An Early 2nd Century Txt Ignores Peter and Paul in Jerusalem

[Secret Alias]

I think the author is right. It is not about written gospels but about a 'hostile meeting.'

[Secret Alias]

Still it is interesting that we have a witness which seems to ignore Galatians 1 and 2 as spurious. Price and I have noticed independently of one another than Jerome's use of Origen's reflection of Marcion seems to indicate no Marcionite reference to the same section of text in Galatians. In other words, the historical framework in Galatians was entirely absent.

[Secret Alias]

Here is what Lightfoot says about the passage:

In this treatise the writer denounces the Praedicatio Pauli as maintaining " adulterinum, imo internecinum baptisma"; in order to invalidate its authority, he proceeds to show its thoroughly unhistorical character; and among other instances he alleges the fact that it makes St Peter and St Paul meet in Rome as if for the first time forgetting all about the congress at Jerusalem, the collision at Antioch, and so forth.

Forgetting or ignorant of these made up facts inserted into the original Marcionite edition of Galatians and then reflected later in Acts.

[Secret Alias]

Tertullian Resurrection of the Flesh has an interesting statement:

Some will have it, that by the phrase "flesh and blood," because of its rite of circumcision, Judaism is meant, which is itself too alienated from the kingdom of God, as being accounted "the old or former conversation," and as being designated by this title in another passage of the apostle also, who, "when it pleased God to reveal to him His Son, to preach Him amongst the heathen, immediately conferred not with flesh and blood," as he writes to the Galatians, the circumcision, that is to say, Judaism.

Galatians 1:15, 16 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult flesh and blood.

Ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν ὁ [θεὸς ὁ] ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου καὶ καλέσας διὰ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ 16 ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν Υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοὶ, ἵνα εὐαγγελίζωμαι αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, εὐθέως οὐ προσανεθέμην σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι,

The idea that 'flesh and blood' means the circumcision is intriguing because it implies that the lengthy history that follows and its absence in two sources might well mean that it was added by a later (post-Marcionite) editor to deny the Marcionite understanding that he never consulted with any Jews.