Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by MrMacSon »

Markus Vinzent is writing two books -

1. Writing the History of Early Christianity, CUP ('Die Anfänge des Christentums'), due March 2019

. . . retrospective historiography is developed in the first chapter; and chapters follow on the so-called 'Avercius' inscription, the statue of Hippolytus, the apology of Aristides, and the letters of Ignatius.

edit to add -
Despite novel approaches to the study of Early Christianity ... much scholarship on this topic differs little from that written a century ago.  In this study, Markus Vinzent challenges the interpretation of the sources that have been used in the study of the Early Christian era.  He brings a new approach to the topic by reading history backwards. Applying this methodology to four case studies, and using a range of media, he poses radically new questions on the famous 'Abercius' inscription, on the first extant apologist Aristides of Athens, on the prolific Hippolytus of Rome, and on Ignatius and the first non-canonical collection of letters. Vinzent's novel methodology of a retrospective writing thus challenges many fundamental and anachronistic assumptions about Early Christian history.

https://www.amazon.com.au/Writing-Histo ... us+vinzent


2. The Beginnings of Christianity.

... a follow up to [the first one, above], and also to [an] earlier one (Christ's Resurrection in Early Christianity and the Making of the New Testament, 2011).

As the book was requested by Herder, Freiburg i.Br., Germany, where the book on Christ's resurrection appeared in a revised German translation, the new book [will] first [be] written in German, but will also appear in an English translation soon after.

The Beginnings of Christianity will attempt a retro-history of Christianity.

In order to show, how the contemporary grand narrative of the beginnings of Christianity emerged, we go through formative stages of its development, starting out with Orosius and his construction of the beginnings of early Christianity as part of his universal history in his seven books of Historical Events Against the Pagans from the early fifth century CE.

Christianity being Romanitas, a new chapter in history, compared to the pagan past, hence the divide of time into BC and CE.

The next chapter deals with Eusebius of Caesarea, the reference for any writing of early Christian history. Interestingly, as you will see, Eusebius is far from using the canonical writings as the foundations of his story, [and] constructs his narrative using mainly Flavius Josephus and "Jesus' own writing" (as part of the letter exchange between King Abgar and Jesus). Other sources, amongst which also the canonical writings and particularly Acts surface, are mostly only corroborative to his main sources.

Further chapters deal with Iulius Africanus, the chronist who provided Eusebius with his chronological time line; with Origen, the preacher and commentator of Scripture who is less interested in the material history, but wants us to focus on the spiritual path that goes beyond history; [with] his counter-part Tertullian who is less interested in the Scriptures (be they historically or spiritually read), [and] focuses on the tradition of the Church and reconstructs the genealogy of authority; with Irenaeus, the mastermind behind the traditional construction of the beginnings of Christianity as we have learned it all. Instead of taking him as a representative and source for this kind of narrative which is reflected in Eusebius, but also in all our textbooks today, I read him as the creator of this story who struggled with counter-stories, but was the [most] successful amongst competitors. 

Further chapters will develop earlier constructions of the beginnings of Christianity: through the collection of writings brought together into the New Testament shortly before or contemporary to Irenaeus; the re-writing and complementing of Paul's letters; the previous attempt by Marcion and his 'New Testament', and Paul's own construction, as seen through the version of Paul's letters that were available to Marcion.

Hence, the book is a story of stories that moves scene by scene back towards the beginnings without claiming that any of these stories provide us with the one or the correct history of the beginnings. Instead it will show that our master-narrative today is but a revamped version of what has been constructed towards the late second through to the early fifth century.
.
http://markusvinzent.blogspot.com/2018/ ... anity.html
Last edited by MrMacSon on Fri Nov 23, 2018 4:02 pm, edited 9 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Two forthcoming Markus Vinzent books

Post by MrMacSon »

In another post, titled καινὴ διαθήκη: The title of the "New Testament" in Irenaeus of Lyon, Vinzent provides an excerpt in German (from the second book, I presume), which I have Google-translated and fiddled with. Please feel free to post any corrections (and I will try to edit this to accommodate them).

http://markusvinzent.blogspot.com/2018/ ... s-bei.html

German
English
My usual readers may excuse me writing in German, but I am writing at present a history of the beginnings of Christianity for a German publisher, hence, the text that follows as an extract from this book is in German. I hope that, once the book is published, there will follow an English translation.

