I'm a simple man. I see a video on Marcion. I watch it. Thanks Jacob and Dr Lieu

@MrTebrown

4 ай бұрын

I laughed at this for 5 minutes.

Yes to more Marcion content.

I have the greatest respect for Dr Lieu. I was so blessed to have had her as my teacher at KCL all those years ago. Although I have no empathy for Marcion I know that Dr Lieu knows her stuff and makes wise decisions based on experience over many decades. People should listen to what she says. :)

@christianmichael8609

Ай бұрын

Here is an example of excellent highly perceptive exegesis of 1 Cor 12 by Dr. Lieu. Do you know of other videos with her lecturing on Paul? kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y2Fl0a9sp6zNc7w.htmlsi=N2c27pP-UkzuejDX

Every night there’s a new History Valley I feel like it’s a 🎉

Brilliant interview, thanks for introducing another Marcion scholar to me. I learned a lot. It is such a fascinating puzzle with so many missing pieces.

Thank you for hosting a formidable and careful scholar. It's great to hear Lieu largely confirm the greater antiquity of Marcion's Gospel vis-a-vis canonical Luke. To quibble a bit, the idea that Marcion's Gospel is reflective of a less-edited appropriation of proto-Luke than the more heavily edited appropriation of canonical Luke begs the question... in what exact ways did Marcion's Gospel differ from proto-Luke? If no specific passages, verses, or words are posited as different, then it seems to be a artificial distinction without a difference. This is to say, the Semler hypothesis is a more tentative version of the Schwegler hypothesis.

@Patristica

4 ай бұрын

I met Lieu this year and she truly is brilliant.

@mgbilby

4 ай бұрын

Absolutely. She was highly encouraging of my dissertation research on Luke 23.39-43 as a “convert-martyr story” when I presented it at NAPS 15+ years ago. Still remember that fondly.

@mcosu1

4 ай бұрын

Dr. Bilby, are you more in the camp of Marcion creating or adopting or redacting proto Luke?

@mgbilby

4 ай бұрын

@@mcosu1 I think Marcion was a publisher, possibly a light-handed editor, but certainly not an author in the typical sense of that word. Both the Evangelion and the Apostolos have two clear underlying sources--2/3rds of the Evangelion is a coherent Galilean Aesopian gospel championing the cause of the poor/beggars and slaves (= Qn, the real Q, not a collective scholarly hallucination), and a third of it (= early Mark) is about an anti-Roman wonder worker prone to debates over halakhic matters. 2/3rds of the Apostolos is likely authentic to the historical Paul as a visionary whose authority and work as an itinerant preacher and message of freedom from Torah rivalled the message and halakhic observance of Peter and James, and 1/3 of it (= part of Colossians, Ephesians, and 2 Thessalonians) is about Christ as a cosmic redeemer figure. These sources all have distinctive vocabularies and morpho-syntactical patterns, rather than a consistent authorial voice.

@mcosu1

4 ай бұрын

@@mgbilby great reply! Thank you!

Now, ponder you being a scribe ten years after the events at Golgata. You desire to write the story about the person called Jesus, whom everybody speak so fondly, or ghastly about. Think it through: What must you do, and where are your sources. How will you begin, and what style must you use to make the fans happy? Will you speak with, and have some correspondence with the survivors? Will they tell distinct but varying memories of the events? Like that of the memories of characters in a movie of the 1940s remembering the prohibition time, telling their lavish and fantastical stories about how it truly was back then. Of course it was! We know by common sense how these things evolve, is remembered, and loved strongly by nostalgia and philosophical reasons. It is a fantastic thing, the whole progression.

Amazing interview l learnt soo much

Very interesting!

Much appreciated!

Interesting that Marcion would have been accused of Simony, given the story that is told about Simon of Samaria later in the Book of Acts. I wonder about Tertullian’s linkage of Marcion with the Simonian, Ceedo being at the base of the Acts story

Her view of Marcion seems quite different than Vinzent

Please consider changing the outro clip. Think of all the listeners you wake up again in the end.

It only makes sense that Yeshua was preaching a different God from the old testament and the devil was trying to set him up the entire time to have him killed.

