Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Moderator: andrewcriddle
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Besides the infancy narrative in Luke 1-2, which is reflected quite often in Justin Martyr, what passages does Justin quote or allude to which would reflect what we know as (chapters 3-24 of) canonical Luke over and against the Marcionite Gospel? For example, were Justin to say something about the Prodigal Son, we would be thinking of canonical Luke, since Marcion is said to have lacked that parable; but I do not think that Justin ever mentions it, so it cannot count. Are there passages which would count? If so, what are they?
Ben.
PS 1: I am asking for evidence based on the usual suspects (Epiphanius, Tertullian, Adamantius, and so on) and the usual methodologies. This is not the thread for speculations about Marcion's text(s) which sidestep that line of evidence. Replace "the Marcionite Gospel" with "whatever the church fathers were talking about," if need be. Also, evidence based on what one thinks must or must not have appeared in Marcion's Gospel, based on Marcionite theology, will do me no good, either.
PS 2: Justin referring to something which we find in canonical Luke but which remains unattested in either direction for Marcion will not help a lot, either. It really needs to be something that we have good reason to think was not in Marcion but which we find in Luke. The Lucan infancy narrative is the perfect example, but I already have that one well in hand. I am looking for more.
Ben.
PS 1: I am asking for evidence based on the usual suspects (Epiphanius, Tertullian, Adamantius, and so on) and the usual methodologies. This is not the thread for speculations about Marcion's text(s) which sidestep that line of evidence. Replace "the Marcionite Gospel" with "whatever the church fathers were talking about," if need be. Also, evidence based on what one thinks must or must not have appeared in Marcion's Gospel, based on Marcionite theology, will do me no good, either.
PS 2: Justin referring to something which we find in canonical Luke but which remains unattested in either direction for Marcion will not help a lot, either. It really needs to be something that we have good reason to think was not in Marcion but which we find in Luke. The Lucan infancy narrative is the perfect example, but I already have that one well in hand. I am looking for more.
-
- Posts: 18922
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
YOU'RE AWARE THAT "ATTESTED IN MARCION ' MEANS 'COMES UP IN A DISCUSSION ABOUT MARCION BY A CHURCH FATHER. ' OUR STANDARDS ARE VERY VERY LOW. WHEN MARCION IS BROUGHT UP IN IRENAEUS'S DISCUSSION OF THE FIRST VERSES OF JOHN NO ONE KNOWS WHAT TO DO.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
YES.Secret Alias wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 6:53 pm YOU'RE AWARE THAT "ATTESTED IN MARCION ' MEANS 'COMES UP IN A DISCUSSION ABOUT MARCION BY A CHURCH FATHER. '
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8623
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Maybe the best way to contribute would be to offer two lists based on stuff I've done before:
(a) the list of the "shorter readings of Luke"
(b) the e-Catena citations in Justin identified in the footnotes of ANF as belonging to Luke
Here's the list of the shorter readings (of the two resources, this one depends on a lot more assumptions):
viewtopic.php?t=3170
Here's the e-Catena (of the two resources, I'm more concerned that this one isn't comprehensive & about synoptic gospel overlap):
http://earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/
There are references in Justin that look like Luke 6:28-36, but those aren't shorter readings.
Luke 9:22 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading. Luke 9:23 is a shorter reading, not attested until Tertullian.
Luke 10:16,19 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 12:48 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 13:26 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 18:18 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 20:34-35 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Justin Martyr seems to have the bread-first order, which recalls the manuscripts of Luke that omit 22:17-18 (a shorter reading).
First Apology of Justin
An alleged fragment of Justin references Luke 24:32, which is a likely (but not explicit) shorter reading.
Fragments of the Lost Work of Justin on the Resurrection (?)
