The Shocking Truth
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
JM
Jun 11, 2010, 2:49:27 AM6/11/10
to Reader's Round Table
In the Gospel According to Matthew, if you should search an on-line
text of the Authorized Version (King James) such as this one . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4380943
. . . for the word "repentance" you will find 11 occurrences of that
word, which, as a movement of faith, none will doubt to be essential
to any possible denominational flavor of Christian soteriology, i.e.
doctrines related to "salvation". But as one turns to the 4th Gospel,
which is attributed to the disciple "John," what do we find?
Not one occurrence of the word.
Go back to Matthew . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4380943
Scroll down through the highlighted hits and you will find that every
form of the word, such as 'repented' and 'repent' etc. is included in
that tally of 11 hits.
Go to Luke . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4609530
The number of hits, as you may see, is 14.
As for Mark . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4520748
Forms of the word "repent" occur 4 times, in that far shorter text.
--
Going back to Matthew, let us choose another word that all Christians
would agree no gospel of Jesus Christ can be without, and still be a
gospel of Jesus Christ: let us search the word, "forgive."
Matthew: 15
Mark: 11
Luke: 17
John: 0
At this stage of the investigation, you might well be thinking like,
something must be wrong here! A gospel of Jesus Christ without
forgiveness and repentance? It is a gospel that cannot serve the
Christian religion by itself, all on its own. It is absolutely
dependent on the other gospels, the Synoptic Tradition, for it to hold
any part with it at all--IF at all, depending on what may be
discovered about its origin; an apparently dark and conflicted one,
even so far on as into the 3rd century when Gaius of Rome (a highly
respected bishop or presbyter under the episcopate of Zephyrinus) was
refusing his approbation to the book for any proposed canon based on
his information that it had been authored by the heretic Cerinthus.
Due to these issues, and others that are little known or remain yet to
be discovered, the controversy rages on . . .
Let us do one more highly revealing search. We shall choose the word
"Jew".
A search of the entire Old Testament for the word "Jew" returns a
grand total of . . .
121 hits.
A search of the New Testament reveals . . .
202 hits.
Mathew: 5 hits
Mark: 6 hits
Luke: 6 hits
John: 71 hits
The remainder to be found of course, throughout the book of Acts,
Epistles and Revelations.
In the Synoptic tradition, for the most part, rather than seeing the
word "Jews" in the narrative, "priests, scribes and pharisees" will be
found. Where the adversary of Jesus is presented as "Jews" in John,
the synoptic tradition of Matthew, Mark and Luke, has priests, scribes
and pharisees--not "Jews."
There are those who say on strength of these numbers that the Fourth
Gospel is really no gospel of Jesus Christ at all, but an "anti-
Semitic tract" of far later origin that generally tends to be dated
from somewhere between 90-130 A.D. in the time of the great Gnostic
heresies that culminated, circa 144, with that of Marcion, who so
hated the Jewish Law that he desired to completely separate the
religion of Jesus Christ from its foundation in the Hebrew scriptures
of the Jews. He became notorious for his own copy of Luke which he
had expurgated of all references to the Old Testament.
Whether the Fourth Gospel pseudepigraphically attributed to the
disciple John was a production of the schismatic Marcionite Church
(which had grown to such an extent that the Catholic church at Rome
was in grave danger of being supplanted by it) or authored by his
immediate Gnostic forbears, such as Cerdon (Cerdo), Cerinthus or
Valentinus (the later not likely--so far out as his doctrines were),
notwithstanding, it came of the same Gnostic ferment which wanted to
deny a fleshly, truly human Jesus, to replace him with a Christ made
only of visible spirit. Marcion identified the God of the Jews as the
author of evil in the world, creator of the material world, a
"demiurge," a 'devil' who would not be father to the spirit but of the
flesh. Marcion's claim was that Jesus was son of another god, some
higher god which had nothing to do with the Jews.
Observe the following dialog between the Christ of the Fourth Gospel
and the "Jews" in the 8th chapter . . .
[33] They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in
bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
[34] Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever
committeth sin is the servant of sin.
[35] And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son
abideth ever.
[36] If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free
indeed.
[37] I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me,
because my word hath no place in you.
[38] I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that
which ye have seen with your father.
[39] They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus
saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works
of Abraham.
[40] But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth,
which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
[41] Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not
born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
[42] Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me:
for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but
he sent me.
[43] Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear
my word.
[44] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the
truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he
speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
--
What Jewish person could read that and not be horrified? What
Christian of any conscience, any understanding or affection for the
Jesus of Matthew, Mark and Luke, any fear for the God of the Old
Testament would not greatly sympathize with his Jewish brethren in
their horror of that?
Much of interest pertaining to recent scholarship on the "heresiarch"
Marcion may be found here . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope
Most interesting is the speculation drawn from recent readings in
Clement of Alexandria and Justin Martyr which would afford an earlier
date for the career of Marcion, to put him as a young man squarely
into the time of the earliest carbon date proffered for the oldest
extant textual fragments of the Fourth Gospel found at Alexandria.
Though Marcion's authorship of the Fourth Gospel had always seemed a
shoe-in for me, based largely on the tone of the above passage from
the 8th Chapter of "John," till now I have always had the 'devil to
pay' to try and get others interested in the matter to lend the least
credence to it, in view of the later date attributed by Tertullian to
the apex of Marcion's monstrous mischief, which he had set at 144 A.D.
But now that an earlier date is being proffered by respectable
scholars, I am right back up on my good ol' "John is Marcion is
Antichrist" hobby-horse and thus I ride, "hell bent for leather" dear
brethren and sisters.