Ephraim and Eznk indicate "Marcion" was NOT necessarily a version of "Luke." Over in the Syriac regions, it was something LONG. As was the Syriac "gospel". I really discount everything said about Marcion by Irenaeus et al. If you think "Marcion" was a shipbuilder from Pontus, then I've got some swamp land in the artic to sell you. Marcion sounded like "Marqiyone." But Marqiyone was the ARAMAIC for something way different from a shipbuilder from Pontus. Simply ASK anyone who knows Aramaic what "marqiyone" means. And then you'll see how much Irenaeus and et al were MISINFORMING. It's "those of Mark." Every time you read or hear Marcion, instead go "those of Mark." So Irenaeus et al were misinforming about MARK. And those who followed Mark. Did you notice how Tertullian spoke of Mark AND Paul before "claiming" both of them to "his side?" Anyway, for ME, it's been EASIER to jettison the "shipbuilder from Pontus misinfo and INSTEAD follow the "those of Mark" trail. It isn't that hard to see who "those of Mark" were. Alexandria, the precursors of the Copts...that's one lot. The other? Well, if we stopped thinking of this and a particular work as fourth century...and placed them in the LATE-first...then Marqe and the Mimar Marqeh to the SAMARITANS would be the OTHER lot of "those of Mark." An implication here...the Mimar Marqeh may be CLOSER to a 70-115 c.e. INITIAL Euangelon than the "canonical" NT ever was. You will find the Copts giving some INCREDIBLE UNIQUE information on "mark." * Relative of Philo. * Youth in the LInen CLoth (means Mark was wriritng about HIMSELF in allegorical fashion. * HEBREW name JOHN...some BIG implications there. Relative of Philo...well, only two candidates with a first, non-Jewish name Mark or Marcus. Which narrows it down greatly. Seriously, it's time we stopped believing Irenaeus et al, the "those of John" lot who didn't LIKE the "those of Mark" lot. You have a MARK or MARQE late-first century writing or helping proclaim something in tandem with the Flavians. It is really TIED to any Euangelon for Vespasian becoming emperor or Titus destroying the temple and subjugating the Jews. It's an OCCUPATION "new law" for the 70-115 c.e. period. With some Epistles. And something akin to the Sermon on the Mount for the ANTITHESES. And the writer of Acts, somewhere just after 147 c.e. was still very much aware of this...because that writer was doing his OWN version of the ORIGINAL allegory...to create, fictionally, "Paul." Go look at Acts 7 and 21 in that regard.

@mgbilby

4 ай бұрын

To what specific citations of Ephrem and Eznik are you referring?

@GeorgeHall-geehall1

4 ай бұрын

@@mgbilby There ARE readers and studies that inform about what Ephraim and Eznik were looking at and calling "Marcion." Eznik and Ephraim are eastern, Syriac area writers. They do not seem to be dealing with a "version of Luke." It's a simple Google to find information on Ephraim the Syrian and Eznik of Kolb. You may also find that studies on their thoughts also are in the Diatesseronic studies. Because up TILL the fifth century, the Syriac regions worked with a LONG gospel, NOT "four." Four had to be FORCED on them.

@GeorgeHall-geehall1

4 ай бұрын

Quite simply put, we shouldn't think what Irenaeus and Tertullian say are the WHOLE of the information. When east talks of "Marcion," it's different to how "west" talks of "Marcion." And still the big joke..."Marcion sounds like "marqiyone." Marqiyone is ARAMIC for "those of Mark." Because we are filtered by Irenaeus and co, we are missing out on following a Line of Enquiry to do with "those of Mark." Those of Mark actually becomes a while interesting look at things itself. Really, I've gotten to know Irenaeus and co do a LOT of misinforming. and Disinforming. And their information on SAMARITANS, even, is that bad it's NOT funny. Did you know that Samaritans themselves NEVER heard of a "SImon Magus?" But they DID know a....MARK. Marqe, son of Tite/Tute. In Middle-Eastern languages, "Tite/Tute" was how TITUS' name was said. A Marqe, Mark...son of...(adopted?)...or associate of a TITUS... WHo wrote the liturgical MIMAR MARQEH? When? Fourth century or late-first? Then SAMARITANS would be a "those of Mark" group.

@mgbilby

4 ай бұрын

@@GeorgeHall-geehall1 I'm well aware of the scholarly literature. I'm asking for you to support your initial position (Eznik and Ephrem, in their citations of Marcion's Gospel, were not necessarily of the view that it was a version of Luke) with actual, specific evidence from the primary sources.

@mgbilby

4 ай бұрын

@@GeorgeHall-geehall1 The proposed etymology does not reflect Aramaic conventions or proper grammar. Μαρκιων is a Greek diminutive, essentially meaning "little Mark." If you wish to defend your position, please provide a comparable, documented example of "-iyone" ending meaning "of" or "belonging to" a person or party in a published Aramaic text.

But how qualified is she really? hahah. joking. That's amazing.

2nd century is where I see PARADIGMS changing...and where "dude from Nazareth" STARTS building as a paradigm. Mid-2nd century is where I see BOTH Acts AND a "Josephan" corpus being woven. And BOTH try to make out there's TWO Herod Agrippas. In fact, looking also as if they were PLAGIARISING from Sotah 41. So I would presume the writer had spent some time in Iudea tuning in to Sage discussion. perhaps between Kitos and Bar Kochba. I'm following my own investigation into whether the Peregrinus Proteus was a FRUMENTARII...a Hadrian-endorsed SPY and agent provocateur. You've never read Lucian and thought that was what he was describing? That mid-2nd century writer or forger...I especially look at what he's playing with Acts. CHapters 7 and 21 are going a whole different direction from the rest of Acts.

she is of the ancient school 😂.

Lol mor Drs,talk about doctoring scripture,unreal,do absolutely anything for a title off the elites.

@dayofthejackyl

4 ай бұрын

Are you implying some kind of conspiracy theory here? Do you think “the scriptures” you’ve read are undoctored?