A Conservative Scholar's Discovery -> Marcionite Priority

[Secret Alias]

http://michaeljkruger.com/a-curious-clu ... ment-canon

One passage that I think contains a number of intriguing clues is 2 Cor 3:14 when Paul says, “When they read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted.”

Often overlooked in this passage is that Paul understands a covenant to be something that you read. In other words, for Paul (and his audience) covenants are understood to be written documents.

In summa Paul likely knew of a written new Testament canon.

[arnoldo]

http://biblehub.com/jeremiah/31-33.htm

[Nathan]

http://michaeljkruger.com/a-curious-clu ... ment-canon

One passage that I think contains a number of intriguing clues is 2 Cor 3:14 when Paul says, “When they read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted.”

Often overlooked in this passage is that Paul understands a covenant to be something that you read. In other words, for Paul (and his audience) covenants are understood to be written documents.

In summa Paul likely knew of a written new Testament canon.

Does Kruger argue for Marcionite priority somewhere? (It's certainly not in the blog you've linked to, where he says nothing whatsoever about Marcion.)

[Secret Alias]

No of course not. He doesn't see the implications of his discovery. Nevertheless it's there. Paul knew a written text of the gospel (for what other Christian text could have used as the basis of a new covenant). It has to be the gospel, the gospel juxtaposed against the Pentateuch.

[Secret Alias]

I personally take great pride in re-purposing discoveries. When someone you don't otherwise agree with says "A means B" and you can say "and B means C so A = C" that's a great argument.

[Nathan]

No of course not.

So what's with the thread title then? It seems rather misleading, not to mention dishonest, considering there's no conservative scholar's argument for Marcionite priority coming from Kruger and the blog you've linked to.

[Nathan]

I would also add: How exactly does a NT canon at the time of Paul support a claim for Marcionite priority? Or are you proposing a broader revision of history? Marcion preceded Paul?

[MrMacSon]

I would also add: How exactly does a NT canon at the time of Paul support a claim for Marcionite priority? Or are you proposing a broader revision of history? Marcion preceded Paul?

• or Paul was concurrent to or overlapped with Marcion. See RM Price's The Amazing Colossal Apostle

[MrMacSon]

http://michaeljkruger.com/a-curious-clu ... ment-canon -

One passage that I think contains a number of intriguing clues is 2 Cor 3:14 when Paul says, “When they read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted.”

Often overlooked in this passage is that Paul understands a covenant to be something that you read. In other words, for Paul (and his audience) covenants are understood to be written documents.

• In summa Paul likely knew of a written new Testament canon.

• “When they read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains ..."

[arnoldo]

Perhaps it's my confirmation bias/ cognitive dissonance, but Kruger is arguing against Marcionite Priority. .

There is no explicit mention, at least in the second century, of any identifiable Gnostic, Marcionite, or Ebionite holding the office of bishop. Or, at least, I haven’t found one (please let me know if I have missed an example).
https://books.google.com/books?id=eYgMA ... on&f=false

. . but then again Kruger may be arguing for Marcionite Priority but just doesn't know it.