The Gospel According to Marcion? Is This Being Taught at your Church under the Guise of "Under Grace."???
Share
Today at 12:33am | Edit Note | Delete
I (Brian) did NOT write anything below and don't agree with nearly all of it. The author speaks in the first person and is a self-confessed Ascetic Gnostic. He espouses their views. Since many Churches basically teach the Gnosticism of Marcion, particularly in saying that Jesus is a "Superior god" that can override G-d's previously given Laws, and the Gospel is a "Superior Testament' to Genesis through Malachi, and a "New Covenant' which replaces, instead of revises, the Covenants that came before. Most churches also preach that G-d can mostly be experienced by "personal revelation" such as revelations, visions, and other such events (which I do no argue with) and that these events, visions, voices, etc. hold more weight than Scripture (which I do take issue with). This is a very Gnostic concept. Marcion, like ancient and modern Gnostics also held that the Law given through Moses was a curse and burden given to the Jews because G-d felt they were ignorant and needed to be punished by a heavy burden, but G-d sent Jesus to release people from the "Curse of the Law." They also believed that once you reached a certain level of "Spirituality" or came to a "Revelation" of who Jesus really was (in their opinion, a teacher sent by G-d to tell people that G-d's Laws are a burden and the Commands of G-d are keeping them from Spiritual advancement) then this knowledge would save you! Just as churches preach today that if you say the prayer and intellectually believe and know (Gnosis in Greek) then you will be saved, even if you continue in willing sin (breaking the Law of G-d, as sin is defined in 1st John 3:4). Satan told Adam and Eve that G-d would bend His Laws for them, and instead of following G-d's Commands, the Spirit within them would show them what is Right and Wrong and they would surely not feel the "Curse of the Law' which is the penalty for breaking it.

So, review Gnosticism and see if a similar message comes from pulpits you know????


This is the Marcion site and the information from it. I am not the author nor do I endorse their beliefs. Though as a former Gnostic of sorts, I am familiar with the teachings.


from http://www.marcion.info/

Marcion's Bible

Marcion's New Testament consisted of Euangelion (meaning something along the lines of a rewarded for good news given to the messenger) which was two thirds of the Gospel of Luke, and Apostolikon which was 10 Pauline Epistles. These were a shorter Galations and Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Laodiceans (which was Ephesians), Philippians, Philemon and Colossians.

The Marcionites regarded the Mosaic Law, Sabbaths, Holidays, Fasting, Angels, Archangels and even Jehovah as things to be avoided in order to make spiritual progress. Therefore most references to these things in the New Testament were either added later in order to water down his doctrine, and present Christianity as a New Dispensation of Judaism, or in some cases Marcion mentions Jewish Prophets and observances himself as a bad example. In some cases these have simply been turned around later by editors.

The main differences between the Gospel of Luke and Euangelion, is that Euangelion starts around chapter 4. Therefore there is no virgin birth and Marcion's Isu Chrestos is a phantom. However he is still crucified in the end and bleeds. Marcion's text has been the object of ridicule because of this. Interestingly Marcion was a true Christian Evangelist, and didn't care much about logic of this sort. It was simply a life to be practiced, and the good news was to be shared. This is clearly where Marcion was not a Gnostic (although until I learn more, I am guessing that Marcion was the father of Gnosticism also - after all Nag Hammadi is dated late 4th century) as the Gnostics believe in receiving revelation directly from God in a creative process.

Marcion, the Stranger God and the Demiurge

Adolf von Harnack was a scholar of the history of Christian dogma a century ago, and the first to study Marcion thoroughly in modern times. He concluded that it makes little sense for Christians to retain the Old Testament.

In von Harnack's case this was because he regarded Marcion as the most important figure in the early church. I would go a step further and say that there was no Christianity resembling what we know today, that the New Testament never existed before Marcion, and that the original New Testament, the Euangelion and the Apostolikon was an outright rejection of the jealous God Jehovah, his law and all the unnecessary legalistic requirements like circumcision.

Marcion taught that the Archon, the Creator God or God of the Law who created our bodies and the world was of less importance than the unknowable Stranger God, the God who sent Isu Chrestos. It was essential for the Marcionites that Isu Chrestos was a ghost, as the true God was far too pure to take human form. The Marcionites saw Judaism as a very worldly religion, and Isu Chrestos came to replace legalism with mercy and love.

