging edicts to mankind to proceed from the lips of Jesus, "Love your enemies".

I hope - if only this idea alone - might eventually circulate more prominently in the mainstream of human thought.

It would be a much better world for it. Much preferable to the sabre-rattlings going on among the different nations now.

Can we learn to love one another before sending this little world into oblivion?

But then I might add also - Christians are not the only ones who have laid down their lives for their faith. And not all martyrs have laid down their lives for the noble

reasons you've described. Far from being "stripped of all pride", martydom can also become something of a "pride" in and of itself, or even worst, a death wish.

Not all the Christian martyrs of old were thrown to the lions - some threw themselves to the ravenous beasts with joy. Might not the desire to rush to one's

heavenly estate be just as easily be motivated out of selfishness? And lest we forget - those which regarded themselves as "martyrs" for their cause,

when they steered those hijacked planes into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on 9/11?

Jeno - I applaud you, because interestingly enough, I see you exercising a far nobler and far healthier conception of “family” than Jesus himself

is seen expressing in places. In fact, like the cult leaders of our own time, Jesus appeared in places strikingly antagonistic to the notion of the

natural “family” unit:

“Do you think I have come to send peace upon the earth? No, I tell you, but division…they will be divided, father against son and son against his father;

mother against daughter and daughter against her mother, etc. (Matt.24:34ff/Luke 12:49ff).

This doesn’t exactly promote “family values”, does it.

“…and one of his disciples said to him, “Lord, let me go first and bury my father” But Jesus said to him, “Follow me, and leave the dead to bury the dead”

(Matt.8:21-22)

Some have interpreted “bury my father” as being idiomatic for caring for an elderly parent in their feeble age, and still others have interpreted “let the

city bury the dead”, As if to suggest: “it’s not your problem – let “the city” do it,” or someone else.

Whatever the case may be, this sickens me greatly as not one of Jesus’ finer moments. I'm not impressed with him here at all. Especially in light of my

own experience as having cared for my own parents in their final years, who were no longer able to care for themselves. To their credit, each sibling in

my family put their lives on hold to help them out. Our parents cared for us when we were children. And then it was our turn to care for them.

Put yourself in that person’s sandals, when being told by “God”:“Throw your parent under the bus, and follow me”

And what horrible pain, grief and heartbreak must have gone through the mind of that feeble, weak parent, had his son actually abandoned him

to follow the latest messiah.

Herein a question to pose to everyone here:

If Jesus told you that you must abandon a dying parent or loved one in order to follow him, - would you have done it?

invisible dan,

obviously, you don't know Him...

Unfortunately, I think I've gotten to know him all too well.

Much ado has been made on our cult experiences of having been railed upon by zealous leaders for our "lack of believing" or lack of "faith".

But is there really any significant difference throughout the gospels (esp. "Mark") in the manner Jesus rebukes his own disciples for the same?

When you gather all the citations from the gospels of such cases, it presents us a rather unsettling depiction.

Unsettling in the fact that it's all too familiar.