Re: [GTh] Beyond Belief ...
- sarban writes:
> This would be similar to the position of the "Epistle of Barnabas".That epistle even predates Christianity.
Therapeutae or other diaspora Jewish mystery cults may have given up on
the outer expressions of the law when the Romans oppressed those
after the temple fall, and even more the messianic wars of Lukuas
and sticked the more to the inner values of the Thorah instead,
like some later Quietist Christian movements
e.g. the Beguines (13th century) or Miguel De Molinos (17th century).
Another important work of those circles is the Didache, or
This has been developed in Edwin Johnson's book "Antiqua Mater".
The Didache knows some of Matthew's logia,
but in a varia lectio that represents a more judaist phase.
For example, the Golden Rule appears still in its passive formulation
the Talmud ascribed to Hillel (1 cent. BCE).
- jmgcormier writes:
> Your sense of Perrin overstating his case seems sound to me asthat'd be Barnabas.
> well ... as I recall (and while opinions most certainly vary), the
> Diatessaron seems to "log in" at appx. 175 C.E. That sounds a little
> late for people to be asking (Thomas #53) if "circumcision is
> (remember ... this question was settled by Paul & Barsabbas
Barsabbas is the guy who drank lethal poison without being harmed.
> in or around 49 C.E.)Following Couchoud "La Premie`re E'dition de St. Paul"
and Van den Bergh van Eysinga "Marcion als Getuige voor een
voor-katoliek Christendom" I put Paul's epistles into the
second century, and posterior to the Marcionite versions
reported by Tertullian and Epiphanius.
Justin Martyr does not use the Paulinics where they should be used,
so this first chief ideologer of fledgling Catholic Christianity
does either not know about the canonical versions or not consider
them as authorative, even if (which I doubt severely)
they were extant before Irenaios and Tertullian wrote against Marcion.
In any case this shows that in Antonius Pius' times, they were not
accepted as guidelines throughout early Christianity.
This has been pointed out by E. Johnson in "Antiqua Mater".
Severians and Elkasaits also refused Paul as too hellenic.
Van den Bergh van Eysinga, using H. Raschke's "Werkstatt des
Markus-Evangelisten", showed also that the Marcionite Gospel
predates, or at least is more original than the canonical ones.
Turmel in "The Fourth Gospel" shows that John's contains much of
Marcionite stuff, thinly overpainted by Catholic redactors.
Justin Martyr even is ignorant about Evangelia as a literary genre,
and talks about Memorabilia Apostolorum, which contained much
of the material of the canonical Gospels.
- On 9 Jun 2003, at 12:27, pessy@... wrote:
> Justin Martyr does not use the Paulinics where they should be used,Jay Raskin has shown (according to him) that Justin Martyr is the
> so this first chief ideologer of fledgling Catholic Christianity
> does either not know about the canonical versions or not consider
> them as authorative, even if (which I doubt severely)
> they were extant before Irenaios and Tertullian wrote against Marcion.
mouthpiece of Tertullian as well.