Schools as the birthplace of the Gospels

 join me on the latest show of History Valley with Jacob Berman:

Dating the Synoptic Gospels - a forgotten book

 Though, an important book where the dating of the synoptic gospels is placed into the times of Justin, has been almost forgotten:

Ludwig Paul, Die Abfassungszeit der synoptischen Evangelien. Ein Nachweis aus Justinus Martyr, Leipzig: Grunow, 1887, worth reading.

The oral tradition and Marcion

With permission of the sender, I am posting here a recent email exchange that we had on the question of dating and sequence of oral information and the writing of Marcion's Gospel. Thanks for the question and the permission to post this non-anonymized:

Dear Mr. Professor Dr. Vincent Marcus, sir!

 

Let me remind you about myself. I am the Orthodox Bishop Oleg Chekrygin. Three years ago I asked you to send me your book on the dating of the gospels. I was happy to receive all three of your books, thank you. To the best of my poor English, I familiarized myself with your works. I must tell you that this is an outstanding study in my opinion. And even revolutionary.

 

Unfortunately, it is little known in Russia, your books have not been translated into Russian, and the fruits of your research are hushed up by Russian biblical scholars, who remain on the point of view of the early dating of the synoptic gospels by the middle of the first century.

 

>indeed, it would be nice, if I found somebody who could translate the work into Russian.

 

Once again, I express my deep gratitude to you for your outstanding work.

 

However, if I may, I want to ask you some questions.

 

From my point of view, the synoptic problem cannot be removed by establishing the priority of the Gospel of Marcion over the synoptics. 

>see the latest publication on this by Matthias Klinghardt, The Oldest Gospel and the Formation of the Canonical Gospels (Peeters Publishers, 2021) which has a very detailed discussion about the relation between Marcion's Gospel and the synoptics.

 

The dating of the Markion's Gospel is only known about the time of its appearance in Rome, around 140. The time and place of writing is unknown. 

> it is either that the Gospel was written in Sinope (Pontus) or in Rome.

 

Thus, the synoptic problem is transferred from the synoptics themselves to the presynoptic text of Marcion. 

> not precisely. The stations are: Pre-synoptic Gospel of Marcion - then the synoptics and John as reactions to this Gospel - then Marcion's publication of his New Testament, including his preface (Antitheses), his (surely slightly revised Gospel) and 10 Pauline Letters.

 

It consists, as I understand it, in the fact that when dating the Markion Gospel to the second century, the origin of very many sayings of Jesus and episodes associated with Him have no rational explanation. 

> I don't think so (and you give your own explanation below). At the moment I am writing a new book that is attempting to do precisely what you are asking, namely to read the many sayings of Jesus and the narrated episodes in the light of the mid second century, and each time I am doing this with a given narrative, it seems to me that they are better fitting this time rather than the first century.

 

Some similar sayings and even events can be found in ev. John and Thomas, as earlier monuments, but most of the corps of ev. Marcion is of original origin. 

>I don't think that John and Thomas are prior to Marcion's Gospel (the same is held by Klinghardt). Yet, of course, there are several sayings that one cannot find in Marcion's Gospel (and, as we know, there are several sayings which we know of, but which are not in any of our 'canonical' Gospels)

 

Where historical information on this score could come from in the second century is completely incomprehensible. 

>not entirely. Different people have different access to oral traditions. If Marcion has put the same energy, money and networks into collecting oral traditions about Jesus as he did with finding letters of Paul (remember, until today, we only have those letters of Paul that Marcion provided us with. None of the letters that have been added to his collection - like the Pastorals and Hebrews - are, today, regarded as authentic amongst scholars), then he provided us potentially with a very good, and even a rather reliable stock. Whether additional material that others have gathered are like the Pastorals or Hebrews would need to be checked.

 

The same applies to the utterances of Jesus, although in this case historical losses can be assumed.

>indeed, you give a good example:

Such as the disappearance of the five volumes of the logias of Jesus collected by Papias of Hierapolis - some of the lost logia could presumably enter into ev. Marcion. However, it is suspicious that the early fathers practically did not cite the synoptics: if the logia were known to the authors. Marcion, then other authors should have known about their existence and cited them, as cited logia close to logia from E. John. Perhaps I just missed something or forgot, and have the wrong view on this problem.

>As said above, we do have logia that predate Marcion, we have - though very few - in Paul, we have a few more in other sources, but in none of our sources do we find narratives, especially not a single miracle story, no Easter stories, no stories about Jesus' youth ... These are all post-Marcion stories which, I think, where inspired by him.

 

On the other hand, be ev. Marcion was written before the 1st Jewish War, and other authors should know and mention about him, but according to my information, there are no such references. 

>The same that accounts for the Synoptics and John accounts for Marcion, there is no mention of narratives about Jesus before Marcion came up with his Gospel.

 

The same is even more true for the description of events - in the second century, this information would simply have nowhere to come from, given the complete absence of eyewitness records or anything like that, even in a scattered form. 

>this is, why I think, it needed Marcion to recover those and put them into a biographical and geographial order, just he did with his collection of Paul's letters which he ordered according to time and geography.

 

And in general, as far as I understand, there was a tradition of oral preservation of logia, which were then collected and written down by someone - but not the events of the Gospel history.

>potentially, as we have neither a collection of logia older than the Gospel of Marcion. All we have are very, very few individual logia, here and there.

 

I have a rather audacious assumption on this score. Is it possible that the Gospel of Marcion was created by its author as an artificial construct of fictional events in the fabric of surviving rumors and legends that roamed in the early Christian environment in the form of legends to include those logos of Jesus that were available to the author. 

>This is a very good assumption. For, if Marcion had a source with an authority, why would he not give the name of this authority when he attributed the letters he found to Paul. Yet - and Tertullian complaints about Marcion that he did not give an author's name to his Gospel, assuming that he should have put his name to his product.

 

I would like to know your competent opinion on this matter. Perhaps flaws and gaps in my education led me to erroneous assumptions. I would be extremely grateful and grateful to you if you find it possible to answer me and at least briefly criticize and correct my ideas.

 

With respect and gratitude

 

Bp. Oleg Chekrygin

The religion of spiritualism - a synoptic reading of the Transfiguration

If we include Marcion's Gospel into our synoptic reading - well-known stories like that of the transfiguration are suddenly seen in a new light, and we can easier explain how it came that a Christianity developed into a religion of spiritualism, certainly present in some circles of Judaism of the time (as is today), rather than being one of the many charismatic or social movements.

Marcion, as we are told by many ancient sources did not provide the birth and youth stories of Jesus, but in Marcion's Gospel Jesus came as an adult from above without further indication to his origin. Fom his start through to his resurrection Jesus remains the prophet and the angelic divine figure who only appears in human form, but in truth is the transcendent God who reveals himself. The entire Gospel, therefore, serves to show the antithesis of flesh and spirit and the impossibility for the flesh to grasp the spirit. One of the most typical narratives which highlights the middle-platonic spiritualism of this new cult is the story of the transfiguration of Christ.

