Another Curious Dependence on Matthew for Marcion

[davidbrainerd]

But again could the centrality of the Marcionite interest in Jesus blood redemption - 'Jesus blood redemption' ultimately being a recorded event in the gospel (viz. the crucifixion) - have been wholly based on the Pauline writings, a secondary (i.e. based on/derived from the gospels) testament??? No mention in the gospel but Paul said so a generation later or Paul wrote the gospel but then failed to mention anything about Jesus's blood. Would that have stuck with anyone? Would that have convinced anyone? The price of Jesus's blood redeemed us ... but it's not in the gospel. I don't think so.

Probably where Luke says "this is my blood which is shed for you" Marcion said "this is my blood which is shed for to purchase you" or something like that. The connection of the gospel to Paul's ransom theology was probably more expilicit.

Edit:
Probably the distinction between the two god was explicit too. Something like "this is my blood which is shed for to purchase you from the god of this world and give you to my Father"

[Secret Alias]

But the Marcionites drank that blood as water. Hard to get to redemption from that. There is a clear sense that blood of Jesus for the Marcionites meant his crucifixion. See Blackman above.

[davidbrainerd]

But the Marcionites drank the blood as water. Hard to get to redemption from that. There is a clear sense that blood of Jesus for the Marcionites meant his crucifixion. See Blackman above.

They were undoubtedly "Protestant" in interpretation of the eucharist, its just a symbol to remind you of the cross, not transubstantiation.

[Secret Alias]

But how do you get to redemption from there? Blackman and everyone else ties the 'blood of Jesus' literally to his death and crucifixion. Rightly.

[Secret Alias]

It is interesting to note the timing of Judas's metanoia in the Diatessaron - i.e. after the Pilate episode (as opposed to Matthew which switches the order):

And Pilate, when he saw it, and he was gaining nothing, but the tumult was increasing, took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, and said, I 5 am innocent of the blood of this innocent man: ye shall know. And all the people 6 answered and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then Pilate commanded to grant them their request; and delivered up Jesus to be crucified, according to their wish.

Then Judas the betrayer, when he saw Jesus wronged, went and returned the 8 thirty pieces of money to the chief priests and the eiders, and said, I have sinned in my betraying innocent blood. And they said unto him, And we, what must we do? 9 know thou. And he threw down the money in the temple, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the money, and said, We have not authority to cast it into the place of the offering, for it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with it the plain of the potter, for the burial of strangers. Therefore that plain was called, The field of blood, unto 13 Arabic, this day. Therein was fulfilled the saying in the prophet which said, I took thirty pieces of money, the price of the precious one, which was fixed by the children of Israel; and I paid them for the plain of the potter, as the Lord commanded me.

So Judas is at the trial of Jesus. Interestingly he hears Pilate establishes the 'innocence' of Jesus's blood and repents and then the 'price' stipulated in Exodus for a slave (which then sets up the chain reaction that follows i.e. his blood being on the Jews and the 'price of blood' of an innocent man).

[davidbrainerd]

But how do you get to redemption from there? Blackman and everyone else ties the 'blood of Jesus' literally to his death and crucifixion. Rightly.

If in the communion institution he said something like "this is [a symbol for] my blood which is shed to purchase you from the god of this world and give you to my Father" that would obviously point to the cross as the real thing behind the symbol. Or it could be explained in another context, any time when the notion of explaining he must be crucified is brought up, like Luke 24:7, or in a post resurrection appearance. There could even have been a post resurrection appearance to Paul in the gospel.

[Peter Kirby]

It is interesting to note the timing of Judas's metanoia in the Diatessaron - i.e. after the Pilate episode (as opposed to Matthew which switches the order):

And Pilate, when he saw it, and he was gaining nothing, but the tumult was increasing, took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, and said, I 5 am innocent of the blood of this innocent man: ye shall know. And all the people 6 answered and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then Pilate commanded to grant them their request; and delivered up Jesus to be crucified, according to their wish.

Then Judas the betrayer, when he saw Jesus wronged, went and returned the 8 thirty pieces of money to the chief priests and the eiders, and said, I have sinned in my betraying innocent blood. And they said unto him, And we, what must we do? 9 know thou. And he threw down the money in the temple, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the money, and said, We have not authority to cast it into the place of the offering, for it is the price of blood. And they took counsel, and bought with it the plain of the potter, for the burial of strangers. Therefore that plain was called, The field of blood, unto 13 Arabic, this day. Therein was fulfilled the saying in the prophet which said, I took thirty pieces of money, the price of the precious one, which was fixed by the children of Israel; and I paid them for the plain of the potter, as the Lord commanded me.

So Judas is at the trial of Jesus. Interestingly he hears Pilate establishes the 'innocence' of Jesus's blood and repents and then the 'price' stipulated in Exodus for a slave (which then sets up the chain reaction that follows i.e. his blood being on the Jews and the 'price of blood' of an innocent man).

That is interesting.

[Secret Alias]

On the blood of Matthew 27:25 as redemption https://books.google.com/books?id=a3iir ... od&f=false

[Secret Alias]

Matthew 27:25 is based on Exodus 24:8 and there is irony in the statement from the Jews as necessarily the blood must have been understood to cleanse/redeem the Jews and enact a "new covenant" entirely accidentally. https://books.google.com/books?id=HSCAC ... 25&f=false. Already Adv Tert 3 says Marcionites drew from Jewish proselytes. I suspect the first Christians were Jews who accepted that Jesus's blood redeemed them owing to an accident. It was an involuntary or accidental end to the old and beginning of the new

[Secret Alias]

That the Marcionite redemption was from the blood of Jesus see Eznik:

And in vain was that saying of Marcion, "We are the price of the blood of Jesus." Because that blood of his was not shed, nor were they bought, for the reason that they speak of the cross and death figuratively and not really. Even the Jews refute them, who to this day insist, "Our fathers lifted up Jesus to the cross." https://books.google.com/books?id=3yP-K ... 22&f=false

Although Eznik stresses the differences between the Marcionite understanding and the orthodox, I am suspicious. Notice that in a near contemporary (to Eznik) Armenian saint (= Gregory the Illuminator) we hear a preservation of the Marcionite 'creed' only now in the voice of an orthodox. Gregory declares:

“ Then, because men ate and drank of that which was offered in sacrifice to their gods, therefore did Thy Son shed His Blood on the Cross. For that wood is to men instead of their carved images of wood ; and He Himself, instead of the human similitudes of impurity ; His Blood also is in place of the cup of their joyful libations of blood. For He came and redeemed us with His Blood from our hard bondage, and set us free from the servitude of the wickedness of sin, by His divine nature. For we are the price of the Blood of Thy Son ; being saved and made free by the Blood of His Body. For we are not masters of our own selves, that we should walk according to our ideas of ease and comfort, or according to the opinions of any mortal man, even though he be our lord and master after the flesh. "We must honour them only as Thou hast commanded ; for they can only torment our bodies; but Thy Son Jesus Christ has power to cast into everlasting torments both our souls and bodies, into the fire that is not quenched and the worm that dieth hot.”

Armenia was still under the influence of Marcionite ideas at the time Gregory rose to prominence and I imagine that they had pretty much the same idea about how 'the blood of Christ' or Jesus redeemed. So Augustine:

https://books.google.com/books?id=9FynY ... 22&f=false

Ambrose:

“That without God He should taste death for every man;” that is, that every creature might be redeemed without any suffering at the price of the blood of the Lord’s Divinity, as it stands elsewhere: “Every creature shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption.”

Some more clues of what the Marcionites believed regarding the redemption of blood in Eznik:

Then Jesus descended again, but this time in the form of his divinity, and accused the Lord of Creation of his death. The god was dismayed as he had not known until then that any other god existed, but Jesus said to him, "I have a case against thee and no one shall judge between us but thine own law which thou has written ... Didst thou not write in thy Law that he who kills shall die and they shall shed the blood of him who sheds blood? ... Now thou hast delivered thyself into my hands so that I may kill thee and shed thy blood as thou didst kill me and shed my blood. For I am more righteous than thou and I have done great kindness to thy creation." And he recounted all the kindnesses he had done. At this the Lord of Creation was confounded, and, pleading ignorance of the Stranger's existence, offered as amends to give Jesus all those who would believe in him to go wherever he wished. Jesus then departed and appointed Paul to proclaim the news that "we are bought with a price (1 Cor 6.20) and that all who believe in Jesus have been sold by the Righteous to the Good God."