THE GOSPEL OF ME - FOUND AGAIN!

Antoninus called “Pius” – there is no clear understanding of why Antoninus was so-called. Dio Cassius’ record of this Caesar is strangely missing for the most part. It is noteworthy that the “head of the Church of Rome” at the time was also called Pius. The New Advent Encyclopedia writes of him that he was “pope from about 140 to about 154 ("Adv. haer.", II, xxxi; cf. Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", V, vi) … During the pontificate of Pius the Roman Church was visited by various heretics, who sought to propagate their false doctrine among the faithful of the capital … [not only Valentinus but] Cerdon was also active in Rome at this period, during which Marcion arrived in the capital. Excluded from communion by Pius, the latter founded his heretical body (Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", III, iii) ... A great activity thus marks the Christian community in Rome, which stands clearly conspicuous as the centre of the Church. The "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. cit.) speaks of a decision of this pope to the effect that Jewish converts to Christianity should be admitted and baptized. What this means we do not know; doubtless the author of the "Liber Pontificalis", here as frequently, refers to the pope a decree valid in the Church of his own time. A later legend refers the foundation of the two churches, the titulus Pudentis (ecclesia Pudentiana) and the titulus Praxedis, to the time of this pope, who is also supposed to have built a baptistry near the former and to have exercised episcopal functions there (Acta SS., IV May, 299 sqq.; cf. de Rossi, "Musaici delle chiese di Roma: S. Pudenziana, S. Prassede").

Ephraim of Smyrna – i.e. “Polycarp of Smyrna” the man I argue in my Against Polycarp is the real founder of Catholic Christianity. Polycarpou = “fruitful” = Ephraim. Polycarp is otherwise an unknown name. Ephraim however is clearly a name of the messiah (cf. Jastrow). The arguments for Polycarp as founder of Christianity should be referenced in Against Polycarp.

the religion of a supposed “Jesus Christ” – Irenaeus explicitly says of the original followers of Mark (whom he now deems as heretics) that “those who prefer the gospel according to Mark separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible” (AFG 3).

“philosopher king” – Antoninus was an adherent to Stoic philosophy and his Meditations survive.

p. 30

In that eighth year [of Mark’s life]– i.e. 36 – 37 A.D. the year of the gospel (Passover to Passover)

I was there and witnessed it all firsthand and then later put it all down in writing – cf. Muratorian Canon (c. late second century A.D.) “those things at which [Mark] was present he placed thus [in his gospel].” Also Pope Shenouda III of the Coptic tradition in his Mark the Evangelist p. 27 “Some called [the Gospel of Mark] the "Book of St. Peter and His Follower Disciple". Father Chineau called him, " His dear secretary and translator" [ Marc, son secretaire et son cher interpréte.] Others said that Peter dictated the gospel to Mark. Others claimed that Mark wrote from the collection he had when he heard Peter, or from what he knew from him. Some even dared to call this Gospel, "Peter's memoir." Bizarre was the printing of these claims in our liturgy books when they published them in their countries. As in the case when Rene Basset published a Synaxarium in Paris about the Oriental Fathers, "Patrologia Orientales" and mentioned on St. Mark's feast on the 30 th of Baramoda, "He went to Peter in Rome and became his disciple. There he wrote his Gospel that Peter dictated to him, and preached in Rome."(8) That is what it appeared in French : "Marc, alla trouver Pierre à Rome et devint. son disciple. Ily êcrivit son evangile que Pierre lui dicta et l' annonça dans la ville" In order to express this wrong idea about the Book of Mark, they created an icon for St. Mark by the artist Angelico drawing Mark at Peter's feet, while preaching in Rome, with a caption in the book which read, : " Saint Marc assis au Pieds de Saint Pierre Prechant au Romains, note dans un livre ses paroles" Here we may say that the Gospel was Mark's and it wasn't dictated by Peter, but was from the filling of the Holy Spirit. Mark the apostle had no need to know from St. Peter any information about Lord Christ, he knew it very well as he witnessed God and saw His miracles from the start, beginning with the first one at the wedding in Cana of Galilee, as one of the seventy apostles. He knew it all as his house was the place where the apostles assembled and with them was Saint Mary, the Mother of God.”