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 5, 32
Luke 6, 14
Luke 6, 27
Luke 6, 28
Luke 6, 29
Luke 6, 30
Luke 6, 34
Luke 6, 35
Luke 6, 36
Luke 6, 43
Luke 6, 44
Luke 6, 46
Luke 6, 47
Luke 8, 8
Luke 9, 22
Luke 10, 16
Luke 10, 17
Luke 10, 19
Luke 10, 22
Luke 11, 29
Luke 11, 39
Luke 11, 41
Luke 11, 42
Luke 11, 52
Luke 12, 4
Luke 12, 5
Luke 12, 8
Luke 12, 22
Luke 12, 23
Luke 12, 24
Luke 12, 29
Luke 12, 30
Luke 12, 31
Luke 12, 33
Luke 12, 34
Luke 12, 48
Luke 13, 26
Luke 13, 27
Luke 13, 28
Luke 13, 29
Luke 16, 15
Luke 16, 16
Luke 18, 18
Luke 18, 19
Luke 22, 19
Luke 22, 20
Luke 22, 44
Luke 23, 7
Luke 23, 46
Luke 24, 25
Luke 24, 26
Luke 24, 27
Luke 24, 36
Of these, the shorter readings are:
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 11, 29 (? - only 11:29b is a shorter reading)
Luke 11, 42 (? - only a clause is a shorter reading)
Luke 12, 8
Luke 13, 29
Luke 22, 44
Luke 24, 27
Several of these are explicitly attested shorter readings. More study is required to figure out what the Biblindex search results are mentioning.
(a) the list of the "shorter readings of Luke"
(b) the e-Catena citations in Justin identified in the footnotes of ANF as belonging to Luke
Here's the list of the shorter readings (of the two resources, this one depends on a lot more assumptions):
viewtopic.php?t=3170
Here's the e-Catena (of the two resources, I'm more concerned that this one isn't comprehensive & about synoptic gospel overlap):
http://earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/
There are references in Justin that look like Luke 6:28-36, but those aren't shorter readings.
Luke 9:22 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading. Luke 9:23 is a shorter reading, not attested until Tertullian.
Luke 10:16,19 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 12:48 is referenced by Justin, but isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 13:26 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 18:18 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Luke 20:34-35 is referenced by Justin, but it isn't a shorter reading.
Justin Martyr seems to have the bread-first order, which recalls the manuscripts of Luke that omit 22:17-18 (a shorter reading).
First Apology of Justin
Justin references Luke 22:44, which is a likely (but not explicit) shorter reading.For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me,
Notes on this verse as a shorter reading (BeDuhn, The First New Testament):For in the memoirs which I say were drawn up by His apostles and those who followed them, [it is recorded] that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying, and saying, `If it be possible, let this cup pass: '
Justin references Luke 23:46, but it isn't a shorter reading.Luke 22:42-44 - "Luke 22.42-44 is unattested for the Evangelion and appears to have been absent from P69. Verses 22.43-44 would have been useful for Epiphanius or Tertullian in making a point of Jesus' physicality. They are lacking in many Greek manuscripts, including P75, along with the SSyr, the SCopt, OL ms f, and were stricken out by the first corrector of the Gk ms Sinaiticus. But no other witness to Luke lacks v. 42 except P69, which may be crucial in identifying it as a fragment of the Evangelion." (p. 188)
An alleged fragment of Justin references Luke 24:32, which is a likely (but not explicit) shorter reading.
Fragments of the Lost Work of Justin on the Resurrection (?)
Why did He rise in the flesh in which He suffered, unless to show the resurrection of the flesh? And wishing to confirm this, when His disciples did not know whether to believe He had truly risen in the body, and were looking upon Him and doubting, He said to them, "Ye have not yet faith, see that it is I; "
The Biblindex search turns up more references:Luke 24:27 - "Luke 24.27-29 is unattested. Verse 27 would surely have been commented upon by Tertullian or Epiphanius if they found it in Marcion's text. It is somewhat surprising that Epiphanius does not note the textual variance. The same verse is likewise lacking in Gk ms 1313 (possibly due to haplography), and goes unmentioned in Ephrem, Comm. Diat. Some of the content of vv. 28-29 was probably present, since it is needed to advance the narrative to a meal setting." (p. 196)
Luke 24:32 - "Luke 24.32 is unattested for the Evangelion. It is coordinated to v. 27, also unattested for the Evangelion, and would certainly have been cited by our sources if it appeared. It is not mentioned in Ephrem, Comm. Diat." (p. 196)
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 5, 32
Luke 6, 14
Luke 6, 27
Luke 6, 28
Luke 6, 29
Luke 6, 30
Luke 6, 34
Luke 6, 35
Luke 6, 36
Luke 6, 43
Luke 6, 44
Luke 6, 46
Luke 6, 47
Luke 8, 8
Luke 9, 22
Luke 10, 16
Luke 10, 17
Luke 10, 19
Luke 10, 22
Luke 11, 29
Luke 11, 39
Luke 11, 41
Luke 11, 42
Luke 11, 52
Luke 12, 4
Luke 12, 5
Luke 12, 8
Luke 12, 22
Luke 12, 23
Luke 12, 24
Luke 12, 29
Luke 12, 30
Luke 12, 31
Luke 12, 33
Luke 12, 34
Luke 12, 48
Luke 13, 26
Luke 13, 27
Luke 13, 28
Luke 13, 29
Luke 16, 15
Luke 16, 16
Luke 18, 18
Luke 18, 19
Luke 22, 19
Luke 22, 20
Luke 22, 44
Luke 23, 7
Luke 23, 46
Luke 24, 25
Luke 24, 26
Luke 24, 27
Luke 24, 36
Of these, the shorter readings are:
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 11, 29 (? - only 11:29b is a shorter reading)
Luke 11, 42 (? - only a clause is a shorter reading)
Luke 12, 8
Luke 13, 29
Luke 22, 44
Luke 24, 27
Several of these are explicitly attested shorter readings. More study is required to figure out what the Biblindex search results are mentioning.
