SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
mlinssen
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story < argumentation

Post by mlinssen » Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:40 am

MrMacSon wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 2:01 pm
mlinssen wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 8:49 am
Marcion starts at Luke chapter 4:16,1 and the infamous error that Luke makes is that he gets told to repeat what he did in Capernaum, where in Luke he hasn't been yet.2
1 I presume you mean - a better way of putting it would be - Marcion doesn't appear in Luke until 4:16 (?)

2 I don't get this: who hasn't been yet?
I missed this one, sorry

Yes, wanting to say too much with too little!

Marcion doesn't appear in Luke until 4:16 indeed, and even that is not precise enough.
And Jesus hasn't been yet, when he says they would say

Jesus said to them, "Surely you will quote this proverb to me: 'Physician, heal yourself!' And you will tell me, 'Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.'"

In Marcion he has, in Luke he hasn't - explicitly been in Capernaum. And where it could be condoned in Marcion to suggest that he had by implicit use, as it was where he descended, Luke is trying hard to debunk all that by suggesting that Nazareth is πατρίδι σου, making Capernaum just another town

mlinssen
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story < argumentation

Post by mlinssen » Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:43 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 2:20 pm
MrMacSon wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 2:01 pm
mlinssen wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 8:49 am
Marcion starts at Luke chapter 4:16,1 and the infamous error that Luke makes is that he gets told to repeat what he did in Capernaum, where in Luke he hasn't been yet.2
1 I presume you mean - a better way of putting it would be - Marcion doesn't appear in Luke until 4:16 (?)
Marcion does not appear in Luke at all. At any rate, the beginning of the Marcionite gospel appears to have been Luke 3.1 + Luke 4.31-35 + Luke 4.16-30, in that order. I think what Martin means is that Luke 4.16 begins the first actual Lucan event in its current Lucan order which appears in the usual reconstructions of Marcion.
2 I don't get this: who hasn't been yet?
Jesus has not yet been to Capernaum in Luke 4.23, which has people asking him to replicate the miracles he did in Capernaum. The Marcionite gospel is not as disjointed here, since it reverses the order of events, making it so that Jesus has indeed been to Capernaum by this point of the narrative.
A perfect 10 to Ben!

mlinssen
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by mlinssen » Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:49 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 3:24 pm
to mlinssen,
That depends on motive and purpose, Bernard. I think there are more than enough similarities between Luke and Matthew, wouldn't you think so?
Most of the similarities can be explained by "Matthew" & "Luke" having gMark & Q. gLuke & gMatthew have also noticeable important differences.
Note: the Q authors had knowledge of gMark.

I have a webpage on Q: http://historical-jesus.info/q.html

Cordially, Bernard
And I missed this one as well Bernard, my apologies.
Yes it's awfully convenient to make up a non extant text in order to explain suspiciously suspect similarities, but that still doesn't explain the differences between Luke and Matthew.

Did you know that 45% of what Weststar came up with is identical to Thomas?
What are the odds that the remainder is also copied from somewhere and not the usual mix of fiction and fantasy?

I know, you'll likely argue that Thomas was dependent on Q. Good luck with the textual criticism there in that case
Last edited by mlinssen on Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

mlinssen
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by mlinssen » Mon Oct 12, 2020 7:58 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Oct 11, 2020 3:34 pm
to mlinssen,
About the so-called Bethsaida gospel, I explained here why it was not included in gLuke, even if "Luke" had a copy of gMark:
The great omission in Luke's gospel, http://historical-jesus.info/appf.html

Cordially, Bernard
There, all caught up now. Good analysis really, I made it until the comparison to Jesus.
Short and simple: the entire Markan block is slow reading and "pure Jewish" give or take a verse or two, which Luke does use later on (the Thomas material).
Luke adresses the Thomas supporters / Gentiles who really don't care at all about the supposed intricacies of signs, leaven, and so on. It's just not interesting material to his intended audience, there's no ROI in it

So I do pick your option

a) "Luke" chose not to deal with the content of the so-called missing block, even if it was available.