Der Titel der Sammlung „Neues Testament“, der griechisch καινὴ διαθήκη und lateinisch novum testamentum lautet stellt ein spezifisches Problem dar, das verknüpft ist mit diesem Sprachgebrauch, weil sowohl im Griechischen wie im Lateinischen diese Begriffe nicht nur als Übersetzung des Titels dieser Sammlung von Schriften steht, sondern auch geprägt ist durch die Septuagintaübersetzung der hebräischen Bibel, in welcher διαθήκη für den „Bund“ (brit) steht, den Gott mit den Menschen geschlossen hat.

Mehr noch, das Griechische wie das Lateinische „Testament“ kann für die erbschaftsrechtliche Verfügung im ganz allgemeinen Sinne benutzt werden,[1] wie es etwa auch in Gal. 3,15.17 und Heb. 9,16f. der Fall ist.

Theodor Zahn verwies bereits darauf, dass „διαθήκη in der Bibel den von Gott gestifteten Bund (bezeichnete), die von Gott der Gemeinde gegebene Ordnung ihres Verhältnisses zu ihm, und καινὴ διαθήκη eine der Endzeit vorbehaltene, durch Christus gestiftete Neuordnung dieses Verhältnisses, als nicht Offenbarungsurkunde, sondern Offenbarung“ meinte.[2]


Bevor man also in den Schriften, auch des Irenäus, den terminus technicus für den Titel vorzufinden glaubt, muss man erst prüfen, ob nicht einer der älteren Inhalte nicht im Sinne von schriftlichen Urkunden, sondern von Ordnung und Bund gemeint ist, und wenn ein Schriftstück bezeichnet zu werden scheint, ob es auf eine Erbschaftsanordnung geht, oder wirklich die Sammlung von Schriften bedeutet wird.[3]

Für Irenäus gibt es die beiden „Testamente“.[4] Bei der Diskussion des Liebesgebotes verweist Irenäus darauf, „dass die wesentlichen Gebote für das Leben in beiden Testamenten dieselben sind und auf denselben Herrn verweisen, der zwar die Einzelgebote den Umständen beider Testamente angepasst hat, als die wichtigeren und höchsten Gebote aber, ohne die man nicht erlöst werden kann, in beiden Testamenten dieselben gegeben hat“.[5] Und an späterer Stelle betont er, „dass es zwei Synagogen in zwei Völkern gab und dass es trotzdem ein und derselbe Gott ist, der sie beide zum Nutzen der Menschen eingerichtet hat; dementsprechend wurden die Testamente denen gegeben, die zum Glauben an Gott kamen ... Außerdem auch, dass das erste Testament weder unnütz noch vergeblich oder zufällig gegeben worden ist“.[6]

Auffallenderweise setzt Irenäus die beiden Testamente an der ersten Stelle gleich mit „Gesetz“ (lex) und „Evangelium“ (evangelium) und an der zweiten mit „erstem Testament (prius testamentum) und „Evangelium“. In einem anderen Kapitel wird deutlich, dass Irenäus auch die Schriften des Paulus zum Neuen Testament hinzuzählt.[7] An einer weiteren Stelle liegt eindeutig der Begriff διαθήκη (testamentum) als Erbschaftstestament vor, interessanterweise noch kombiniert mit „Evangelium“: Die Glieder der Menschen „werden vom Geist zum Erbe genommen und ins Himmelreich gebracht. Deshalb aber ist Christus auch gestorben: Das Testament des Evangeliums, das eröffnet und in der gesamten Welt gelesen werden sollte, sollte zuerst seine Knechte frei machen. Darauf sollte es sie dann zu Erben seiner Güter einsetzen ... Wer lebt ergreift nämlich Besitz vom Erbe.“[8] Hier wird deutlich, dass für Irenäus „Testament“ nicht nur wie meist in seinen Schriften als „Bund“ zu verstehen ist, sondern gerade mit Blick auf das Evangelium als Erbüberlassung.

Insgesamt wird deutlich, Irenäus nutzt die Vorstellung vom „Testament“ als „Bund“, einmal auch als „Erbschaftsurkunde/-überlassung“, doch nur an zwei gesicherten Stellen benutzt er den Begriff zur Kennzeichnung der Sammlungen von Schriften. An beiden Stellen spricht er nicht von einem Testament, sondern von zweien, wobei er das eine, auch das „erste“ genannte, mit dem Gesetz gleichsetzt, das andere mit dem Evangelium (zu diesem Testament zählt er auch die Paulusbriefe an anderer Stelle).

