1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Jax wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 7:12 amNice Ben, thanks.
No problem.
I'm coming to the conclusion that an early dating, while I would love it to be true for my early Paul theory, is in fact a dead end. With the mention of the Temple being probably an interpolation and the persecutions under Domitian or Nero probably having no merit (Dave's book link above has a very good write up on this) the only thing left is the mention of Peter and Paul being of this generation, whatever that means.

Ellegard was also arguing for a Christianity before the common era, but I personally feel that he was going for a bit of a stretch with some of his evidence (like Clement). I'm just glad that I have guys like you all around to help me vet information like this. I agree totally with his Teacher of Righteousness/Essene origin of Christianity, for Paul anyway, but doubt some of his evidence supporting that theory.

The insertion of a completely different letter into 1 Clement is interesting however. The 'letter' is long and boring as it is, why try peoples patience even more with this insertion. What purpose really does it fulfill?
Good question.

If Peter is right about this passage being an interpolation, it is an open question whether the inserted text is younger or older than the rest of 1 Clement. The Apology of Aristides, for example, is far older than the medieval Christian novel Barlaam and Josaphat, but the Apology is found, with modifications, as a speech on the lips of Nachor in chapter 27 of the novel.

Sometimes scribes in possession of a scrap of text which they value will insert that text into a manuscript just to preserve it (these scraps will typically be found at the end of manuscripts whose last intended text fell a bit short of the end of the codex or whatnot). In this case, however, the insertion being into the middle of an existing letter, perhaps there was a motive to give the (Jewish?) text some (Christian) authority, and Clement of Rome's name was used in that way in other cases, as well (2 Clement, the Recognitions, the Homilies, the Apostolic Constitutions, and so on).

More study is clearly required. :cheers:
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Jax »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 8:30 am More study is clearly required. :cheers:
Totally! :D
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

rgprice wrote: Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:20 am
Paul the Uncertain wrote: Wed Sep 25, 2019 6:13 am It is not obvious that in the other Matthew examples, Matthew is closer to 1 Clement than Mark is:


Mt 15:8 ~ Mk 7:6 ~ 1 Clem 15:2
The chance of having read one Gospel is higher than having read two. If everything can be accounted for via one, that seems the cleaner explanation.
I think that Mark is Clement's source or the source of his source ...

1)
The wording of Clement follows closely the Septuagint in quoting Isaiah. The only exception is 1 Clement 15:2 (quotation of Isa 29:13)

'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.

with the phrase "Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς (This the people) ..." instead of “ ... ὁ λαὸς οὗτος (The people this) ...”. But Mark used exactly this phrase in Mark 7:6. Matthew switched back to the wording of the LXX. It's a direct relationship between Mark and Clement and I tend to think that one must have copied the other.

LXX Isa 29:13
ὁ λαὸς οὗτος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ
καὶ ἐν τοῖς χείλεσιν αὐτῶν τιμῶσί με,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ·

Cod.Sin. Isa 29:13
ο λαοϲ ουτοϲ · τοιϲ χιλεϲιν αυτων τιμουϲιν με ·
η δε καρδιαʼ αυτων πορω απεχι απ εμου

Mark 7:6
Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ·

1. Clement 15:2
Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ

2. Clement 3:5
Ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ

Matthew 15:7
Ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ


2)
In 1 Clement there is no peculiarity that could explain an intentional change in the wording of Isaiah 29:13.

But Mark always emphasized the word "οὗτος". He used the word "οὗτος" 12 times. At no point, the word is unstressed. It seems most likely that Mark changed the wording of Isaiah 29:13 in a way that the word "οὗτος" (this) is at the beginning and before "ὁ λαὸς" and is particularly highlighted. Clement quoted Mark naively.

Mark
2:7 Why does this (οὗτος) man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?
3:35 For whoever does the will of God, he (οὗτος) is my brother and sister and mother.
4:41 Who then is this (οὗτος), that even the wind and the sea obey him?
6:3 Is not this (οὗτος) the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James
6:16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, he (οὗτος) has been raised.”
7:6 the Isaiah quote
9:7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This (οὗτος) is my beloved Son ...
12:7 But those tenants said to one another, ‘This (οὗτος) is the heir. Come, let us kill him
12:10 The stone that the builders rejected this (οὗτος) has become the cornerstone
13:13 And you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one (οὗτος) who endures to the end will be saved
14:69 And the servant girl saw him and began again to say to the bystanders, “This (οὗτος) man is one of them.”
15:39 And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he8 breathed his last, he said, “Truly this (οὗτος) man was the Son of God!

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:46 pm
rgprice wrote: Wed Sep 25, 2019 10:20 am
Paul the Uncertain wrote: Wed Sep 25, 2019 6:13 am It is not obvious that in the other Matthew examples, Matthew is closer to 1 Clement than Mark is:


Mt 15:8 ~ Mk 7:6 ~ 1 Clem 15:2
The chance of having read one Gospel is higher than having read two. If everything can be accounted for via one, that seems the cleaner explanation.
I think that Mark is Clement's source or the source of his source ...

1)
The wording of Clement follows closely the Septuagint in quoting Isaiah. The only exception is 1 Clement 15:2 (quotation of Isa 29:13)

'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.

with the phrase "Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς (This the people) ..." instead of “ ... ὁ λαὸς οὗτος (The people this) ...”. But Mark used exactly this phrase in Mark 7:6. Matthew switched back to the wording of the LXX. It's a direct relationship between Mark and Clement and I tend to think that one must have copied the other.

LXX Isa 29:13
ὁ λαὸς οὗτος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ
καὶ ἐν τοῖς χείλεσιν αὐτῶν τιμῶσί με,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ·

Cod.Sin. Isa 29:13
ο λαοϲ ουτοϲ · τοιϲ χιλεϲιν αυτων τιμουϲιν με ·
η δε καρδιαʼ αυτων πορω απεχι απ εμου

Mark 7:6
Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ·

1. Clement 15:2
Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ

2. Clement 3:5
Ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ

Matthew 15:7
Ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ,
ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ


2)
In 1 Clement there is no peculiarity that could explain an intentional change in the wording of Isaiah 29:13.

But Mark always emphasized the word "οὗτος". He used the word "οὗτος" 12 times. At no point, the word is unstressed. It seems most likely that Mark changed the wording of Isaiah 29:13 in a way that the word "οὗτος" (this) is at the beginning and before "ὁ λαὸς" and is particularly highlighted. Clement quoted Mark naively.

Mark
2:7 Why does this (οὗτος) man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?
3:35 For whoever does the will of God, he (οὗτος) is my brother and sister and mother.
4:41 Who then is this (οὗτος), that even the wind and the sea obey him?
6:3 Is not this (οὗτος) the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James
6:16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, he (οὗτος) has been raised.”
7:6 the Isaiah quote
9:7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This (οὗτος) is my beloved Son ...
12:7 But those tenants said to one another, ‘This (οὗτος) is the heir. Come, let us kill him
12:10 The stone that the builders rejected this (οὗτος) has become the cornerstone
13:13 And you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one (οὗτος) who endures to the end will be saved
14:69 And the servant girl saw him and began again to say to the bystanders, “This (οὗτος) man is one of them.”
15:39 And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he8 breathed his last, he said, “Truly this (οὗτος) man was the Son of God!

A few counterpoints.

First, all but three of Mark's usages of the nominative singular οὗτος are referring to Jesus (or to somebody who represents Jesus, like the heir in the parable). This strikes me as a somewhat specialized usage which might not really be applicable to instances of the same word which refer to someone or something else.

Second, 1 Clement loves to front the demonstrative adjective in its own clause or sentence (limiting it to the nominative case only is artificial and would have to be justified):

1 Clement 6.1 Τούτοις τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ὁσίως πολιτευσαμένοις συνηθροίσθη πολὺ πλῆθος ἐκλεκτῶν οἵτινες πολλαῖς αἰκίαις καὶ βασάνοις διὰ ζῆλος παθόντες ὑπόδειγμα κάλλιστον ἐγένοντο ἐν ἡμῖν.
1 Clement 15.2 λέγει γὰρ που, Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ.
1 Clement 13.3 ταύτῃ τῇ ἐντολῇ καὶ τοῖς παραγγέλμασιν τούτοις στηρίξωμεν ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὸ πορεύεσθαι ὑπηκόους ὄντας τοῖς ἁγιοπρεπέσι λόγοις αὐτοῦ ταπεινοφρονοῦντες φησὶν γὰρ ὁ ἅγιος λόγος.
1 Clement 20.11 ταῦτα πάντα ὁ μέγας δημιουργὸς καὶ δεσπότης τῶν ἁπάντων ἐν εἰρήνῃ καὶ ὁμονοίᾳ προσέταξεν εἶναι εὐεργετῶν τὰ πάντα ὑπερεκπερισσῶς δὲ ἡμᾶς τοὺς προσπεφευγότας τοῖς οἰκτιρμοῖς αὐτοῦ διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
1 Clement 22.1 Ταῦτα δὲ πάντα βεβαιοῖ ἡ ἐν Χριστῷ πίστις καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸς διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου οὕτως προσκαλεῖται ἡμᾶς Δεῦτε τέκνα ἀκούσατέ μου φόβον κυρίου διδάξω ὑμᾶς.
1 Clement 27.1 Ταύτῃ οὖν τῇ ἐλπίδι προσδεδέσθωσαν αἱ ψυχαὶ ἡμῶν τῷ πιστῷ ἐν ταῖς ἐπαγγελίαις καὶ τῷ δικαίῳ ἐν τοῖς κρίμασιν.
1 Clement 33.6 ταῦτα οὖν πάντα τελειώσας ἐπῄνεσεν αὐτὰ καὶ ηὐλόγησεν καὶ εἶπεν Αὐξάνεσθε καὶ πληθύνεσθε.
1 Clement 36.1 Αὕτη ἡ ὁδός ἀγαπητοί ἐν ᾗ εὕρομεν τὸ σωτήριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν τὸν ἀρχιερέα τῶν προσφορῶν ἡμῶν τὸν προστάτην καὶ βοηθὸν τῆς ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν.
1 Clement 38.4 ταῦτα οὖν πάντα ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἔχοντες ὀφείλομεν κατὰ πάντα εὐχαριστεῖν αὐτῷ ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν.
1 Clement 47.7 καὶ αὕτη ἡ ἀκοὴ οὐ μόνον εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐχώρησεν ἀλλὰ καὶ εἰς τοὺς ἑτεροκλινεῖς ὑπάρχοντας ἀφ᾽ ἡμῶν ὥστε καὶ βλασφημίας ἐπιφέρεσθαι τῷ ὀνόματι κυρίου διὰ τὴν ὑμετέραν ἀφροσύνην ἑαυτοῖς δὲ κίνδυνον ἐπεξεργάζεσθαι.
1 Clement 48.3 αὕτη ἡ πύλη τοῦ κυρίου δίκαιοι εἰσελεύσονται ἐν αὐτῇ.
1 Clement 50.7 οὗτος ὁ μακαρισμὸς ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τοὺς ἐκλελεγμένους ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν.

The author does not always do so, but it is pretty frequent, even in cases in which the demonstrative is used substantively:

1 Clement 6.3 ζῆλος ἀπηλλοτρίωσεν γαμετὰς ἀνδρῶν καὶ ἠλλοίωσεν τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἀδάμ, Τοῦτο νῦν ὀστοῦν ἐκ τῶν ὀστέων μου καὶ σὰρξ ἐκ τῆς σαρκός μου.
1 Clement 7.1 Ταῦτα ἀγαπητοί οὐ μόνον ὑμᾶς νουθετοῦντες ἐπιστέλλομεν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἑαυτοὺς ὑπομιμνήσκοντες ἐν γὰρ τῷ αὐτῷ ἐσμὲν σκάμματι καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς ἡμῖν ἀγὼν ἐπίκειται.
1 Clement 10.2 οὗτος δι᾽ ὑπακοῆς ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκ τῆς συγγενείας αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ οἴκου τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ὅπως γῆν ὀλίγην καὶ συγγένειαν ἀσθενῆ καὶ οἶκον μικρὸν καταλιπὼν κληρονομήσῃ τὰς ἐπαγγελίας τοῦ θεοῦ λέγει γὰρ αὐτῷ.
1 Clement 16.4 οὗτος τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν ὀδυνᾶται καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐλογισάμεθα αὐτὸν εἶναι ἐν πόνῳ καὶ ἐν πληγῇ καὶ ἐν κακώσει.
1 Clement 35.6 ταῦτα γὰρ οἱ πράσσοντες στυγητοὶ τῷ θεῷ ὑπάρχουσιν οὐ μόνον δὲ οἱ πράσσοντες αὐτά ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ συνευδοκοῦντες αὐτοῖς.
1 Clement 35.9 ταῦτα ἐποίησας καὶ ἐσίγησα ὑπέλαβες ἄνομε ὅτι ἔσομαί σοι ὅμοιος.
1 Clement 45.5 ταῦτα πάσχοντες εὐκλεῶς ἤνεγκαν.
1 Clement 54.3 τοῦτο ὁ ποιήσας ἑαυτῷ μέγα κλέος ἐν Χριστῷ περιποιήσεται καὶ πᾶς τόπος δέξεται αὐτόν τοῦ γὰρ κυρίου ἡ γῆ καὶ τὸ πλήρωμα αὐτῆς.
1 Clement 54.4 ταῦτα οἱ πολιτευόμενοι τὴν ἀμεταμέλητον πολιτείαν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐποίησαν καὶ ποιήσουσιν.
1 Clement 63.4 τοῦτο δὲ ἐποιήσαμεν ἵνα εἰδῆτε ὅτι πᾶσα ἡμῖν φροντὶς καὶ γέγονεν καὶ ἔστιν εἰς τὸ ἐν τάχει ὑμᾶς εἰρηνεῦσαι.

1 Clement 15.2 does not appear to stand out from other Clementine examples of this sort of phrase.

Third, several of the church fathers make this same change (if that is what it is) to the OG of Isaiah, and in contexts which suggest no influence from Mark in particular over and against Matthew (raw TLG data):

Origenes Theol., Fragmenta in Psalmos 1–150 [Dub.] (2042: 044) “Analecta sacra spicilegio Solesmensi parata, vols. 2 and 3”, Ed. Pitra, J.B. 2:Paris; 3:Venice: 2:Tusculum; 3:St. Lazarus Monastery, 2:1884; 3:1883, Repr. 1966. Psalm 77, verse 36, line 4

Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτοῦ πόῤῥω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ.

Amphilochius Scr. Eccl., Contra haereticos (2112: 011) “Amphilochii Iconiensis opera”, Ed. Datema, C. Turnhout: Brepols, 1978. Line 459

Χωρισθέντες γὰρ ἀπ' ἀλλήλων <πό>λεμον ἀδιάλλακτον κατ' ἐκείνων ἔχουσιν, ὅπως ἴδωμεν τὴν τούτων ἐγκράτειαν καὶ τίνων ἐγκρατεύονται· λόγου <δὲ> ἐπαγγείλασθαι ἐγκράτειαν ἢ ἀπόταξιν οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν οὐδὲ καμάτου πρόξενον· ἀλλ' οὐ ζητεῖται λόγος μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ἔργον, Λέγει γὰρ ὁ κύριος ἐν εὐαγγελίοις· Τί <δέ με κα>λε<ῖτε>· κύριε, κύριε· καὶ οὐ ποιεῖτε ἃ λέγω· καὶ Ἠσαΐ<ας> ὁ π<ρο>φήτης· Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, τῇ δὲ κα<ρδίᾳ πόρρ>ω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ· μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με, καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς.

Theodoretus Scr. Eccl., Theol., Historia religiosa (= Philotheus) (4089: 004) “Théodoret de Cyr. L'histoire des moines de Syrie, 2 vols.”, Ed. Canivet, P., Leroy–Molinghen, A. Paris: Cerf, 1:1977; 2:1979; Sources chrétiennes 234, 257. Vita 1, section 10, line 26

ἐφρόνουν, γυμνοῦν δὲ τὴν σφῶν οὐκ ἐθάρρουν ἀσέβειαν, ἀλλὰ δελεάσμασί τισι συνεκάλυπτον, οὐ πᾶσι μὲν γνωρίμοις, τοῖς δὲ ἀκριβέσι τῆς ἀληθείας μύσταις καὶ μάλα δήλοις – , ὑπαγορεύεται μὲν ἡ κατὰ πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐπὶ τοῦ πάροντος κρατοῦσά τε καὶ κηρυττομένη τῆς πίστεως ὁμολογία, ὑπεσημήναντο δὲ ἅπαντες, καὶ τῇ χειρὶ καὶ τῷ καλάμῳ οὕτω πιστεύειν καὶ φρονεῖν ὡμολόγησαν· ἀλλ' οἱ πλείους μὲν ἄσμενοι τοῦτο ἐποίουν, ἑπτὰ δέ τινες τῆς Ἀρείου βλασφημίας συνήγοροι τῇ μὲν γλώττῃ καὶ τῇ χειρὶ συνωμολόγησαν, ἀντιφθεγγομένην δὲ τῇ γλώττῃ τὴν γνώμην ἐπέκτηντο κατὰ τὴν προφητείαν τὴν λέγουσαν· «Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, τῇ δὲ καρδίᾳ πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ» καὶ κατὰ τὴν Ἱερεμίου φωνὴν τὴν διαρρήδην βοῶσαν· «Ἐγγὺς εἶ σὺ τοῦ στόματος αὐτῶν, καὶ πόρρω ἀπὸ τῶν νεφρῶν αὐτῶν».

Theodoretus Scr. Eccl., Theol., Interpretatio in Psalmos Volume 80, page 1900, line 19

Καὶ νῦν μέν φησιν ὁ προφήτης Ἱερεμίας πρὸς τὸν τῶν ὅλων Θεόν· «Ἐγγὺς εἶ στόματος αὐτῶν, καὶ πόῤῥω ἀπὸ τῶν νεφρῶν αὐτῶν·» νῦν δὲ αὐτὸς ὁ Θεὸς διὰ Ἡσαΐου τοῦ προφήτου Ἰουδαίων κατηγορεῖ λέγων· «Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, τῇ δὲ καρδίᾳ πόῤῥω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ.

It feels like a very natural change to make without any help from anybody else, especially if one is fronting this entire phrase (unlike the OG of Isaiah).

Fourth, 1 Clement says that this verse is found "somewhere" (που), so it sounds as if the author is either quoting from memory or using an unmarked or insufficiently marked list of testimonial passages. For, if he were using Matthew or Mark, he would know that this quote is found in Isaiah ("rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites," Matthew 15.7 = Mark 7.6). That he does not seem to know indicates that he is probably not using either of these two gospels. (You held out the possibility that he was using a source which had already used Mark as a source, and that is still possible with respect to this observation, provided that the intermediate text had removed Isaiah as the prophet in question.) Of course, 1 Clement is often vague about specific scriptural sources, so perhaps this is just an affectation, but it seems at least as likely that the author is using a list of testimonia: a phenomenon which has, in my judgment, been underappreciated since the days of J. Rendel Harris.

Fifth, how many gospels do we think the author of 1 Clement knew? If οὗτος ὁ λαὸς is evidence for Mark, we already have scads more evidence for Matthew in 1 Clement 13.2; and "as you give, so it will be given to you" in 1 Clement 13.2 would have to be evidence for Luke. Did he know all three synoptics?

My two cents.

PS: For reference:

I = Isaiah.
M = Matthew.
K = Mark.
C = 1 Clement.
O = Origen.
A = Amphilochius.
T = Theodoretus.

I: ἐγγίζει μοι ὁ λαὸς οὗτος [ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐν] τοῖς χείλεσιν αὐτῶν τιμῶσίν με, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ.
M: ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ.
K: οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ.
C: οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἄπεστιν ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ.
O: οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτοῦ πόῤῥω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ.
A: οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, τῇ δὲ καρδίᾳ πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ.
T: οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί με τιμᾷ, τῇ δὲ καρδίᾳ πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ.

I: μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με διδάσκοντες ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων καὶ διδασκαλίας.
M: μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων.
K: μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων.
A: μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με.

ETA: Let me add that, if the change in word order (ὁ λαὸς οὗτος to οὗτος ὁ λαὸς, or vice versa) is best explained by one author having consulted another (if, for example, 1 Clement needed Mark in order to get from the Old Greek's word order to Mark's word order), then Marcan priority becomes difficult to defend on this point, since the easiest solution would be for Matthew to have copied from Isaiah (making a change or two) and Mark to have copied from Matthew (making one more change). To go in the other direction would require Matthew (A) to have had both Mark and Isaiah at hand, (B) to have checked Mark against Isaiah, and (C) to have changed οὗτος ὁ λαὸς back to ὁ λαὸς οὗτος without also having changed με τιμᾷ back to τιμῶσίν με or τοῖς χείλεσίν back to τοῖς χείλεσιν αὐτῶν. But I think this is all moot, since I doubt that anybody needed to consult anybody else in order to arrive at this simple switch of word order (noun-adjective to adjective-noun); a simple preference would explain matters. Finally, I should add for the sake of completeness that Mark bears a textual variant in this very phrase, with both Bezae and Vaticanus opting for ὁ λαὸς οὗτος instead of for οὗτος ὁ λαὸς, though at this moment I am inclined to ignore (like the critical editions) this powerful confluence of East and West because the manuscripts may have been restoring the Old Greek's word order.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Giuseppe »

1 Clement says that Paul went to Spain.

It is curious the fact that the Gerasene episode in Mark (considered by me as an anti-pauline parody) is based, according to a possible exegesis, on Gerasa being Gades in Spain.

He then goes on to say that part of the tribe of Gad had settled in Spain. His reasoning for this is that in the ancient world, there was a region in southern Spain called Tartessos. Situated in the area of Tartessos was a coastal town called Gades/Gadir/Gadira, now modern-day Cadiz. He speculates further that because the town of Gades has Gad in its name, it is evidence that it was inhabited by members of the tribe of Gad. Jacobovici believes Tartessos to be the place referred to in the Book of Jonah as Tarshish.

https://eyesofreason.com/tag/gades/
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Secret Alias »

And there is a Manchester NH and a Manchester in the UK so perhaps the Premier League is really played in New England rather than England.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Giuseppe »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:23 am And there is a Manchester NH and a Manchester in the UK so perhaps the Premier League is really played in New England rather than England.
you may disagree with the view but before you should note that the case for Gadara=Gades is academic:
Eric C. Stewart (Gathered around Jesus: An Alternative Spatial Practice in the Gospel of Mark, pp. 261-2 — a University of Notre Dame thesis) refers to a study that argues Jesus’ voyage to the Gadarenes — where he exorcises the man possessed by Legion — is best read against the Greco-Roman traditions of sailing through the Straits of Gibraltar that were considered the gateways to land of the dead

https://vridar.org/2012/03/23/jesus-jou ... l-of-mark/
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Giuseppe »

Hence, Mark was written after 1 Clement. But when was 1 Clement written?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Secret Alias »

The issue for me is to determine

(1) is 1 Clement using a written gospel?

The answer is yes.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 1 Clement & the Gospel of Matthew?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:48 am The issue for me is to determine

(1) is 1 Clement using a written gospel?

The answer is yes.
On what basis? And what kind of gospel? Is it a sayings gospel like Thomas is and Q is imagined to be? Or is it a narrative gospel? Or something else?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply