The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

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

The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

I would like to update the first post of this thread by adding what supports the priority of a proto-Matthew.
While expecting a book based on internal analysis that claims to make the case, I can list until now:
  • 1) Justin (a contemporary of Marcion) appears to quote from lost memorabilia that seem to be similar in spirit to Matthew (i.e. a Judaizing gospel);
  • 2) Papias appears to know a lost Hebrew proto-Matthew (i.e. a Judaizing gospel);
  • 3) independently one from other, both Stuart Waugh and Gordon-Louis Rylands think that Galatians was not genuine and betrayes rivarly against a Judaizing written Gospel (accordingly, something of very similar to a proto-Matthew). Note that, according to their view, the author of Galatians curses that Judaizing gospel without quoting from a his own Gospel story: this is expected as clash between previous 'mythicist' Christians and the news about a "degrading heresy" (i.e. 'historicist' Christians);
  • 4) the midrash based on Jewish scriptures, and especially on pun names in Hebrew and on Jewish gematria, found in Gentilizing gospels (I think about Mark, or Mcn, for examples) would move to think that the trend would go from Judaizing gospels to Gentilizing gospels, rather than vice versa.
  • 5) I quote Mergui:
    Les nombreuses péricopes (unités narratives) qui composent les Evangiles peuvent être réduites à un très petit nombre de péricopes génériques.

Last edited by Giuseppe on Mon Nov 28, 2022 5:49 am, edited 2 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

I can't quote the hypothetical source Q as an example of a Judaizing gospel à la Matthew, since Q reflects also radical gentilizing features insofar it can be seen as proto-Luke, i.e. Mcn.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

The fact that Mark has in a bad light the family of Jesus doesn't imply the priority of a lost proto-Matthew, since in Marcion there is not at all a Jesus's family but only the temptation of one, hence the Jesus who rejects cruelly his own family can be seen as anti-marcionite, rather than reflecting the rivalry against a Jerusalem-based Jewish-Christian gospel.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 3:09 am The fact that Mark has in a bad light the family of Jesus doesn't imply the priority of a lost proto-Matthew, since in Marcion there is not at all a Jesus's family but only the temptation of one, hence the Jesus who rejects cruelly his own family can be seen as anti-marcionite, rather than reflecting the rivalry against a Jerusalem-based Jewish-Christian gospel.
At least in the English-speaking world, Mark having Jesus's family "in a bad light" (3:19b-35) is something "found in translation" where the Greek is at best ambiguous and objectively asserts no such thing.

Jesus does not reject his family, cruelly or otherwise. The situation is that he inside and his family outside are physically separated by a densely packed crowd of people. The family group cannot get inside, and the point of their being there at all is apparently that Jesus could leave only with difficulty. What Jesus says at that point is that the concept of family can be expanded to include all who are dedicated to the same cause. Those whom he can be with in that moment are his figurative family; there is nothing about the biological kin whom he cannot possibly join just then not being his family.

As to verse 6:4 (no honor from the prophet's relatives), an English secular parallel is "No man is a hero to his valet" or more sharply "Familiarity breeds contempt." The point is not to cast valets or familiars in a bad light, but to capture a global and timeless truism about human beings - in other words, a garden variety wisdom saying.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:23 am Jesus does not reject his family, cruelly or otherwise. The situation is that he inside and his family outside are physically separated by a densely packed crowd of people. The family group cannot get inside,
in Marcion, they said to Jesus "your family is there out" with the intention to tempt him, to test if he is really a man. This is known. It was a lie, that the family of Jesus was outside to expect him. Jesus knows it in advance etc.

Mark wants to react against the absence in Marcion of a biological family "there outside" and therefore Mark invents a biological family being really "there outside". The result is that we have a Jesus who doesn't respect his father and his mother, contra Moses's commandments. A little collateral effect of an anti-marcionite reaction.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

In the words of Guy Fau (Le puzzle des evangiles):

Likewise, Marcion's Christ, who had no earthly birth and descended from heaven, could well answer to the tempters: "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?” This denial in Mark would be hateful if it weren't devoid of meaning: yet it has been preserved there. Marcion's Christ could well proclaim himself superior to David, but how is it that, in Mark, David's descendant can call himself the "Lord of David"?