Noch auffallender aber ist, dass die Gegensetzung der beiden Testamente wie auch die Gleichsetzung mit einerseits Gesetz, andererseits Evangelium auf den älteren Sprachgebrauch hindeuten, in welchen Markion sowohl den Begriff „Neues Testament“ im Gegensatz zu „Altem Testament“ geprägt hat, und Irenäus an beiden Stellen in Adversus haereses sich tatsächlich mit Markion und seinen Anhängern auseinandersetzt. Im Anschluss an die erste Stelle resümiert Irenäus: „Es gibt ja noch mehr solcher Gebote. Sie bedeuten aber alle keinen Widerspruch (contrarietas) und keine Auflösung der alten Gebote, wie das die Anhänger Markions daherschreien“.[9]

Und auf die zweite Stelle, die mit dem antimarkionitischen anonymen Presbyterbericht verbunden ist,[10] folgt: „Er wird aber auch die Lehre Markions richten“.[11]

Aus alledem kann man bezüglich Irenäus nur dieselbe Schlussfolgerung ziehen, die Wolfram Kinzig bereits bei seiner Untersuchung zum Sprachgebrauch von testamentum bei Tertullian vertreten hat: Ausschließlich wenn die Rede von Markion und seiner Position die Rede ist, verfällt der Berichterstatter in den Sprachgebrauch dessen, über den er berichtet, und spricht von „Testament“ im technischen Sinne als von einer Sammlung von Schriften.[12]

Während dieser technische Gebrauch von „Neuem Testament“ bei Tertullian begegnet, findet er sich jedoch noch nicht bei Irenäus, der nur von den beiden Testamenten spricht, auch von einem ersten, doch sowohl von Markions antithetischen Charakterisierungen dieser Testamente als „Altes“ und „Neues“ Testament absieht, wie er überhaupt Markions Einleitung zu seinem „Neuen Testament“, Antitheses genannt, durch seine Bestreitung des antithetischen Charakters (contrarietates) der beiden Testamente, wie gezeigt wurde, ablehnt. Es scheint mir darum ausgeschlossen, dass Irenäus die Sammlung der Schriften, die uns als „Neues Testament“ bekannt ist, bereits unter diesem Namen akzeptiert hatte. Wohl muss er die Titel „Altes“ und „Neues Testament“ von Markion her gekannt haben, doch während er von den Testamenten sprechen konnte, konnte er sich offenkundig noch nicht durchringen die Schriftsammlung der Christen, die er als solche zu kennen scheint, als „Neues Testament“ zu bezeichnen.

Wie wir sehen werden, und worauf ebenfalls Wolfram Kinzig bereits hingewiesen hatte, benutzt auch Justin der Märtyrer, der etwas älter als Irenäus ist, den Begriff des „Neuen Testaments“ nie als Sammlungstitel, obwohl „bei Justin die Gegenübersetzung von alter und neuer διαθήκη eine große Rolle spielt“.[13]

Wenn „allerdings das uniforme Zeugnis der existierenden Überlieferung deutlich darauf hinweist, dass dies („Das Neue Testament“) der Titel des Archetyps“ war, dann müsste man davon ausgehen, dass die Sammlung von neutestamentlichen Schriften, die Irenäus kannte, bewusst eine – wenn auch kritische – Fortführung und Überarbeitung der älteren Sammlung darstellte, die auf Markion zurückgeht und die von Irenäus dem Inhalt nach, nicht aber, was ihren Titel betraf, akzeptiert und titellos propagiert wurde.





The title of the "New Testament" collection, which in Greek is καινὴ διαθήκη and in Latin is novum testamentum, represents a specific problem associated with linguistic usage, because, in both Greek and Latin, these terms not only translate the title of this collection of scriptures but is also marked by the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible, in which  διαθήκη stands  for the "covenant" ( brit), which God has concluded with men.

Moreover, the Greek, as [with] Latin "Testament", can be used for inheritance law available in the most general sense,[1]  as well as in about Gal, 3,15.17 and  Heb. 9,16f. the case is.

Theodor Zahn already [has] pointed out that " διαθήκη  in the Bible [is] the covenant instituted by God, the order/[nature] of their relationship to him given by God to the church, and καινὴ διαθήκη [is] a reorganization of this relation[ship] reserved for the end-time, instituted by Christ, as not Revelation, but Revelation " meant.[2]  

Before, therefore, in the writings of Irenaeus, the terminus technicus  For the title one thinks, one must first check whether not one of the older contents is meant in the sense of written documents, but of order and covenant, and if a document seems to be called, whether it is based on an inheritance order, or really the collection of writings is meant.[3]

For Irenaeus there are the two "Testaments".[4] In discussing the commandment to love, Irenaeus points out that "the essential commandments for life in both wills are the same and refer to the same Lord, who, though he has adapted the individual commandments to the circumstances of both wills, as the more important and highest commandments, without which one can not be redeemed, has given the same in both wills".[5] And later, he emphasizes, "that there were two synagogues in two peoples, and yet it is the one and the same God who established them both for the benefit of men; accordingly, the wills were given to those who came to believe in God ... Moreover, that the first will was given neither uselessly nor in vain or by chance".[6]

Strikingly, Irenaeus places the two Testaments first[ly] with "Law" (lex) and "Gospel" (gospel), and [secondly/ secondarily[?]] with "First Testament ('prius testamentum') and "Gospel".  In another chapter it becomes clear that Irenaeus also adds the writings of Paul to the New Testament. [7]  The term  διαθήκη (testamentum) [is] as an 'inheritance testament', interestingly still combined with "gospel": the members of the people "are taken by the spirit to 'the inheritance' and brought into the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, Christ also died: the Gospel testament, which was to be opened and read throughout the world, should first set free his servants. It should then use them to inherit his goods ... Who lives, namely, takes possession of the inheritance." [8]  Here it is clear that, for Irenaeus, "Testament" [is] not only, as usually in his writings, as a "covenant" is to understand but especially with regard to the gospel as an inheritance.

Overall, it is clear, Irenaeus uses the idea of ​​the "Testament" as a "covenant", once as a "certificate of inheritance / subrogation", but only in two secure places he uses the term to identify the collections of writings.  In both passages he does not speak of one will, but of two, equating the one, also called the "first," with the law; the other with the gospel (for this will he also counts Paul's letters elsewhere).

Even more striking, however, is that the opposition of the two wills, as well as the equation with law on the one hand, and gospel on the other hand, indicate that Markion coined the term "New Testament" as opposed to "Old Testament" and Irenaeus [in] two places in Adversus haereses actually dealt with Markion and his followers.  Following on from the first passage, Irenaeus concludes: "There are even more such bids. But they all mean no contradiction (contrarietas) and no dissolution of the old commandments, as the followers of Markion cry out".[9]  

And the second passage, which is connected with the anti-Markionitic anonymous presbyteral report,[10] follows [with]: "He will also judge Markion."[11]

For all that, Irenaeus can only draw the same conclusion that Wolfram Kinzig already made about Tertullian's testimony [of the] Testamentum's use of language. Only when the talk is about Markion and his position does the rapporteur fall into the linguistic usage of that [which] he reports, and speaks of "testament" in the technical sense, as of a collection of writings. [12]

While this technical use of Tertullian's "New Testament" is encountered, he still does not find himself [as] Irenaeus [was/did], who speaks only of the two Testaments, but also of a first, but both of Markion's antithetical characterizations of these as "Old" and "New" Testament refrains, as he ever called Markion's introduction to his "New Testament", Antithesis, by his denial of the antithetic character (contrarietates) of the two wills, as shown rejected.  It seems to me impossible that Irenaeus had already accepted the collection of the scriptures known to us as the "New Testament" under this name.  He must have known the titles of "Old" and "New Testament" from Markion, but while he could speak of the wills, obviously he could not yet penetrate the Christian scriptures, which he seems to know as such, as " New Testament ".


As we will see, and what also Wolfram Kinzig had already pointed, also used [by] Justin Martyr, who is a little older than Irenaeus, [was] the concept of the "New Testament" never as a collection of titles, although [for] "Justin the translation between old and new διαθήκη plays a big role". [13]

However, if "the uniform testimony of the existing tradition makes it clear that this was the title of the archetype" then one would have to assume that the collection of New Testament writings that Irenaeus knew was consciously a - if also critical - continuation and revision of the older collection, which goes back to Markion and which was accepted by Irenaeus in [its] content, but not in terms of their title, and was propagated without a title.


  1. See. (Kinzig 1994)
  2. (Zahn 1888/1892: 103)
  3. Both the major German and English translations of Irenaeus are not always accurate here, and there is doubt [in] cases where it is difficult to decide which translation to use. . Examples are Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. IV 17.5 and 28.1-2 where in the English translation (ANL) for "hic et illic" "both testaments" and finally for "in novo testamento" is called "New Testament", while the German translation here correctly from "Covenant" speaks. .The case is similar in Iren. Adv. Haer. V 34,1. .The same finding is found in the translation of Epid. 91. .A difficult case is Irenaeus., Adv. Haer. IV 32, where, within long reflections on the subject of old and new covenants [in] this chapter comes in which probably more of the "two testaments" is mentioned, as well as the English and German translation.
  4. See Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.  IV 12.3; 28.1; 32.1-2.
  5. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.  IV 12.3.
  6. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.  IV 32.2.
  7. See Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. IV 15.2.
  8. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.  V 9.4.
  9. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.  IV 13,1.
  10. The report is found in Irenaeus., Adv. Haer.  IV 27-32; see, on this report, with older literature (Vinzent 2014: 52-55)
  11. Irenaeus, adv. Haer.  IV 33,1.
  12. (Kinzig 1994)
  13. (Kinzig 1994: 528) There also older literature.