what they say about me - i.e. that he is Marcion the antichrist.

to reveal something better - On the significance of Jesus as the “better” god in Marcion’s system – i.e. Chrestos see Embry “One of the most startling things in Justin's unfavorable review of Marcion is the surprising appearance of the word "Christians" as a commonly used title to describe the members of Marcionite churches. By AD 138, Marcionites could be found in "every nation." At this early time, there is some confusion about the correct spelling for "Christian." It is known that Marcion preferred to call Jesus the "Chrestos" (which means the Kind or Helpful One). "… [T]he spelling for 'Chrestos' (=the Good one) [is] derived from an ancient inscription to a Marcionite synagogue" (Daniel Jon Mahar. English Reconstruction and Translation of Marcion's version of To The Galatians. p. 1). Those 'orthodox' believers who were more allied with the Roman Ecclesia were already at this time proudly bearing the title "Catholic." By the time when The Acts of the Apostles was formally published about the middle of the Second Century, the word "Christian" had become very popular as a designation for believers in Jesus. Because of this, there was needed some kind of explanation about its origin. Not many know that the Sinaiticus manuscript has a peculiar way of spelling the word Christian. Everywhere this title appears, that Fourth Century manuscript spells it "Chrestian." Vaticanus, a manuscript of the same age, utilizes a slightly transitional spelling: "Chreistian." This surely is strong evidence about Marcion's real role. Not only is Marcion's original spelling for "Christian" still evident in such important manuscripts, this also indicates directly the strength and extent of Marcionite effects on the entire Christian community, including its scholars. There is still some bifurcation between the words "Catholic" and "Christian" today. In AD 49, Rome experienced disturbances in the Jewish community that had been provoked by the preaching of "Chrestus" (based on the account of Suetonius in J. Steven's New Eusebius. no. 2, p. 1). "[Aquila] and his wife Priscilla had recently left Italy because an edict of Claudius had expelled all the Jews from Rome" (Acts 18:2, Jerusalem Bible). It seems notable at this time (AD 49) that "Jews" in general were expelled, and not simply followers of "Chrestus" or "Chrestians." "Was it because at this early date the Roman authorities did not or could not clearly differentiate between the Christians and the Jews?" (Wilson. Marcion… p. 25). The presence of the Gentile title "Chrestus" in Rome implies also the presence of an accompanying Gentile-oriented Gospel. Some Jews seem to have loudly voiced a degree of intolerance upon hearing this proclamation of "Chrestus." In Vaticanus and Sinaiticus it is not possible to discover how Jesus' main title (Christ) was spelled. A scribal device called "nomina sacra" was employed as a emphatic technique to highlight special words. The highlighted words were shortened. Because of this, the scribes left out the main vowel every time. Most Greek editions restore the vowel as an iota ("i"). By making a back formation from the Sinaiticus' "Chrestian," the word "Chrestos" appears as the proper title for Jesus. Through this logical method, it can be reasonably argued that Jesus' normal title should be fully spelled "Chrestos" throughout Sinaiticus. Besides the two oldest Greek New Testaments from the Fourth Century, and in addition to the oldest dated church inscription (AD 318), there is an abundance of ancient testimony that shows that the title "Chrestus" for Jesus was very popular among "common" Christians. The two titles "Chrestus" or "Chrestian" are referred to in the following written sources: Tertullian (AD 210), The Eighth Sibyl (AD 200), Theophilos of Antioch (AD 170), Marcus (AD 145), Apocalypse of Elijah (AD 100), Suetonius (AD 124) and Tacitus (AD 116). There is even a disputed inscription (now lost) from Pompei (AD 79) that is believed to have contained a reference to this lost title of Jesus. The ruling theologians of orthodoxy denounced the spelling "Chrestus" as based on ignorance. Lactantius (AD 310) said: "The ignorant are accustomed to call Him 'Chrestus'" (ANF. Vol. 7, p. 106).

