Marcion, 2nd Century Bad Boy -- Could It Be True?

[Peter Kirby]

Consider the idea that Marcion was a renegade, who broke from existing teaching and adulterated the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke. Some here have claimed that he came up with the idea of docetic christology; that is, they have claimed that Marcion, unlike anyone before him, claimed that Jesus was a phantom instead of a man in the flesh. They claim that Marcion carefully edited the start of Luke to make it look like Jesus wafted out of the sky and could fly off cliffs and such. They claim that Marcion removed most of the juiciest passages in the letters of Paul, claiming that Jesus was descended from David and born of a woman. They claim that Marcion was rebuffed by the church at Rome after attempting to bribe them and that, therefore, he went his own way with these perverted doctrines. They claim that Marcion came up with the idea of the bad god of this world (and the Father above that Jesus preached) and that previous Christian theology didn't have this.

Let's entertain the idea here -- is there anything that could help us establish that it is true? (Or that it is false?)

EDIT: Most of the claims above come from the church fathers. We don't wonder whether they made them; we wonder whether they're true. Analysis of why they should be believed or disbelieved is a good start.

[DCHindley]

Consider the idea that Marcion was a renegade, who broke from existing teaching and adulterated the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke. Some here have claimed that he came up with the idea of docetic christology; that is, they have claimed that Marcion, unlike anyone before him, claimed that Jesus was a phantom instead of a man in the flesh. They claim that Marcion carefully edited the start of Luke to make it look like Jesus wafted out of the sky and could fly off cliffs and such. They claim that Marcion removed most of the juiciest passages in the letters of Paul, claiming that Jesus was descended from David and born of a woman. They claim that Marcion was rebuffed by the church at Rome after attempting to bribe them and that, therefore, he went his own way with these perverted doctrines. They claim that Marcion came up with the idea of the bad god of this world (and the Father above that Jesus preached) and that previous Christian theology didn't have this.

Let's entertain the idea here -- is there anything that could help us establish that it is true? (Or that it is false?)

Late 2nd century Christians, and those who followed, seem to have rationalized much out of the threadbare evidence that had been passed down to them. It is almost as if they had not been paying any attention to normal changes over time to their organization or beliefs, until around the mid 2nd century (ca 150-200 CE), when they snapped out of their "half-dreamed-dream" and tried to reconstruct their history. Maybe before then they really did not think they could gain the acceptance from society and rulers, but by then they were certainly holders of a high Christology that that they felt transcended and reversed the circumstances of being followers of a man who was crucified for Judean royal ambitions that had not been sanctioned by the Romans.

DCH

[Stuart]

Prove the vocabulary is nearly identical between the attested and unattested segments of the Marcionite Gospel. Also prove that the usage of vocabulary that is common is the same between the attested and unattested.

A mechanical argument is the only one I'd consider

[Peter Kirby]

Consider the idea that Marcion was a renegade, who broke from existing teaching and adulterated the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke. Some here have claimed that he came up with the idea of docetic christology; that is, they have claimed that Marcion, unlike anyone before him, claimed that Jesus was a phantom instead of a man in the flesh. They claim that Marcion carefully edited the start of Luke to make it look like Jesus wafted out of the sky and could fly off cliffs and such. They claim that Marcion removed most of the juiciest passages in the letters of Paul, claiming that Jesus was descended from David and born of a woman. They claim that Marcion was rebuffed by the church at Rome after attempting to bribe them and that, therefore, he went his own way with these perverted doctrines. They claim that Marcion came up with the idea of the bad god of this world (and the Father above that Jesus preached) and that previous Christian theology didn't have this.

Let's entertain the idea here -- is there anything that could help us establish that it is true? (Or that it is false?)

Late 2nd century Christians, and those who followed, seem to have rationalized much out of the threadbare evidence that had been passed down to them. It is almost as if they had not been paying any attention to normal changes over time to their organization or beliefs, until around the mid 2nd century (ca 150-200 CE), when they snapped out of their "half-dreamed-dream" and tried to reconstruct their history. Maybe before then they really did not think they could gain the acceptance from society and rulers, but by then they were certainly holders of a high Christology that that they felt transcended and reversed the circumstances of being followers of a man who was crucified for Judean royal ambitions that had not been sanctioned by the Romans.

Does this address the prompt of the OP?

[Peter Kirby]

Prove the vocabulary is nearly identical between the attested and unattested segments of the Marcionite Gospel. Also prove that the usage of vocabulary that is common is the same between the attested and unattested.

A mechanical argument is the only one I'd consider

IIRC, the "mechanical argument" has typically been wielded to draw Luke 1-2 and other portions into proximity with Acts and not with the rest of Luke. This has been true of several scholarly "by-hand" studies.

This has also been the finding of my own stylometric study (by computer).

[DCHindley]

Consider the idea that Marcion was a renegade, who broke from existing teaching and adulterated the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke. Some here have claimed that he came up with the idea of docetic christology; that is, they have claimed that Marcion, unlike anyone before him, claimed that Jesus was a phantom instead of a man in the flesh. They claim that Marcion carefully edited the start of Luke to make it look like Jesus wafted out of the sky and could fly off cliffs and such. They claim that Marcion removed most of the juiciest passages in the letters of Paul, claiming that Jesus was descended from David and born of a woman. They claim that Marcion was rebuffed by the church at Rome after attempting to bribe them and that, therefore, he went his own way with these perverted doctrines. They claim that Marcion came up with the idea of the bad god of this world (and the Father above that Jesus preached) and that previous Christian theology didn't have this.

Let's entertain the idea here -- is there anything that could help us establish that it is true? (Or that it is false?)

Late 2nd century Christians, and those who followed, seem to have rationalized much out of the threadbare evidence that had been passed down to them. It is almost as if they had not been paying any attention to normal changes over time to their organization or beliefs, until around the mid 2nd century (ca 150-200 CE), when they snapped out of their "half-dreamed-dream" and tried to reconstruct their history. Maybe before then they really did not think they could gain the acceptance from society and rulers, but by then they were certainly holders of a high Christology that that they felt transcended and reversed the circumstances of being followers of a man who was crucified for Judean royal ambitions that had not been sanctioned by the Romans.

Does this address the prompt of the OP?

The prompt asked whether it could be proved that there was any truth to the picture of Marcion drawn by early Christian fathers. I called into question the likelihood that early Christians of the late 2nd century had a clue what their history entailed, including the history of outlier voices like Marcion's, just a decade or two earlier, who were eventually drowned out by the "proto-orthodox" circle. Are we supposed to swallow the obvious fiction that the family of Jesus that supposedly survived into the early-mid 2nd century, was "virgin" pure in their understanding of Jesus, an understanding that exactly mirrored that of "the proto-orthodox?"

FWIW, I am not calling their re-constructions outright fiction, but they were, let's just say, "imaginative," in the way they connected the dots. They had high hopes of rejoining normal society, and anything was game if it could be employed to explain away the Christian journey from followers of Jesus the crucified Judean to participants in a mystery cult that promised benefit to all mankind through the vicarious sacrifice of a divine Christ in the form of Jesus.

If one wants a defense of the "conservative" POV that sees Marcion as a Gnostic heretic from proto-orthodox Christianity who corrupted what the orthodox managed to keep pure, there is always Simone Petrement A Separate God, although Marcion is a supporting character and not a lead in her POV.
A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism, 1990
by Simone Petrement (Author), Carol Harrison (Translator)
https://www.amazon.com/Separate-God-Chr ... 0060664215
A snippet of a review:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1465606?se ... b_contents

DCH

[Bernard Muller]

Consider the idea that Marcion was a renegade, who broke from existing teaching and adulterated the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke.

Let's entertain the idea here -- is there anything that could help us establish that it is true? (Or that it is false?)

Two arguments in favor of proving Marcion's Pauline epistles were written after the "canonical" ones: http://historical-jesus.info/73.html
Three arguments in favor of proving Marcion's gospel (of the Lord) was written after Luke's gospel:
http://historical-jesus.info/53.html

Cordially, Bernard

[davidbrainerd]

That Judea is riddled with demon possessions in the gospels may be a pointer towards Marcionite priority by itself. Good orthodox Jew writers would have saved the demon casting outs for Acts in Gentile territory, or for times Jesus is on the border on the other side of the Lake Ginnesaret in Gergesene or Gadarrne territory, but there are as many demons in Judea and Galilee proper as on the border, and in synagogues to boot!

The Jews are a demon-riddled people because their god is not the Good God. If the only god there is is the creator, the god of the Jews, they shouldn't havd so many demons, especially since only like 2 demons appear in Acts in Gentile land. It seems then that casting out of demons is a Marcionite feature, which is why its maximized in thr gospels and minimized in Acts: it serves to show how the Jews' god has failed them. He failed them big time letting the be demon and disease ridden and leprous (despite the law promising health) and Jesus comes out of nowhere and outshines him....its the whole point of the gospels.

Turn the gospels orthodox, and all of the sudden the one and only god is just torturing people to show his power, meaning Jesus (now the OT god) is only demonstrated to be a saddist by his healings and exorcisms since he caused the afflictions just to have something to show off with (as is indicated in John 9 by the way in our orthodox canon, John 9:3 "Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him").

The orthodox can't remove the excorcisms, which are central to the gospel, so try to create an orthodox flavoring by making the demons confess to know Jesus is the Messiah. Whereas previously the demons just grunted with loud voices and Jesus commanded them to be silrnt simply because he was conquering them, NOW they shout "Jesus we know you're the Messiah" and he hushes them up "because they know him" because they'd have to know the one-and-only god obviously, the one who filled Judea up with them snd told them to confess him as Messiah when he cast them out so he could look cool.

[Secret Alias]

If you stagger or gradate the accusation against Marcion you will have to examine the Apology of Justin. First instance:

And there is Marcion, a man of Pontus (δέ τινα Ποντικόν), who is even at this day alive, and teaching his disciples to believe in some other god greater than the Creator. And he, by the aid of the devils, has caused many of every nation to speak blasphemies, and to deny that God is the maker of this universe, and to assert that some other being, greater than He, has done greater works. All who take their opinions from these men, are, as we before said, called Christians; just as also those who do not agree with the philosophers in their doctrines, have yet in common with them the name of philosophers given to them. And whether they perpetrate those fabulous and shameful deeds — the upsetting of the lamp, and promiscuous intercourse, and eating human flesh— we know not; but we do know that they are neither persecuted nor put to death by you, at least on account of their opinions. But I have a treatise against all the heresies that have existed already composed, which, if you wish to read it, I will give you.

and again:

And, as we said before, the devils put forward Marcion of Pontus, who is even now teaching men to deny that God is the maker of all things in heaven and on earth, and that the Christ predicted by the prophets is His Son, and preaches another god besides the Creator of all, and likewise another son. And this man many have believed, as if he alone knew the truth, and laugh at us, though they have no proof of what they say, but are carried away irrationally as lambs by a wolf, and become the prey of atheistical doctrines, and of devils. For they who are called devils attempt nothing else than to seduce men from God who made them, and from Christ His first-begotten; and those who are unable to raise themselves above the earth they have riveted, and do now rivet, to things earthly, and to the works of their own hands; but those who devote themselves to the contemplation of things divine, they secretly beat back; and if they have not a wise sober-mindedness, and a pure and passionless life, they drive them into godlessness.

This is the real extent of what we can know was the accusation against Marcion in the earliest period which to my understanding amounts to him:

1. being of Pontus and a contemporary of Justin
2. being conceived by demons (δαιμόνων συλλήψεως)
3. having denied that God was the maker (ποιητὴν) of all things in heaven and earth and that the Christ predicted (προκηρυχθέντα) by the prophets is His Son preaching and persuading (πειθομένους) his disciples to believe in some other god greater (μείζονα) than the Demiurge god (δημιουργοῦ θεόν) and another son (ἕτερον υἱόν)
4. establishing a widespread (indeed global = κατὰ πᾶν γένος ἀνθρώπων) community of Χριστιανοὶ (or likely Chrestoi) as a philosophical sect (or heresy)

This is a very limited portrait of Marcion which can be shrunk further. There is no palpable hostility against Judaism mentioned here. Indeed denying that the messiah to come was a heavenly being would be come the ultimate demarcation line between Jews and Christians in coming centuries.

There is an overriding sense that Marcion and his followers were arrogant viewing their orthodox counterparts as inferior to their intellectual sophistication. Their arrogance may well have resulted from their antiquity as there is clearly some sense that it was the Marcionites who were the Christians who engaged in love feasts/orgies. The reason Justin (or his editor) leaves this door open is rather curious. Again the sense of the passage suggests great antiquity to the Marcionites given that - despite the statement that Marcion was still alive - that pagan reports (which must have been well known and thus well established) about Christians generally and their foul practices might have applied to them.

Perhaps more interesting is what we see in the second citation προεβάλλοντο οἱ φαῦλοι δαίμονες. The language here is unmistakably reminiscent of Justin's own description of the Word where in Dial. 62.4, he uses the verb προβάλλω to denotes “uttering a word” (cf. Dial. 61.2). When we start comparing this to the previous identification of Marcion as being 'conceived by demons' (δαιμόνων συλλήψεως) it should be noted that a later in the Apology Justin (or his editor) cites a harmonized gospel text:

but the power of God having come upon the virgin, overshadowed her, and caused her while yet a virgin to conceive. And the angel of God who was sent to the same virgin at that time brought her good news, saying, Behold, you shall conceive of the Holy Ghost, and shall bear a Son, and He shall be called the Son of the Highest, and you shall call His name Jesus; for He shall save His people from their sins, Luke 1:32; Matthew 1:21 — as they who have recorded all that concerns our Saviour Jesus Christ have taught, whom we believed,

It would appear then that the person of Marcion begins as almost a mythologized character, a counterpart of the heavenly Christ (perhaps again the Antichrist) with a shadowy historical background. Instead of being conceived as a virgin birth, he is conceived by demons; instead of being emitted by the Most High God (as the creative Word) he is emitted by demons. This Marcion might well have dated back to the apostolic period as we read in other Patristic sources (i.e. Clement Strom 7.17 and Syriac sources). Indeed Justin's identification of Marcion as still living is rather weak. He isn't sure whether the Marcionites were the ones who were mentioned as engaging in orgiastic love feasts but slips in mention of the possibility anyway. The claim that he might be still alive should only mean that it was physiologically possible not that it was a certain fact.

[davidbrainerd]

Indeed Justin's identification of Marcion as still living is rather weak.

The fathers seem to say "Marcion" in many cases where they mean "Marcionites" so that Marcion is "still alive to this day" may mean only that his *doctrine* is still alive.

In fact, moderns sometimes say things like "Marcion is still alive in the church" or "Pelagius is still alive in the churches":

Example, Bart Ehrman https://ehrmanblog.org/marcion-as-alive ... -among-us/ "As I’ve been thinking about Marcion over the past couple of days, it has occurred to me that in some ways he is still alive and well among us."

Instead of being conceived as a virgin birth, he is conceived by demons;

Which came first, this statement of Justin or the possibly mythical Polycarp's "firstborn of Satan"?