There are a lot of parallels with Gnosticism here. The Gnostics believed that there was creation before the creation of the physical world. Where there Gnostics before Marcion? The main source of Gnostic gospels was the Nag Hammadi library, but this was dated post Constantine. Marcion is not regarded as a Gnostic by most critics. The Gnostics relied heavily on a direct relationship with God, and personal revelations. Marcion differed not even slightly from modern Christians who strictly follow the book. Of course his book was without the Old Testament, and many of the other books in the New Testament which support the idea that Christianity is a new dispensation of Judaism.

Who were the Marcionites?

Marcion started the Marcionites around 140 AD, and they lasted for about three centuries, alongside Roman Christianity and the followers of Apollonius of Tyana.

Marcion was a wealthy merchant and excellent administrator. It appears that the connection between commerce and Christianity is a long one. After all don't many top salesmen refer to the Bible as a good story which has sold many people?

The Marcionites were celibate, vegetarian and prayed constantly. The oldest Christian church still standing is the Marcionite Synagogue with the inscription "Isu Chrestos" in Syria.
Marcion

Marcion wrote the first canon of the New Testament in AD 140. For centuries Marcion has been maligned as a heretic, since the Church Fathers like Tertullian accused him of taking the razor to the Bible and cutting out several of the Pauline epistles; Acts, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. In addition the only Gospel in Marcion's Bible is two thirds of Luke. Actually that's it. One Gospel and ten Pauline epistles, which means no Revelations and no Old Testament.

Christians like to tell us that Marcion changed the Bible to suit his theology. However it appeared to me from the beginning that before Marcion there was no documented history of Christianity as we know it. So for example there are no reliable historical contemporary accounts of Paul, Peter, Luke, Mark or even the Jesus that we think of today. Likewise archaeological New Testament fragments have been dated starting around 190 AD, again consistent with the first New Testament being written 140 AD.

In addition Bible scholars who actually question things have come to the conclusion that some of the Pauline epistles were added later than whoever wrote the first ones. Their conclusions are consistent with Marcion's Bible being the original text.
Isu Chrestos

Even more important than the fact that Marcion's Bible was very short are the number of radical political differences between Marcion's Bible and our modern day Bible. Firstly the hero of Marcion's Bible was called Isu Chrestos - not Jesus. An important point here is you don't see "Jesus Christ" in second century texts. So in the Bible of Marcion of Sinope "Isu Chrestos" appears instead of "Christ" and "Jesus". Also in the archaeological fragments mentioned earlier the scribes used the letters "IS" wherever Jesus Christ now appears. The inscription "Isu Chrestos" can still be seen on the oldest surviving Christian "Synagogue" in Syria.

The next difference is that Isu Chrestos was a ghost. The first three chapters of Luke where "Jesus" was born are missing. When you think about it they are missing in two of the synoptic Gospels too. There were no Gospels of Luke, Mark, Matthew or John in the second century. There was only "Euangelion" - the "Good News" of Marcion's single Gospel.

The fact is that Paul spoke of "my gospel" singular and warned us of other gospels. Read Marcion. It all takes on a whole new meaning!
Marcion's Dualism

It was important for the Marcionites that Isu Chrestos was a ghost. They believed that the world (and our bodies) were created by Jehovah, and that the world which Jehovah had created, his Angels and Archangels and the Mosaic law were a spiritual pitfall to be avoided. There weren't really any fallen angels in Marcion's theology. All angels were fallen, which is reasonably consistent with Gnostic teachings about the Divine Mother. Marcion does recognise the Divine Mother by the way (but not Mary - who makes no appearance).

Galatians was Marcions most important book. Marcion's Galatians 4:24-26 states:

4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth by the Law to the Synagogue of the Jews to bondage. The other gendereth higher than all Principalities, Virtues, Powers; even higher than any Lady ever named; not only in this Aeon but in the following one also, 4:26 which is the mother of us all.

Note: Most of the Marcion Bible was reconstructed simply by removing verses. Sections like the above, where verses needed to be rewritten are less common.

You are no doubt familiar with the following quote from the Bible. As you can see after reading the above example, it is original Marcionite text warning against Angels and Archangels:

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickidness in high places."

I believe also that is why Satan became the devil. He wasn't really a demon in the context of the Old Testament. But after Marcion, someone demonized him, and we can thank Marcion for making that possible through his association with Jehovah. It is important to note however that there is no serious reference in Marcion's Pauline text to the Devil and Hell as in Revelations. There is a brief mention to Gehenna in Euangelion (ie. Luke) as follows:

12:5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into Gehenna; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

Regarding Lucifer it could also be argued that Christian demology does not have firm roots in Judaism. Lucifer makes one appearance in the Old Testament ie. Isaiah 14:12

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"

The English translation of the original Hebrew text reads a little differently:

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, that didst cast lots over the nations!

