Origen Connects that the 'Sign of Jonah' to the Marcionite 'Circumcision'

I can't believe that I didn't see this before. I am Jewish and didn't even realize that baptism as originally conceived by the Marcion is rooted in the practice of circumcision. It is so obvious now it's embarrassing. I think everything will be plainly manifested to everyone (once we stop reinforcing our tradition assumptions and presuppositions).

I even think this understanding explains why eventually newborns received baptism.

If scholars actually read what is in the surviving Alexandrian commentaries on the gospel it would be readily apparent that much of what Morton Smith said about Secret Mark is borne out. All that we have done to further Smith's original argument is to note that the 'sign of Jonah' (Matt 16:1 - 4) necessarily derived from an original Aramaic association with the word siman. The word siman as we have already noted from Jastrow's Jewish Aramaic Dictionary took on a meaning like 'the mark' or 'sign of the removal of organs' especially with regards to slaughtered animals.

I have supposed that the 'sign of John' (Yonah is a diminutive form of 'John') must have meant something like - John's ritual castration before baptism. This is the siman which came from heaven which made a man perfect and which - I have argued - was the actual context of LGM 1, the first addition to the gospel of Mark in the Letterto Theodore's 'Secret Mark.'

The way we start to prove such an assertion is by looking at Origen's understanding of the 'sign of Jonah' story in his Commentary on Matthew. He begins by noting that:

and when tempting Him, they [the Jews] ask Jesus about a heavenly sign, let him know that we plausibly say that they were drawn away to the end that they might not believe in the miracles of Jesus; but not as to deserve forgiveness; for they did not look to the words of the prophets which were being fulfilled in the acts of Jesus, which an evil power was not at all capable of imitating. But to bring back a soul which had gone out, so that it came out of the grave when already stinking and passing the fourth day, [John 11:39] was the work of no other than Him who heard the word of the Father, Let us make man after our image and likeness. [Genesis 1:26]

To me it seems very intriguing that Origen should connect the 'sign of Johnny' with the raising of Lazarus and - as we shall see - the idea of a death baptism. Indeed in what immediately follows, Origen furthermore explicitly connects the 'sign of Johnny' with a superior form of circumcision which is the completion - even the perfection - of what was originally introduced by Moses:

Next let us remark in what way, when asked in regard to one sign, that He might show it from heaven, to the Pharisees and Sadducees who put the question, He answers and says, “An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall be no sign given to it, but the sign of Jonah the prophet, ” when also, “He left them and departed.” But the sign of Jonah, in truth, according to their question, was not merely a sign but also a sign from heaven; so that even to those who tempted Him and sought a sign from heaven He, nevertheless, out of His own great goodness gave the sign ... And the Saviour seems to me to conjoin the sign which was to come from Himself with the reason of the sign in regard to Jonah when He says, not merely that a sign like to that is granted by Him but that very sign; for attend to the words, “And there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet.” Accordingly that sign was this sign, because that became indicative of this, so that the elucidation of that sign, which was obscure on the face of it, might be found in the fact that the Saviour suffered, and passed three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. At the same time also we learn the general principle that, if the sign signifies something, each of the signs which are recorded, whether as in actual history, or by way of precept, is indicative of something afterwards fulfilled ... and that which is called circumcision is the sign of that which is indicated by Paul in the words: “We are the circumcision.” Seek you also every sign in the Old Scriptures as indicative of some passage in the New Scripture, and that which is named a sign in the New Covenant as indicative of something either in the age about to be, or even in the subsequent generations after that the sign has taken place. [Origen Comm. Matt. XII.3]

It should be remembered that Marcus Julius Agrippa is remembered in rabbinic literature for stressing that circumcision was not one of the ten commandments and therefore was not a heavenly commandment.

For those of my Gentile readers who can't understand why Origen would connect 'siman' with circumcision, let me give them a little history.

The following is a literal translation of the liturgy that is recited in Hebrew at a traditional bris. Any portion may be translated into English for your guests during the ceremony. We provide the translation to allow you to better understand the ceremony and to give you the option of choosing a section to be recited in English for your guests.

1. The infant is brought into the room by the Kvater, and all in attendance welcome him by saying: "Baruch HaBa!" - "Blessed is the newcomer!"