Last edited by MrMacSon on Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:07 am, edited 4 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Two forthcoming Markus Vinzent books

Post by Giuseppe »

What I don't like decisively about Vinzent's introduction to Marcion, is that he assumes that Marcion was remembering a historical man, and insofar he was doing this, the prof doesn't accuse him of Conspiracy and of Invention, but only of 'sacred inspiration', etc.

Couchoud did the same, even if according to him Marcion was deliberately inventing.

But other authors are not so gooders.

The mythicist Guy Fau, for example, accused Marcion of falsification, here, just as the his enemies judaizers.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Publications by Markus Vinzent in recent years

Post by MrMacSon »

Publications of Markus Vinzent in recent years, via https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/per ... tions.html

Methodological Assumptions in the Reconstruction of Marcion's Gospel (Mcn). The Example of the Lord's Prayer
Vinzent, M. 10 Jan 2018, in Das Neue Testament und sein Text im 2. Jahrhundert. Heilmann, J. & Klinghardt, M. (eds.). Tuebingen: Narr, Vol. 61, p. 183 (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter; vol. 61)
Chapter in Book › Chapter

Kontinuitäten und Diskontinuitäten in Liturgischem Übungswissen des frühen Christentums*
Vinzent, M. 2018, in Übungswissen in Religion und Philosophie Religionswissenschaft: Produktion, Weitergabe, Wandel. Renger, A-B. & Stellmacher, A. (eds.). Münster: LIT Verlag, Vol. 15, p. 109-128 (Religionswissenschaft. Forschung und Wisenschaft; vol. 15)
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter
  • ['Continuity/ies and Discontinuity/ies in Liturgical Practice Knowledge in/of early Christianity']

The human Spirit and its Relationship to God with Augustine and Meister Eckhart
Vinzent, M. Oct 2017, in Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur. 146, 4, p. 532-534
Contribution to journal › Article


Marcion and the Making of a Heretic: God and Scripture in the Second Century
Vinzent, M. 23 Mar 2017, in Journal of Theological Studies. 68, p. 345-348
Contribution to journal › Article (this is likely to be a review of Judith Lieu's book of the same name)

The Text of Marcion's Gospel
Vinzent, M. Jan 2017, in Journal of Early Christian Studies. 25, 3, p. 484-488
Contribution to journal › Article (a review of Dieter T Roth's book of the same name)

Christians, the “more obvious” representatives of the religion of Israel than the Rabbis?
Vinzent, M. 2017, in Beyond Priesthood. Religious Entrepreneurs and Innovators in the Roman Empire, (Berlin, 2017) .. Gordon, R. L., Petridou, G. & Rüpke, J. (eds.). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, p. 215-229 (Religionsgeschichteliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten; vol. 66)
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Eckharts deutsche Übersetzung seiner lateinischen Bibelkommentare. Eckharts lateinisches Werk in deutscher Rezeption
Vinzent, M. 2017, in 'Meister-Eckhart-Jahrbuch'. 11, p. 219-258
Contribution to journal › Article


Eckhart’s Early Teaching and Preaching in Paris
Vinzent, M. 2017, in Meister Eckhart in Paris and Strasbourg. Leuven: Peeters, p. 209-265 (Eckhart: Texts and Studies; vol. 4)
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter


Eusebius of Caesarea, Against Marcellus and On Ecclesiastical Theology
Vinzent, M. & McCarthy Spoerl, K., 2017 Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press. (The Fathers of the Church)
Book/Report › Book

Polycarp’s Martyrdom According to the Gospel
Vinzent, M. 2017, in Visions of God and Ideas on Deification in Patristic Thought. Edwards, M. & Ene D-Vasilescu, E. (eds.). Routledge, p. 21-36 (Routledge Studies in the Early Christian World)
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Practical mysticism in Islam and Christianity: a comparative study of Jalal al-Din Rumi and Meister Eckhart
Vinzent, M. 2017, in Medieval Mystical Theology. 26, 2, p. 161-163
Contribution to journal › Article

