Expecting to see Marcionite antitheses behind midrash from Jewish scriptures

[Giuseppe]

In another thread rgprice wrote:

Doesn't matter where the Gospel came from. I don't see how a narrative not based on the Jewish scriptures could have been turned into the Gospel of Mark. It means the writer of Mark would had to have been able to take a narrative that had nothing to do with Judaism, and then find passages in the Jewish scriptures that had almost identical working to the original narrative, but also made prefect references to the Jewish scriptures at the same time.

Proponents of marcionite priority don't claim that the gospel of Marcion was a narrative not based on the Jewish scriptures. At contrary, they claim that:

• Marcion based his story on the Jewish scriptures;

• Marcion did so only to raise again and again antitheses between the evil YHWH and the Good Christ.

For example, the Jesus calling the first disciples: there is no doubt that it is based on Elijah calling Elisha.

• Proponents of Markan priority say: Jesus is as and better than Elisha. Perfect continuity with the sense of Jewish scriptures. Same scriptures, same god.

• Proponents of Marcionite priority insist on the obvious differences:
  • Elijah allows Elisha to see his relatives the last time.
  • Jesus's disciples follow him without reluctance.
  The antithesis is:
  • the material world is still important for Elijah, so he allows Elisha to see his relatives the last time;
  • in Marcion, the material world is created by the evil demiurge, so there is no reason to indulge further in it.

This makes sense.

Mine prophecy: if prof Markus Vinzent will be able to list all the antitheses (of a similar tenor) parallel respectively to the list of midrashical episodes in proto-Luke, then this will be equivalent to prove definitively the Marcionite priority.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

This makes sense.

No, like many other opinions by Professor Vinzent, this makes no sense at all.

You are Italian and your beliefs have a cultural matrix deeply influenced by Christian history. That is why you are interested in the question of whether Jesus existed or not. The question of whether Gautama Buddha or Muhammad existed is of little or no interest to you, because these alleged people do not really belong to your background. You distance yourself from where you come from or from your neighbors, but not from something that is happening on the other side of the world. Marcion's supposed antitheses indicate the origin of his beliefs from an originally Jewish root. (Another possibility is that many Jewish traders angered Marcion and he decided to outdo their religion in revenge.)

[Giuseppe]

Marcion's supposed antitheses indicate the origin of his beliefs from an originally Jewish root.

I am not denying the Jewish origins of the myth (=epistles). I am arguing for the marcionite (=gentilizing) origin of the legend (=Gospels).

Is for you the tradition that Marcion compared again and again OT and NT not sufficient to interpret the midrash in proto-Luke as masking an anti-OT point again and again ?

If I see that the interpretation works, why should I not give reason to prof Vinzent?


In addition, Markan prioritists should stop to quote Mark 4.11-12 as if it was alone evidence that the original author knew forever something his readers never knew. If the "ignorance as cause of destruction for outsiders" finds his origin in the OT (Isaiah 6:9) and referred specifically to YHWH's cruelty against his own people, then the exact opposed point, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear,” sounds perfectly marcionite to me. Even if you were able to find a midrashical source for such logion.

[schillingklaus]

Of course the origins of Christianity are in the anti-Jewish reading of passages of the Old Testament, especially Genesis 3. But Marcionism has not invented this opposition; it is even a substantially mitgated and rarified version of antinomianism, giving law a temporary and relative value. Proper gnosticism was unlikely any longer around by then, as all patristic reports show traces of incorporation of elements of the Judaizing counter-exegesis.

[mlinssen]

In another thread rgprice wrote:

Doesn't matter where the Gospel came from. I don't see how a narrative not based on the Jewish scriptures could have been turned into the Gospel of Mark. It means the writer of Mark would had to have been able to take a narrative that had nothing to do with Judaism, and then find passages in the Jewish scriptures that had almost identical working to the original narrative, but also made prefect references to the Jewish scriptures at the same time.

Proponents of marcionite priority don't claim that the gospel of Marcion was a narrative not based on the Jewish scriptures. At contrary, they claim that:

• Marcion based his story on the Jewish scriptures;

• Marcion did so only to raise again and again antitheses between the evil YHWH and the Good Christ.

For example, the Jesus calling the first disciples: there is no doubt that it is based on Elijah calling Elisha.

• Proponents of Markan priority say: Jesus is as and better than Elisha. Perfect continuity with the sense of Jewish scriptures. Same scriptures, same god.

• Proponents of Marcionite priority insist on the obvious differences:
  • Elijah allows Elisha to see his relatives the last time.
  • Jesus's disciples follow him without reluctance.
  The antithesis is:
  • the material world is still important for Elijah, so he allows Elisha to see his relatives the last time;
  • in Marcion, the material world is created by the evil demiurge, so there is no reason to indulge further in it.

This makes sense.

Mine prophecy: if prof Markus Vinzent will be able to list all the antitheses (of a similar tenor) parallel respectively to the list of midrashical episodes in proto-Luke, then this will be equivalent to prove definitively the Marcionite priority.

Excellent Giuseppe! Ignore Kunigunde and just let her play with her BCE dolls even though she managesto put a valid argument in between parentheses, and don't let Geoff's lack of imagination and creativity spoil your party - because you are spot on and your examples here are compelling

Marcion indeed did his utmost to demonstrate that his Jesus was bigger and better than anything in the Tanakh, and apparently he was incredibly successful at that

Reality doesn't exist, and even if it did then no one's interacting with it - all that matters is our own truth. When we believe a story it becomes true and that's that, that's how we all Believe in Santa Claus at some point and are devastated when told that it all was a lie before we find out for ourselves

And what Geoff describes above is EXACTLY what Mark did, had to do, and it is not hard to see how that is an enormous amount of work in itself and why that leaves so many loopholes on a whole.
So yes, all we have to do is go by the Judaism in Mark and decide whether it either is a fresh insertion or a change to what Marcion had; and Luke will always be the odd one out.
The Transfiguration is a fun one to in that regard where Matthew just can't stand the denigration of his poster child Peter and changes Mark's "Rabbi" into "kurie" but even drops the entire "Peter had no idea what he was doing". Luke is more bound than the others, naturally, so Matthew changes the Rabbi there as well but lets the disciples sleep instead

We can solve all this in this month really, it all makes perfect sense