Markus Vinzent's claim about Marcion

[Ben C. Smith]

.
One would expect that also elsewhere in the Gospel no one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos).

Mark 10:18
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone."
ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός.

Is GMark consistently? Yes!
No one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos) elsewhere in the Gospel.


Luke 18:19
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός

Is GLuke consistently? No!
Luke 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good ...
Luke 19:17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good (ἀγαθὲ - agathe) servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little ...
Luke 23:50 Now there was a man named Joseph, from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council, a good (ἀγαθός – agathos) and righteous man


Marcion (18:19) (Ben wrote:)
Jesus asked him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good, except one: God [Epiphanius has: Do not call me good; one is good: God the father]
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός ὁ πατήρ [Epiphanius has: μή με λέγε ἀγαθόν. εἷς ἐστιν ἀγαθὸς ὁ θεός]

Is GMarcion consistently? No! (Ben wrote:)
Marcion 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) man out of the good treasure of his heart brings out that which is good

Very interesting, Kunigunde. Thanks.

[Giuseppe]

I don't see why Mark should be more consistent than Mcn when the entire point of the young rich episode is surely the marcionite condemnation of the richness... ...and so far no one has produced a better candidate who is not Marcion.

1) only the stranger God is good.
2) therefore the observance of the Torah is pointless in order to be 'good', therefore a teacher of Torah (how Jesus is known when he is called 'good teacher' by the young man) is by definition ''not good'' since the Torah is from the creator god.
3) therefore ''omnia munda mundis'' is the true sense of both Marcion 18:19 and Marcion 6:45 : there is no contradiction if a man becomes good only in virtue of his heart, and his heart only (without the observance of the Torah).

[Secret Alias]

If I could take a sledgehammer to the brain of some people. So what is your point here? That Irenaeus says that Marcion corrupted Luke and so Marcionite priority is rejected because of a statement from an anti-Marcionite? I think I come to this forum to learn that intellectuals are just as dumb as the jocks and entertainers I spend most of my time hanging out with. The Philosophumena says Marcion expanded Mark and - on a different note - Marcion is a subform of Marcus (so Tertullian's frequent statement 'the gospel of Marcion' might well be related to 'the gospel of Mark'). But getting back to you. What the fuck is your point? Is there a point or once again is it just because you are obsessed with Mark that Marcion has to be demonstrated to be derived from your obsession?

This situation is hopeless. Almost every single person at this thread has some pet theory (maybe save for Ben) which guides all their research. Perhaps the worst argument ever advanced by an intelligent person at this forum.

Why not have Markan priority as one supposition and Marcionite primacy as another both being POSSIBLY compatible with one another OR NOT? Who knows? Why the either/or? Why? Why? Why does it always come down to the idea that if we spend time on something it has to be 'worth something'? Just investigate Markan primacy as a hobby a pass time an escape? Why does Marcionite primacy have to be 'neutralized' in order to justify all your energies spent on your hobby?

[iskander]

.
One would expect that also elsewhere in the Gospel no one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos).

Mark 10:18
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone."
ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός.

Is GMark consistently? Yes!
No one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos) elsewhere in the Gospel.


Luke 18:19
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός

Is GLuke consistently? No!
Luke 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good ...
Luke 19:17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good (ἀγαθὲ - agathe) servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little ...
Luke 23:50 Now there was a man named Joseph, from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council, a good (ἀγαθός – agathos) and righteous man


Marcion (18:19) (Ben wrote:)
Jesus asked him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good, except one: God [Epiphanius has: Do not call me good; one is good: God the father]
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός ὁ πατήρ [Epiphanius has: μή με λέγε ἀγαθόν. εἷς ἐστιν ἀγαθὸς ὁ θεός]

Is GMarcion consistently? No! (Ben wrote:)
Marcion 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) man out of the good treasure of his heart brings out that which is good

One would expect that also elsewhere in the Gospel no one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos).

'
The question was: , "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
Jesus replies, to inherit eternal life you must follow the teaching of Hashem , for He is the only good teacher. Let no man deceive you. The Decalogue is your guide.