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
This is a good question, Ben. If I understand what you're after, you also mean what passages does Justin quote or allude to peculiarly Lukan material that he could not have gotten from Mark or Matthew. So, for instance, the preaching of John the Baptist from Matt. 3.11-12; Luke 3.16-17 in Trypho 49 would not count, right?Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:58 pm Besides the infancy narrative in Luke 1-2, which is reflected quite often in Justin Martyr, what passages does Justin quote or allude to which would reflect what we know as (chapters 3-24 of) canonical Luke over and against the Marcionite Gospel? For example, were Justin to say something about the Prodigal Son, we would be thinking of canonical Luke, since Marcion is said to have lacked that parable; but I do not think that Justin ever mentions it, so it cannot count. Are there passages which would count? If so, what are they?
Ben.
I think Peter Kirby's on the right track. Coming up with a full answer would involve coming up with a list of peculiarly Lukan readings, matching that with a list of readings unattested (or attested) in Marcion, and then matching that list against Justin.
Best,
Ken
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8623
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Luke 3, 3 and Luke 3, 4 are in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 51:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:49 pm Of these, the shorter readings are:
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 11, 29 (? - only 11:29b is a shorter reading)
Luke 11, 42 (? - only a clause is a shorter reading)
Luke 12, 8
Luke 13, 29
Luke 22, 44
Luke 24, 27
Several of these are explicitly attested shorter readings. More study is required to figure out what the Biblindex search results are mentioning.
Seems ambiguous to me - this could come from another synoptic.But if John came first calling on men to repent, and Christ, while[John] still sat by the river Jordan, having come, put an end to his prophesying and baptizing
Luke 3:8 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 25 and Dialogue with Trypho 44
Those who justify themselves, and say they are sons of Abraham, shall be desirous even in a small degree to receive the inheritance along with you
Both completely ambiguous.And you deceive yourselves while you fancy that, because you are the seed of Abraham after the flesh, therefore you shall fully inherit the good things announced to be bestowed by God through Christ.
Luke 3:15 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 88
It is ambiguous - this could come from another synoptic.For when John remained by the Jordan, and preached the baptism of repentance, wearing only a leathern girdle and a vesture made of camels' hair, eating nothing but locusts and wild honey, men supposed him to be Christ;
Luke 3:16-17 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 49 and 88
He cried, as he sat by the river Jordan: 'I baptize you with water to repentance; but He that is stronger than I shall come, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and will gather the wheat into the barn; but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire.'
This is a parallel between Matthew and Luke that isn't in Mark. As such, it's ambiguous.'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying; for He that is stronger than I shall come, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.'
Luke 3:21-22 is the triple tradition, so the references are ambiguous.
Luke 3:23 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 88
for even at His birth He was in possession of His power; and as He grew up like all other men, by using the fitting means, He assigned its own [requirements] to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, [τριάκοντα ἔτη ἢ πλείονα ἢ καὶ ἐλάσσονα] until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown.
Only Luke mentions that Jesus was thirty years of age. Both Justin and Luke qualify this figure somehow ("about", "more or less"). This seems like it really is a point of contact between the Gospel of Luke and Justin.Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about [ὡσεὶ] thirty [τριάκοντα] years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli
My notes have this as an explicit shorter reading:
To be fair: The statement about Jesus being 'about thirty' could definitely be in the Gospel used by Marcion. It has the ring of authenticity in my opinion. Much is made of the fact that Jesus had the age of 30, which becomes associated with the number of aeons. It's the geneaology that is absent, not necessarily this phrase in Luke 3:23.Luke 3:21-38 - Marc. 4.7.1-6, Pan. 42.11.4-5
The vagueness is almost antithetical to the Gospel of Luke's redactional aims: is the same author who gave us "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness" really content to shrug and say that Jesus was "about thirty"?
