An Argument in Favor of Mark being the Gospel of the Marcionites

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12431
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

An Argument in Favor of Mark being the Gospel of the Marcionites

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:09 pm

1. the Western text of Mark 13:2 is the earliest form of that verse - there will not be left here stone upon stone (λίθος ἐπὶ λίθον) that will not be thrown down and in three days another will be raised without hands

(1) D/05, W/032, it-a,b,c,d,e,ff2,i,k,n,r1, Cyprian support this reading... which comprises 11 of the 14 earliest witnesses to this verse... *every* known Western witness to the verse... so it's not a mere singular rogue reading... it's the unified voice of the entire Western tradition... evidently back to its origins... It's *not* a harmonization to Mark 14:58 (or Jn 2:19) as Mill, Wettstein, Griesbach, Matthaei, Schulz, Westcott & Hort, and virtually everyone else thought... it doesn't match. Instead, it is a carefully composed allusion to the book of Daniel... which is characteristic of the author of Mark... not a later scribe... and the emphasis on Daniel is especially pronounced in Mark 13 (son of man, coming with clouds, kingdom, abomination of desolation, martyrdom, resurrection)

(2) ανευ χειρων is the wording of Dan 2:34-35, 44-45... the *ONLY* time that phrase occurs in the Greek Bible is Dan 2 and Mark 13:2 Western text. The antecedent of αλλος is NEITHER ιερον NOR ναος... BUT λιθος... the Western text is stating that another *stone* will be raised... the stone is the kingdom of God in Dan 2:34-35, 44-45... Western text of Mark 13:2 is predicting the kingdom of God will replace the temple

(3) αναστησεται is the wording of Dan 2:34-35, 44-45... a stone/kingdom will be raised...

(4) δια των τριων ημερων is a time reference based on Daniel 9:27 (literally in Greek, "and in half of the seven/week" και εν τω ημισει της εβδομαδος)... apocalyptic immediacy as found elsewhere in Mark 1:15; 9:1; 13:30; 14:62

(5) The Western text is the reading that best explains the origins of the readings. It's difficult to imagine a later scribe constructing such a carefully worded allusion to Daniel (especially αλλος referring to λιθος as the kingdom of God) and inserting it at this point in the text at a later time... if this Western reading is earliest, it also helps explain why there are so many refs to Jesus replacing the Temple in Jesus traditions (Mk 14:58; 15:29-30; Mt 26:61; 27:40; Acts 6:14; Jn 2:19; Gospel of Thomas 71)

2. Dialogue Adamantius - The stone was the Kingdom of God, appearing in glory, and the statue was the kingdom on earth. It is proven, then, through the Law and the Prophets, that Christ has not yet come, for if He had there would not be another kingdom on earth
MEG. The proof that Christ is not the son of the Just God is very clear to me: The Christ of the law has not yet come. If he had what David announced regarding Him would be coming to fulfilment: "Why were nations insolent, and why did peoples think vain thoughts? The kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against His Christ." Again, "Ask of me, and I will give you nations for your inheritance"148, c And following: "Though wilt shepherd them with a rod of iron." This proves that the Christ who has come is someone else, for neither kings nor Christ who has come is someone else, for neither kings nor rulers were against Him, nor were Gentiles ruled with an iron rod.

AD. Those who were supposed to rule and govern in Israel, and who had authority to put to death and to spare, all came against Christ. And that they were ruled with a rod of iron is demonstrated by the prophecy of Daniel: "After the gold, the silver and the brass shall arise a kingdom of iron."150 This has proved to be the Roman power151, d by which those who opposed Christ were ruled. And the Gentiles have been given Him for an inheritance: Concerning this, David says, "O Lord, remember us in favouring They people: visit us in saving Thy nation; [that we may give praise with Thy inheritance"152. It is apparent that this is the inheritance of the Gentiles for which He asked]153.

EUTR. If there had not existed any authority of kings and rulers, how could Christ have been crucified?

MEG. Daniel says, "I saw, and behold, a stone was cut out of a mountain without hands: and it struck the image and made it like a cloud of dust, and it was blown away by the wind" The stone was the Kingdom of God, appearing in glory, and the statue was the kingdom on earth. It is proven, then, through the Law and the Prophets, that Christ has not yet come, for if He had there would not be another kingdom on earth as Daniel declared. That all the kingdoms do exist shows that the Christ announced through the Law has not yet arrived.

AD: What has been reasonably stated in the Scriptures you want to interpret unreasonably. The Prophets and the Gospel plainly speak of two Advents of Christ — the first in humility, and the one after this, in glory, f Isaiah spoke in this way of the first: "We saw Him, and He had neither beauty nor form. But His form was despised and more abject than the sons of men"155. And again: "Behold by Servant, whom I have chosen, My only beloved156, in whom My soul has been well pleased he shall not contend, nor cry out in the streets. The bruised reed He shall not break; and a spent157 flax He shall not extinguish"^8. 819a Further: "Rejoice, O daughter of Jerusalem, greatly; proclaim, O daughter of Sion, Behold your King comes, meek, and mounted upon an ass"159. This is just what has been clearly indicated in the Gospel: that He came into Jerusalem, seated upon an ass160. It is plain, then, that He comes in glory, and once in humility. The Apostle Paul also knows about His coming in glory, for he says, "With the commandment of God, and with the voice of an archangel, and with the last trumpet, the Lord shall come down from heaven, and the dead shall rise — these first. Then we who are left to His coming, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Him"161.

MEG: This is similar to what Daniel says: b "I saw One like a son of man coming though the clouds."

AD: And in the Gospel it says, "As lightning comes out of the east and appears even (50) unto the west: so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.' His first coming has been very clearly demonstrated — that it was in humility, and the future coming, that it will be in glory164. So as, when He lived on earth, He announced another coming — the one that is to be in glory
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 12431
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: An Argument in Favor of Mark being the Gospel of the Marcionites

Post by Secret Alias » Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:08 pm

There are three questions:

1. why of all the 'Old Testament' books do the Marcionites focus on Daniel?
2. what is the Mark 13:2 (western text) take an interest in Daniel 2:34?
3. is the Marcionite interest in Daniel 2:34 connected to Mark 13:2?

Let me start with (2):

Jesus is likened in Luke 20:18 to a destroying stone that will crush its opponents, an allusion to Dan. 2:34:
Jesus looked directly at them and asked, “Then what is the meaning of that which is written: “‘The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed.”
This is said with the Jews listening explaining the fact that it later comes back in his trial. Some background on the western text of Mark 13:2

Several Old Latin witnesses have an interpolation at the end of Mark 13:2 based on Mark 14:58, although the wording differs. The earliest witness is Cyprian, who reads et post triduum aliud excitabitur sine manibus ('after three days another [stone] will be raised up without hands")

Codex Bezae Mark 13:2 - και μετα τριων ημερων αλλος αναστησεται ανευ χειρων
“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

Martin Klatt
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 5:10 am

Re: An Argument in Favor of Mark being the Gospel of the Marcionites

Post by Martin Klatt » Sun Feb 09, 2020 4:39 pm

Last edited by Martin Klatt on Wed Feb 12, 2020 12:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
What I have written, I have written........., but it ain't necessarily so.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12431
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: An Argument in Favor of Mark being the Gospel of the Marcionites

Post by Secret Alias » Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:04 pm

I agree. I think Jesus' identification as the "another stone" is tied to two powers theology. And it was made before Jewish witnesses hence it being brought up at the trial. It wasn't a false witness originally. Jesus says he is the stone which destroys the temple. In the third century Jews understood the stone was the messiah:
Now Daniel had seen the King Messiah, as stated: “You looked on until a stone was cut out without hands” (Dan 2:34). Resh Laqish said: “This stone is the King Messiah.” “Then it struck the image on its feet” (Dan 2:34), that is, struck all the kingdoms which were set in the image. Now by virtue of what is the King Messiah likened to a stone? By virtue of Jacob, (of whom) it is stated: "From there (comes) the shepherd the stone of Israel" (Gen 49:24). "That stone was cut from the mountain," so that it consumes the whole world, as it is stated: "And he shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth" (Isa 1 1:4).
It is worth noting that in contemporary Aramaic there is some evidence that the 'stone' here might have meant 'gem.'

3 gem Qumran, JLAtg, Gal, PTA, Syr, LJLA. 4QTQah 3,2:11 : ٠٠٠]בה יקרו א֗ב֗ניא ‏ . TgO Ex31:5 : וֻבאֻומָנֻות אַבַן טָבָא ‏ . BR 125:3(2) : אבן טבא ‏ . TN Ex25:7 : אבנין טבין ואבנין דאשלמן למקבעא באפודא ובחשנא ‏ precious stones and stones for setting in the ephod and the breastplate.
“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

Post Reply