Epiphanius says that they use this passage in a way similar to what Marcionites did:
"Moreover they deny that he was a man, evidently on the ground of the word which the Savior spoke when it was reported to him: 'Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without' , namely: 'Who is my mother and who are my brethren'? And he stretched forth his hand towards his disciples and said: 'These are my brethren and mother and sisters, which do the will of my Father'." (14.5)
And Epiphanius says that they have modified this passage in this way:
But they abandon the proper sequence of the words and pervert the saying, as is plain to all from the readings attached, and have let the disciples say:
"Where will you have us prepare the passover?"
And him to answer to that:
"Do I desire with desire at this Passover to eat flesh with you?"
(Epiphanius, Panarion 30.22.4)
"Where will you have us prepare the passover?"
And him to answer to that:
"Do I desire with desire at this Passover to eat flesh with you?"
(Epiphanius, Panarion 30.22.4)
This modification would overcome an objection to Marcionites. Compare Eznik, "Perhaps about this Pasch too they will say that it was fish and not lamb!" and Tertullian, "He considered it His own feast; for it would have been unworthy of God to desire to partake of what was not His own." (see Ben Smith for quotes)
Compare the statement that Epiphanius makes regarding the Marcionite gospel here:
'With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer.' 63. He falsified, 'I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.'
The difference where it isn't in the form of a question can be understood if Epiphanius read the Marcionite gospel directly (not perceiving an interpretation of the Marcionites according to which this is phrased as a question... an interpretation that is not necessarily that of the author of the Marcionite gospel btw). Epiphanius may have encountered the quote from the Ebionite gospel in the context of disputes, where the interpretation of a question was made more clear. The addition of the word "flesh" would be particular to the Ebionite gospel, but common to them both would be cutting off the words of Jesus at an earlier point (compared to the text of Luke).
Perhaps the most interesting passage here is this one:
"They say that he was not begotten of God the Father, but created as one of the archangels ... that he rules over the angels and all the creatures of the Almighty, and that he came and declared, as their Gospel, which is called according to the Hebrews, reports: 'I am come to abolish the sacrifices, if ye cease not from sacrificing, the wrath will not cease from you'." (16.4–5)
Given the presence of statements about the Marcionite gospel having said something similar to this.
Irish1975 wrote: ↑Sat May 27, 2023 8:09 am According to Epiphanius (but not Tertullian), Marcion’s Gospel (*Ev) included two accusations against Jesus before Pilate, which are not found in the Lukan Gospel. One of these charges touches a critical and ambiguous theme in early Christianity: the dissolving (abolition, destruction) of the Law and the Prophets. (The other charge, about misleading women and children, is obscure and outside the scope of this thread.)
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:17 pm Luke 23.1-25 Evangelion 23:1-2, Jesus before Pilate
1 Καὶ ἀναστὰν ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος αὐτῶν ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸν Πειλᾶτον.
2 ἤρξαντο δὲ κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ λέγοντες
Τοῦτον εὕραμεν διαστρέφοντα τὸ ἔθνος ἡμῶν
καὶ καταλύοντα τὸν νόμον καὶ τοὺς προφήτας,
κωλύοντα φόρους Καίσαρι διδόναι,
καὶ ἀποστρέφοντα τὰς γυναῖκας καὶ τὰ τέκνα,
καὶ λέγοντα ἑαυτὸν Χριστὸν βασιλέα εἶναι.1 The whole company of them rose up and brought him before Pilate.
2 They began to accuse him, saying,
“We found this man perverting the nation,
destroying [dissolving, abolishing] the law and the prophets,
forbidding paying taxes to Caesar,
misleading women and children,
and saying that he himself is Christ, a king.”
These references make us think of the parallel in Matthew 5:17, seeing as they are with reference to "the law," or with reference to "the law and the prophets."
The Gospel of the Ebionites may have used *Ev, which raises the possibility that *Ev could have had a statement on the subject of "abolish[ing] the sacrifices" somewhere.