Luke 3:38 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 100
If this is an early reference to an interpretation of Luke 3:23 - "being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli" - as actually presenting the genealogy of Mary, then this would be an additional reference of Justin to Luke 3:23 and following. Unless there's another enumeration of the descent of Mary that Justin has in mind? (Hard to be sure, really, with various apocryphal infancy gospels and a book actually titled "Descent of Mary.")He said then that He was the Son of man, either because of His birth by the Virgin, who was, as I said, of the family of David and Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham; or because Adam was the father both of Himself and of those who have been first enumerated from whom Mary derives her descent. For we know that the fathers of women are the fathers likewise of those children whom their daughters bear.
To be continued.
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8623
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
The Luke 4:1 reference says Dialogue with Trypho 124, but it is chapter 125 that has the temptation episode:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:49 pm Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 11, 29 (? - only 11:29b is a shorter reading)
Luke 11, 42 (? - only a clause is a shorter reading)
Luke 12, 8
Luke 13, 29
Luke 22, 44
Luke 24, 27
Several of these are explicitly attested shorter readings. More study is required to figure out what the Biblindex search results are mentioning.
This is a parallel between Matthew and Luke that is not in Mark, so it is ambiguous.For when He became man, as I previously remarked, the devil came to Him--i.e., that power which is called the serpent and Sa-tan--tempting Him, and striving to effect His downfall by asking Him to worship him. But He destroyed and overthrew the devil, having proved him to be wicked, in that he asked to be worshipper as God, contrary to the Scripture; who is an apostate from the will of God. For He answers him, 'It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shall thou serve.' Then, overcome and convicted, the devil departed at that time.
The Luke 4:7-8 reference comes from Dialogue with Trypho 103:
But the part of the answer that says "Be gone, Satan!" or "Get thee behind me, Satan" is unattested in Luke in some of the best witnesses (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus), which could make this a Matthew-only reference. Unless, of course, it had already gotten into Justin's copy.For this devil, when [Jesus] went up from the river Jordan, at the time when the voice spake to Him, 'Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten Thee,' is recorded in the memoirs of the apostles to have come to Him and tempted Him, even so far as to say to Him, 'Worship me;' and Christ answered him, 'Get thee behind me, Satan: thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.'
The Luke 4:13 reference comes from Dialogue with Trypho 125:
This is found in both Matthew and Luke. It's slightly closer to Luke, given that Matthew's statement harmonizes to add that angels ministered to him. It seems ambiguous, though, whether Justin's knowledge of this came from Luke.Then, overcome and convicted, the devil departed at that time.
Luke 11:29 is in mentioned in connection with Dialogue with Trypho 103.
Luke 11:29-30And though all the men of your nation knew the incidents in the life of Jonah, and though Christ said amongst you that He would give the sign of Jonah, exhorting you to repent of your wicked deeds at least after He rose again from the dead, and to mourn before God as did the Ninevites, in order that your nation and city might not be taken and destroyed, as they have been destroyed
This is found in both Matthew and Luke, so it is ambiguous.And when the people were gathered thick together, He began to say, “This is an evil generation. They seek a sign, and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonah the prophet. For as Jonah was a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of Man be to this generation.
Dialogue with Trypho 17 parallels Luke 11:42.
Dialogue with Trypho 17
Luke 11:42He overthrew also the tables of the money-changers in the temple, and exclaimed, 'Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye pay tithe of mint and rue, but do not observe the love of God and justice.
Matthew 23:23But woe unto you, Pharisees! For ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God.
This requires a closer look.Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness.
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοςμον καὶ τὸ πήγανον (Trypho 17 - "tithe mint and rue")
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ πήγανον (Lk. 11:42 - "tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs")
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ ἄνηθον καὶ τὸ κύμινον (Matt. 23:23 - "tithe mint and dill and cumin")
τὴν δὲ ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν κρίσιν οὐ κατανοεῖτε (Trypho 17 - "but love of God and justice, you do not observe")
καὶ παρέρχεσθε τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ (Lk. 11:42 BGT)
καὶ ἀφήκατε τὰ βαρύτερα τοῦ νόμου, τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὸ ἔλεος καὶ τὴν πίστιν (Matt. 23:23 BGT)
These two similarities between Justin and Luke ("and rue," "love of God"), absent from Matthew, suggest a connection between them.
