Reconstructions of Marcion's Antitheses?

[Ken Olson]

Is there a scholarly reconstruction of Marcion's Antitheses more recent (and/or better) than Harnack's? Preferably one that cites its sources for each item in the reconstruction. (I'm aware of the discussion of the Antitheses in chapter 10 of Judith M. Lieu, Marcion and the Making of a Heretic (2015) 270-289).

Thanks,

Ken

[Secret Alias]

Too straightforward for a "scholarly" opinion but the actual right answer. Whatever the Marcionites had instead of this

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Murder
21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

23 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.

25 “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e] 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Divorce
31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’[f] 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.[g]

Eye for Eye
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect

.

"For such are Marcion's Antitheses, or Contrary Oppositions, which are designed to show the conflict and disagreement of the Gospel and the Law" (1.20) check

"Now if my plea that the Creator combines goodness with judgement had called for a more elaborate demolition of Marcion's Antitheses" (1.29) as opposed to Marcion who argued that the ten commandments came from power of judgment Yahweh. Ok.

"and so I am for the time being content to have rebutted in summary fashion those antitheses which, by criticism of the moral value of the Creator's works, his laws, and his miracles" (ibid) I guess as good as any explanation.

"Instead of dividing, those antitheses do rather combine into unity the two whom they place in such oppositions as, when combined together, give a complete conception of God. " (ibid) so Tertullian is going to refute Marcion's interpretation of the antitheses which are part of the gospel. Ok. Nothing specific here.

"His antitheses are in conformity with his own world: for it is composed and regulated by elements contrary to each other, yet in perfect proportion." (1.29) again very general statement.

"a work entitled Antitheses because of its juxtaposition of opposites, a work strained into making such a division between the Law and
the Gospel as thereby to make two separate gods, opposite to each other, one belonging to one instrument (or, as it is more usual to say, testament), one to the other, and thus lend its patronage to faith in another gospel, that according to the Antitheses." (4.1) sure.

"Now I might have demolished those antitheses by a specially directed hand-to-hand attack, taking each of the statements of the man of Pontus one by one, except that it was much more convenient to refute them both in and along with that gospel which they serve: although it is perfectly easy to take action against them by counter-claim,1 even accepting them as admissible, accounting them valid, and alleging that they support my argument, that so they may be put to shame for the blindness of their author, having now become my antitheses against Marcion." (ibid) Tertullian never attacks all of the antitheses (Matthew 5:17 - 47) in Book Four. Fine.

"Why need you explain a difference of facts as an opposition of authorities? Why need you distort against the Creator those antitheses in the evidences, which you can recognize also in his own thoughts and affections? I will smite, he says, and I will heal:k I will slay, he says, and also make alive, by establishing evil things and making peace" (ibid) it is conceivable that someone read a Marcionite version of Matthew's Antitheses and said "there are two powers"

" For all that, judgement is already given, and that by manifest proofs, that he whose works and ways are consistently antithetic, has also his mysteries <of revelation> consistently of that same pattern. You have there my short and sharp answer to the Antitheses ..." (ibid) no one else was come up with a better answer than Matthew's Antitheses for any of this. And it has Irenaeus in support.

"What now, if the Marcionites are going to deny that his faith at first was with us—even against the evidence of his own letter? What if they refuse to acknowledge that letter? Certainly Marcion's own Antitheses not only admit this, but even make a show of it. Proof taken from them is good enough for me. If that gospel which among us is ascribed to Luke—we shall see <later> whether it is <accepted by> Marcion—if that is the same that Marcion by his Antitheses accuses of having been falsified by the upholders of Judaism with a view to its being so combined in one body with the law and the prophets that they might also pretend that Christ had that origin, evidently he could only have brought accusation against something he had found there already." (4.4) if Marcion's Antitheses looked like Matthew's it would fit the billing of proof that he was once orthodox.

"Certainly the whole of the work he has done, including the prefixing of his Antitheses, he directs to the one purpose of setting up opposition between the Old Testament and the New, and thereby putting his Christ in separation from the Creator, as belonging to another god, and having no connection with the law and the prophets." (4.6) If Matthew's Antitheses are any yardstick a gospel without Birth Narratives would have it appear that these "Antitheses" were "pre-fixed" to the gospel because they appear right at the very beginning, shortly after he descended from heaven and likely caused the crowds at "Bethsaida" to try to push him off a cliff.

"Now I have already postulated, in opposition to the Antitheses, that Marcion's purpose is in no sense served by what he supposes to be an opposition between the law and the gospel, because this too was ordained by the Creator, and in fact was foretold by that promise of a new law and a new word and a new testament." (4.9) No problem here.

[lsayre]

It seems that at least a couple of the above are not actually Antithesis. Rather they are adding additions that go beyond the original but seem to still be in support the original. I can't fully accept that these are Marcion's Antithesis.

[Secret Alias]

So Matthew preserved a form of an antithetical section of the gospel which are frequently or even usually called "Antitheses" https://rsc.byu.edu/sermon-mount-latter ... antitheses which could be used to prove their are two gods, two testaments, two powers in heaven - whatever - which had nothing to do with Marcion? Really? The most Marcionite thing in any of the gospels which is naturally and without prompting called "the Antitheses" is not Marcionite . Wow. I must be in the wrong business. And the fifteen accusations that Marcion cut Matthew 5.17 in Book Four and the frequent references to 5.18 - 47 in Tertullian and originally Irenaeus. I guess is also wholly unrelated. And the 40 - 50 references to Matthew. Another coincidence. And all the references to Marcion knowing Matthew but rejecting it. Just circumstantial evidence again. And the parallels between the Marcionite reading of Galatians (that the "Jewish gospel" was "stolen" form, a Judaized i.e. one with added references to the prophets, of his text) that it testified to a situation like Papias's description of the relationship between Mark and Matthew, namely that the latter, though secondary and undoubtedly derived from the former was "better arranged" because of its reliance on references to the Jewish prophets that doesn't figure into a common use of the Antitheses (i.e. where the Judaized version likely watered down the original Marcionite-like inferences). Ok to each his own.

[Peter Kirby]

Is there a scholarly reconstruction of Marcion's Antitheses more recent (and/or better) than Harnack's? Preferably one that cites its sources for each item in the reconstruction. (I'm aware of the discussion of the Antitheses in chapter 10 of Judith M. Lieu, Marcion and the Making of a Heretic (2015) 270-289).

Thanks,

Ken

I don't know about a full reconstruction. This is a good discussion, however:

Marcion's Antitheses and the Isagogic Genre, Eric W. Scherbenske
Vigiliae Christianae, Vol. 64, No. 3 (2010), pp. 255-279 (25 pages)

[davidmartin]

will you guys give it a rest about Marcion? half the posts started are Marcionite

the Shepherd of Hermas is overlooked, for some dude that left less information than the historical Jesus

ok, he popularises Paul and maybe had an early edition of Luke
but Marcion comes after Paul and after the gospel he packaged up - he's not that early - how useful can he be?

All it looks like is Marcionism was the gentilising process going a bit far, to include Jewish scripture and possibly God
and because he wasn't a dope smoking gnostic the orthodox had a problem in case he became the orthodox not them

[Peter Kirby]

ok, he popularises Paul and maybe had an early edition of Luke
but Marcion comes after Paul and after the gospel he packaged up - he's not that early - how useful can he be?

We don't have direct access to the first century and must approach it through the texts and controversies of the second, third, and fourth.

On the other hand, sure. I think we have a distorted picture if we focus only on this.

And you're right that we seem to be going through a bit of a phase here, e.g. compare to just a few weeks ago:
viewforum.php?f=3&start=100
viewforum.php?f=3&start=125
viewforum.php?f=3&start=150

As for this:

will you guys give it a rest about Marcion?

No, and what would the point be? We would just have half as many posts.

Start some new, different threads.

[Secret Alias]

Yeah so because ONLY Tertullian can be read to tells us that Marcion "pre-fixed" something that just so happens to suspiciously sound like Luther's THESES "fixed" to a door by mostly German Lutheran scholars is supposed to be believable. Yeah, that's so convincing in a bad art movie kind of way. You can also see scholars and their predecessors theologians are completely clueless about criminals and criminality. "I am going to adulterate a gospel to make it agree with me and then just to make sure that no one notices my interpolations I AM GOING TO NAIL A FUCKING EXPLICIT ADMISSION OF MY WRONGDOING OR THE PURPOSE OF MY WRONGDOING TO THE VERY NARRATIVES I FALSIFIED SO EVERYONE CAN KNOW WHAT I AM UP TO." Brilliant master criminal Marcion. File this under, things that never happened.

[Secret Alias]

The same people who believe this implausible art movie plot think that its "reasonable" to conclude that one of their own in the 1950s thought "I like fucking men so I'm going to make a gospel about Jesus fucking men." Yeah if only life wasn't drearily boring. If only life was like this neverending art film plot where all the garbage you learn in humanities courses about literary devices actually happened in real life. Marcion did not falsify a gospel AND nail the falsifications on the front of his gospel. Morton Smith didn't falsify Secret Mark AND bury clues of his crime in his forgery. Too much book reading too little living outside of books.

[Peter Kirby]

You can also see scholars and their predecessors theologians are completely clueless about criminals and criminality. "I am going to adulterate a gospel to make it agree with me and then just to make sure that no one notices my interpolations I AM GOING TO NAIL A FUCKING EXPLICIT ADMISSION OF MY WRONGDOING OR THE PURPOSE OF MY WRONGDOING TO THE VERY NARRATIVES I FALSIFIED SO EVERYONE CAN KNOW WHAT I AM UP TO." Brilliant master criminal Marcion. File this under, things that never happened.

Marcion did not falsify a gospel AND nail the falsifications on the front of his gospel.

You're right. Harnack was wrong.