Why Do the Gospels of Marcion, the "Matthew" of Papias and the Synoptics All Agree on Order?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Why Do the Gospels of Marcion, the "Matthew" of Papias and the Synoptics All Agree on Order?

Post by Secret Alias »

Here's another point. If all Marcion is Luke with a few little changes why the fuck does Luke begin with this Papian-like discussion about other gospels (presumably Marcion's gospel) which are in a different order? So we'd have to believe that (a) Marcion is accused of corrupting Luke when, if we follow Tertullian's actual citations, there's not much difference between Luke and Marcion's gospel i.e. Marcion's gospel is close enough to Luke that Tertullian can fulfill Irenaeus promise to disprove Marcion "from the portions of Luke he retains" and (b) Marcion is accused of having "bad ordering" in Against Marcion Book 3 and 4 and the statement in the incipit of Luke but again, "really" there's not much difference between Marcion and the synoptics in terms of ordering. Why are the Church Fathers such drama queens? Why are the always bring up "huge issues" if in reality everything exactly mirrored the synoptic situation? When we look at Papias you'd think there was this huge difference between Matthew and Mark's ordering BUT AGAIN no big difference when these texts "miraculously" appear in the canon. The same with Celsus's statement about why the gospel was developed "threefold and fourfold to answer objections." It's always reports of "massive disagreements" between the texts but then in the end when they "settle" in the canon, everything is "just fine.' Wonder why ...
Post Reply