Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Then Jesus asked the disciples, “Did you need anything when I sent you without a purse, bag or sandals?”

“Nothing,” they answered.

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it. And also take a bag. If you don’t have a sword, sell your coat and buy one. It is written, ‘He was counted among those who had committed crimes.’ (Isaiah 53:12) I tell you that what is written about me must come true. Yes, it is already coming true.”

The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”

“Two swords are enough!” he replied.

(Luke 22:35-38)

The point seems to be that Jesus deliberately wants to fulfill Isaiah 53:12, so his enemies have finally the fatidic opportunity to arrest him.

Since no people is arresting Jesus, then Jesus himself is giving a reason to arrest him (by fulfilling Isaiah 53:12)!

The episode is not found in Mcn.

What could be a marcionite interpretation of that passage?

It has all the air of a proto-catholic insertion, to have both:

1) a Jesus based on previous Scripture, as usual
2) a Jesus who decides even why his opponents should arrest him: his followers have two swords ''therefore'' he will be counted ''among evildoers''.

This supports my suspect that our canonical Gospels don't know really why Jesus is arrested and put to death among two lestes.

Can Mark know that reason?

Or Mcn?


Jesus is clearly a lestes in Mark 3:27 :

In fact, none of you can enter a strong man’s house unless you tie him up first. Then you can steal things from his house.

Curiously, Mark 3:26 talks about ''division'' in the kingdom of Satan, the same term that in Mcn replaces ''sword'' in Luke 12:49-53

“I have come to bring fire on the earth. How I wish the fire had already started! But I have a baptism of suffering to go through. And I must go through it. Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you. I have come to separate people. From now on there will be five members in a family, each one against the other. There will be three against two and two against three. They will be separated. Father will turn against son and son against father. Mother will turn against daughter and daughter against mother. Mother-in-law will turn against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

Maybe in Mcn the original goal of Jesus was to put Satan against himself.

If Satan is the Demiurge, then he is put ''against himself'' when his Law condemns the fully Innocent (Jesus) as worthy of death.

If I am correct, then Mark 3:35-37 is a correction of that view, meant to exorcize the marcionite idea that Jesus meant defeating the demiurge with its own rules of the game.

Note what the proto-catholics have made:

the first Gospel did talk about Jesus who puts division between Satan/the creator god and his Law (given by angels = archons of this eon),

the canonical Gospels did talk about a Jesus who puts division between a disciple of Jesus and his relatives.

This may explain why the demons recognize Jesus in Mark, despite of the Messianic Secret.

In Mcn, the demons think wrongly that Jesus is the messiah of the god of Jews coming to destroy them (here we have really a presumed Satan in conflict against his same demons!).

DIVIDE ET IMPERA, is the tactic of the marcionite Jesus against demons, in Mcn.

FYI Epiphanius Panarion 42.11.6.64 explicitly states verses 22:35-37 were not in Marcion

He falsified 'When I sent you, lacked ye anything,' and so on, because of the words, 'This also that is written must be accomplished, And he was numbered among the transgressors.'
<ξδ> Παρέκοψε τό «ὅτε ἀπέστειλα ὑμᾶς, μή τινος ὑστερήσατε;» καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς, διὰ τό «καὶ τοῦτο τὸ γεγραμμένον δεῖ τελεσθῆναι, τό· καὶ μετὰ ἀνόμων συνελογίσθη».

Verse 22:38 depends on the passage.

It's not surprising that the content is antithetical to Marcionite exegesis.

Thanks, Stuart. My implicit point is that where Jesus is described usually as an aggressive warrior-messiah in the gospels, very probably :
1) he is the proto-catholic version of Jesus or...
2) he only appears to be a warrior-messiah, while really he is another more meek messiah.

Verses 22:38 is an example of point 1.

The episodes where the demons fear Jesus and escape from him make the point 2 (the demons believe wrongly that Jesus is the vengeful and aggressive messiah of the Demiurge, but in reality Jesus is an alien).

My growing suspect is that the point 1 is an anti-marcionite reaction to point 2.

In Mcn the actors are:

1) Jesus against the demons.
2) The demons against the messiah of the demiurge.
3) Jesus against the demiurge.


In our gospels the actors are:

1) Jesus against the demons.
2) the demons against the god of the Jews.
3) Jesus is the son of the god of Jews.

In this way it is not more explained why the demons can violate the messianic secret in Mark.