(my bold)
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by schillingklaus »

This denial derives from Sabaoth's denial of his archon family, as described in Hypostasis of the Archons. Apologists like Kreuzigerin fail to understand this connection.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 6:02 am
Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:23 am Jesus does not reject his family, cruelly or otherwise. The situation is that he inside and his family outside are physically separated by a densely packed crowd of people. The family group cannot get inside,
in Marcion, they said to Jesus "your family is there out" with the intention to tempt him, to test if he is really a man. This is known. It was a lie, that the family of Jesus was outside to expect him. Jesus knows it in advance etc.

Mark wants to react against the absence in Marcion of a biological family "there outside" and therefore Mark invents a biological family being really "there outside". The result is that we have a Jesus who doesn't respect his father and his mother, contra Moses's commandments. A little collateral effect of an anti-marcionite reaction.
Jesus's father isn't a character in Mark. In what respect does Jesus fail to respect his mother? They are separated by an impenetrable crowd of people.

If Mark was concerned to show Jesus interact with his family to underscore the biological aspect of his humanity, then there are plenty of opportunities to do so throughout the story with no collateral effect. Part of the impact of the scene in chapter 3 is that this is the first mention of Jesus's family, never mind their first actual appearance. Peter, James and John have all had family members appear as characters. Mark does know how to work family members into his story. He's obviously not hasty in getting around to it for Jesus.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Giuseppe »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:46 am this is the first mention of Jesus's family, never mind their first actual appearance.
in Marcion the family doesn't appear, Jesus is only informed about the presence of the family outside, but the family is not really there. In Mark 3:21 the family is said to be explicitly there:
When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.

Mark introduced it to transform what was in Marcion a lie (=the presence of a family being "outside") in a reality.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: The case for the priority of a proto-Matthew

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 10:31 am
Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:46 am this is the first mention of Jesus's family, never mind their first actual appearance.
in Marcion the family doesn't appear, Jesus is only informed about the presence of the family outside, but the family is not really there. In Mark 3:21 the family is said to be explicitly there:
When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of his mind.

Mark introduced it to transform what was in Marcion a lie (=the presence of a family being "outside") in a reality.
Yes, what's in your box shows one of the popular English language "translations" of verse 3:21. The first mention in the Greek language of Jesus's family comes 10 verses later when indeed the narrator states that Jesus's mother and some sibs are outside the crowded house where Jesus is inside.

Back at your verse 3:21, the Greek text refers to unspecified people close to Jesus. The KJV translates that into English as "his friends." Other possibilities are the just-before appointed Twelve or (perhaps obscured by the much later versification) those who just-after accuse Jesus of being possessed by the prince of demons while being inside the packed house with him. The argument for the phrase referring to his family depends on 3:31 ff, that family members show up outside the house. All these incompatible possibilities are admissible interpretations of "closeness" in one or another sense, and "closeness" is all that the Greek of verse 3:21 asserts.

Similarly vague are the sense of what comes out as "to take charge" and "out of his mind," but that's not our immediate problem, except that the whole "translation" is IMO interesting as a counterexample to the "criterion of embarrassment." That is, some Christians, the translators who produced what's in your box, manage to impugn Jesus's mental health on the authority of those who knew him best, with no strong support for any such thing in the text. Of course, from a Jungian perspective, that sort of dreaded confession against interest is just as routine and expected as the "satanic verses" controversy in Islam, and for the same psychological reasons.

Anyway, we don't reach the merits of your rhetorical leap from "Marcion and Mark disagree about Jesus's family" to "Mark came after Marcion" until and unless we are clear what Mark said in the first place about Jesus's family in Greek. Under the circumstances, perhaps it is best to focus on 3:31-32, especially if the disagreement turns solely on the existence of the family in the two intersecting story universes.
Post Reply