You're arguing the wrong way. First there is textual evidence, then one can draw conclusions.
So my question is: why do you think that Marcion came after Paul? What textual evidence is there that brings you to that conclusion?
I am absolutely positive that Marcion didn't have thati see it the other way round. instead of Marcion not teaching it, it's about recognising the crucifixion (done by the power of the enemy) nullified the Marcionite's claim Jesus couldn't have been tempted (ie if he can be crucified he can be tempted) - it seems more likely to me Marcion didn't have the temptation
Tertullian AM 5.6.7
There is a clear difference here between our gospel and that which is common to both, hence the conclusion must be drawn that Marcion didn't have the temptation. And why would he? That is only there because it fulfils scripture, so it is none of Marcion's business
Why would Jesus have to be made look guilty? Of what?anything that made Jesus appear more guilty might have been Marcion's bag
Do you see how this is the epitome of circular reasoning? Can I at least have an argument or two ofre: the stuff Marcion leaves in with resurrection/physical body
Ah.. again Marcion has to agree with Paul whose letters he promotes and I believe that its true, he's a radical Pauline. So he must have the cross and the resurrection... or he can't have Paul
1) how Marcion would be a "radical Pauline" and what that would mean?
2) why Marcion can't be that all by himself of himself?
I find nothing in Marcion about flesh, body, soul and spirit parts at all, let alone those of Jesus. I'm currently reading Harnack in original form, and he also presumes that Marcion came after Paul and thus removes flesh and such.I recon Marcion maybe taught Jesus already had the 'glorified body' of Paul, which appears fleshly. Possibly nothing of his body changed after the cross he means. So he's not the pure spirit of the gnostics but does have the new body Paul speaks of
So in other words Jesus 'appeared' to be normal but he really had the glorified body we find in Paul, which presumably is not 'born' right?!
But that is an assumption and I have yet to find in Harnack what his arguments are
The Church fathers were really intent on bending the Pauline image of a celestial Christ at some point, and added all the flesh stuff. With their strategy of making it appear as if Marcion copied Luke instead of vice versa, this is the logical outcome of their argumentation.
But Thomas doesn't give a damn about the make up of IS, and I think that Marcion didn't either. You really shouldn't take Churchianity as the centre of the universe and reason back and forth from that, because you'll end up there again
Have I ever addressed your physical make up? Are you sure that you're made of flesh, and not just a spirit? Can I just talk to you without making a statement on that?
If I can do so, why can't Marcion?
Have you noticed that I am arguing for the complete opposite?I can see how the Paul based Christians could more easily split over Jesus's birth and body more than they could over the God issue. I bet you that there were Paul types who didn't have a gospel at all and rejected a physical Jesus body. Out of this group Marcion came, with a gospel and well against Jewish religion, its worth mentioning that for all Paul's quotes of scripture most are moralising and justification types, he doesn't use the same proofs the fathers or matthew uses. i'm not sure Paul even says Jesus is the messiah explicitly. so its not as crazy as it first appears Marcion uses Paul i think its possible to make sense of it.
That is also possible, but it would mean that he really did remove an awful lot of stuff.
i guess Marcion got his gospel from Mark and other sources available at the time, and someone 'corrected' it pretty early on to make Luke in parallel circulation for a while then chooom the fathers say he messed with Luke
In my scenario, each just adds to the previous "good message"
Marcion adds the story / narrative to Thomas and has him die and resurrect;
Paul refutes the anti-Judean elements by arguing at enormous length about them;
Mark adds the Tanakh footing and makes sure that Jesus is a human being;
Luke makes it all his own by copying Marcion in its entirety while creating his own Thomasine parables