Bernard Muller
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by Bernard Muller » Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:34 am

to mlinssen,
In essence, you have only one argument on the page you cited, and that is "this John issue". The remainder of your arguments is derived from Church fathers, unless I
have overlooked something
There is also an argument about heaven and earth:
Furthermore, in Luke's gospel we have:
21:31 "So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that the kingdom of God is near.
21:32 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all has taken place.
21:33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away."


However in Marcion's gospel, we read (according to Tertullian's Against Marcion, IV, XXXIX):
31 Even so you also, when you see these things happening, know that God's Kingdom is near.
32 Most certainly I tell you, heaven and earth will not pass away until except all things be accomplished.
33 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will remain forever."


Here, "this generation" has been substituted by "heaven and earth".

Note: Irenaeus (before Tertullian's writings), in a general statement, was the first to confirm gMarcion did not have "this generation":
Against Heresies, I, XXVII, 2: "Besides this, he mutilates the Gospel which is according to Luke, removing all that is written respecting the generation of the Lord"

What to draw from that?
Luke's gospel was written around 85 CE (see http://historical-jesus.info/62.html). At that time, it still could be thought Jesus' generation was not over yet. But when gMarcion was written (around 130 CE), Jesus' generation had pass away.
Marcion had to remove "this generation". If not, his gospel would make Jesus a liar and a false prophet.
That shows Marcion's gospel was written decades after gLuke, well into the 2nd century. Then, if so, it was Marcion who truncated gLuke and not the other way around ("Luke" adding up on gMarcion (or some proto-Luke that Marcion copied)).
Marcion wouldn't want to pay much attention to John? Not that Mark pays much attention to John, of course.
But Marcion mentioned John regardless. And the first time he did that, it is abruptly, and not about John himself, but about his disciples.
You assume Jesus to be historical, the canonicals to be authentic, and that's your Beacon of Truth, to which you compare everything else. The outcome is predictable, and very biased and lopsided.
If you're wielding a hammer, everything looks like a nail
I did not assume anything. And what do you mean by "authentic" concerning the canonicals? So I won't comment on that yet.

Cordially, Bernard

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by Bernard Muller » Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:01 am

to mlinssen,
And I missed this one as well Bernard, my apologies.
Yes it's awfully convenient to make up a non extant text in order to explain suspiciously suspect similarities, but that still doesn't explain the differences between Luke and Matthew.
The differences are explained by "Matthew" not knowing about Luke's gospel, and "Luke" not knowing about Matthew's gospel.
Did you know that 45% of what Weststar came up with is identical to Thomas?
I am not surprised with that and Weststar is probably correct here. But that does not say anything about directionality.
Furthermore, Weststar withdrew from the concept of an early gospel of Thomas. And Crossan put the gospel of Thomas written at the same times as the canonical gospels.
I know, you'll likely argue that Thomas was dependent on Q. Good luck with the textual criticism there in that case
I argued that Thomas is dependent on all the Canonicals, not only Q (as part of gMatthew and gLuke).

gThomas is also dependent on 1 Peter and gospel of the Hebrews (as explained on my webpage on Thomas).

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8017
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:15 am

mlinssen wrote:
Mon Oct 12, 2020 4:32 am
Thomas is balanced, impartial, unbiased, purely showing the incompatibility between two, not picking any side....
Well, not quite, right? Thomas 47.3 (47c) prefers old wine to new, right along with the rest of humankind:

Wisdom of Sirach 9.10: 10 Forsake not an old friend, for a new one does not compare with him. A new friend is like new wine; when it has aged you will drink it with pleasure.

Mishnah, Pirkei Avot 4.20: 20 Elisha ben Abuyah said, “He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet.” Rabbi Yose ben Judah, a man of Kfar Ha Babli, said, “He who learns from the young, to what is he compared? To one who eats unripe grapes and drinks wine from his vat. And he who learns from the old, to what is he compared? To one who eats ripe grapes and drinks old wine.” Rabbi said, “Do not look at the container, but at that which is in it: there is a new container full of old wine, and an old one in which there is not even new.”

