Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »


*Ev contained John's designation as the 'Baptist'. Accordingly, *E was also familiar with the 'baptism of John', which Tertullian attests for *20,2 (see there). *Ev, however, does not elucidate in any way the background of John's 'baptising' practice: that John is a 'baptizer' plays no further role for *Ev (against the canonical Gospels). Only Mark picked up this aspect in 1,1-11 and assigned a narrative function to the baptism, which was then variously adopted by Matthew, Luke, and John. Thus, the tradition of John the Baptist in the New Testament commenced with the enigmatic reference in *Ev.

(ibid., p. 641, my bold)

John of Gischala who recruited soldiers was by definition a 'baptizer'.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

Klinghardt doesn't follow Couchoud about the verse of 8:9 being absent in Mcn. Hence the dualism between insiders versus outsiders is found also in Mcn, according to Klinghardt.

At contrary, differently from Couchoud, the goal of Mark was not to introduce that dualism in conformity to YHWH's prescription to secrecy in Isaiah (see the first post of this thread), and against the extreme embarrassing "nakedness" of the Marcionite Jesus.

For Klinghardt, if I have read well, it was 'Mark' (author) who wanted to overcome the dualism insiders versus outsiders, against Mcn.



Against *8,9f, the arrangement of Mark 4,10-12 discloses the careful revision of the passage. Jesus not only instructs the disciples on the meaning of the sower parable, he emphasizes the disciples' purpose as multipliers.

(p. 673, my bold)


This verse is absent in Mcn:

Mark 4.24
And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given

The threat is: if you idiot disciples don't overcome the ('Gnostic'? :scratch: ) dualism insiders versus outsiders by your preaching to all the world, then I (the Son of YHWH) will remove from you what you have.

The conclusion:

This reconstruction of the pericope in *Ev and its textual arrangement is significant for the tradition history in several aspects, since it clearly exhibits the Markan revision of the older text of *Ev.

(ibid. p. 673, my bold)
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

Gasp! :silenced: :silenced: :silenced: :silenced: :silenced: :silenced: I have read again the Couchoud's reconstruction and I have seen what is highly surprising: he inserted 8:9 in Mcn!!!

This is a great error by Couchoud and really a point supporting Klinghardt's reconstruction. "Mark" (author) didn't like the implicit corollary of Mcn in 8:9-10:


He said, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that,

“‘though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand.’

...that the crowd had to remain in the darkness while only few would have known the truth. Hence the anti-elitist warning of the interpolation introduced in Mcn (Luke 8:9) and in Mark 4:24.


Against Mcn.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

What is strange is that in Ben's (really, Roth's)reconstruction the verse 8:9 figures in Marcion (it is in blue)

Be careful therefore how you hear. For whoever has, to him will be given; and whoever doesn’t have, from him will be taken away even that which he thinks he has.”

...but if I have understood well Klinghardt, that verse didn't figure at all in Mcn.

How is it possible?
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Apr 12, 2021 12:16 pm What is strange is that in Ben's (really, Roth's)reconstruction the verse 8:9 figures in Marcion (it is in blue)

Be careful therefore how you hear. For whoever has, to him will be given; and whoever doesn’t have, from him will be taken away even that which he thinks he has.”

...but if I have understood well Klinghardt, that verse didn't figure at all in Mcn.

How is it possible?
Problem resolved.

The verse 8:9 is attested in Marcion:

Then his disciples asked him, “What does this parable mean?”

...while what is the blatant interpolation is 8:18 (=Mark 4:24):

Be careful therefore how you hear. For whoever has, to him will be given; and whoever doesn’t have, from him will be taken away even that which he thinks he has.”

The point of both "Mark" (editor) and the interpolator is that 8:18 corrects 8:9 and is against 8:9.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

Correction: 8:18 was in Mcn but "Mark" (editor) placed it at the end: his point was to insist more and more on the disciples' overcoming the division between insiders and outsiders.

Above all, Mark moved the logion purposefully from its position in *Ev (it would have been between Mark 4,11 and 12) and used it as the conclusion on disclosing what is hidden (Mark 4,25, after 4,21-24).

(ibid. p. 671)

This appears to be as an editorial move.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »


Furthermore, it was reasonable to highlight the adversative meaning of the logion about the lamp (*8,16). Mark achieved this by inserting the indirect objects (ὑπὸ τὸν μόδιον τεθῇ ἢ ὑπὸ τὴν κλίνην) pertaining to καλύπτει (Mark 4:21a) against *8:16. This instruction, which Jesus imparts to the disciples inside the boat, is supposed to enlighten those outside; it must not remain hidden under bushel basket or under the bed. The comparison between Mark 4,10-25 and *8,9-18 reveals the Markan composition as consistently secondary to *Ev.

