And, indeed, the living God is so completely indescribable, that even those powers which minister unto him do not announce (αρρητος) his proper name to us. At all events, after the wrestling match in which the practicer of virtue wrestled for the sake of the acquisition of virtue, he says to the invisible Master, "Tell me thy Name;" (Gen 32:29} but he said, "Why askest thou me my name?" And he does not tell him (αρρητος) his peculiar and proper name, for says he, it is sufficient for thee to be taught my ordinary explanations. But as for names which are the symbols of created things, do not seek to find them among immortal natures. Therefore do not doubt either whether that which is more ancient than any existing thing is indescribable, when his very word is not to be mentioned (αρρητος) by us according to its proper name. So that we must understand that the expression, "The Lord was seen by Abraham," (Gen 17:1} means not as if the Cause of all things had shone forth and become visible, (for what human mind is able to contain the greatness of his appearance?) but as if some one of the powers which surround him, that is to say, his kingly power, had presented itself to the sight, for the appellation Lord belongs to authority and sovereignty. [On the Change of Names 14,15]
Philo claims that the ultimate unutterable (αρρητος) name of God has never been revealed to any mortal. Instead Abraham, Jacob and Moses only had revealed to them the names of subordinate powers.
It is clearly that the Alexandrian traditions deemed 'heretical' by Irenaeus and the Roman Church understood that the Apostle did indeed have this unutterable (αρρητος) name revealed to him. For them, this understanding is the very foundation of Christianity.
Not only does the Apostle announce that he "was caught up to paradise and heard unutterable (αρρητος) things, things that man is not permitted to tell" but moreover that "God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name that at the name of Iesous every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth." [Philippians 2:9,10]
I have already demonstrated in a previous post that the name Iesous (=888) was developed as an expression of the pre-Christian expectation of the ogdoad - viz a greater one than Moses to emerge (Moses only represented the power of seven). This figure, the one who harnessed the name of the eighthness (ogdoad) would be the Christ. Yet Jesus was not understood to be the Christ i.e. the messiah. He was the power, the glory associated with that name.
Look at the Alexandrian variant of the concluding line in the section in Philippians just cited:
At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and every tongue shall confess that the Lord Jesus is in the glory of God the Father. [de Principiis Book 1]
In other words, the subtle distinction here is that Jesus is the 'glory of the Father' and NOT the Christ. That role was held by someone else, i.e. the neaniskos whom Jesus initiated into the mysteries of the kingdom of God.
Origen, like all early Alexandrian authorities cites not only from a New Testament canon shared the world over but from a variant canon - what I consider to be a Marcosian canon - which Irenaeus condemns as "an unspeakable number of apocryphal and spurious scriptures, which they themselves have forged, to bewilder the minds of foolish men, and of such as are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth."
The 'Scriptures of truth' represent the orthodox canon of four gospels and thirteen apostolic letters attributed to 'Paul' established by Irenaeus himself in the age of Commodus. The 'apocryphal and spurious scripture' represent the Alexandrian canon - a single, long gospel and seven apostolic letters including 'to the Alexandrians' which was strangely renamed 'to the Corinthians' by the same Roman authorities.
Clement and Origen drew from BOTH canons. Laugh if you will, I believe there was pressure from the Imperial government itself to accept this Roman canon. I do accept the founding principle of Islamic history - namely that the Roman government effectively corrupted the pre-Islamic traditions.
To this end as we have noted the 'Marcionites' (i.e. 'those of Mark') identified their founder as having underwent the unutterable (αρρητος) experience which is attributed to 'Paul' in the Catholic tradition. As I have noted many times, when you cut through the language barrier and see that 'Marcionite' in Aramaic means 'Marcosian' or 'Marcite' in Greek or Latin, the name behind all these traditions is Mark. Mark was the real historical name of the apostle named 'Paul' in the Catholic tradition.
We will come across the explanation for where this 'Catholic name' originated in Book Four of the Mimar Marqe. Yet for the moment it is enough to remind ourselves that even the Catholic acknowledge that 'Paul' was not the apostle's real name. It was something he picked up later. We will argue that it was a messianic title from Deut 32:4 known to the Samaritan traditin of Marqe and misrepresented in the Catholic tradition as a 'good Roman name.'
Let's just acknowledge again that Irenaeus identifies those heretics who 'prefer the gospel of Mark' (i.e. of rejecting or hypocritically employing the newly established 'fourfold canon' of Rome) as emphasizing that Jesus was not the Christ - i.e. not the royal messiah expected by centuries of Judaism. Even Marcionitism falls within this category.
Thus when we hear Clement declare in Book One of the Stromata that:
Such is the Lord, who receives all who believe on Him and by Him. For the Father has delivered and subjected all to Christ our King," that at the name of Jesus every knee may bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.'
He is DELIBERATELY CITING from the authorized Roman New Testament canon. Yet fellow Marcosians within the Church, i.e. those who only pretend to accept the Catholic faith but continue to secretly maintain another, more ancient canon established wholly in the name of St. Mark knew that the correct reading of the last citation should be:
Such is the Lord, who receives all who believe on Him and by Him. For the Father has delivered and subjected all to Christ our King," that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and every tongue shall confess that the Lord Jesus is in the glory of God the Father.
The point is that 'crypto-Jews' have been operating this way for centuries. Just look at the example of the Dönmeh in Turkey. They can't openly express their faith but they can continue to operate owing to the fact that their fellow co-religionists know how to fill in the gaps, that they know the official orthodoxy THAT HAS TO BE CONFESSED and then make the necessary substitutions knowing that the speaker - i.e. Clement or Origen - is 'really one of us.'
To this end it is plain to see again that Clement is one of those heretics who prefers the gospel of Mark (cf. the Letter to Theodore) and who really believes that someone else other than Jesus is the messianic Christ who sits in the earthly throne in Alexandria. This figure is St. Mark and I was lucky enough to have rediscovered his original episcopal throne at the time of Clement and Origen in Venice.
It was Irenaeus' entire purpose in falsifying our existing New Testament canon to deny this core principle of the original Alexandrian tradition - namely that someone other than Caesar was the real ruler of this world and that he sat on the episcopal throne of St. Mark in a church just outside the eastern walls of Alexandria in the so-called 'Boucolia' a semi-autonomous region which extended into the Nile Delta.
Against this original founding principle of Christianity Irenaeus writes against the heresies in Book one that:
The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations(6) of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father "to gather all things in one," and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, "every knee should bow, of things in heaven,, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess" to Him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all."
As is easy enough to demonstrate, the original Alexandrian tradition of St. Mark envisioned Iesous the 888 sitting in a throne in the eighth sphere (or 'third heaven') unknown to the 'ruler of the world' for generations while his representative on earth, the Pope of Alexandria sat in a similar chair in Alexandria secretly ruling over a 'kingdom of God' hidden within the Roman Empire (and later the Catholic Church established at the time of Commodus).
So we see in the Liturgy of St. Mark the Alexandrian priesthood looks up into heaven to see its vision of Iesous the 888 sitting in his throne:
The Priest: Peace be to all.
The Deacon: Bow your heads to Jesus.
The People: Thou, Lord.
The Priest prays: O Sovereign and Almighty Lord,60 who sittest upon the cherubim, and art glorified by the seraphim; who hast made the heaven out of waters, and adorned it with choirs of stars; who hast placed an unbodied host of angels in the highest heavens to sing Thy praise for ever; before Thee have we bowed our souls and bodies in token of our bondage. We beseech Thee to repel the dark assaults of sin from our understanding, and to gladden our minds with the divine radiance of Thy Holy Spirit, that, filled with the knowledge of Thee, we may worthily partake of the mercies set before us, the pure body and precious blood of Thine only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Pardon all our sins in Thy abundant and unsearchable goodness, through the grace, mercy, and love of Thine only-begotten Son:
(Aloud.) Through whom and with whom be glory and power to Thee, with the all-holy, good, and life-giving Spirit.
The Priest: Peace be to all.
The Deacon: With the fear of God.
The Priest prays: O holy, highest, awe-inspiring God, who dwellest among the saints, sanctify us by the word of Thy grace and by the inspiration of Thy all-holy Spirit; for Thou hast said, O Lord our God, Be ye holy; for I am holy. O Word of God, past finding out, consubstantial and co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit, and sharer of their sovereignty, accept the pure song which cherubim and seraphim, and the unworthy lips of Thy sinful and unworthy servant, sing aloud.
The People: Lord, have mercy; Lord, have mercy; Lord, have mercy.
I know there are of lot of people out there shaking their heads saying 'what's the big deal about all of this?' This is pretty 'standard stuff.' What all of these people fail to take into account is the fact that the Alexandrian tradition alone of all traditions in the world had a Father - a Pope - who sat in a throne obviously modeled on this same heavenly seat described in the literature.
You just have to read my book and begin the process of reintegrating all the original beliefs associated with who Mark was - viz. the new Moses - who received the name of God and established the new, perfect covenant according to his 'eighthness.'
If you won't read my book just look at the symbolism of the throne and figure it out yourself ...