Marcion’s Gospel		Luke 9:28-36
4:28 Now about eight days after these sayings, Jesus took with him Peter, John, and James, and went up the mountain.   4:29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothes became very bright, a brilliant white. 4:30 Then two men, Moses and Elijah, both talked to him                   4:33 in glory, Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is good for us to be here. Let us make three shelters, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah” – not knowing what he was saying. 4:34 As he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 4:35 Then a voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Beloved One. Listen to him!” 9:36 After the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. So they kept silent and told no one at that time anything of what they had seen.	4:28 <᾿Εγένετο δὲ μετὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους ὡσεὶ ἡμέραι ὀκτὼ?> καὶ παραλαβὼν Πέτρον καὶ ᾿Ιωάννην καὶ ᾿Ιάκωβον ἀνέβη εἰς τὸ ὄρος. 29 καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι αὐτὸν ἡ ἰδέα τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἠλλοιώθη καὶ ὁ ἱματισμὸς αὐτοῦ λευκὸς ἐξαστράπτων. 30 καὶ ἰδοὺ δύο ἄνδρες συνελάλουν αὐτῷ, ᾿Ηλίας καὶ Μωϋσῆς, 31/32 ἐν δόξῃ εἶπεν ὁ Πέτρος πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, ᾿Επιστάτα, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι, καὶ ποιήσωμεν ὧδε τρεῖς σκηνάς, μίαν σοὶ καὶ Μωϋσεῖ μίαν καὶ ᾿Ηλίᾳ μίαν, μὴ εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει. 34 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ λέγοντος ἐγένετο νεϕέλη καὶ ἐπεσκίαζεν αὐτούς· ἐϕοβήθησαν δὲ ἐν τῷ εἰσελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν νεϕέλην. 35 καὶ ϕωνὴ ἐκ τῆς νεϕέλης Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε. 36 καὶ ἐν τῷ γενέσθαι τὴν ϕωνὴν εὑρέθη ᾿Ιησοῦς μόνος. καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐσίγησαν καὶ οὐδενὶ ἀπήγγειλαν ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις ὧν ἑώρακαν.	28Ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους ὡσεὶ ἡμέραι ὀκτὼ [καὶ] παραλαβὼν Πέτρον καὶ Ἰωάννην καὶ Ἰάκωβον ἀνέβη εἰς τὸ ὄρος προσεύξασθαι. 29καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι αὐτὸν τὸ εἶδος τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἕτερον καὶ ὁ ἱματισμὸς αὐτοῦ λευκὸς ἐξαστράπτων. 30καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο συνελάλουν αὐτῷ, οἵτινες ἦσαν Μωϋσῆς καὶ Ἠλίας, 31οἳ ὀφθέντες ἐν δόξῃ ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον αὐτοῦ ἣν ἤμελλεν πληροῦν ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ. 32ὁ δὲ Πέτρος καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ ἦσαν βεβαρημένοι ὕπνῳ: διαγρηγορήσαντες δὲ εἶδον τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ καὶ τοὺς δύο ἄνδρας τοὺς συνεστῶτας αὐτῷ. 33καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ διαχωρίζεσθαι αὐτοὺς ἀπ' αὐτοῦ εἶπεν ὁ Πέτρος πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν, Ἐπιστάτα, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι, καὶ ποιήσωμεν σκηνὰς τρεῖς, μίαν σοὶ καὶ μίαν Μωϋσεῖ καὶ μίαν Ἠλίᾳ, μὴ εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει. 34ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ λέγοντος ἐγένετο νεφέλη καὶ ἐπεσκίαζεν αὐτούς: ἐφοβήθησαν δὲ ἐν τῷ εἰσελθεῖν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν νεφέλην. 35καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῆς νεφέλης λέγουσα, Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἐκλελεγμένος, αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε. 36καὶ ἐν τῷ γενέσθαι τὴν φωνὴν εὑρέθη Ἰησοῦς μόνος. καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐσίγησαν καὶ οὐδενὶ ἀπήγγειλαν ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις οὐδὲν ὧν ἑώρακαν.	9:28 Now about eight days after these sayings, Jesus took with him Peter, John, and James, and went up the mountain to pray.   9:29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face was transformed, and his clothes became very bright, a brilliant white. 9:30 Then two men, Moses and Elijah, began talking with him. 9:31 They appeared in glorious splendor and spoke about his departure that he was about to carry out at Jerusalem. 9:32 Now Peter and those with him were quite sleepy, but as they became fully awake, they saw his glory and the two men standing with him. 9:33 Then as the men were starting to leave, Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is good for us to be here. Let us make three shelters, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah” – not knowing what he was saying. 9:34 As he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud. 9:35 Then a voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, my Chosen One. Listen to him!” 9:36 After the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. So they kept silent and told no one at that time anything of what they had seen.

