If it's the OT god you are looking for in the Marconite gospel, then, methinks, you are looking in the wrong place. The gospel attributed to Marcion is not a gospel designed to highlight the OT god - a god generally viewed as being a god of 'evil', a god of negative dualism. 'Chosen people' clearly a reflection of that god's negativity. Arguments about the nature of god - and in particular the OT god - were, seemingly, of interest to Marcion. That he was in possession of an anti-thesis is evidence of that. As old as the hills one could say - what is god, what is the nature of god. To think these questions were not of interest - and of considerable concern - to the writers of the NT would be inexcusable. Yes, of course, that debate is ongoing - and perhaps never to be resolved. Dawkins had his own take on the OT god.Ken Olson wrote: ↑Mon May 29, 2023 10:17 am To clarify the initial question: I am asking if it is unambiguously stated anywhere in the text of the Evangelion (according to the reconstructions of BeDuhn, Roth, or Klinghardt) that the God of Israel is definitely to be distinguished from the Father (the 'good god") referred to by Jesus.
I am not asking if Marcionites interpreted the texts of the Evangelion that way. I am sure they did, or at least were reported to have done so by the so-called orthodox fathers (e.g., Tertullian).
To put it another way, I am not asking if there are texts in the Evangelion can be interpreted in a Marcionite framework (good high God vs. evil creator of the material world who is the God of Israel), I am asking if that framework is ever explicitly described in the text.
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Perhaps one way to look at the gospel problem - i.e. in what order were these books composed - is to consider numbers used in their storytelling. Yes, placing all the Greek words into a computer program will most likely demonstrate how many voices are involved, how many hands played their part in writing the gospel stories. Maybe some words are from an earlier time than a later time. Perhaps all the gospels have had additions and subtractions. Perhaps it's all one big mix up, a giant puzzle of who did what where and when. I don't know Greek. What I do know is that the gospel story has a structure, a structure using a specific template - variations on a theme of Daniel ch.9. I think once the numbers are followed that a pattern can emerge as to which order the gospel story should be read.
Where to find the OT god of evil, of negative dualism if not in Marcion's gospel - you'll find him loud and clear in the gospel of Matthew.
37 Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38 And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39 And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?' 40 And the king will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.' 41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, 'You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' 44 Then they also will answer, 'Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?' 45 Then he will answer them, 'Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
Jesus is either a schizophrenic or a composite literary figure. A composite literary figure that can not only represent more than one historical figure - but also can reflect both the OT evil god and the NT god who wants us all to turn the other cheek and to love our enemies. Perhaps, it's this tension, in all of us, that allows the gospels of John and the gospel attributed to Marcion, to concentrate, highlight, the 'new' god of positive dualism. Leaving the gospel of Matthew to retain a place for the OT god of 'evil'.
Below is a chart to demonstrate how I think the gospels have managed to retain a role for the 'evil' god of the OT while giving preferential treatment to the NT god of love your enemies. The Pauline story, with its celestial, outer-space, crucifixion story, is allowing the OT evil god prominence within a spiritual/philosophical context.
Gospel: Theology/Philosophy focus | Gospel: history/dating structure focus |
Gospel of John: Jesus not yet 50 years old. Use of Daniel ch.9 and it's 70 weeks of years. 7 x 7 = 49 years. Utilizing this numbers formula as a time frame in which to set out the gospel story. Time of Pilate. Suggesting a birth narrative early in the rule of Herod. → →→ | Gospel of Matthew version One. Slavonic Josephus: Birth narrative prior to the 15th year of Herod, 25 b.c. 490 years back to 515 b.c. and temple rededicating. Acts of Pilate, crucifixion in the 7th year of Tiberius, 21 c.e. |
Gospel attributed to Marcion. 15th year of Tiberius, 29/30 c.e. 7 years from 7th year of Tiberius, 21/22 c.e. Pilate governor of Judea. 70 years back to 40 b.c. and Herod. → →→ | Gospel of Matthew version Two. Archelaus added; Jesus a young child on return from Egypt. Suggestion a birth narrative late in the time of Herod. Archelaus 4 b.c. to 6 c.e. Gospel Jesus becomes a younger man in the 15th year of Tiberius. |
Gospel of Luke. 15th year of Tiberius back to Lysanias of Abilene in 40 b.c. Removal of Archelaus and arrival of Quirinius census. Birth narrative 6 c.e. 70 years back to 63 b.c. Jesus figure about 30 years old in 15th year of Tiberius. Requiring a second birth narrative in 1 b.c. ..Two birth narratives allowing for a crucifixion date in 30 c.e. or 36/37 c.e. Tiberius 14 - 37 c.e. Gospel Jesus story ends 77 years after 40 b.c. | |
Gospel of Mark. No useful historical markers, aside from Pilate. Perhaps designed for public reading or play. A synopsis or abstract designed to be all things to all people. All well and good - but the gospel story is bigger, and more troublesome, when read from the beginning. |
A recent post of mine on the gospels.
Philo, Pilate, Tiberius and the Gospel of John
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10457&p=150109#p150109