The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 2711
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:48 am

I have read again the words of Markus Vinzent here:

http://markusvinzent.blogspot.it/2011/1 ... n-has.html

at the light of what Couchoud wrote about the Parable of the Banquet:
He is not angered against the guests, as Tertullian thought him to be, but seized with compassion for the disinherited. “The good god took compassion on sinners who were unknown to him…and, his bowels being moved, had pity on them” (A. i. 23). 239 “The invitation to this supper represents the heavenly banquet at which satisfaction and rejoicing will be spiritual” (T. iv. 31). The guests who make excuses are the Jews. The beggars, the lame, the halt, and the blind are the sinners [the heathen]. Cf. the feast at Levi's (v. 29).

(Creation of Christ, p. 410, my bold)

Matth. 22:4-8 Luke 13:17-24 = Mcn
22:4 Again he sent other slaves, saying,
‘Tell those who have been invited,
“Look! The feast I have prepared for you is ready. My oxen and fattened cattle have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.”’
22:5 But they were indifferent and went away, one to his farm,

another to his business.


22:6 The rest seized his slaves, insolently mistreated them, and killed them. 22:7 The king was furious! He sent his soldiers, and they put those murderers to death and set their city on fire.










22:8 Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but the ones who had been invited were not worthy.
14:17 At the time for the banquet he sent his slave to tell those who had been invited,
‘Come, because everything is now ready.’ 14:18



But one after another they all began to make excuses. The first said to him, ‘I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it. Please excuse me.’ 14:19 Another said, ‘I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going out to examine them. Please excuse me.’ 14:20 Another said, ‘I just got married, and I cannot come.’


14:21 So the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the master of the household was furious and said to his slave, ‘Go out quickly to the streets and alleys of the city, and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.’ 14:22 Then the slave said, ‘Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.’ 14:23 So the master said to his slave, ‘Go out to the highways and country roads and urge people to come in, so that my house will be filled. 14:24 For I tell you, not one of those individuals who were invited will taste my banquet!’”

Mark Goodacre is surprised:
‘The thing that is so striking here is the extent to which this element [of the furious king who sends his soldiers and burns the city] intrudes into a story that can be told quite adequately without it (as in Luke and Thomas). It may be that Matthew is thinking here of the fall of Jerusalem.’
(my bold)

Now we know the reason for Matthew to do so. He wanted to put more emphasis on the anger of the king so that it is interpreted as addressed against uniquely the old invitees.

But in the Gospel of Marcion ''the king'' (the good god) is angered at the sight of Pagans neglected (in whiletime) as Pagans. It is anger against the present status quo, not against the old invitees who have ignored the first invitation (= the Jews worshipers of the creator God).

The new ''invitees'' are the Pagans. The invitation to become Christians is addressed now only to them and, since ''the slave said, ‘Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.’'' , it seems that these Pagans are already became (Marcionite) Christians.

The replacement of old invitees with new invitees for Matthew doesn't allegorize in the real History the fact that Jerusalem is only destroyed (to punish the Jews and only that). But the fact that Jerusalem is destroyed to be filled by Pagans. An event realized indeed under Hadrian with Jerusalem renamed Aelia Capitolina and populated again by Pagans.

But in Mcn the banquet doesn't allegorize at all Jerusalem. The intepretation of the room at banquet as ''Jerusalem'' is imposed on the original Marcionite parable only by Matthew.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 2711
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Post by Giuseppe » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:13 am

In Mark Goodacre’s book, Thomas and the Gospels: The making of an apocryphal text, he proposes a mid-second century date for Thomas. It is true that the whole thrust of his book is an argument for a post-Synoptic date, but this would only push Thomas back to around 100 AD. So where does he get the idea that Thomas is mid second-century? In the conclusion to Chapter 9 he gives his rationale:
“The dating of the Gospel of Thomas to the 140s makes good sense of a book that witnesses to the destruction of the temple (Thom. 71) and apparently presupposes the Bar Kokhba revolt (Thom. 68)…”
So he gives two supports for the date apart from the supposed dependence on the Synoptics. The first justification, that Thomas 71 alludes to the destruction of the second temple, is clear but it only means that Thomas was written after 70 AD, so it is hardly relevant to a date in 140s AD. Effectively then, Goodacre only offers a single reason for his late date, and that is that Thomas 68 refers to the Bar Kokhba revolt which took place in 135 AD. It was after this revolt that the Jews were finally banished from Jerusalem.
Now this is what Thomas 68 actually says:
Jesus said: “Blessed are you when they hate you and persecute you, and they do not find a place in the place where they persecuted you.” (Thomas 68)
The idea behind this interpretation is that the “place where they persecuted you” means Jerusalem. So those who “do not find a place” in the “place where they persecuted you“, means the Jews who were expelled from Jerusalem after 135 AD.