The contrast of Marcion’s original version to that of Luke highlights the different nature of their Gospels. For Marcion, the scene of the transformation not only follows immediately after the pericope that outlined the condition of following Jesus (‘who wants to save his soul will loose it, but who lost it because of me, will be saved’ and that ‘some will not taste death unless they have seen the Son of Man coming in his glory’), but also delivers its content – yet, with a similar outcome as with the previously discussed pericopes. Jesus takes the three mentioned followers, Peter, John and James up the mountain – and while he is praying, his appearance of his faces was altered and his clotes shine in white. Two men, Moses and Elijah – hence the lawgiver and a prophet – both talked to him. The glorious scene makes Peter also talk to Jesus and ask him to built three shelters, one for Jesus, one for Moses and one for Elijah – as if the Master could settle in glory with the lawgiver and the prophet. The narrator’s comment, however, is drastic and states about Peter’s suggestion: He was ‘not knowing what he was saying’. And if this was not enough, the narration carries on that even while Peter was saying this, ‘a cloud came and overshadowed’ Jesus’ followers, hence they were not only no knowing, but they also lost sight – and the only thing that was left was what they could hear. And ‘a voice came from the cloud, saying: « This is my Son, my Beloved One. Listen to him! »’ And, indeed, ‘Jesus was found alone’. In Marcion’s version, it becomes clear that Peter’s wish to bring Jesus together with the lawgiver and the prophet was radically denied by the heavenly voice which only pointed to the one and only Beloved, the voices’ ‘Son’. Neither to Mose nor to Elijah, hence neither to the law nor to the prophecies should Peter, John and James listen, but solely to the Son, Jesus who was found alone. Moreover, this address was not only directed to Peter (and the Zebedee sons), but also to Moses and Elijah – all of them were asked to listen to the Son. While in this non-transformed world there are shelters for all three, the spiritual world is only made for one – one that goes beyond physicality, beyond seeing, but where only the heavenly voice gives instructions – it is neither embedded in the law, nor in the prophecies, but solely in the beloved Son.

Luke who has picked up this story and follows it almost slaveshly, introduces, however, a few important small changes and with his redactional addition in the middle section turns the story upside down. First he adds in 9 :31 that not only did Jesus appear transformed with whom the two men, Moses and Elijah talked (in Marcion, as Tertullian rightly remarked, it is not said that Jesus talked to the two men !), but that also these two men ‘appeared in glorious splendor’ – and he gives the impression that the three men were in conversation with each other. Moreover, the content of this conversation which is filled in by Luke refers to Jesus’ departure ‘that he was to carry out at Jerusalem’ – stating exactly what Marcion rejected in his Antitheses pointing to the altered versions of his Gospel, namely that Mose and Elija, the law and the prophets foretold what would happen with Jesus. Luke also brings in Peter ‘and those with him’ who ‘were quite sleepy’, but then lets them be ‘fully awake’, and makes them even see Jesus’ glory with whom the two men stood together, before he mentions the two men’s departure. Marcion’s redactional remark, therefore, that Peter did not know what he was saying, becomes an entirely different spin. Peter is excused of having been quite sleepy and only slowly starts to know and recognize. He saw the three men in conversation, then they depart, and only now is Peter asking for the three shelters. Instead of the radical ignorance of Peter that Marcion had in mind, namely him not willing to recognize the difference between Jesus on the one side and Mose and Elijah on the other, in Luke Peter’s non-knowing becomes a clouded insight into the transformed nature of the three, of which Jesus is the ‘Chosen One’ which cannot have the same shelter together with the others, while the other two are not rejected, but clearly subordinated to the voices’ Son. Luke’s revision and redaction shows, how deeply he has adopted Marcion’s view of a spiritualized religion, while it also demonstrates, how he adapted the story to accomodate the Jewish past and heritage in moderating and smoothening Marcion’s antithetical position. If we looked into Mark and Matthew we would see that they like Luke were struggeling exactly with the same criticism of Peter (check out yourself).

If Marcion did not create himself the entire pericope with its outspoken marcionite content, what could have been pre-marcionite material? Was it the endorsement oracle of the voice from the cloud? The ending of the story that Peter and the Zebedees kept silent ‘at that time ... of what they had seen’ indicates that it might have been an oral tradition which Marcion had come across, as apparently at a later time Peter or the Zebedees were granted to have spoken about this experience.