YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Stuart »

20:1-8 is about John's baptism. What has that to do with descent into the land of the dead?
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun Mar 29, 2020 9:34 pm Joseph D.L., I don't know why you insist so much on the Jewish origins of anti-demiurgism.
I don't insist that there was a Jewish origin for anti-demiurgism. I reject that Marcion, Cerinthus, Velntinus, Cerdon, Menander, et al. were anti-demiurgists.

I think this misunderstanding illuminates that you're not comprehending what I'm saying at all.

If Gnostic Judaism was indebted to Plato, than they had converted YHWH to that of a benevolent demiurge, just as Plato did.

Where some Gnostic Jews differed is if there was a power above YHWH. They used the first two chapters of Genesis to illustrate their argument, and that one god was named El (theos) and another named YHWH (kyrios). El creates the celestial heaven and the celestial, hermaphrodite Adam/Man; while YHWH creates the earthly world and the earthly Adam. Genesis 1 is the Platonic World of Forms, of perfect realities, and Genesis 2 is the World of Perception (there's a word for it in Plato, but I forgot what it is); space, time, and matter.

You can easily see the influence here on certain gnostic texts like Pistos Sophia and Gospel of Truth, where the higher world, Pleroma, exists eternally and without blemish, while the lower world is but a shadow of it, ruled over by an ignorant (not necessarily evil or malevolent) creator god.

What I am arguing is that early Christian Gnostics were ambivalent towards the demiurge. Latter gnostics could have been radicalized and become more vitriolic towards creation and its creator; but most of the information is coming from their critics, who are saying that they hate truth, therefore they must hate God.
What surprises me, is that you reject even a reconstruction of the origins of anti-demiurgism in a Jewish milieu, as that proposed by scholar Carl Ben Smith (distinct from our Ben with an identical surname) in No Longer Jews: The Search for Gnostic Origins.
Again I think you're not understanding what my position is.

You are free to disagree with this author, but even so, I would not justify a so dogmatic and insistent negation of early anti-demiurgism as dualism. Especially when so many scholars seem to be inclined with that idea.
My contention is that Marcion viewed the world from a top-down perceptive, where the Higher God was above, below him was Isu Chrestus, below him was YHWH, below him were the archons, and below them was the world. Most gnostics kept this hierarchy concept, like Bythos emanating an Aeon who would emanate another and so forth until Sophia/Achamoth, the last one, created Yaldabaoth/Abraxas.
My difference with Stuart is that I think Cerdon or Marcion wrote the Earliest Gospel, de facto making Jesus descending on earth and not more only in outer space and Sheol. The Barabbas episode is the smoking gun, in my view, that proves this marcionite priority and marcionite dualism in the field of gospels. About the epistles, I follow humbly Earl Doherty without no claim of originality.

I guess this is where I differ from both of you, because I don't see the earliest Gospel even touching on these ideas. The earliest Gospel was written for a sociopolitical reason. Gnosticism, which was pre-existing, just became attached to it because that's what gnosticism does.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Giuseppe »

Stuart wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:08 am 20:1-8 is about John's baptism. What has that to do with descent into the land of the dead?
the parallelisms are:
  • Jesus's identity is tested in both the cases
  • The test on Jesus becomes a test on a different person: on the demiurge (is he a tempter?), on John the Baptist (is he a tempter?)
  • The test assumes a distinction between a superior origin and an inferior origin: between the Good God and the demiurge, between a human baptism and a divine baptism
  • The questionners are Judaizers: the OT prophets and the pharisees.
Last edited by Giuseppe on Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Giuseppe »

This quote:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 am I don't insist that there was a Jewish origin for anti-demiurgism. I reject that Marcion, Cerinthus, Velntinus, Cerdon, Menander, et al. were anti-demiurgists.
...seems to be in contradiction with this:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 amLatter gnostics could have been radicalized and become more vitriolic towards creation and its creator; but most of the information is coming from their critics, who are saying that they hate truth, therefore they must hate God.
Apart this, another great contradiction I see in your view: you concede easily that for Jews the Pagan gods were reduced to evil bastard demons, but the vice versa for you doesn't hold just as easily: that some ex-Jews or ex-nohaides reduced the Jewish god to an evil (=cursed) god.

And we have evidence of this Pagan reduction of YHWH to a moral monster:

"When the Jews lost in battle, the Greeks offered sacrifices to the gods"
and, "when the revolt was suppressed, they instituted an annual memorial".

...if the god in question [=YHWH] was directly involved in the war

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=84&start=90#p31742
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 amtheir critics, who are saying that they hate truth, therefore they must hate God.
That is the strongest argument by you, but Celsus (an independent witness without dogmatic interests in game) secures me that it was not the case, that their critics were sincere at least on that point: that Marcion et alia hated YHWH.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:15 am This quote:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 am I don't insist that there was a Jewish origin for anti-demiurgism. I reject that Marcion, Cerinthus, Velntinus, Cerdon, Menander, et al. were anti-demiurgists.
...seems to be in contradiction with this:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 amLatter gnostics could have been radicalized and become more vitriolic towards creation and its creator; but most of the information is coming from their critics, who are saying that they hate truth, therefore they must hate God.
There isn't a contradiction here. I'm making a distinction between Jewish Gnostics (bc 100 - ad 100), from "Marcion, Cerinthus, Velntinus, Cerdon, Menander, et al", and "Latter [sic] Gnostics." I should have emphasized the "could" because it is not a qualifier of absolute, but probability.