Sermo XXVIII: “Bene omnia fecit”
Vinzent, M. 2017, in Lectura Eckhardi. Steer, G. & Sturlese, L. (eds.). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, Vol. IV, p. 201-237
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter


Tertullian's Preface on Marcion's Gospel
Vinzent, M. 2017 Leuven: Peeters.
Book/Report › Book

Embodied Early and Medieval Christianity: Challenging its “Canonical” and “Institutional” “Origin”
Vinzent, M. Mar 2016, in: Religion in the Roman Empire. p. 203
Contribution to journal › Article

Earliest “Christian” Art is Jewish Art
Vinzent, M. 2016, in Jewish Art in Its Late Antique Context. Hezser, C. & Leibner, U. (eds.). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, p. 263-277 (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism) Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Eckhart on Space and Time
Vinzent, M. 2016, in Eckhart: Texts and Studies. 6, p. 49-63
Contribution to journal › Article


Meister Eckharts lateinische Texte, überlieferungsgeschichtlich gelesen – am Beispiel seiner Pariser Quästionen
Vinzent, M. 2016, in Überlieferungsgeschichte transdisziplinär. Neue Perspektiven auf ein germanistisches Forschungsparadigma. Klein , D., Brunner, H. & Löser, F. (eds.). Reichert Verlag, p. 123-134 (Wissensliteratur im Mittelalter; vol. 52)
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter


Pseudo-Chrysostom’s Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum in Meister Eckhart
Vinzent, M. 2016, in Studia Patristica. 74, p. 281-301
Contribution to journal › Article

Towards the One. Eckhart on Monotheistic and Trinitarian Mysticism
Vinzent, M. 2016, in Meister Eckhart – interreligiös. Schiewer, R. D. (ed.). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, Vol. 10, p. 207-222 (Meister-Eckhart-Jahrbuch) Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter

Index Eckhardianus: Meister Eckhart und seine Quellen I Die Bibel
Vinzent, M. 2015, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart.
Book/Report › Book


Omnipotence between Duns Scotus and Meister Eckhart
Vinzent, M. 2015, in Archa Verbi. p. 455
Contribution to journal › Article


Die Auferstehung Christi im frühen Christentum [The resurrection of Christ in early Christianity]
Vinzent, M. 2014, Herder.
Book/Report › Book
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by MrMacSon »

.
Studia Patristica. Vol. XCIX
- Marcion of Sinope as Religious Entrepreneur - ISBN: 978-90-429-3656-0

Series: Studia Patristica, 99
Editor: Vinzent M.
Year: 2018

Summary:
Marcion of Sinope, as the vast output of books and papers about this second century teacher has proven since the times when he was alive and still until today, is one of the most known and debated Christian entrepreneurs of the new religious Jesus-movement, perhaps the one who was responsible for the self-denomination ‘Christianity’. In this volume, papers have been collected that originated or were inspired by a workshop in 2014 at the Max-Weber-Kolleg, University of Erfurt, directed by Jan Bremmer, Jörg Rüpke and Markus Vinzent. ‘Marcion of Sinope as Religious Entrepreneur’ is not just a volume on Marcion’s texts, but also on his role and his reception in the second century, particularly in the making of Christianity.

http://www.peeters-leuven.be/boekoverz.asp?nr=10696
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:37 pm .
Studia Patristica. Vol. XCIX
- Marcion of Sinope as Religious Entrepreneur - ISBN: 978-90-429-3656-0
I kind of like to think of Marcion as a popularizer of certain religious ideas, so that title resonates with me.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 7:07 pm
MrMacSon wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:37 pm .
Studia Patristica. Vol. XCIX
- Marcion of Sinope as Religious Entrepreneur - ISBN: 978-90-429-3656-0
I kind of like to think of Marcion as a popularizer of certain religious ideas, so that title resonates with me.
That's interesting, particularly in light of "In this volume, papers have been collected that originated or were inspired by a workshop in 2014 at the Max-Weber-Kolleg, University of Erfurt, directed by Jan Bremmer, Jörg Rüpke and Markus Vinzent."

I was intrigued to see Rüpke's name in light of some of the things he said in the book he published this year, Pantheon: A New History of Roman Religion -

The most influential aspect of Marcionism, however, was neither the institutions it created nor any accompanying rituals, but its historiographical groundwork. In outlining a simple biographical schema, replete with current anecdotes and quotations —here I am following the increasingly mooted, even if still radical position of a second-century date for the canonical gospels and the Acts of the Apostles— Marcion’s portrayal of the life of an apocalyptic visionary and peripatetic preacher, from his first emergence to his rather unusual execution, could be seen as the model of a life turning away from Judaism. He thus orchestrated a rupture that he relocated a century into the past, carefully keeping his narrative free of contemporary references 131 ...

... Marcion invented something new. In the literary environment of the Roman Empire as described, nothing was more natural than to write a Greek-language “biography” as a founding document for a new religious network.

Marcion’s opponents reacted immediately with a weighty intellectual exchange of the sort that a metropolis like Rome made possible; and, as was usual in historiography, they reacted with competing versions.133 ... because Marcion’s competitors were in fact also active in Rome, and, moreover, adopted substantial parts of his model. The author of the text that most plagiarized Marcion was identified a little later, by Marcion himself, as Luke, in an edition that featured the gospel along with some of Paul’s letters. It concentrated on correcting Marcion’s fundamental break with Judaism. With their narratives of Jesus’s childhood, both Luke and Matthew demonstrate how familiar the biographical character of the template was, and also how scant the source background was as soon as one wanted to move beyond that template.

Marcion, for his part, criticized their compositions (and that of Mark) as lying close to his own text.

Writings competing with Marcion’s edition of the 140s AD, which was prefaced by his “Antitheses,” could now only continue to accumulate. AD 160 saw a counter-edition that established the core of the future New Testament. The late addition of Luke’s Acts of the Apostles rescued the philosophical core represented by Paul and took a direction that, while no longer avoiding the gray zones of Jewishness, also provided this orientation with a patron.134 Within the same movement, however, spokesmen such as Luke (in Acts of the Apostles) and Justin (in his Apology) —and perhaps earlier the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas— persisted with the genealogy of exclusion, insisting that the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 was a consequence of the crucifixion of the “anointed one.”135

Still others in this same period, such as the author of the Gospel of Peter, did not shrink from obvious anti-Judaism and fawning to the Roman authorities.136 ... such schismatic polemics would remain a critical source of friction over the coming centuries, providing a forum where agendas of inclusion and exclusion could be exchanged. The polemic propagated by many Christian positions against the “gnosticism” of clearly anti-Judaic stances demonstrates the complexity that was emerging at the margins of a developing tradition.

This now historiographically constructed collective, this genealogy of Christ’s apostles, had no basis in any historical reality of exclusive bonding ...

Professional philosophers who taught for pay may well, like Justin, have read history, but it seldom played any important role in their argumentation. Tatian, Theophilus, and Athenagoras, in their “defenses” of their positions in the late second century, may often have addressed the Augusti formally, but in fact their primary goal was to reassure their students, freshly pressed into the fray, or to carry on disputes with critical colleagues. Christ (let alone Jesus) had no role to play ...

... And the new gospels gave rise to no text-based communities. The only exception was Marcion’s group, founded by a typical, religious, small-scale entrepreneur: a well-traveled merchant, an organizer, an arriviste (at least by virtue of his move to Rome), and more successful with his money than with his writings. Beyond this group and the intellectual conversation circles (in which Marcion, at least since Justin’s attack on him, was fully involved at a literary level), “God’s people’s assembly” (ekklēsia) had no lasting institutional basis: no one precisely knew where Peter and Paul had died, to say nothing of where their graves might be ...

..Christianity had thus been invented historiographically [in the 2nd century] by means of the gospels and the Acts of the Apostles complemented by collections of letters. There was as yet no actual community.


Rüpke, Jörg. Pantheon: A New History of Roman Religion (pp. 355-358). Princeton University Press.


130. On the central work of Harnack and his earlier position, see Harnack 1921, Steck and Harnack 2003, Kinzig 2004. The most important source is Tertullian (see Moreschini 2014).

131. cf. the observations in Becker 2011, 143, on Matthew and Mark (dating them much earlier).

132. Generally, Foley 1987, 1988.

133. See in general Ankersmit 2002, Ascough 2008.

134. Vinzent 2014a, 73. 272–76; for the same dating of the collection on a different basis, see Zwierlein 2010, 143; Zwierlein 2009, 299–301. Nicklas 2014, 218, characterizes Paul’s orientation as a new focus in a Jewish matrix.

135. Clements 2012. On the Acts of the Apostles as a tale of schism, see Cancik 2011, 328–33.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 7:07 pm I kind of like to think of Marcion as a popularizer of certain religious ideas, so that title resonates with me.
There are other interesting things in that thread, eg. --
Peter Kirby wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2015 8:59 am
maryhelena wrote:A solution would be to jettison the consensus dating for the NT Paul and have him a contemporary of Marcion.
Yes!! Why isn't anyone talking about this?

