Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8863
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe » Tue Mar 30, 2021 11:35 am

Expecting the coming of Klinghardt's opus magnum by 20 May, about which the first thing I will read will be the relation between Mark and Mcn, I woukd like to list here, before my view of things can change radically, what are the arguments actually enough persuasive for assume Marcion before Mark:
  • The Parable of Wineskins:
    The Marcionite meaning of this parable seem to be too much obvious, and Mark has it: does Mark depend on Marcion, accordingly?
  • Luke/Mcn 21:5-6:
    Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”

    Mark assumes the knowledge of this episode, given the accusation otherwise without apparent explanation found in 14:58:

    “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.’”

  • The theme of Messianic Secret in Mark 4:11-12: is it anti-marcionite? The strong suspicion in such sense is raised by Origen:


    But there is that direct mode of His speaking to the people — You shall hear with the ear, but you shall not understand (Isaiah 6:9) — which now claims notice as having furnished to Christ that frequent form of His earnest instruction: He that has ears to hear, let him hear (Luke 8:8). Not as if Christ, actuated with a diverse spirit, permitted a hearing which the Creator had refused; but because the exhortation followed the threatening.

    https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm

    The god of the Jews said, Aure audietis et non audietis (Is. vi. 9). Jesus, on the other hand, wishes all ears to be opened (Tertullian iv. 19). All should listen, since there is no longer anything hidden; everything is made clear.

    (P.-L. Couchoud, Creation of Christ, p. 399)
When I will have read the Klinghardt's arguments, I will say if they will be more or less persuasive than these here listed.

cora
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:57 pm

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by cora » Wed Mar 31, 2021 3:35 pm

IMO, Marcion is the very first gospel ever. Mark was written after 170. Fooled by the master-forger.

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8863
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe » Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:08 pm

I have to make it clear what I think are the possible "hidden agendas" behind both mythicists and historicists (in their obstinacy) to have Mark as first gospel:
  • 1) some Mythicists believe that the Messianic Secret in Mark (of which the presumed culmination would be Mark 4:11-12) confirms indirectly the Mark's knowledge of the historical truth: that Jesus never existed hence the secrecy of his life was a necessity. The problems with this view is that Mark 4:11-12 may be anti-marcionite (see my previous post).
  • 2) the historicists believe that the Markan priority justifies the existence of an independent source called Q hence it makes more optimistic their confidence in searching for a historical Jesus based only on Gospel sources.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3907
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Bernard Muller » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:35 am

gMarcion was written from gLuke:
http://historical-jesus.info/53.html

gLuke was written in the 1st century:
http://historical-jesus.info/62.html

Marcion knew about (most likely) gLuke:
Tertullian's AM, IV, IV "For if the Gospel, said to be Luke's which is current amongst us (we shall see whether it be also current with Marcion), is the very one which, as Marcion argues in his Antitheses, was interpolated by the defenders of Judaism,"

"Luke" knew about gMark.

So we have: gMark -> gLuke -> gMarcion

Cordially, Bernard

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8863
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:59 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:35 am
gMarcion was written from gLuke:
until you are of that opinion, then the implication (Markan priority) is logically necessary.

The problem arises when you abandon that premise (that Luke precedes Mcn).

According to Klinghardt, if you think that Mcn preceded Luke, then you are obliged to think that Mcn precedes Mark, also.

Assume, for mere sake of discussion, that Luke is lost and you have only Mcn. Under that premise, do you think still that Mark precedes Mcn?

Can you think really that the Parable of Wineskins doesn't assume already the (marcionite) distinction between a New and an Old Testamentum?

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3907
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Bernard Muller » Fri Apr 02, 2021 12:21 pm

to Giuseppe,
until you are of that opinion
That's not an opinion, but deduction from the evidence.
According to Klinghardt, if you think that Mcn preceded Luke, then you are obliged to think that Mcn precedes Mark, also.
But that's not what I have shown in the webpage I posted. On the contrary, Luke preceded Mcn.
Assume, for mere sake of discussion, that Luke is lost and you have only Mcn. Under that premise, do you think still that Mark precedes Mcn?
Luke is not lost. So I am not going to waste my time on that.
Can you think really that the Parable of Wineskins doesn't assume already the (marcionite) distinction between a New and an Old Testamentum?
I don't see what you mean. The parable of the wineskins appears in Luke and Mark. As for Marcion's version, we cannot be sure on how Marcion wrote it.
Mark assumes the knowledge of this episode, given the accusation otherwise without apparent explanation found in 14:58:
“We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.’”

"Mark" knew about the destruction of the temple and probably initiated the resurrection after three days.
So "Mark" likely meant: the temple will be destroyed (so also Saduccees' Judaism), but Jesus' resurrection will replace it (with Christian beliefs).
No need for "Mark" to know about Luke/Mcn 21:5-6.

And the so-called messianic secret in gMark 4:11-12, I think "Mark" explained why the Galileans did not become Christians (because they did not understand the parables).

Cordially, Benard

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8863
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe » Fri Apr 02, 2021 9:23 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri Apr 02, 2021 12:21 pm
"Mark" knew about the destruction of the temple
yes, he knew. But "Mark" assumes that the false witnesses of Jesus "knew" too, in the fiction (14:58). How could they "know", when they
  • 1) are not insiders
  • 2) Jesus never reveals them explicitly his prophecy of destroying the temple
Best answer: "Mark" was based on a previous gospel (=Mcn).

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3907
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Bernard Muller » Sat Apr 03, 2021 7:24 am

to Giuseppe,
yes, he knew. But "Mark" assumes that the false witnesses of Jesus "knew" too, in the fiction (14:58)
No, the false witnesses report what Jesus allegedly said. That does not imply these false witnesses know about the future destruction of the temple.

Cordially, Bernard

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 8863
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe » Sat Apr 03, 2021 7:32 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sat Apr 03, 2021 7:24 am
No, the false witnesses report what Jesus allegedly said.
Precisely: allegedly.

Were they deriving that assumption from a previous episode in Mark where Jesus did that prophecy and they were found there?
No.

Then what is the origin of that assumption, for these false witnesses of Jesus in the fiction?

In Luke you have Jesus saying that prophecy near the Temple.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3907
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Bernard Muller » Sat Apr 03, 2021 7:56 am

to Giuseppe,
Were they deriving that assumption from a previous episode in Mark where Jesus did that prophecy and they were found there?
No.
I said allegedly because, according to "Mark", these false witnesses were proven wrong. Of course, the whole story is fiction.
Actually, since the charge of these false witnesses is rejected, that implies Jesus never made that prophecy.

Cordially, Bernard

PS: from the disturbance in the temple, I only retain as true the arrest (but not its details) and the crucifixion as king of the Jews (but not its details). All the rest in between is fiction.

Post Reply