Revelations of Lesser Gods: the Heresy of Christian Anti-Judaism and the Logic of a Demiurge for Nostalgic Israel By

Revelations of Lesser Gods: The Heresy of Christian Anti-Judaism and the Logic of a Demiurge for Nostalgic Israel By Glen Jody Fairen A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy RELIGIOUS STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA © GLEN JODY FAIREN, 2015 ii Abstract In the rush to (correctly) reclassify early “Christianity” as “Jewish,” scholars have made a few dubious assumptions. On one hand, while vigorously defending the “Jewishness” of some “Christianities” such as those found in the New Testament, scholars are just as quick to assume others “Christianities,” such as Marcion and the Apocryphon of John, were not, nor ever could have been “Jewish,” despite similarities to figures like Paul or texts such as John or Matthew. Indeed, considering the rhetorical vitriol surrounding the scholarly claims of what was “Jewish” and the lack of evidence that either Marcion or the Apocryphon of John held to any animosity towards “Judaisms” it appears that the relative “pro-” and “anti-Jewishness” of a given discourse is a cipher for more modern issues and concerns. Therefore, by first looking at how Marcion was represented in antiquity, and later reconstructed by scholars such as von Harnack, it will be argued that this early Christian “heretic” was not “anti-Jewish,” (however this is problematically defined) but, because of the vague similarities between his understanding of Jesus and the “Aryan Christ,” Marcion has easily been marginalized by modern scholars as the “heretical” forerunner of the Christian antisemitism. Next, by examining how the Apocryphon of John supposedly misappropriates “Judaisms” and as such can not be properly “Jewish,” (as opposed to Paul or John) it will be argued that this is not as a reflection of the ideological options available to ancient Jews, but is simply a convenient method of rebranding what used to be “heretical,” as that which is now “anti-Jewish.” And finally—after taking into account that ancient “Judaisms” were hardly stable, self- evident or monothetic—it will be shown that, when both Marcion and the Apocryphon of John iii are divorced from the “pro-” or “anti-Jewish” rhetoric of scholars, and then (re)considered in parity with other contemporary “Jews” and “pro-Jewish Christians,” that they were not “antisemitic heretics,” but were simply two possible ways in which the authority of “Nostalgic Israel” was preserved in antiquity for those who identified in someway with its mythic narrative and claims. iv Dedication. This thesis is dedicated to the memories of my mother Noreen Tweedle (1939-2014) and my father Tim Miller (1946-2014). v Acknowledgments. With a project this size, and one that has gone on for so long, it is almost impossible to thank everyone who in some way helped me with its completion. First and foremost I would like to thank my Supervisor Dr. Willi Braun who never doubted and who has helped me in more ways than he could possibly know. Thank you. I would also like to thank Dr. Andrew Gow. While not able to serve on the committee, has nonetheless been such a support for me during my time as a student and lecturer at the University of Alberta. I would also like to thank Janey Kennedy and Barb Heagle in O.I.S. As always, above and beyond what their jobs require and without their support and guidance I would have never made it this far. To my committee members I wish to give my thanks: Dr William Arnal (for the 3rd time!!), Dr. James Crossley and Dr Lorne Zelych. Their insights helped make this work the best it could be. I would also like to give a shout out to my friends and colleagues at the University of Alberta. Dr. Clayton Bench, Pat Hart and Mark Wheller. I can’t wait to hang out together at a conference and wave our doctorates at folks and pretend we know what we are talking about. And while not part of the department at the University of Alberta, I would like to thank my dear friends Larry Gasper and Jenn Babbs. I’m sure both would have fun at the doctoral waving and pointing out that we are indeed pretending. I would like to thank Melinda Noyes, not just for her help in editing, but for being there when I needed her. Much love. vi Finally, I would like to acknowledge the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the University of Alberta for their generous financial support during my doctoral program. vii INTRODUCTION: The More Things Change 1 SECTION ONE: Marcion-Ancient Representations, Modern Inventions Chapter 1: The Making of a Heretic. 