Verse 9 also refers to Hell, but the Hebrew text talks of the nether-world. More importantly Lucifer is not mentioned. The day-star may refer to venus, and some scholars think that it refers to a Babylonian king. In any case it is a single reference amongst the entire Jewish scriptures, and not much to base a Lucifer myth on.

However that is not to say that Babylonian religion, worshipping Ishtar (venus) and involving child sacrifice has not been with us from the time this text was written to the present. In fact it would not be unreasonable to assume that the authors of some of the New Testament texts (like Revelations) had a vested interest in replacing the names of the gods worshipped in real life "Satanic" practices and using Satan and Lucifer as a smokescreen. However the information found in the Old Testament still accurately describes the deities involved in the depraved occult activities of today. These were described in the Old Testament as Baal or Beelzebub (the sun god), Astoreth or Ishtar (venus) and Molech.

The Marcionites believed that the God of Isu Chrestos was a higher God than Jehovah, and that consequently Isu Chrestos could not incarnate in human form. In contrast our souls were created by the God of Isu Chrestos. The Marcionites practiced a life of vegetarianism, celibacy and constant prayer. They believed that people that shunned the world in this way were free from the Mosaic Law which binds us. They believed that marriage was fornication.
Marcion and the Old Testament

When you read Marcion's Bible you will see that there are none of the references to the Old Testament Prophets, to Christianity being a new dispensation of Judaism, to Angels, Archangels and the Law of Moses. That is apart from those which are used as an example. Even the account of the Transfiguration where "Jesus" spoke to Moses and Elias, was placed very carefully by Marcion in order to point out their inferiority. It is actually through the later interpolations that Judaism and Christianity were entwined. This is not the case in Marcion's text. It is much simpler to read, and the meaning is much clearer.

Of course, if you don't know this already, the Old Testament pointers to Christianity like "A virgin shall conceive" and "They pierced my hands and my feet" simply aren't in the Jewish books from which the Old Testament was taken. This is very strange when you consider that otherwise the texts are very close.

So for example in the Old Testament we find in Isaiah 7-14

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

However let's have a look at an English translation of the Hebrew Prophets. It is the original text isn't it? Why do Christians never mention this?

"Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

Let's have a look at the supposed reference to the crucifixion in Psalm 22-16. In the Old Testament it says:

"For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet."

Now compare this with Writings Psalm 22-17 translated from the original Hebrew:

For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.

Notice how in the original Jewish text they parted his garments and casts lots. But guess what? None of that is mentioned in Marcion's Euangelion. See how they did it?
Conclusion

Books like the Torah and Marcion's eleven books were modified and cross referenced to create one religion - Judaeo-Christianity. However when the Jewish books and Marcion's books are read in the original they have nothing in common at all.

Most likely this was done partly or wholly because of the numerous religions in the Roman empire which were it's greatest threat to stability.

None of Marcion's original Bible has survived. Fortunately the Early Church Fathers criticized Marcion's New Testamant so much, that just about every verse has been compared with the modern Bible. That is how we know very nearly what was in it.

Marcion (the heretic) was such an awful threat to the Early Roman Church. Considering that most scholars believe that Marcion probably had no idea about any of this, and that his text was most likely the original, what were they afraid of? Were they afraid that they would be caught out altering the Scriptures?

"Against Marcion" by Tertullian

Most of what we know about Marcion comes from what the early Church Fathers wrote against him. The first mention of Marcion was in Apologia by Justin Martyr, a contemporary of Marcion. A century later Polycarp's pupil Irenaeus describes a confrontation with Marcion in Adversus Haereses which was taken further by the choleric Tertullian in Adversus Marcionem.

The most important outcomes are that we know that the Roman Church hated Marcion, and saw his Canon as a threat. It is almost certain that these "saints" spread lies about Marcion. We know almost exactly what was in Marcion's Canon as a result of these exhaustive criticisms, and considering the bitterness of the Church aginst Marcion it may simply be because his New Testament Canon is the original, thereby exposing the Church's own interpolations of his work.

Note that most of what was written against Marcion was long after his death. It was only when his original Scripture was mutilated that they needed to explain why it was different from Euangelion and Apostolikon.