(Ibid., p. 674, my bold)

Hence, if both the episodes (in Mcn and in Mark) go in the same theological direction (an original dualism between insiders and outsiders that will be overcome by the unifying Apostolic preaching in all the world), there was no reason by Mcn to mitigate the superb contrast, in Mark, between original dualism and final unity. The vice versa is more expected: "Mark" (editor) emphasized the contrast, already found in nuce in Mcn.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

I find another persuasive evidence of Mcn's priority over Mark in p. 1177-1178.

I have to do clear that 'persuasive', in my metric of judgement , means that it persuades me about the sound truth of this thesis: the assumption of Mcn's priority over Luke implies the Mcn's priority over Mark. You can't accept the former without the latter.

Now, if Mcn precedes Luke, then the ping pong "Pilate Herod Pilate" is found in Mcn and precedes equally Luke.

This has sound collateral effects on the relation between Mcn and Mark (about which I am interested principally here):

*Ev makes obvious that Herod's joy (verse *8a) may have been only shortlived, since Jesus did not respond to the inquiry (verse *9b) as attested by Tertullian. Jesus' silence in response to Herod's questions and — one may add — to the reproaches by the chief priests and scribes (verse *10, unattested), shaped the subsequent tradition: Mark 15,3f || Matt 27,12 adopted this element into Pilate's interrogation, and even John 19,8 describes it in that context. This insight into the reception of elements of the Herod episode by Mark and Matthew is important because the following mockery of Jesus by Herod and the soldiers (verse *11) is unattested and has a counterpart in the mockery by the soldiers of Pilate (Mark 15,17-20a || Matt 27,27-31a). The omission of the Herod episode through Mark and Matthew had the consequence that they adopted these elements, placed them into the mockery by Pilate's soldiers, and combined with elements from the pre-canonical crucifixion episode.

This fits perfectly the clash between Gentilizers and Judaizers during the II° century CE: the mockery by Herod's soldiers has been introduced againt the Judaizers, while the mockery by Pilate's soldiers has been introduced against the Gentilizers.

"Mark" (editor) was too much a moderate Gentilizer to have still the trial of Jesus before Herod.

To this regard, Robert Eisler argued that Agrippa was made, in the Christian tradition, author of the evils made by the Zealots, i.e. his figure was zealot-ized, against the historical truth.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

What strikes in this book is the quasi-total absence of references to rival theological trends, apart the most obvious. The author himself confirms this feature.

If Marcion was neither the editor of an older text nor the original author of *Ev, what was his role? How did the separation from the Roman congregation occur? What appears more obvious is that the heresiologists' association of Marcion with *Ev was based solely on his recitation of this Gospel. Accordingly, Marcion did not work as author or editor at all; he merely used *Ev.

(ibid., p. 401)


Not difficult to imagine is Marcion's theological profile, which (even in this pre-Roman era) contained elements of his theology that were eventually labeled heretical. These elements may have included: (1) a disinterest in Jewish roots of Christianity (or perhaps even in its explicit rejection, inasmuch the history of salvation between Israel and the Christian church had become a topic for theological discussion): and (2) the discussion of uncertainties regarding the image of God and the two divine principles — one being responsible for creation and the other for salvation.


Three possibilities, mutually exclusive:
  • Marcion as reformer
  • Marcion as innovator
  • Marcion as a "conservative protector".

*Ev is repeatedly labeled as his Gospel, even though widely dispersed witnesses document the use of this Gospel far beyond the Marcionites, and even though the heresiologists' refutations cite (time and again!) the very text of his Gospel.

(p. 404, my bold)

The "Marcion's lasting heritage": he moved his enemies to use the scripture to legitimate the theology.

I wonder what would be happened if Marcion was not heretic: there would be only 1 Gospel, without need of replacing it with others in order to distance the heretic? Probable.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Marcion versus Mark: who comes first?

Post by Giuseppe »

On a point I agree very much: the Marcionites were numerous.

Given that Marcion represented his theological convictions not as an individual but as a representative of a broader movement and that his insistence in the one true (and older) Gospel was not chosen by one person but advocated in a broader confrontation, the reports about the great number of followers seem quite plausible.

(ibid. p. 403)

This confirms that very probably Celsus witnessed independently the marcionite belief and without a Catholic filter, in particular their anti-demiurgism.
Post Reply