Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑
Thu Aug 27, 2015 7:39 am
Here are two other possible
indications of Marcionite priority over Luke; these rest on slender grounds, however, since they both depend on unattested material being absent from Marcion and not merely unmentioned by Tertullian and Epiphanius (and the other church fathers).
, in Luke 4.23, Jesus is preaching in the synagogue at Nazara, and he imagines his listeners saying to him, "Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your home town as well." Luke, however, has not yet narrated anything about Capernaum; this is its first mention. Awkward.
By contrast, both Matthew and Mark locate this preaching at Nazareth much later in their respective narratives (Matthew 13.53-58 = Mark 6.1-6a), well after Jesus has performed many miracles in Capernaum (Matthew 7.28-29; 8.5-17; Mark 1.21-38). Neither Matthew nor Mark, however, record anything like Luke 4.23, so the order in which Jesus does things at the two towns does not come into play anyway. Yet the order is an issue in Luke: did the same author (Luke or pseudo-Luke or whoever) both
add the line hearkening back to miracles in Capernaum and
also move the entire pericope back to before any miracles were performed in Capernaum?
The Marcionite gospel has Jesus appearing in Capernaum first and performing an exorcism there before moving on to Nazareth. Now, on the one hand, perhaps one exorcism is not enough to merit the saying in Luke 4.23, which actually uses the plural (ὅσα ἠκούσαμεν γενόμενα
, as many things as we have heard were done
). On the other hand, however, the particular line of Luke 4.23 which refers back to things done in Nazareth is not attested as either present in or absent from the Marcionite gospel. One wonders what the relationship of Matthew and Mark to Marcion might be in this case, since in Marcion the Nazareth trip seems to come very early, as in Luke, but not until after Capernaum, as in Matthew and Mark.
There is more. Luke 4.31 reads, "And he came down into Capernaum, a city of Galilee." The extra descriptor certainly makes it sound as if this is the first mention of Capernaum... but of course we already have that earlier mention in the dominical saying of Luke 4.23. In Mark 1.21, the Marcan parallel to Luke 4.31, it is
the first mention of Capernaum in that gospel; yet Mark simply says, "And he went into Capernaum," with no further description (that happens with some frequency in Mark). The Marcionite parallel to Luke 4.31 is the first mention of Capernaum in that
gospel, as well. In the ever intriguing codex Bezae (D), Luke 4.31 comes off even more
like the first mention of Capernaum: "And he came down into Capernaum, a city of Galilee, near the sea, in the regions of Zebulun and Naphtali. Compare Matthew 4.13: "And he left Nazareth and came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali." This, of course, is the first mention of Capernaum in Matthew, just like it sounds. (Notice that, in Matthew, Jesus actually hits Nazareth first, yet this visit is not described at all; after the temptation, Jesus comes into Galilee, specifically Nazareth, then leaves with no description of events at all and settles in Capernaum.)
There is more. Irenaeus writes in Against Heresies
For this reason, too, did the Lord Himself read at Capernaum the prophecies of Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me; to preach the Gospel to the poor hath He sent Me, to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and sight to the blind [Is. 61:1]." At the same time, showing that it was He Himself who had been foretold by Isaiah the prophet, He said to them: "This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears."
But these quotations come from Luke 4.18 and 4.21, from the visit to Nazareth, not
Regardless of what we may think of the quote from Irenaeus, it seems clear that the Marcan and Matthean order of events (Capernaum first, then later Nazareth) is the more original, and that Luke has created an inconcinnity in both affirming it in 4.23 and altering it by moving the rejection at Nazareth forward in his gospel. Marcion, however, is closer in order on this point to Mark and Matthew than to Luke, showing no signs of the Lucan inconcinnity.
, Luke again suffers a bit of incongruity by having Simon Peter's mother-in-law healed in Luke 4.38-39, at Simon's house... before Simon has even been introduced to us, and certainly before his call to discipleship in Luke 5.1-11. Obviously Matthew and Mark can both claim priority in this case over Luke, since they relate the call before the healing, but it is possible that Marcion can, as well, because the healing of Simon's mother-in-law is not attested (either as present or as absent) for the Marcionite gospel; if it was absent, then Simon is introduced at his call to discipleship, just as in Mark and Matthew.