But Justin also omits the part thought to be absent in the Gospel used by Marcion:
Luke 12:8 is not actually one of the shorter readings.Luke 11:42 - "The additional clause in Luke 11.42 - 'These things you were under obligation to do, but those other things not to omit - is unattested for the Evangelion, and was probably lacking, as in Gk ms D and its associated Latin ms d. The United Bible Societies (UBS) text committe considers its absence in D as due to Marcionite influence (Metzger, Textual Commentary, 159), but its presence in the majority of witnesses to Luke is just as likely to be a harmonization to Matthew." (p. 162)
Luke 13:29 is a parallel, but Dialogue with Trypho 76 actually has more in common with Matthew 8:11.
Dialogue with Trypho 120 also has more in common with Matthew 8:11.when He said: 'They shall come from the east[and from the west], and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven: but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.
Likewise Dialogue with Trypho 140.'For they shall come,' He said, 'from the west and from the east, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.'
Dialogue with Trypho 103:And our Lord, according to the will of Him that sent Him, who is the Father and Lord of all, would not have said, 'They shall come from the east, and from the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.'
Many manuscripts omit Luke 22:43-44. But I'm not aware of any other gospel text that has this passage.For in the memoirs which I say were drawn up by His apostles and those who followed them, [it is recorded] that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying, and saying, 'If it be possible, let this cup pass:' His heart and also His bones trembling; His heart being like wax melting in His belly: in order that we may perceive that the Father wished His Son really to undergo such sufferings for our sakes, and may not say that He, being the Son of God, did not feel what was happening to Him and inflicted on Him.
Trypho 50 is possibly referring to Luke 24:27:
But I'm not so sure.And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
-
- Posts: 2857
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
The allusion to Luke 3:21-22
Andrew Criddle
is specifically Western Lukan (and non-Marcionite). Matthew Mark and most manuscripts of Luke read with thee I am well pleased instead of this day have I begotten thee,For this devil, when [Jesus] went up from the river Jordan, at the time when the voice spake to Him, ‘Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten Thee,’ is recorded in the memoirs of the apostles to have come to Him and tempted Him,
Andrew Criddle
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Good info here. I don't have much to add in the way of details, just a point out something. Based on the three stage theory of canonical Luke, it may be very difficult to really identify use of canonical Luke vs proto-Luke. If Luke was created via Marcion > proto-Luke > canonical-Luke, it may be impossible to distinguish between use of proto-Luke vs canonical-Luke. However, Martyr's references to the infancy narrative make it likely that canonical Luke existed by the time of his commentary. What's odd is why it seems that Martyr is using the Infancy Gospel of James instead of Luke's infancy narrative, if Martyr had Luke's Gospel in hand.
Something I tend to assume: If someone had gLuke in hand then they likely also had Acts or all four Gospels. I think it's pretty safe at this point to conclude that the primary means by which gLuke would have circulated was either as part of a compilation with Acts -- a two part set of works intended to counter Marcion's Gospel + Apostle, or gLuke would have been part of the collection of four canonical Gospels, as part of the first edition of the NT (which was produced in four sets of codices, one of which was the four Gospels).
The point here is that one can look for indications that someone knew these other presumed companion works.
Something I tend to assume: If someone had gLuke in hand then they likely also had Acts or all four Gospels. I think it's pretty safe at this point to conclude that the primary means by which gLuke would have circulated was either as part of a compilation with Acts -- a two part set of works intended to counter Marcion's Gospel + Apostle, or gLuke would have been part of the collection of four canonical Gospels, as part of the first edition of the NT (which was produced in four sets of codices, one of which was the four Gospels).
The point here is that one can look for indications that someone knew these other presumed companion works.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Right.Ken Olson wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 10:03 pmThis is a good question, Ben. If I understand what you're after, you also mean what passages does Justin quote or allude to peculiarly Lukan material that he could not have gotten from Mark or Matthew. So, for instance, the preaching of John the Baptist from Matt. 3.11-12; Luke 3.16-17 in Trypho 49 would not count, right?