Mark 10:17-19
17 As he was setting out on a journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, ‘Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ 18Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 19You know the commandments: “You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honour your father and mother

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
Stephan, I presented a little tiny fact and all are free to do what they wish with it. But you are running around with

a sledgehammer

cool down bro

[Peter Kirby]

Almost every single person at this thread has some pet theory (maybe save for Ben) which guides all their research.

I'm sorry but you, Kunigunde, and several others (yes Ben too) at this forum also aren't so bad themselves.

.
Stephan, I presented a little tiny fact and all are free to do what they wish with it. But you are running around with

a sledgehammer

cool down bro

[Giuseppe]

.
One would expect that also elsewhere in the Gospel no one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos).

Mark 10:18
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone."
ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός.

Is GMark consistently? Yes!
No one is described as „good“ (ἀγαθός – agathos) elsewhere in the Gospel.


Luke 18:19
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός

Is GLuke consistently? No!
Luke 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good ...
Luke 19:17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good (ἀγαθὲ - agathe) servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little ...
Luke 23:50 Now there was a man named Joseph, from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council, a good (ἀγαθός – agathos) and righteous man


Marcion (18:19) (Ben wrote:)
Jesus asked him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good, except one: God [Epiphanius has: Do not call me good; one is good: God the father]
εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός ὁ πατήρ [Epiphanius has: μή με λέγε ἀγαθόν. εἷς ἐστιν ἀγαθὸς ὁ θεός]

Is GMarcion consistently? No! (Ben wrote:)
Marcion 6:45 The good (ἀγαθός – agathos) man out of the good treasure of his heart brings out that which is good

Nil Guillemette expresses another apparent criticism when he notes that Jesus does not seem to follow literally some of his commandments, including calling the Pharisees fools (Mt. 23.17) after he had prohibited using such terms of abuse in Mt. 5.22. To solve such problems, Guillemette advocates 'absolute fidelity and at the same time non-literal fidelity'. For Guillemette, 'Jesus does not give directives, but rather direction'. In other words, Guillemette is still trying to reconcile Jesus' deeds with his own pronouncements, which he thinks still should be followed today. But Guillemette is not willing to accuse Jesus of being a hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. One wonders if Guillemette would use the word 'hypocrite' for anyone else who does not practice what he or she preaches.

(Hector Avalos, The Bad Jesus, p. 5-6)

Is Matthew consistently? No!

'Therefore' Matthew is after gMarcion.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

Nil Guillemette expresses another apparent criticism when he notes that Jesus does not seem to follow literally some of his commandments, including calling the Pharisees fools (Mt. 23.17) after he had prohibited using such terms of abuse in Mt. 5.22. To solve such problems, Guillemette advocates 'absolute fidelity and at the same time non-literal fidelity'. For Guillemette, 'Jesus does not give directives, but rather direction'. In other words, Guillemette is still trying to reconcile Jesus' deeds with his own pronouncements, which he thinks still should be followed today. But Guillemette is not willing to accuse Jesus of being a hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. One wonders if Guillemette would use the word 'hypocrite' for anyone else who does not practice what he or she preaches.

(Hector Avalos, The Bad Jesus, p. 5-6)

Is Matthew consistently? No!

'Therefore' Matthew is after gMarcion.

Mmh. If I am not mistaken, GMarcion has no parallel to Matt 5:22. Matt 23:17 seems to be a contradiction within the Gospel of Matthew, but it says nothing about the relationship to GMarcion.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
I've always wondered what Richard Carrier would probably say about Markus "Vinzey" Vinzent and his claims.

Now Dr. Carrier actually says the following:

illogical and factless

Is this sentence too harsh? ... After all, every day you read very conservative interpretations of scripture by some traditional Bible scholars. I just somehow think that these people are excused by their faith. These are believing Christians. It's completely fine if these scholars do very traditional exegesis, which doesn't have to be uninteresting.

Ultimately, Trobey, Vinzey and Klinghey just make interesting and bombastic claims outside of church tradition and the modern scholarly mainstream, but their evidence is mostly a nightmare. They have now become a little known and are sometimes invited to conferences and seminars. Good for them.

Tomorrow I will encourage a few female scholars to put forward the thesis that Mary Magdalene wrote the first gospel. We will prove this and reconstruct her oppressed gospel. I expect a similar “success” of this thesis, if not an even bigger one.

[rgprice]

Anyhoo, what's the point of the OP?