[The Savior] was merely my supporting witness – a Marcionite idea (Jesus was not the messiah only “his messenger”) which made its way to Mohammed and Islam.

they use non-existent witnesses – i.e. that the names on the Catholic gospels are made up or derive their origins from Mark.

the concocted “Acts” – i.e. the Acts of the Apostles which the Marcionites and other early Christian communities had never heard of or did not use cf Irenaeus, Tertullian etc.

I am the real person behind all these invented personalities – i.e. he is the Mark of the “gospel of Mark,” the John of the “gospel of John,” and “Luke” actually comes from a corruption of the Aramaic form of John – i.e. l’yukhanon.

My followers are martyred in the thousands - On the Marcionite interest in martyrdom New Advent“the Marcionites differed from the Gnostic Christians in that they thought it unlawful to deny their religion in times of persecution, nobly vying with the Catholics in shedding their blood for the name of Christ. Marcionite martyrs are not infrequently referred to in Eusebius' "Church History" (IV, xv, xlvi; V, xvi, xxi; VII, xii). Their number and influence seem always to have been less in the West than in the East, and in the West they soon died out. Epiphanius, however, testifies that in the East in A.D. 374 they had deceived " a vast number of men" and were found, "not only in Rome and Italy but in Egypt, Palestine, Arabia, Syria, Cyprus and the Thebaid and even in Persia". And Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus in the Province of the Euphrates from 423 to 458, in his letter to Domno, the Patriarch of Antioch, refers with just pride to having converted one thousand Marcionites in his scattered diocese.”

p. 31

using my own material – cf. Tertullian Against Marcion Book 1 “

p. 32

the gaping hole in the surviving history of the last seventy years – i.e. 67 – 137 A.D. There really is no history of Judaism, Samaritanism or Christianity of any reliability in this period. It seems universally agreed in all of these traditions that “orthodoxy” was only “re-established” in the period of Antoninus after a long period where “heresies” dominated the earth and “truth” was driven underground.

then you will die a horrible death - Scholars typically ignore the fact that Catholic Church Fathers positive opinion of Antoninus and claims that he did not persecute them does not at all mean that other “heretical” forms of Christianity were similarly treated. Even the Catholic New Advent Encyclopedia writes “There can be no doubt, however, that persecution did take place in the reign of Antoninus, and that many Christians did suffer death. The pages of the contemporary apologists, though lacking in detail, are ample proof that capital punishment was frequently inflicted.” Also “Antoninus Pius “In his "Apology" to Marcus Aurelius he speaks of "letters" addressed by Antoninus Pius to the Larissæans, the Thessalonians, the Athenians, and to all the Greeks, forbidding all tumultuous outbreaks against the Christians. The edict found in Eusebius (op. cit., IV, 13) is now looked on by most critics as a forgery of the latter half of the second century. In the past, Tillemont, and in the present, Wieseler stand for its genuineness. "It speaks in admiring terms of the innocence of the Christians, declares unproved the charges against them, bids men admire the steadfastness and faith with which they met the earthquake and other calamities that drove others to despair, ascribes the persecutions to the jealousy which men felt against those who were truer worshippers of God than themselves."

The same methodology exists among the Jews – cf. Schechter’s article on the rebellious elder viz. “an elder who defies the authoritative rabbinic interpretation of the Mosaic Law. In the period when the Sanhedrin flourished this was a capital offense, punishable by strangulation (Sanh. xi. 1). This is based on Deut. xvii. 8-13, and according to the Talmud refers not to an ordinary man who refuses to abide by the decision of the priest or the judge, but to a regular ordained rabbi, or a judge, or an elder over the age of forty, or one of the twenty-three jurists constituting the minor Sanhedrin of a city or town. If such a judge dared to defy the decision of a majority of the major Sanhedrin, he became liable to the penalty of strangulation. R. Meïr, however, would convict only an elder whose opposition concerned a criminal act which, if committed unintentionally, would entail a sin-offering, or, committed intentionally, would be punished with excision (=). According to R. Judah, the elder could be convicted only of a schismatic decision concerning a law which had its origin in Scripture, but the interpretation of which was left to the Soferim. The mode of procedure in such cases of contumacy is related in the Mishnah. There were three tribunals (in Jerusalem), one at the foot of the Temple hill (Mount Moriah), another at the entrance to the court of the Temple, and another at the granite corridor (=) of the Temple. The associate judges, with the accused, came before the tribunalat the foot of the Temple hill. The accused pleaded: "Thus and so have I expounded the Law, and thus and so have my associates; thus and thus have I taught the people, and thus have my associates." The judges of the tribunals, if they had any tradition bearing upon the case, gave their opinion; if not, they betook themselves to the tribunal at the entrance to the court of the Temple, where the same proceeding was repeated. Finally, they all appeared before the highest tribunal at the granite hall of the Temple, whence came the interpretation of the Torah. The Great Sanhedrin rendered a decision. Should the elder still maintain a schismatic position and persist in asserting it, he became liable to punishment. In this event he was brought before the supreme court for trial, conviction, and execution. According to R. Akiba, the execution took place on the first festival following his conviction, when, as a rule, the people were gathered together in Jerusalem, so "that the people may hear and fear." R. Meïr thought such a delay cruel, and would have had the culprit executed immediately after his conviction, which would be followed by a proclamation announcing the execution. The rebellious elder was classed with three other offenders: one who incites to idolatry (=), a rebellious son, and a perjured witness. In all these cases the execution was publicly announced (Sanh. 89a). The question whether the supreme court might pardon the rebellious elder and overlook the insult done it by his dissent is a controverted point, and the opinion of the majority was that pardon was not permissible, as this would increase the number of schisms in Israel (Sanh. 88a and b).

someone else will follow me – the Persian messianic claimant Shuriak called Mani certainly claimed to be this figure (see the so-called “Acts of Archelaus”) as well as Mohammed long after him. Various Jewish messianic prophets can also be argued to have claimed to fulfill this role too especially Jacob Frank.

p. 33

he will be great from me – cf the Peshitta version of

communities all across the world which have remained … true to me -

To my followers in Egypt – New Advent Encyclopedia “The Church of Alexandria, founded according to the constant tradition of both East and West by St. Mark the Evangelist, was the centre from which Christianity spread throughout all Egypt, the nucleus of the powerful Patriarchate of Alexandria. Within its jurisdiction, during its most flourishing period, were included about 108 bishops; its territory embraced the six provinces of Upper Libya, Lower Libya (or Pentapolis), the Thebaid, Egypt, Acadia (or Heptapolis), and Augustamnica. In the beginning the successor of St. Mark was the only metropolitan, and he governed ecclesiastically the entire territory. As the Christians multiplied, and other metropolitan sees were created, he became known as the arch-metropolitan.”

my other adherents … among the Samaritans - The surviving orthodoxy and much of the liturgy of the Samaritans was established by a figure named Mark – or Marqeh son of Titus – in the late first century/early second century A.D. (Kippenberg, Stenhousen, Boid etc.)

Preserve my seat in Tiberias – the Jews apparently were denied control of the capitol of Galilee. Al Fath claims it went to the Samaritans.

You still live in places like Edessa - On surviving Marcionite communities in the Near East see the Bauer on the Edessan Chronicle, Acts of Archelaus, the Armenian bishop Eznik of Kolb among other documents.

when my comforter returns – cf Acts of Archelaus as well as various Manichaean references to Mani as the Comforter (or “Paraclete”)

Do not fret that Galilee, Samaria and Judea are off limits to us any more - After the bar Kochba revolt Hadrian banned all people of Jewish blood from setting foot in Palestine. The assumption here is that must have extended to members of the various Jewish-Christian heresies as well.

Edessa shall be our gathering place – Bauer makes clear that Marcionitism was not only the officially recognized religion of “Christianity” here but moreover we can see that it was also the state religion too. See also ““Marcellus” viz. Marcion in the Acts of Archelaus.

the lands of Shem – i.e. Syria

p. 34

many thousand refugees from the last conflict – the Chronicles of Edessa emphasize the beginning of Antoninus’ reign as bringing with it a significant influx of Marcionites. See also the Acts of Archelaus for this type of scenario playing itself out over time as well as the remembrance of a “little Mark” from much earlier.

[Edessa] sits between the two great powers of the world - i.e. Persia and Rome