Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 14008
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by Giuseppe »

And there is another evidence of the same point:

...only that Marcion says that his god is not feared; maintaining that a good being is not an object of fear, but only a judicial being, in whom reside the grounds of fear— anger, severity, judgments, vengeance, condemnation. But it was from fear, undoubtedly, that the evil spirits were cowed. Therefore they confessed that (Christ) was the Son of a God who was to be feared, because they would have an occasion of not submitting if there were none for fearing. Besides, He showed that He was to be feared, because He drove them out, not by persuasion like a good being, but by command and reproof. Or else did he reprove them, because they were making him an object of fear, when all the while he did not want to be feared? And in what manner did he wish them to go forth, when they could not do so except with fear? So that he fell into the dilemma of having to conduct himself contrary to his nature, whereas he might in his simple goodness have at once treated them with leniency. He fell, too, into another false position — of prevarication, when he permitted himself to be feared by the demons as the Son of the Creator, that he might drive them out, not indeed by his own power, but by the authority of the Creator.

It is so clear that here Tertullian is reporting pure Marcionite thought that there is no need of justification by me.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:02 am It is so simple, that your suspicions regard it betray more your fear that Mcn precedes all the Gospels than a real skepticism about who is of Tertullian and what is not (but this is - obviously - only a my personal suspicion).
What fear? I could not care less which came first. I just want to have good reasons for believing whatever it is I believe about the sequence.
At any rate:

My present discussion is, how the evil spirit could have known that He was called by such a name, when there had never at any time been uttered about Him a single prophecy by a god who was unknown, and up to that time silent, of whom it was not possible for Him to be attested as the Holy One, as (of a god) unknown even to his own Creator. What similar event could he then have published of a new deity, whereby he might betoken for the holy one of the rival god? Simply that he went into the synagogue, and did nothing even in word against the Creator? As therefore he could not by any means acknowledge him, whom he was ignorant of, to be Jesus and the Holy One of God; so did he acknowledge Him whom he knew (to be both). For he remembered how that the prophet had prophesied of the Holy One of God, and how that God's name of Jesus was in the son of Nun.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm
The line you gave me was:
Giuseppe wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:56 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:20 am That is not what this skepticism is about. My skepticism is in inferring Marcion's exegesis when Marcion's exegesis is not even being quoted, whether by Tertullian or not. "Doubtless you will say" is not actually a quotation or even a paraphrase.
But in this case, Tertullian says us which is the Marcionite exegesis:
Because this one lies in saying that Jesus comes from the god of the Jews

(Tertullian, 4:17).
Which sounds like Marcion is saying that the demoniac ("this one") is lying about Jesus. But now you give me this line:
Simply that he went into the synagogue, and did nothing even in word against the Creator?
Which is not the same line at all, and which sounds nothing like Marcion doing any kind of exegesis on the exorcism. Did you misunderstand what I was asking of you?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 14008
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by Giuseppe »

I find the quote (“Because this one lies in saying that Jesus comes from the god of the Jews”) from 4:17 in Couchoud's book, but it is surely an error of translation because there is no in 4:17 that claim. I am curious where is that quote from.

But while I will find it, it is sufficient to make my case this other quote (the occurrence of which I can identify easily):
Therefore they confessed that (Christ) was the Son of a God who was to be feared, because they would have an occasion of not submitting if there were none for fearing
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 14008
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by Giuseppe »

I point out this thread as the thread that saw me more totally in disagreement with Ben C. Smith.

See in particular my last post that fixed my point contra Ben.
JarekS
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2024 12:53 pm

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by JarekS »

IMHO Jesus was betrayed and captured by the Jews and crucified by the Romans because the author of this story was a Greek who hated the Jews and despised the Romans.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 14008
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Three different reasons to kill Jesus (if you are one of the 'Rulers of this Age')

Post by Giuseppe »

Ok, but the point of the thread, beyond the title, is that Ben C. Smith claimed that we don't have evidence of the Marcion's interpretation of the demons's recognition of Jesus as a wrong recognition, whereas I have shown the point in Tertullian where it is clearly said that, according to Marcion, the demons confused Jesus with the son of YHWH when really, according to Marcion, Jesus was not the son of YHWH:

But it was from fear, undoubtedly, that the evil spirits were cowed. Therefore they confessed that (Christ) was the Son of a God who was to be feared, because they would have an occasion of not submitting if there were none for fearing.

Post Reply