2. The baby is then placed on Kisay shel Eliyahu - The Seat of Elijah, and the mohel recites his prayer: "This is the seat of Elijah the Prophet, who is remembered for the good. I have longed for Your salvation, O God. I have hoped for Your salvation, O God, and I have performed Your commandments. Elijah, angel of the bris: What is yours is before you; stand to my right and support me! I have hoped for Your salvation, O God. I rejoice over Your statements as a person who finds a great treasure. May there be abundant peace for those who love Your Torah, and may there not be any obstacle before them. Fortunate is one whom You choose and bring close; such a person will dwell in Your courtyards..." Everyone responds: "We will be sated by the goodness of Your abode, the holiness of Your sanctuary."

3. The father turns to Mohel and states: "I am hereby prepared to fulfill the positive commandment that the blessed Creator has commanded me, to circumcise my son. I hereby appoint you, the Mohel, to be my proxy to fulfill this commandment."

4. The Mohel recites: "The Holy One, Blessed is He, said to Abraham our patriarch: 'Walk before me and be complete.' I am hereby prepared to fulfill the positive commandment that blessed Creator has commanded me to fulfill, that of circumcision. Blessed are You, God our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments, and has commanded us regarding circumcision."

5. As the Mohel circumcises, the father recites: "Blessed are You, God our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments, and has commanded us bring this child into the covenant of Abraham our patriarch."

6. All in attendance recite loudly, "Amen! Just as he has been inaugurated into the bris, so may he be inaugurated into Torah, the wedding canopy and good deeds!"

7. After the mohel finishes the procedure, the baby is diapered and wrapped, and is then held by one of the honored guests. Another guest takes the cup of wine, and recites the following blessing: "Blessed are you God, our Lord, King of the universe, who creates the fruit of the vine. Blessed are you God, our, King of the universe, who sanctified the loved one [Abraham] from the womb. He placed a mark in his flesh, and made a seal on his descendants with the sign of the holy covenant. Therefore, in this merit, Living God, our Rock, give charge to save the beloved soul within our flesh from destruction, for the sake of the His covenant that He placed in our flesh. Blessed are You, God, who contracts the covenant."

8. The baby is then passed to another guest, and another guest recites the naming of the baby: "Our Lord, and Lord of our ancestors: Establish this child for his father and mother, and may his name be called in Israel ___________ the son of _______________. May the father be happy with the issue of his loins, and may his mother rejoice in the fruit of her womb. As it says (Proverbs 23:25): 'May your father and mother be happy, and may those who gave birth to you rejoice.' And it says (Ezekiel 16:6): 'I passed over you and I saw you wallowing in your blood; I said to you, "By your blood shall you live!" I said to you, "By your blood shall you live!"' And it says (Psalms 105:8-10): 'He eternally remembers His covenant, the matter which He commanded to a thousand generations, the covenant that he made with Abraham, and the oath He made with Isaac. He established it as a statute for Jacob, for Israel an eternal covenant.' And it says (Genesis 21:4): 'Abraham circumcised his son, Isaac, at the age of eight days, just as the Lord had commanded him.' Give thanks to God, for He is good, for His goodness endures forever! Give thanks to God, for He is good, for His goodness endures forever! ______________ the son of ______________: May this young child become a great adult! Just as he has been inaugurated into the bris, so may he be inaugurated into Torah, the wedding canopy and good deeds!"

9. The attendees answer, "Amen." At this point, the mohel will bless the child and will say sometimes say some additional prayers. The ceremony ends in joyous singing, usually with the song, "Siman tov umazal tov."

Absolutely every phrase and concept that we have run across in the gnostic writings - the 'bridal chamber,' the gnostic throne, you name it - comes from an early Christian adaptation of the ancient rites associated with being established in the community of Israel. The same song is sung at traditional Jewish weddings.

There is a great deal written about the mystical significance of the 'siman tov' but the regular reader of this blog should realize what must have originally went on in Alexandria.

The Markan ritual demanded the true circumcision that transformed Jacob into Israel - i.e. castration. Just look at the narrative:

And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was strained, as he wrestled with him. And he said: 'Let me go, for the day breaketh.' And he said: 'I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.' And he said unto him: 'What is thy name?' And he said: 'Jacob.' And he said: 'Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel; for thou hast striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed.' And Jacob asked him, and said: 'Tell me, I pray thee, thy name.' And he said: 'Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name?' And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: 'for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.' And the sun rose upon him as he passed over Peniel, and he limped upon his thigh. Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sinew of the thigh-vein which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day; because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh, even in the sinew of the thigh-vein. [Gen 32:25 - 33]

I have noted a number of times in this blog that the Marcionite title for Jesus - viz. 'Chrestos' - actually derives from the name 'Israel.' Jewish tradition has always maintained that the angel here gave his name to Jacob. The angel wrenched the "hip" or "thigh" (Hebrew kaf-yerech, Gen 32:26) that was the symbolic source of his fertility. When the same word reappears in Gen 46:26 - "All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob's sons' wives, all the souls were three score and six" - clearly underscore that the word here means 'sexual organ' or the part of the body which is responsible for fertility.

Again I want to stress the Markan tradition must have originally stressed that the true circumcision - not the poor imitation which was given to the Israelites after they had worshiped the Golden Calf - was castration. This is why Jesus came from heaven as a eunuch. This is why Mark 'mutilated his finger' and so all those of the Alexandrian tradition and most notably Origen and the contemporary Pope of his age, Demetrius I.

Indeed if we turn to the next chapter in Origen's Commentary we can see the clear context of LGM 1 lurking in the background. Origen goes from (a) talking about Jesus raising of Lazarus to (b) spiritual circumcision and then finally to (c) Paul's interest in baptism as not only developing from a 'death state' but specifically death 'to the Law' as we read in what immediately follows:

and He called them, indeed, an evil generation, because of the quality arising from evil which had been produced in them, for wickedness is voluntary evil-doing, but adulterous because that when the Pharisees and Sadducees left that which is figuratively called man, the word of truth or the law, they were debauched by falsehood and the law of sin. For if there are two laws, the law in our members warring against the law of the mind, and the law of the mind, [Romans 7:23] we must say that the law of the mind — that is, the spiritual — is man, to whom the soul was given by God as wife, that is, to the man who is law, according to what is written, A wife is married to a man by God; [Proverbs 19:14] but the other is a paramour of the soul which is subject to it, which also on account of it is called an adulteress. Now that the law is husband of the soul Paul clearly exhibits in the Epistle to the Romans, saying, The law has dominion over a man for so long time as he lives; for the woman that has a husband is bound to the husband while he lives, to the husband who is law, etc. For consider in these things that the law has dominion over the man so long time as the law lives—as a husband over a wife. For the woman that has a husband, that is, the soul under the law, is bound to the husband while he lives, to the husband who is the law; but if the husband— that is, the law die— she is discharged from the law, which is her husband. Now the law dies to him who has gone up to the condition of blessedness, and no longer lives under the law, but acts like to Christ, who, though He became under law for the sake of those under law, that He might gain those under law, [1 Corinthians 9:10] did not continue under law, nor did He leave subject to law those who had been freed by Him; for He led them up along with Himself to the divine citizenship which is above the law, which contains, as for the imperfect and such as are still sinners, sacrifices for the remission of sins. He then who is without sin, and stands no longer in need of legal sacrifices, perhaps when he has become perfect has passed beyond even the spiritual law, and comes to the Word beyond it, who became flesh to those who live in the flesh, but to those who no longer at all war after the flesh, He is perceived as being the Word, as He was God in the beginning with God, and reveals the Father. Three things therefore are to be thought of in connection with this place— the woman that has a husband, who is under a husband— the law; and the woman who is an adulteress, to-wit, the soul, which, while her husband, the law, lives, has become joined to another husband, namely, the law of the flesh; and the woman who is married to the brother of the dead husband, to the Word who is alive and dies not, who being raised from the dead dies no more, for death has no more dominion over Him. [Romans 6:9] So far then because of the saying, But if the husband die she is discharged from the law, the husband, and because of this, so then, while her husband lives, she shall be called an adulteress, if she be joined to another man, and because of this, but if the husband die, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress though she be joined to another man. [Romans 7:2-3][ibid 4]

Is it just me or is it obvious that Origen is identifying the siman of Johnny with a new circumcision from a state of death which frees one from the Law? Is it just me or does Origen sounds absolutely like a Marcionite?