Klinghardt tried with Mark as the source of *Ev but failed. I don’t know if anyone else has attempted this.
The only thing left is to ask a question from the OSI physical layer, which is 3 levels lower than the texts.
What’s the book for? It is a medium for disseminating copies of content for commercial purposes (Bart’s books from Harper One) or for scientific and educational purposes (Bart’s CUP, OUP publications).
So we have a book for missionaries who pass on knowledge to the faithful orally.
Now we only need to find the one who first led the missionary action later imitated by the competition. A person fought by many enemies from different parts of the Empire because the boy had a truly nautical range of his activities and was able to create outposts efficiently. So he annoyed many at the same time in dispersed locations.
Only the success of the first gospel justifies the creation of subsequent gospels in the copy paste cut insert way.
Well, we don’t have much choice for such a candidate and his gospel
The OSI model is a model of 7 abstraction layers used in computer networking. At each level of abstraction, something that belongs in a higher layer relies on the next lower layer to carry out some set of functions, but the higher layer doesn’t need to know or account for any implementation details in that lower layer; it just need the lower layer to work in some uniformed and defined way.
E.g., the web browser on a desktop (which functions at the highest levels of the model) doesn’t know or care whether the computer is connected to the internet over wifi or ethernet or some completely different technology (which operate at the first two levels of the OSI model). Even though, if you consider what is actually happening at the physical level, the hardware and protocols for wifi and gigabit ethernet are very very different, as long as they expose the same functionality to the next layer up in the model, they are interchangeable.
The physical layer is the lowest of the 7 layers in the model.
As you wish. I hope you won’t regret it.
The OSI model facilitates process analysis. You cut the project into layers and separate the goals of the project, the goals of individual layers. This approach facilitates comprehensive design but also analysis of what we have from different angles.
The goal of an author is to be the best author. Only there aren’t any here.
There are only anonymous editors, ghost writers and their bosses.
If a comprehensive biblical analysis leads to the conclusion that the original text was supplemented with other texts, then this is credible research opinion in terms of one layer. On the other hand, dating the content of the text or saying that interpolations and editorial changes are secondary and took place after the appearance of the mythical original are completely unjustified conclusions. The answers to these questions lie beyond the layer of textual analysis, and only the physical layer can provide evidence – manuscript analysis. The same goes beyond the layer of text to separate the historical account from the literary fiction. Jesus Seminar defined about 18% as a historical account, Gerd Ludemann about 5%. These collections do not overlap. Perhaps these layers cannot be separated.
For biblical scholars, Marcion is a theologian who, in order to defend his theology, built a separate church structure, winning the competition on the mass market. So completely by accident and on the occasion of a noble fight for doctrine. What’s the meaning of that? It puts the essence of the matter in reverse.
Marcion is a leader who looks for the best solutions in all layers of the managed project. Because this is the role of a leader in every project. The leader does not write books alone because his people are unable to evaluate them impartially in comparison with other proposals. The leader evaluates the solutions in each layer. He makes decisions. He sends men on missions unlike Paul. Paul, who repeats the same cycle all his life – arrived, founded, left and lost. A dramatically moving story for the audience about a brave but resistant to his own experiences hero. Veni, fundavi, discessi, perdidi. Again and again..
The conclusions of specialists matter – but only in the layers in which they specialize.
…At each level of abstraction, something that belongs in a higher layer relies on the next lower layer to carry out some set of functions, but the higher layer doesn’t need to know or account for any implementation details in that lower layer; it just need the lower layer to work in some uniformed and defined way.
…The physical layer is the lowest of the 7 layers in the model.
Am I the only one who finds it amusing how closely this concept mirrors the speculations of some early gnostic sects?
plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
Hot… Coming back to the topic, these two layers are the author’s layer and the content source layer. Religious imagination, literary workshop, creation, editing are on the side of the former. Literary, religious and cultural traditions constitute the core of this second layer. I am generally full of flaws, but this does not change the fact that dating a text that is the quintessence of the historical policy of Christianity by its content is an illegitimate conclusion. Just like Newtonian time or Einsteinian dice. The author of the first gospel took a risk. Too big to sign paper. Fortune favors the bold. Market respond was clear. The author of the next gospel knew exactly what he was dealing with. Ludemann by the second author is an apologist. 5% historical account? bad joke. Condemned, Crucified, Resurrected. That’s it. Short story. True? Who cares? When, where and why are the questions that bother everyone, not some dietary recipes from Paul. It turned out once again that people do not want information, they just want to feel informed.
Ignosis . nice. I believe in the consistent pursuit of goals by serious, committed people. Paul’s narrative and the story of Pauline Corpus (drawn beautifully by Zuntz) is simply the best prepared part of this whole contrived tradition. In a sea full of ghost writers, no original author is swimming.
I rely on the great achievements of biblical science, I reject only unfounded conclusions where other criteria must be used.
Marcion may have been a mainly theologian before he succeeded. After that, only his Church, missionary success, and competition with others mattered. Same for his competitors. It meant a brotherly dirty fight. As always.
At the beginning of the company I founded, I had to know and do everything. I knew every technical, IT, marketing and legal aspect, I did accounting. I rented a desk in a coworking company so that I didn’t have to buy coffee and clean the office myself. And I started hiring people.
When I left, I had no idea what exactly we were selling and to whom. I didn’t know how the systems we use work. I accounted for Key Performance Indicators for 5 closest associates. With the rest of the people I played soccer or talked about private matters.
Marcion’s theology had NO influence on what happened. It’s like judging Bill Gates as a businessman in 2020, through the prism of the first version of DOS from 1990. It’s not worth much.
Marcion could have been a legendary figure. From the testimonies we learn that he was a disciple of Simon Magus, that he was a disciple of Simon Magus’ disciple, that John the Evangelist expelled him. Some testimonies say that he was from a generation close to the disciples of Jesus, others that in 144 he was excommunicated. Full of unreliable information. I am most convinced by Irenaeus’ complaint that his disciples are leaving him and going to the Marcionian church. Such a real human claim. A plaque from some village indicating the first dedicated house of prayer known to us. An anonymous prologue to the gospel of John that Marcion’s book collection was not his – these were the letters and writings of the brothers from Pontus obedient to the orthodox.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)