--
JM
text of the Authorized Version (King James) such as this one . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4380943
. . . for the word "repentance" you will find 11 occurrences of that
word, which, as a movement of faith, none will doubt to be essential
to any possible denominational flavor of Christian soteriology, i.e.
doctrines related to "salvation". But as one turns to the 4th Gospel,
which is attributed to the disciple "John," what do we find?
Not one occurrence of the word.
Go back to Matthew . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4380943
Scroll down through the highlighted hits and you will find that every
form of the word, such as 'repented' and 'repent' etc. is included in
that tally of 11 hits.
Go to Luke . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4609530
The number of hits, as you may see, is 14.
As for Mark . . .
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4520748
Forms of the word "repent" occur 4 times, in that far shorter text.
--
Going back to Matthew, let us choose another word that all Christians
would agree no gospel of Jesus Christ can be without, and still be a
gospel of Jesus Christ: let us search the word, "forgive."
Matthew: 15
Mark: 11
Luke: 17
John: 0
At this stage of the investigation, you might well be thinking like,
something must be wrong here! A gospel of Jesus Christ without
forgiveness and repentance? It is a gospel that cannot serve the
Christian religion by itself, all on its own. It is absolutely
dependent on the other gospels, the Synoptic Tradition, for it to hold
any part with it at all--IF at all, depending on what may be
discovered about its origin; an apparently dark and conflicted one,
even so far on as into the 3rd century when Gaius of Rome (a highly
respected bishop or presbyter under the episcopate of Zephyrinus) was
refusing his approbation to the book for any proposed canon based on
his information that it had been authored by the heretic Cerinthus.
Due to these issues, and others that are little known or remain yet to
be discovered, the controversy rages on . . .
Let us do one more highly revealing search. We shall choose the word
"Jew".
A search of the entire Old Testament for the word "Jew" returns a
grand total of . . .
121 hits.
A search of the New Testament reveals . . .
202 hits.
Mathew: 5 hits
Mark: 6 hits
Luke: 6 hits
John: 71 hits
The remainder to be found of course, throughout the book of Acts,
Epistles and Revelations.
In the Synoptic tradition, for the most part, rather than seeing the
word "Jews" in the narrative, "priests, scribes and pharisees" will be
found. Where the adversary of Jesus is presented as "Jews" in John,
the synoptic tradition of Matthew, Mark and Luke, has priests, scribes
and pharisees--not "Jews."
There are those who say on strength of these numbers that the Fourth
Gospel is really no gospel of Jesus Christ at all, but an "anti-
Semitic tract" of far later origin that generally tends to be dated
from somewhere between 90-130 A.D. in the time of the great Gnostic
heresies that culminated, circa 144, with that of Marcion, who so
hated the Jewish Law that he desired to completely separate the
religion of Jesus Christ from its foundation in the Hebrew scriptures
of the Jews. He became notorious for his own copy of Luke which he
had expurgated of all references to the Old Testament.
Whether the Fourth Gospel pseudepigraphically attributed to the
disciple John was a production of the schismatic Marcionite Church
(which had grown to such an extent that the Catholic church at Rome
was in grave danger of being supplanted by it) or authored by his
immediate Gnostic forbears, such as Cerdon (Cerdo), Cerinthus or
Valentinus (the later not likely--so far out as his doctrines were),
notwithstanding, it came of the same Gnostic ferment which wanted to
deny a fleshly, truly human Jesus, to replace him with a Christ made
only of visible spirit. Marcion identified the God of the Jews as the
author of evil in the world, creator of the material world, a
"demiurge," a 'devil' who would not be father to the spirit but of the
flesh. Marcion's claim was that Jesus was son of another god, some
higher god which had nothing to do with the Jews.
Observe the following dialog between the Christ of the Fourth Gospel
and the "Jews" in the 8th chapter . . .
[33] They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in
bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
[34] Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever
committeth sin is the servant of sin.
[35] And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son
abideth ever.
[36] If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free
indeed.
[37] I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me,
because my word hath no place in you.
[38] I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that
which ye have seen with your father.
[39] They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus
saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works
of Abraham.
[40] But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth,
which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
[41] Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not
born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
[42] Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me:
for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but
he sent me.
[43] Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear
my word.
[44] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the
truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he
speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
--
What Jewish person could read that and not be horrified? What
Christian of any conscience, any understanding or affection for the
Jesus of Matthew, Mark and Luke, any fear for the God of the Old
Testament would not greatly sympathize with his Jewish brethren in
their horror of that?
Much of interest pertaining to recent scholarship on the "heresiarch"
Marcion may be found here . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope
Most interesting is the speculation drawn from recent readings in
Clement of Alexandria and Justin Martyr which would afford an earlier
date for the career of Marcion, to put him as a young man squarely
into the time of the earliest carbon date proffered for the oldest
extant textual fragments of the Fourth Gospel found at Alexandria.
Though Marcion's authorship of the Fourth Gospel had always seemed a
shoe-in for me, based largely on the tone of the above passage from
the 8th Chapter of "John," till now I have always had the 'devil to
pay' to try and get others interested in the matter to lend the least
credence to it, in view of the later date attributed by Tertullian to
the apex of Marcion's monstrous mischief, which he had set at 144 A.D.
But now that an earlier date is being proffered by respectable
scholars, I am right back up on my good ol' "John is Marcion is
Antichrist" hobby-horse and thus I ride, "hell bent for leather" dear
brethren and sisters.
--
JM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages