Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

but did they look anything like our received canon?

I suspect that before Marcion the Gospels were rather viewed as non-binding texts and in individual use by more learned Christians

Unlikely. Judaism is the model. Jews don't write things about God which are 'open-ended.' God is the word, the word is God, absolute in every sense.

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 2:30 pm

rgprice wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 5:17 am Marcion was the first to create a "New Testament".

I suspect that before Marcion the Gospels were rather viewed as non-binding texts and in individual use by more learned Christians, but that they became authoritative scriptures in the process of the confrontation with Marcion and other groups.

Yes, I think this is correct. This was especially true of Matthew and Luke. Honestly, I'm surprised the Gospel of Mark even made the cut, but thankfully it did. Without it it would be impossible to figure anything out.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Feb 01, 2021 2:53 pm

I suspect that before Marcion the Gospels were rather viewed as non-binding texts and in individual use by more learned Christians

Unlikely. Judaism is the model. Jews don't write things about God which are 'open-ended.' God is the word, the word is God, absolute in every sense.

That's not true. There were literally thousands of non-cannon Jewish stories written between the second century BCE and the second century CE.

But the most vexing thing is that what is presumably the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, both serves the Marcionite function of breaking with Judaism and presenting a new prophet for a new God, but is also deeply tied to Judaism! I can't imagine that Marcion or Marcionite thought could have produced the Gospel of Mark, for it is way too deeply tied into the Jewish scriptures, but at the same time it serves Marcionite goals in many other way

It is clear Paul does see himself as breaking with Judaism in some way shape or form
"But when God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me by his grace to reveal his son in me"
His "mother's womb" is Judaism, or at least the old covenant part of it centred in the temple with it's priests
"One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves... and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother"

I think these quotes are the earliest pieces of Paul's writings on this subject. Paul is talking about his literal mother in chapter 1? No freaking way
The way Paul phrases it - he doesn't even make it sound like he had a great revelation just that he converted to Christianity like anyone else

But Paul is not breaking with the Jewish God one iota in the epistles we have... but he's only one step away from apparently doing so
Because if the priests are wrong and enslaving people... how can they be right about God?

Marcion must have found that Paul could be re-interpreted, taking Paul's arguments further. This is a mortal threat to the church fathers who rely so much on the Hebrew scriptures and Paul not to mention the Jewish God. What an almighty shit show it must have been when Marcion was at the height of his power. Marcion probably compared the priests in Jerusalem Paul opposed to the Christian priests he opposed

Apparently the gospel Jesus is interested in reforming perceptions about God to a more true perception, i doubt any of these latter battles really exemplify this original intent