tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post1801639105333585323..comments2024-03-10T06:20:10.198+00:00Comments on Markus Vinzent's Blog: English translation of Marcion's GospelProfessor Markus Vinzenthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18207418071078727708noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5008517438604159901.post-14772913800607425082011-06-29T21:47:45.264+01:002011-06-29T21:47:45.264+01:00You interesting argue that Tertullian (or his sour...You interesting argue that Tertullian (or his source) knows the correct order of the Marcionite gospel. I am not so sure. I think the text began with the appearance at Bethsaida (= Nazareth). This explains the name 'gospel' (= Jubilee cf. Isa 61.2). It is also worth noting that Clement of Alexandria cites an important variant. I think the scribe added the identification 'Luke' herein:<br /><br />And to prove that this is true, it is written in the Gospel by Luke as follows: "And in the fifteenth year, in the reign of Tiberius Caesar, the word of the Lord came to John, the son of Zacharias." And again in the same book: "And Jesus was coming to His baptism, being about thirty years old," and so on. And that it was necessary for Him to preach only a year, this also is written: "He hath sent Me to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord." This both the prophet spake, and the Gospel. [Strom 1.21]<br /><br />For what it's worth I think this is closest we get to the actual order of the Marcionite gospel (which is really ur-Mark or the preferred gospel of Alexandria). Tertullian is just copying a Syriac text he doesn't fully understand. It reflects the order of Tatian's Diatessaron not Marcion's text just as Galatians is only the first epistle in the Syriac NT (cf. Ephraim) not the Marcionite NT.Stephan Hullerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07712300237611095445noreply@blogger.com