Mit Genehmigung des Briefautors will ich gerne andere Interessierte an diesem Austausch teilnehmen lassen:
Sehr geehrter Herr Prof. Vinzent,
in möglichst großer Kürze möchte ich Ihnen nach der Lektüre von "Offener Anfang" – auch wenn ich nur ein fachfremder theologischer Bücherwurm bin – folgenden Gedanken mitteilen:
Mit dem Third quest nach dem historischen Jesus wird immer deutlicher, wie sehr Jesus Jude war. In Darstellungen der Geschichte des frühen Christentums wird immer wieder die Frage gestellt, wie es sein konnte, daß sich das Christentum so schnell ausbreitete – mit mehr oder weniger überzeugenden Antworten (die schönste Version ist natürlich die Wirkung des heiligen Geistes, "Gott umarmt uns durch die Wirklichkeit").
Gleichzeitig wissen wir, dass es praktisch unmöglich war, als Proselyt während der eigenen Lebenszeit als vollwertiger Jude anerkannt zu werden. Erst die Kinder oder Enkel konnten damit rechnen. Es gab wohl im ersten Jahrhundert in den Städten des römischen Reiches an vielen Orten im Umfeld der jüdischen Synagogen Proselyten. Für sie muß eine Richtung innerhalb des Judentums, die es ihnen ermöglichte, als Anhänger Jesu endlich voll und ganz dazuzugehören oder sogar zu einer herausgehobenen Strömung, wenn nicht gar dem wahren Judentums zu gehören, höchst attraktiv gewesen sein. Diese Menschen müssen auf Paulus und seine missionarischen Nachfolger geradezu geflogen sein. Je nachdem wie zahlreich diese Proselyten waren, könnte das ein entscheidender Faktor für den Erfolg des "Neuen Wegs" gewesen sein - zunächst als Strömung innerhalb des Judentums.
Mit besten Grüßen,
Peter Schießl
Ich habe Herrn Schießl auf diese wichtige Anregung hin geantwortet:
Hi Prof Vinzent,
ReplyDeleteAre you sure that the Barabbas episode was found in Marcion's Gospel?
I raise this question because Couchoud made apparently a good case for "Bar-Abbas" being a caustic Judaizing parody of Marcion's "Jesus Son of Father". Hence, how could Marcion have in his own Gospel an episode where his Jesus (Son of an Unknown Father) is criminalized as Bar-Abbas?
Thanks in advance for any answer,
Giuseppe
I need to check Couchoud on this, for Tertullian seems to have read the Barabbas story in Marcion, though he only mentions it in short (Tert., Adv. Marc. IV 42,4: "Et Barrabas quidem nocentissimus vita ut bonus donatur, Chrustus vero iustissimus ut homicida morti expostulatur ...")
Deleteyours Markus
Dear Guiseppe,
ReplyDeletecan you point me to the work where Couchoud makes this point, so that I can see and follow his arguments. As you know, I have the highest regards for Couchoud. He is one of those independent thinkers who has advanced like few others the studies of Marcion and early Christian writings. By the way, do you know his autobiography, an insight into his painful journey towards his self-liberation.
Hi and thanks for the answer. The article I refer is Jésus Barabbas by P.-L Couchoud and R. Stahl, found in Premiers écrits du Christianisme – p. 139 – 161 – Paris 1930. The French original and the German translation is reported here: http://radikalkritik.de/geschichte/paul-louis-couchoud
ReplyDeleteA quote (my translation):
This son-of-Father who treats the old prophets as robbers and brigands, himself is treated as a brigand. The polemic against Jesus Bar-Abbas took the most popular and most effective form, that of the account. It was a question of showing that only crucified, the only redeemer of the men, was as well the Christ of Israel, that even as announced the prophets. The Synoptic gospels, mainly Luke and Matthew, stuck to this demonstration.
Hence, probably Barabbas didn't figure in the original Marcion's Gospel. The fact that the Father of Barabbas is unknown, makes clearly the (polemical) point that this Father is the Alien Good God adored by Marcion, just as the fact that the only fault of Barabbas (differently from Jesus) is his being not the one 'called Christ'. This talks about an early resistance against the idea that Jesus is the Christ. Wasn't Marcion to insist that Jesus was not the Christ but the son of an unknown Father?
Giuseppe
Hi and thanks for the answer. The article I refer is Jésus Barabbas by P.-L Couchoud and R. Stahl, found in Premiers écrits du Christianisme – p. 139 – 161 – Paris 1930. The French original and the German translation is reported here: http://radikalkritik.de/geschichte/paul-louis-couchoud
ReplyDeleteA quote (my translation):
This son-of-Father who treats the old prophets as robbers and brigands, himself is treated as a brigand. The polemic against Jesus Bar-Abbas took the most popular and most effective form, that of the account. It was a question of showing that only crucified, the only redeemer of the men, was as well the Christ of Israel, that even as announced the prophets. The Synoptic gospels, mainly Luke and Matthew, stuck to this demonstration.
Hence, probably Barabbas didn't figure in the original Marcion's Gospel. The fact that the Father of Barabbas is unknown, makes clearly the (polemical) point that this Father is the Alien Good God adored by Marcion, just as the fact that the only fault of Barabbas (differently from Jesus) is his being not the one 'called Christ'. This talks about an early resistance against the idea that Jesus is the Christ. Wasn't Marcion to insist that Jesus was not the Christ but the son of an unknown Father?
Giuseppe
Thanks so much for this Giuseppe!
ReplyDelete