Qn and GMarc Reconstruction Update

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
perseusomega9
Posts: 676
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am
Contact:

Re: Qn and GMarc Reconstruction Update

Post by perseusomega9 » Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:11 am

vocesanticae wrote:
Wed Sep 23, 2020 3:32 pm

Can you point me to any scholarly publications that claim that Tertullian was not consulting and quoting from Marcion's Gospel? I honestly have never come across this view in the scholarly literature, even from those who take the most minimalist approach to reconstructing Marcion's Gospel.
Yet even with these it is difficult to gain a
confident picture of the development of Tertullian’s direct knowledge of
Marcionite teaching. It is widely agreed that Books IV and V of Against
Marcion were written only for the final version of the work, as a result of
Tertullian having acquired direct access to ‘the actual Scriptures which
Marcion uses’, something that is only in prospect in Book I (AM I. 15.1;
16.2; 29.9). On the other hand, although already in Book I he appealed to
Marcion’s ‘Antitheses’, ‘that is the contradictory oppositions which attempt
to establish the disagreement between Gospel and Law in order to argue
for the difference of Gods from the difference of ideas in each document’
(I. 19.4; cf. IV. 4.3), it is, as shall be seen, far from certain how much he knew
of these, and when.14

- Lieu, Marcion and Making of a Heretic p53
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe

vocesanticae
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2020 3:10 pm

Re: Qn and GMarc Reconstruction Update

Post by vocesanticae » Sun Sep 27, 2020 7:46 am

perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Sep 24, 2020 4:11 am
vocesanticae wrote:
Wed Sep 23, 2020 3:32 pm

Can you point me to any scholarly publications that claim that Tertullian was not consulting and quoting from Marcion's Gospel? I honestly have never come across this view in the scholarly literature, even from those who take the most minimalist approach to reconstructing Marcion's Gospel.
Yet even with these it is difficult to gain a
confident picture of the development of Tertullian’s direct knowledge of
Marcionite teaching. It is widely agreed that Books IV and V of Against
Marcion were written only for the final version of the work, as a result of
Tertullian having acquired direct access to ‘the actual Scriptures which
Marcion uses’, something that is only in prospect in Book I (AM I. 15.1;
16.2; 29.9). On the other hand, although already in Book I he appealed to
Marcion’s ‘Antitheses’, ‘that is the contradictory oppositions which attempt
to establish the disagreement between Gospel and Law in order to argue
for the difference of Gods from the difference of ideas in each document’
(I. 19.4; cf. IV. 4.3), it is, as shall be seen, far from certain how much he knew
of these, and when.14

- Lieu, Marcion and Making of a Heretic p53
Exactly. Tertullian did not have GMarc to consult when he started his polemic, but he did have it and consult it thoroughly in books four and five of his polemic.

vocesanticae
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2020 3:10 pm

Re: Qn and GMarc Reconstruction Update

Post by vocesanticae » Wed Sep 30, 2020 8:50 am

Uploaded v1.24 today, another major update: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3927056
  • Draft reconstructions and translations for the First Gospel (Qn) and the Third Gospel (Early Luke / Gospel of Marcion) are now complete through chapter 11
  • Shifted to SBL fonts for the entire document
  • A more nuanced indication system is now in use to show precisely how the reconstructions relate to Roth’s critical edition: upgrade – ⸂⸃, emendation – ⸄⸅, explicit restoration – ⟨⟩, improvised restoration – ⟪⟫

    Feedback welcomed, especially on the latest materials in chapter 11! Thank you to those who provided feedback on past versions. You'll notice I made several adjustments in response.

    P.S. Friendly encouragement for those wanting to put together their own views into something more substantive than haphazard posts: consider turning your work into a self-published LODLIB that can be shared, updated, openly peer-reviewed by others, etc., all for free using an international open science repository. LODLIB philosophy and instructions here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3971881

vocesanticae
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2020 3:10 pm

Re: Qn and GMarc Reconstruction Update

Post by vocesanticae » Tue Oct 20, 2020 1:01 pm

Uploaded v1.26 (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3927056) this morning. This major update brings the book series draft up to nearly 450 pages and 160,000 words, including some significant new content:
  • Worked carefully through the infancy and childhood narratives, the genealogy, the introduction of John the baptizer, the baptism of Jesus, and the temptation to show that none of this content was present in the First Gospel (Qn) and Third Gospel (GMarc), but all quite clearly created by the Late Luke redactor, LkR2 (working 117-138 CE).
  • Started to develop a new proof of my hypotheses based on mapping the respective travels that Joshua/Jesus takes in each textual stratum. In Qn, Jesus makes a single trip from Nazareth to Jerusalem. In GMarc/Lk1, Jesus wanders around a few extra spots in Galilee before making the Qn single major journey. But in Lk2, Jesus, his parents, and his followers all make numerous back and forth trips between Galilee and Judea/Jerusalem.

Post Reply