The only Gnostic group that I'm aware of that had an unambiguous disdain for the demiurge were the Cainites. When they came about is questionable, probably about 150 ad.
Apart this, another great contradiction I see in your view: you concede easily that for Jews the Pagan gods were reduced to evil bastard demons, but the vice versa for you doesn't hold just as easily: that some ex-Jews or ex-nohaides reduced the Jewish god to an evil (=cursed) god.
I never conceded that. I actually don't know where you got that from. As far as I care, YHWH is just another pagan god, no different than Hadad or Ba'al.

Jews also participated in the practice of syncretism, partook in the mysteries of Dionysus and Osiris.

Now if you're saying that gentiles thought YHWH was evil, well I'm sure there were some, but that doesn't make it universal. Some gentiles would have to think highly of YHWH to convert to Judaism and become a proselyte, correct? You're not thinking of this with nuance.

No, my line of thought is Judaism -> Gnostic Judaism -> Noahide -> Marcion. Marcion was orthodox in his Noahidism.
And we have evidence of this Pagan reduction of YHWH to a moral monster:

"When the Jews lost in battle, the Greeks offered sacrifices to the gods"
and, "when the revolt was suppressed, they instituted an annual memorial".

...if the god in question [=YHWH] was directly involved in the war

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=84&start=90#p31742
I'm not understanding this. Can you elaborate?
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:15 amtheir critics, who are saying that they hate truth, therefore they must hate God.
That is the strongest argument by you, but Celsus (an independent witness without dogmatic interests in game) secures me that it was not the case, that their critics were sincere at least on that point: that Marcion et alia hated YHWH.
Celsus is on shaky ground and both Ben and Stuart have offered valid criticisms against your usage of him.

Even if Celsus can be called an independent witness, what is the quality of his arguments? As far as I can see--from what remains of him--he's just as bad as Lucian. (Wasn't Celsus a student of Lucian? I can't remember). Celsus isn't writing a definitive catalog of Christians and their beliefs. He's arguing that they're all superstitious morons wasting their time over things that don't exist. He doesn't care about the finer details of what they believe, the differences or the similarities. He only cares about one thing. Criticizing these foolish people, and lumps Marcionites and Jews together equally.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Giuseppe »

1) from the link above, there is this interesting quote/image:
Image
Please read it entirely.

2) Celsus cares to point out that he knows the presence of Christians who assume that the creator is "opposed" to a supreme god, and in another point he says that that same "opposed" god is "accursed", too. Stuart has not denied it. To my knowledge (he can correct me at any moment), he believes that, even if Marcion was "Jew", there were a lot there out, before during and after Marcion, of which there is no doubt about their fanatic anti-demiurgism.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Stuart »

The Diaspora revolt is known to us as the Kitos War, a corruption of the Roman general, Lusius Quietus, who put down the Jewish revolt, "quieted them", and from which our English word "quiet" comes from. This was not a Christian war. There is no evidence or even lore of Christian involvement.

What connection this conflict has to Christians is beyond me.
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Giuseppe »

Some scholars see in what happened during the Kitos War, i.e. examples of typical religious monotheistic fanatism against Pagan idols (think about ISIS), a possible plausible reason that moved some marginal Jews of Alexandria to abandon the cult of YHWH.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Yeah I'm reading it and I'm not seeing what the fuss is. Jews believed YHWH was involved in their wars. He was their Man of War after all.

I don't see how this proof of Marcion showing hatred to YHWH.
2) Celsus cares to point out that he knows the presence of Christians who assume that the creator is "opposed" to a supreme god, and in another point he says that that same "opposed" god is "accursed", too. Stuart has not denied it. To my knowledge (he can correct me at any moment), he believes that, even if Marcion was "Jew", there were a lot there out, before during and after Marcion, of which there is no doubt about their fanatic anti-demiurgism.
You're being hyperbolic. What Celsus says is irrelevant as I'm concerned. And Stuart... I like his theories, but Ben's Greek seems more graspable, and he said what I said, that the definition of ἐναντίος has two meanings; and that you are using the one because it's more convenient for your argument, while I'm using the other because it fits the context of Book V, chapter 61. Now Book VI, chapter 51, you might have something. But again I point out the problems with Clesus: he absolutely doesn't have a full, complete understanding of these theologies--because he doesn't care--and he is talking about traditions in his day, 175 ad - 220- ad (pick your flavour). Did the Marcionites by then have a hatred for YHWH? For sake of argument, I will say yes. I won't even try to give myself wiggle room. I will say yes, all of them did. But Giuseppe, my interest isn't what later Marcionites believe. Again that's why I don't use Esnik or Ephraim. I'm not saying that they're wrong for what they know. Only that my interest is Marcion himself, and those in his time, 120 ad - 150 ad. You would be surprised how quickly traditions begin to evolve, even when the leader is alive.

So I'm not disagreeing with you fully, and honestly I never have. I just think you should be more cautious and sceptical.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: YHWH, not Judas, was the original betrayer

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Stuart wrote: Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:20 pm The Diaspora revolt is known to us as the Kitos War, a corruption of the Roman general, Lusius Quietus, who put down the Jewish revolt, "quieted them", and from which our English word "quiet" comes from. This was not a Christian war. There is no evidence or even lore of Christian involvement.

What connection this conflict has to Christians is beyond me.
Well my thinking is that the bedrock for Christianity was laid during and after the Kitos revolt. What Giuseppe is saying is that there were Jews during this time who had a wavering of trust in their god, and this eventually evolved into a hatred of a god who betrayed them.

BTW, why are there no rabbinical sources about Kitos? It's like a Void Century for them. They make one passing remark about Trajan's Day, but this could very well by a confusion for Hadrian.
Post Reply