Pseudo-Ephrem: Marcion Erased John 15:2 - 5 From His Gospel

[Stephan Huller]

It is written in the Gospels, that our Lord likened his faith to plants, it says, 'A man planted his vineyard ; he encircled and closed it with a wall; he prepared a wine-press vat in it, and indeed built a tower in it. And in the same oracle he makes clear that he indeed worked in the vineyard until the time for fruit, and the laborers b denied him." (Mark 12.1) And moreover in another place it says, "I am the vineyard and you are the vines, every vine which in me may be planted and does not give fruit, is taken away." For although this is hidden from the Gospels which the strange Marcionites read, nevertheless from that which is written by the Apostle, there is proof for them that this was truly written in the Gospels, that we are compared to plants; and the Marcionites erased it. p. 39 https://archive.org/stream/MN41656ucmf_ ... 3/mode/2up

[Stephan Huller]

A little from the beginning of the treatise:

AN EXPOSITION OF THE GOSPEL

1. All books whichever are written from the minds of men and speak not from the Law and the Prophets, (such) books are the production and creation of opposing minds. And if anyone approaches to examine their minds, he finds them heretical and wavering because they are not based on the true foundation of the Holy Scriptures. Marcion writes in his book which they indeed named Peran Evangelion, that is, translated into our language it is called 'Before the Gospel', and I have wondered how could there be a book of the Marcionites io which they indeed named 'Before the Gospel', when his disciples hopefully think that the beginning of the divinity in which they believe appeared at those times, in the years of Pontius Pilate, at the time in which the Gospel were written. If it is true for you, O Marcion, that truly the beginning of the divinity concerning which you speak was from the Gospel, really how or in what manner can your book be before the Gospel? And if you are truly affirmed and your book could be before the Gospels, do not say that the life-giving divinity emanated recently and strangely, but he was in fact already here. And it is written in the beginning of the book in this manner, it says, 'O the exceeding greatness, the folly, the power, and the wonders, for there is nothing to say about it, nor to think concerning it, and there is nothing to render like unto it'

2. Now let us leave aside all his books and against this thing let us say that this 1 what you say, Marcion, certainly (is) true, it is not manifested by the tongue, nor is it explained through thoughts, and nothing resembles it. Now silence! and speak not concerning that which you yourself have insisted upon and say, that it is not manifested, nor are there thoughts concerning it, nor does it resemble anything. How much Marcion lied I will show, for he speaks not from the true foundation." The Lord says in his Gospel, that faith in various matters is like everything whatever is of this world. He says in this manner that it is like a building, wine, a garment, fire, seeds, a kingdom, silver, a talent, a plant, a grain of mustard-seed, and leaven. Now how is anyone able to listen to the Gospel which says, faith with its aspects is like all these things and in the meantime 5 listen to Marcion who says, it is not like anything? And how it is like all those things, I show just now.

3. It is like buildings ; because like a building, they are brought together by many works ; it is composed of parts and becomes a house. In like manner also, we of all races, and of all languages, and of all kingdoms, and of all minds, are brought together, and we become one mind, a completed people, a holy tent, a camp of God. Moreover it is like buildings; because when man constructs a building, he does not despise concerning all the necessities ; whatever rmay be necessary for material for the buildings, he gathers, and stone, wood and reeds, earth, and iron and copper, and of all the things of necessity for material for the building. But if he despises each of those, then his building will not be crowned with accomplishment. In like manner also, it is not right for us to despise, because we build faith through fasting, through holiness through giving gifts, and through visiting the sick, through loving 16 the brethern, and through worship of God, and by attending church, and by praying continually, and by considering the mysteries in the Scriptures. And if we despise any one of these, moreover neither will our faith be built. But as those by whom the building is made do not sleep, as also David himself says : 'I will not give sleep to my eyes nor slumber to my eye lids, until I shall make a temple for the Lord and a place of abode for the God of Jacob' ; in like manner also, we are obliged to run by day, and to watch and to be vigilant by night with prayers and supplications, so that we also shall be built so on the foundation of the Apostles and the Prophets, as also the Apostle says, for if they who build earthly houses do give themselves to labor in order that they might make their shelters for a few years, but we make an eternal camp for for our souls and a house of praise to heaven, it is more necessary for us to work and labor.

