Re: [GTh] Pauline Thought?
I've taken the liberty of correcting your misspelling of 'Pauline' in the
> The Gospel of Phillip is not based upon Pauline thought, and neither isWho said they were?
> Phillip says a few things about baptism that are not going to correlateIn my previous two notes, I suggested that the author of GPhil was arguing
> with orthodox views of baptism.
against the Pauline concept of baptism. Here, you seem to agree with me
(insofar as "orthodox" = "Pauline"), but then later in your note (which I'll
get to in a moment), you suggest otherwise. First, though, a short
digression into your use of the word 'apokatastasis':
> ... Phillip falls short here of saying 'they' like those hoping for aLest this be misunderstood, the parenthetical insertions here are yours, not
> Pauline Baptism, are in error. He does say on the bottom of pg. 153,
> "That he who has been anointed (received the chrism) possesses everything.
> He possesses the resurrection (apokatastasis), the light, (The Word), the
> cross, and the holy spirit. The father gave him this in the bridal
the translator's. Also, I assume that you're not suggesting that
'apokatastasis' MEANS 'resurrection'. In fact, the Greek word for
'resurrection' (the word used in the text) is 'anastasis'. 'Apokatastasis'
means something like 'restoration', as far as I can determine. (It would
help if you would use the English equivalent of the Greek terms you're
using. Members of the list should not be burdened by having to look up
unfamiliar terms. Also, they need to know how YOU are using the word.)
> The 'new life of the spirit' for the Gnostic is not with the baptism, itWhy did you insert 'apokatastasis' here after 'chrism'? Seems to me that
> is with the chrism ( apokatastasis), with the Holy Spirit.
either you don't understand what 'apokatastasis' means, or you're doing
funny things with it without explaining what you're doing.
> I think both oil of the chrism, and water of the baptism make theQuite so - which shows that your reasoning is very confused, since Paul
> substances symbolic in much the same way, but to different processes,
> and beliefs about them. Phillip is not talking about a Pauline theory,
> unless Paul subscribed to the following.....
> (quotes from "On Baptism" A and B) ...
> These baptism descriptions are probably from Valentinus.
presumably did NOT subscribe to the Valentinian views in "On Baptism". Hence
to say that "Phillip is not talking about a Pauline theory, unless Paul
subscribed to [the Valentinian theory in "On Baptism"]" is a specious and
In my previous notes, I gave reason to suppose that GPhil WAS talking about
a Pauline theory - in order to rebut it. You're suggesting now, I take it,
that GPhil's author was rebutting another Valentinian's view of baptism. To
resolve this, let's try to figure out who "those who say" are in the
> Those who say they will die first and [then] rise are in error. If they doSeems to me that the view ascribed to "those who say" here is an orthodox
> not first receive the resurrection while they live, when they die they
> will receive nothing. So also when talking about baptism, They say Baptism
> is a great thing, because when people receive it they will live."
view. It may be that some Valentinians endorsed that view, but that doesn't
make it any less orthodox. It isn't
so much evident in this passage that that view was also Pauline, but the
other passage disassociating the water of baptism from death seems directed
at the Pauline doctrine that to be baptized was to participate in Christ's
death. In the passage above, the author seems concerned with denying the
other part of the Pauline doctrine - that to be baptized is also to
participate in Christ's resurrection. (We should think of full immersion -
being submerged under the water presumably correlated with death, the
popping up out of the water with "resurrection" - i.e., entry into a new
spiritual life. When it became more common after Paul's time for baptisms to
be performed in churches using consecrated water, rather than in rivers or
other natural bodies of water, the water involved could presumably no longer
be associated with the world, or with death.)
Mt. Clemens, MI