Thomas 47.3: 3 No one drinks old wine and immediately desires to drink new wine.

There is no balancing attempt to suggest that "no one drinks new wine and immediately desires to drink old wine." Apparently Thomas, no matter how balanced he wishes to be, knows his limits.

mlinssen
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by mlinssen » Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:11 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:15 am
mlinssen wrote:
Mon Oct 12, 2020 4:32 am
Thomas is balanced, impartial, unbiased, purely showing the incompatibility between two, not picking any side....
Well, not quite, right? Thomas 47.3 (47c) prefers old wine to new, right along with the rest of humankind:

Wisdom of Sirach 9.10: 10 Forsake not an old friend, for a new one does not compare with him. A new friend is like new wine; when it has aged you will drink it with pleasure.

Mishnah, Pirkei Avot 4.20: 20 Elisha ben Abuyah said, “He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet.” Rabbi Yose ben Judah, a man of Kfar Ha Babli, said, “He who learns from the young, to what is he compared? To one who eats unripe grapes and drinks wine from his vat. And he who learns from the old, to what is he compared? To one who eats ripe grapes and drinks old wine.” Rabbi said, “Do not look at the container, but at that which is in it: there is a new container full of old wine, and an old one in which there is not even new.”

Thomas 47.3: 3 No one drinks old wine and immediately desires to drink new wine.

There is no balancing attempt to suggest that "no one drinks new wine and immediately desires to drink old wine." Apparently Thomas, no matter how balanced he wishes to be, knows his limits.
"not-usually human drink wine old and within the(F) hour he desire drink wine the young"

Perfectly balanced Ben, it just needs a bit of time. And if you appreciate old wine...

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8017
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:15 am

mlinssen wrote:
Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:11 am
Perfectly balanced Ben, it just needs a bit of time. And if you appreciate old wine...
Perfectly balanced would be adding something about not wanting old wine immediately after new. That is how the other phrases (about patches and so on) in this set are working. There is a clear and definable difference between 47.3 and the other sayings, however you want to characterize it.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SACT: Matthew wrote Luke to support his own story

Post by Bernard Muller » Mon Oct 12, 2020 10:34 am

to mlinssen,
A good example of that would be within logion 21, which exemplifies the insertion of cleanly composed canonical pieces into badly written material with no parallels (some typically "Thomassan"), resulting into a bizarre and confusing assemblage (parallels in italics):
CoGTh 21: "Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are Your disciples like?"
He said, "They are like children who have settled in a field which is not theirs. When the owners of the field come, they will say, 'Let us have back our field.' They (will) undress in their presence in order to let them have back their field and give it back to them.

[how strange and badly written is the last sentence, with an useless repeat! And no apparent connection with what follows!]
` Therefore I say to you, if the owner of a house knows that the thief is coming, he will begin his vigil before he comes and will not let him into his house of his domain to carry away his goods. You, then, be on your guard against the world. Arm yourselves with great strength lest the robbers [who would take your faith away!] find a way to come to you, for the difficulty which you expect will (surely) materialize.
Let there be among you a man of understanding.

[Jesus is answering Mary, a woman!]
` When the grain ripened, he came quickly with his sickle in his hand and reaped it.
[who is "he"? No obvious relation to what is preceding. And the whole sentence is begging for a context]
` Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear".
[why would Jesus say that to Mary then?]"

Parallels in the synoptic gospels:
Mt24:43 "But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into."
Mk4:26-29 (the parable of the growing seed) "And He said, "The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the ground, and should sleep by night and rise by day, and the seed should sprout and grow, he himself does not know how. For the earth yields crops by itself: first the blade, then the head, after that the full grain in the head. But when the grain ripens, immediately he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come
[this last sentence was probably isolated in Logion 21 in order to remove any eschatological content, very obvious within the context of the Markan parable].""
Mk4:9 "And He said to them, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear!""

Cordially, Bernard

Post Reply