When People Say that 'There is No Proof that the Copts Ever Venerated St. Mark as the Messiah' I Say 'Learn to Real Severus Al'Ashmunein Better!'

I get this criticism all the time - where the @#$^^ did Huller get the idea that St. Mark was once the messiah of the Alexandrian tradition.  I even get high ranking Coptic bishops criticizing my book.  Whenever I come across this I just shake my head and wonder what's the matter with these people.  Just because THEY don't think St. Mark is the Christ or the contemporary Alexandrian Church does not OPENLY profess this doctrine does not mean that it was never held in a previous age.

I will translate the French edition of Severus' Homilies on Mark because almost every page refers to just this idea.  In other words, that this tenth century authoritative Coptic Patriarch CAUTIOUSLY introduces lost ancient sources which say exactly what my Real Messiah puts forward.  It's just that idiotic contemporary Copts don't know what is preserved in the authoritative voices of its heritage!

In any event, here is the first mention of this concept in Severus' first homily.  He writes:

St. Mark the apostle and servant of Jesus Christ has appeared among all creatures like the mustard seed (which speaks the Gospel), which grows and becomes a huge tree, so that the birds come to rest on its branches and get away from his shadow, because, although our Lord Jesus Christ (may he be glorified!) have wanted to nominate himself for this comparison, however, can also apply the meaning to St. Mark, this shining light, for those who follow Christ are themselves Christs and other members of Christ. [Homily on St. Mark 1 p.7]

I know the way that nitwits will twist this passage - i.e. that Severus THE WITNESS to this tradition, is 'inventing' the comparison.  Yet this is complete nonsense.  Severus knows that this idea smacks of heresy and so CAUTIOUSLY introduces what he read in ancient source into his homilies on the Apostle.

Just read my book with an open mind for God's sake.  I present the argument in the most palatable manner.  I could have written a boring academic treatise citing sources like Severus but my publisher was not an academic publisher.

The truth is that my blog has GREATER READERSHIP than any academic journal. I can see the number of academics that read my blog.  I have done ten years worth of work in the nine months that my blog has been up and running.  And this is only the beginning.

My objective is nothing short of resurrecting the original faith of Alexandria and that means the understanding of St. Mark as the bearer of the Christ-soul.  This is made explicit in the Passio Petri Sancti but how many people know what that is?  Birger Pearson does and hated my book.  He couldn't see how St. Mark was ever considered the messiah of the Alexandrian tradition.  And there it is laid out in front of you, now.

Is there any debate?  Is there any question that the idea was known to the greatest historian of the Coptic tradition?  Then what is the debate?  What is the question?  What is the controversy?