4. And as they who make buildings are never ashamed when anyone may watch them — for they may pull up reeds and cut wood and roll stones and carry rocks, and it is not possible to hide their works — in like manner also, it is not right for us to be io ashamed of this good, handsome fruit which we make, and it is not possible for us to hide, while we attend church, and visit the sick and give gifts a, and pray and fast ; and if anyone is ashamed of these, he can not be a part of the divine building. But they who construct buildings, although the building itself is not hid, nevertheless not in order that their brethern might see them and praise them do they labor (and) offer whatever rmay be necessary for material for the building, but they work and labor for themselves. Moreover the outsiders see that they work not in order that they rmight be praised by men. In like manner also, it is not right for us to hide, not to take anew so that men might see and praise us, and we should not run for the praise of others. But as some men, rwe do mercies for ourselves, and others who might and others who might meet us will see that we labor not for them.

[perseusomega9]

Always amazing to see how many things from other gospels Marcion erased from "Luke"

[perseusomega9]

When do church theologians stop talking about what Marcionite(s) took out of the gospels/epistles? Pseudo-Ephraim is circa 7th century right?

[Stephan Huller]

I don't know if it is that late. I mean when did the Marcionites die out and why would the author have written a polemic against a sect that already disappeared? He must have either had access to the Marcionite 'proto-gospel' or 'gospel (which was argued to be before the gospel or gospels) in front of him.

The reason I cited the section (other than I think it is interesting that we have yet another anti-Marcionite treatise that is typically ignored by everyone) is that it challenges the traditional Marcionite gospel = 'cut' Luke presupposition. The author clearly employed a Diatessaron as did Ephrem and likely Eznik. As such we don't hear these authors speak from the same perspective as Irenaeus (sometimes but not always) and Tertullian - i.e. Marcionite gospel = 'cut' Luke.

The authors in the East see the Marcionite gospel as a 'cut' Diatessaron which is IMO behind the statements in Tertullian's anti-Marcionite treatise Adv Marc Book where he says Marcion also cut things which only appear now in Matthew. It is undeniable that most of our 'Marcion cut something' reference things which now appear in canonical Luke even in pseudo-Ephrem. But I am absolutely certain that what we have are different blind men (or in the case of Irenaeus people 'pretending to be blind' feeling different parts of the same elephant thinking that the elephant is all 'Luke' or all 'Mark' - or existing from a period of time before the four gospels were created so as not to reference or think in terms of 'Matthew' 'Mark' 'Luke' or 'John.'



To this end there is consistent reference in our sources to blind men feeling different parts of the bigger 'elephant':

1. the Marcionite gospel cut things which only appeared in Matthew
2. the Marcionite gospel retained things which only appeared in Matthew
3. the Marcionite gospel cut things which read like citations from Mark
4. the Marcionite gospel retained things which read like citations from Mark
5. the Marcionite gospel is an expanded canonical Mark (Philosophumena 7.18)
6. the Marcionite gospel is secret Mark or a modified version of John (http://stephanhuller.blogspot.com/2014/ ... -mark.html)
7. the Marcionite gospel cut things from John (Pseudo-Ephrem)
8. the Marcionite gospel retained things from John (Origen, Homilies on Luke)
9. the Marcionites approved of things found only in the Johannine corpus (the Marcionite in De Recta in Deum Fide)
10. Marcion wrote the gospel of John for John (cf various prologues to the gospel of John according to Vinzent and Eisler's re-punctuation)

But top off this list - something which is beyond merely being 'number 11' on the list - is the fact that our eastern witnesses clearly had the Marcionite gospel before them and saw it as a 'cut' Diatessaron. Casey wrote a published academic article to this effect in the last century (look up 'Casey' and Armenian Diatessaron) but he came to the conclusion that which this 'cut' Diatessaron did exist it was something created by eastern Marcionites which I think is stupid. The anomalies in Tertullian's reporting about what Marcion cut from his gospel necessitates a Diatessaron no less than the order of Pauline letters assumes a Pauline canon shared or used by eastern Christians (like Ephrem) who also used a Diatessaron.

This will be my great contribution to scholarship (assuming I live long enough). Not merely that the Diatessaron goes back to the original form of the gospel (Epiphanius was the first recorded opinion to this effect but it goes back much further). Petersen represents only the latest in a long chain here. But that the Marcionite gospel was first and took on the shape of a 'cut' Diatessaron (complete with Johannine prologue).

[Stephan Huller]

But why the preponderance of Lukan references in relation to Marcion? My best guess is that Luke was specifically created as an anti-Marcionite gospel which put a 'Catholic spin' (i.e. false developed 'variants' to read important passages in the greater Diatessaron in manner which wasn't necessarily antinomian).