No "Descending" - The Myth About Marcion's Incipit

[Ken Olson]

[Sorry, I deleted my post because I may have misunderstood what Giuseppe was arguing]

[Secret Alias]

To use a North American sports analogy that the original understanding of Christianity was Jesus descending from heaven is more likely than the Carolina Panthers winning the Super Bowl.

[Stuart]

To use a North American sports analogy that the original understanding of Christianity was Jesus descending from heaven is more likely than the Carolina Panthers winning the Super Bowl.

Not really. It's no more out there than Enoch ascending into heaven. Or perhaps Jesus' own ascension. In fact the interpretation seems quite reasonable is you consider other passages in the NT:

John 3:13

No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.

Here we have Jesus himself implying his heavenly descent.

The Catholic view, which we all have been raised on, was in fact a construct of compromise to create unity. We can see the change in position from that of Marcion or similarly presented in John's gospel, to a compromise position that endorsed the descent as postmortem as suggested in Matthew's mention of the dead rising upon his crucifixion, in Ephesians 4:9-10

"He ascended," what does it mean except that He also had descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is Himself also He who far above all the heavens, so that He might fill all things.

τὸ δὲ Ἀνέβη τί ἐστιν εἰ μὴ ὅτι καὶ κατέβη εἰς τὰ κατώτερα μέρη τῆς γῆς; ὁ καταβὰς αὐτός ἐστιν καὶ ὁ ἀναβὰς ὑπεράνω πάντων τῶν οὐρανῶν, ἵνα πληρώσῃ τὰ πάντα.

There is no difficulty at all in the ancients to speak of Jesus in terms of one with God powers, who comes and goes from heaven. The difficulty only arises in moderns who try to cram the Jesus we have in literature into the small box of a human only, and who then project backwards that the writers and theologians and evangelists of Christianity both knew that and that same way as us moderns. Clearly they did not.

[schillingklaus]

This proves that moderns like Ehrman are only misguiding mankind. Gerardus Bolland, as a metaphycisist, did not fall for the modern superstition.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

I see that prof Vinzent differs precisely from prof Kinghardt about Capernaum in the incipit of Mcn:

If Vinzent differs, then not only from Klinghardt, but also from Volkmar, Harnack, Roth, BeDuhn, Nicoletti and others. The overwhelming majority of scholars can be traced back to the quotations by Tertullian and Adamantius, which agree on this point, while the other sources seem to reflect not quotations from the gospel, but teachings, possibly from late Marcionites.

Apparently the reading "Capernaum" causes difficulties for Vinzent and he would therefore prefer to avoid it, since a first appearance of Marcion's Jesus in Galilee seems to make little theological sense (either Marcion's Jesus has to appear in Asia Minor or Rome or as an antithesis in Jerusalem or Judea.) Capernaum is therefore certainly also lectio difficilior and thus original.

[Ken Olson]

I see that prof Vinzent differs precisely from prof Kinghardt about Capernaum in the incipit of Mcn:

If Vinzent differs, then not only from Klinghardt, but also from Volkmar, Harnack, Roth, BeDuhn, Nicoletti and others. The overwhelming majority of scholars can be traced back to the quotations by Tertullian and Adamantius, which agree on this point, while the other sources seem to reflect not quotations from the gospel, but teachings, possibly from late Marcionites.

Apparently the reading "Capernaum" causes difficulties for Vinzent and he would therefore prefer to avoid it, since a first appearance of Marcion's Jesus in Galilee seems to make little theological sense (either Marcion's Jesus has to appear in Asia Minor or Rome or as an antithesis in Jerusalem or Judea.) Capernaum is therefore certainly also lectio difficilior and thus original.

Giuseppe,

Are you saying you believe that 'Capernaum' was not in the incipit to the original Evangelion used (or perhaps written) by Marcion?

Best,

Ken

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

To use a North American sports analogy that the original understanding of Christianity was Jesus descending from heaven is more likely than the Carolina Panthers winning the Super Bowl.

imho a "theological clarification" of a "descent from heaven" already presupposes other, divergent ideas.

In the Tanakh, often the angels suddenly "are there" or "appear" suddenly. I would consider such an appearance to be more original.

[Secret Alias]

Based on what?

[Secret Alias]

An interesting question would be when was the first recorded understanding of the opening of Mark as "complete" ie not being conscious of or dependent on other gospels. I would guess 1889.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
I find it interesting that Marcion agrees with Mark that the first (specifically described) public appearance of Jesus took place in Capernaum, while Matthew (Sermon on the Mount), Luke (Rejection at Nazareth) and John (Wedding at Cana) each inserted one different place before that, but then also reported an activity in Capernaum.