Note that I have used the same logic to date Matthew after Bar-Kochba. Also in Matthew the room for banquet in the correspondent parable is Jerusalem.

In Mcn "the king" was angered for all the time the first invitees (the Jews) didn't go to banquet while the poor people (the Pagans) were still not called. The anger of the Marcion's "king" was for the absence of the latter and not for the absence of the former.

But in Matthew the anger is for the absence of the former (the Jews) and only for it. Therefore the Jews who didn't go to banquet become eo ipso persecutors of the not-still-called Pagans as usurpers of their place, until the moment when "the king" decides to call the Pagans in their place. A place that in Matthew can only be Jerusalem.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 4878
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Post by MrMacSon » Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:27 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:48 am

Matth. 22:4-8 Luke 14:17-24 = Mcn
22:4 Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited, “Look! The feast I have prepared for you is ready. My oxen and fattened cattle have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet”.’

22:5 But they were indifferent and went away, one to his farm, another to his business.



22:6 The rest seized his slaves, insolently mistreated them, and killed them.

22:7 The king was furious! He sent his soldiers, and they put those murderers to death and set their city on fire.


22:8 Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but the ones who had been invited were not worthy.

9 Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.’

10 And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11 “But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment.

12 And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.”
14:17 At the time for the banquet he sent his slave to tell those who had been invited, ‘Come, because everything is now ready.’


14:18 But one after another they all began to make excuses. The first said to him, ‘I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it. Please excuse me.’ 14:19 Another said, ‘I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going out to examine them. Please excuse me.’

14:20 Another said, ‘I just got married, and I cannot come.’



14:21 So the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the master of the household was furious and said to his slave,

‘Go out quickly to the streets and alleys of the city, and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.’

14:22 Then the slave said, ‘Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.’

14:23 So the master said to his slave, ‘Go out to the highways and country roads and urge people to come in, so that my house will be filled.

14:24 For I tell you, not one of those individuals who were invited will taste my banquet!’”

25 Now great crowds accompanied him, and he turned and said to them, 26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. 27 Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple...."


Matthew ... wanted to put more emphasis on the anger of the king so that it is interpreted as addressed against uniquely the old invitees.

But in the Gospel of Marcion ''the king'' (the good god) is angered at the sight of Pagans neglected (in whiletime) as Pagans. It is anger against the present status quo, not against the old invitees who have ignored the first invitation (= the Jews worshipers of the creator God).

The new ''invitees'' are the Pagans. The invitation to become Christians is addressed now only to them and, since ''the slave said, ‘Sir, what you instructed has been done, and there is still room.’'' , it seems that these Pagans are already became (Marcionite) Christians.

The replacement of old invitees with new invitees for Matthew doesn't allegorize in the real History the fact that Jerusalem is only destroyed (to punish the Jews and only that). But the fact that Jerusalem is destroyed to be filled by Pagans. An event realized indeed under Hadrian with Jerusalem renamed Aelia Capitolina and populated again by Pagans.

But in Mcn the banquet doesn't allegorize at all Jerusalem. The intepretation of the room at banquet as ''Jerusalem'' is imposed on the original Marcionite parable only by Matthew.

Giuseppe
Posts: 2711
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:17 am

Ops. Thanks :)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Giuseppe
Posts: 2711
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Vicenza (Italy)

Re: The Parable of the Banquet as Evidence for dating the Gospels after Bar Kochba

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:51 am

I could be more short (the readers excuse me):

In Mcn the king is angered for the absence of guests PER SE, beyond if Jews or Pagans.
In Matthew the king is angered only for the negative answer received by the first invitees who had said "no".

In Mcn there is still (potentially infinite) room for new invitees. In Matthew the room is not more available after the coming of the new invitees.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Giuseppe, Google [Bot], Joseph D. L., MrMacSon, Ulan, Yahoo [Bot] and 36 guests