< . . snip . . >

Can we start thinking of Marcion not as some late upstart... but rather as a person who attempted to carry on the mission of Paul, being one of his disciples or former disciples? The phenomenon in general is widely known in the history of religious movements (immediate successor of "founder"), and it's almost conspicuous in its absence in the case of Paul (super charismatic and prodigious guy, tons of contacts and authority, *poof* after death). And who fits the description better than a Paul-o-phile like Marcion?
.
maryhelena wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2015 9:16 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
<snip>
Can we start thinking of Marcion not as some late upstart... but rather as a person who attempted to carry on the mission of Paul, being one of his disciples or former disciples? The phenomenon in general is widely known in the history of religious movements (immediate successor of "founder"), and it's almost conspicuous in its absence in the case of Paul (super charismatic and prodigious guy, tons of contacts and authority, *poof* after death). And who fits the description better than a Paul-o-phile like Marcion?
Yep, but reverse the order - first Marcion then Paul ... ;)

Acts is not history....Paul has been backdated to take the place of Marcion ...
.
-----------------
Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:20 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
Ben C. Smith wrote:An alternative to this that I have been toying with is that Marcion was less an innovator than a popularizer, that what we call "Marcionism" (including the notion of the antitheses) predated Marcion, who simply picked up the torch and ran with it.
Could be.

I would likely agree with the statement, "Marcion was less an innovator than a popularizer."

But I don't think that would imply not writing "Antitheses." (The notion? No idea who had it first.)
I do not doubt that Marcion wrote a book or tract by that title. What I am saying is that it seems possible to me that the kind of idea that book or tract conveyed was already around (the Matthean sermon on the mount has its own set of antithetical statements regarding the law, for example). Maybe, in fact, the idea was around early enough for 1 Timothy to complain about.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 7:37 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 7:07 pm
MrMacSon wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:37 pm .
Studia Patristica. Vol. XCIX
- Marcion of Sinope as Religious Entrepreneur - ISBN: 978-90-429-3656-0
I kind of like to think of Marcion as a popularizer of certain religious ideas, so that title resonates with me.
That's interesting, particularly in light of "In this volume, papers have been collected that originated or were inspired by a workshop in 2014 at the Max-Weber-Kolleg, University of Erfurt, directed by Jan Bremmer, Jörg Rüpke and Markus Vinzent."

I was intrigued to see Rüpke's name in light of some of the things he said in the book he published this year, Pantheon: A New History of Roman Religion -
....

In the literary environment of the Roman Empire as described, nothing was more natural than to write a Greek-language “biography” as a founding document for a new religious network.

....
Good quote overall, but I personally question this line. I have argued that none of the gospel literature gives us an example of Greco-Roman biography. Almost certainly none of their antecedents would, either.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Forthcoming Markus Vinzent books [& his recent publications]

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Thu Dec 27, 2018 8:32 pm
....
In the literary environment of the Roman Empire as described, nothing was more natural than to write a Greek-language “biography” as a founding document for a new religious network.
....
Pantheon: A New History of Roman Religion
.
Good quote overall, but I personally question this line. I have argued that none of the gospel literature gives us an example of Greco-Roman biography. Almost certainly none of their antecedents would, either.

Yes, I agree re both "none of the gospel literature gives us an example of Greco-Roman biography" and re that line. I left it in because it provides context to the very next paragraph^^.

And Rüpke also made a lot of the Shepherd of Hermas and a few other texts, eg. -

.
... Judeo-Christian narrative texts, surviving in sufficient numbers for us to find variants at different locations, once again show us the boldness with which individual authors have introduced new ideas into existing narrative schemata, going so far beyond reproduction as to justify the use of such descriptive terms as “rewritten Bible” or “rewritten gospel.” The gospel described as the Epistle of the Apostles, for example, is configured as a dialogue with the risen Jesus. An apostolic pair, characterized simply as “we,” learn from Jesus that he appeared to the virgin Mary in the shape of the archangel Gabriel and spoke with her in such a way that her heart received him, and she believed and laughed. He was thus his own servant, and would assume that role again, in the guise of an angel, before returning to his father. There are similar new attempts at explanations in the Ascension of Isaiah, where Mary conceives upon catching sight of a baby. The author of the Gospel of the Saviour, again probably written in the second century, and likewise in dialogue form, does not hesitate to make Jesus announce that he will descend into “Hades.”

Rüpke, Jörg (2018) Pantheon: A New History of Roman Religion (p. 347). Princeton University Press. Kindle Edition.
.

Post Reply