14 1.1.1: Introduction 14 1.1.2: Whose “Historic” Marcion? Arnal, Lieu and Lincoln 17 1.1.3: The Sources: Marcion’s Life and Thoughts 26 1.1.4: Representing Marcion’s Christianity 40 1.1.5: The Myth of Marcion in Antiquity 49 Chapter 2: Marcion(s) in Modernity 52 1.2.1: Introduction 52 1.2.2: Harnack 53 1.2.3: Harnack’s Myth of Marcion 58 1.2.4: Harnack’s Marcion and anti-Judaism 62 1.2.5: The Other Marcion(s) of the Early 20th Century: Bauer, Knox and Blackman 68 1.2.6: Marcion(s) of the Present 74 1.2.7: Jesus the Jew, Marcion the Antisemite 81 1.2.8: Constructing a Pedigree 87 1.2.9: Hitler Made Me Do It! The academic doxa of Marcion’s anti-Judaism 102 Chapter 3 Apples and Dragons: Q, Marcion and the (De) Contextualization of Divine Wisdom 108 1.3.1: Introduction 108 viii 1.3.2: Q as Method 111 1.3.3: Where to Begin? The Problems in a (Re)construction of the Euangelion 116 1.3.4: Q and the Euangelion Jesus and Wisdom’s (De) Contextualization 128 SECTION TWO: John's Not So Secret Revelation Chapter 1: Christian....but Not Jewish Enough 140 2.1.1:Introduction 140 2.1.2: Jewish...but NOT THAT Jewish: Exceptions in the “Ways That Never Parted.” 145 2.1.3: The Jewish Matthew 152 2.1.4: The Jewish John 159 2.1.5: The Jewish Apocalypse of John 163 2.1.6: The Jewish Paul(s) 168 2.1.7: The Jewish Q 177 2.1.8: The Exceptions that Make the Rule 183 Chapter 2:The Weirdo at the Table: the Apocryphon of John and constructing “Christianity.” 191 2.2.1: Introduction 191 2.2.2: Qualities of Anti-Jewishness:Construction of Sophia and Divine Wisdom 200 2.2.3: Qualities of Anti-Jewishness: Genesis 1-3 204 2.2.4: Origins of Anti-Jewishness: Spiting the Divine and an Ignorant Creator 212 2.2.5: If Not Jewish Enough...Then What? 217 Chapter 3. A Demiurgical Bastard and the Oxymoron of Jewish Gnosticism 230 2.3.1: Introduction 230 ix 2.3.2: The Apocalypse of Adam and Jewish Gnosticism 238 SECTION THREE: Cipher Judaism(s) and a Game of Nostalgic Israel Introduction: The Problem as it Stands 244 Chapter 1: Look at all the Judaisms! 256 3.1.1: Introduction 256 3.1.2: Problemitizing Judaism(s) 260 3.1.3: Monotheism? 272 Chapter 2: Steve Mason, the ethnoi of the Judaens and the Case of the Vanishing Jews 280 3.2.1: Introduction: Steve Mason 280 3.2.2: Not Saying You Hate Judaism, But... 291 Chapter 3: A Game of Nostalgic Israel and the Rectification of the Demiurge 313 3.3.1: A Matter of Perspective 313 3.3.2: A “Pro-Jewish” Marcion? 314 3.3.3: A Jewish Apocryphon of John? 317 3.3.4: Redescribing 322 3.3.5: Donald Who? 328 3.3.6: Lets Play Nostalgic Israel 334 3.3.7: Its All Just a Game 346 3.3.8: Marcion, the Apocryphon of John and Salvaging Nostalgic Israel 347 CONCLUSION: Naming, Classifying and Taxonomy 355 BIBLIOGRAPHY 365 Introduction The More Things Change... One of the central issues within scholarship on emergent Christianities over the last few decades has been a re-evaluation of Christianity’s relationship to Judaism. For, while in the past scholars insisted on a definitive and early break between what eventually became “Christian” from what was understood to be “Jewish”1 by the end of the first century C.E., over the last few decades there has been a critical rectification of this “Parting of the Ways” model to one more accurately described as the “Ways that Never Parted” (Becker & Reed 2007). It is now standard for scholars to claim that many of the so-called earliest “Christian” innovations of what has been traditionally constructed as “Judaism” were not a breaking away or the invention of a new religion, but should more properly be understood as “Jewish” and / or in continuity with, and examples of, the variety of Judaisms of the period (Sanders 1983, 1985; Gager 2000; Becker & Reed 2007).2 1 Please note that the terms “Judaism”, “Judaisms”, “Jewish”, “Jew” etc., when used throughout this project, are not intended to imply a monothetic tradition or “religion” in antiquity. Indeed, considering the whole point of this project is to challenge the assumption of the existence of such a creature, and its use by scholars of early “Christianity” (another problematic classification) the use of the term(s) will parallel those of the scholars who insist on the existence of that “particular beast, Judaism in the Greco-Roman Age”. (Lightstone 2006 [1984], 5. See also Arnal 2005, 58; Crossley 2008, 173-193 and Sanders (1993) for a list of the stereotypes used for the invention of Judaism.) 2 For instance, while past scholarship saw Paul’s juxtaposition between Gospel and Law or the Gospel of John’s deification of Jesus as creative / demiurgical logos as a definitive “Christian” break with “Judaism,” in more recent scholarship they have been (correctly) reconfigured as simply examples of the multiplicity of options available to Jews in the ancient Greco-Roman world.

Load more