Agreed.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 11:42 pmLuke 3, 3 and Luke 3, 4 are in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 51:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:49 pm Of these, the shorter readings are:
Luke 3, 3
Luke 3, 4
Luke 3, 8
Luke 3, 15
Luke 3, 16
Luke 3, 17
Luke 3, 21
Luke 3, 22
Luke 3, 23
Luke 3, 38
Luke 4, 1
Luke 4, 7
Luke 4, 8
Luke 4, 13
Luke 11, 29 (? - only 11:29b is a shorter reading)
Luke 11, 42 (? - only a clause is a shorter reading)
Luke 12, 8
Luke 13, 29
Luke 22, 44
Luke 24, 27
Several of these are explicitly attested shorter readings. More study is required to figure out what the Biblindex search results are mentioning.Seems ambiguous to me - this could come from another synoptic.But if John came first calling on men to repent, and Christ, while[John] still sat by the river Jordan, having come, put an end to his prophesying and baptizing
Ditto.Luke 3:8 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 25 and Dialogue with Trypho 44Those who justify themselves, and say they are sons of Abraham, shall be desirous even in a small degree to receive the inheritance along with youBoth completely ambiguous.And you deceive yourselves while you fancy that, because you are the seed of Abraham after the flesh, therefore you shall fully inherit the good things announced to be bestowed by God through Christ.
In fact, Luke lacks the bits about John's diet and attire.Luke 3:15 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 88It is ambiguous - this could come from another synoptic.For when John remained by the Jordan, and preached the baptism of repentance, wearing only a leathern girdle and a vesture made of camels' hair, eating nothing but locusts and wild honey, men supposed him to be Christ;
Agreed, and Ken pointed this one out, as well.Luke 3:16-17 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 49 and 88He cried, as he sat by the river Jordan: 'I baptize you with water to repentance; but He that is stronger than I shall come, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor, and will gather the wheat into the barn; but the chaff He will burn up with unquenchable fire.'This is a parallel between Matthew and Luke that isn't in Mark. As such, it's ambiguous.'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying; for He that is stronger than I shall come, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.'
This is the most promising reference so far!Luke 3:21-22 is the triple tradition, so the references are ambiguous.
Luke 3:23 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 88for even at His birth He was in possession of His power; and as He grew up like all other men, by using the fitting means, He assigned its own [requirements] to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, [τριάκοντα ἔτη ἢ πλείονα ἢ καὶ ἐλάσσονα] until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown.Only Luke mentions that Jesus was thirty years of age. Both Justin and Luke qualify this figure somehow ("about", "more or less"). This seems like it really is a point of contact between the Gospel of Luke and Justin.Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about [ὡσεὶ] thirty [τριάκοντα] years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli
My notes have this as an explicit shorter reading:
To be fair: The statement about Jesus being 'about thirty' could definitely be in the Gospel used by Marcion. It has the ring of authenticity in my opinion. Much is made of the fact that Jesus had the age of 30, which becomes associated with the number of aeons. It's the geneaology that is absent, not necessarily this phrase in Luke 3:23.Luke 3:21-38 - Marc. 4.7.1-6, Pan. 42.11.4-5
Not sure, but the gimmick of qualifying a numerical figure with "about" (ὡσεί) is pretty common in Luke-Acts (refer also to Luke 9.14, 28; 22.41, 59; 23.44; Acts 1.15; 2.41; 10.3; 19.7).The vagueness is almost antithetical to the Gospel of Luke's redactional aims: is the same author who gave us "In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness" really content to shrug and say that Jesus was "about thirty"?
This one bears looking more closely into, as well.Luke 3:38 is in reference to Dialogue with Trypho 100If this is an early reference to an interpretation of Luke 3:23 - "being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli" - as actually presenting the genealogy of Mary, then this would be an additional reference of Justin to Luke 3:23 and following. Unless there's another enumeration of the descent of Mary that Justin has in mind? (Hard to be sure, really, with various apocryphal infancy gospels and a book actually titled "Descent of Mary.")He said then that He was the Son of man, either because of His birth by the Virgin, who was, as I said, of the family of David and Jacob, and Isaac, and Abraham; or because Adam was the father both of Himself and of those who have been first enumerated from whom Mary derives her descent. For we know that the fathers of women are the fathers likewise of those children whom their daughters bear.
Right. The temptation is said to have been absent from Marcion's gospel, so that is a start, at least. But I am not yet seeing anything that has to come from Luke rather than from Matthew.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sat Apr 10, 2021 2:08 amThe Luke 4:1 reference says Dialogue with Trypho 124, but it is chapter 125 that has the temptation episode:
This is a parallel between Matthew and Luke that is not in Mark, so it is ambiguous.For when He became man, as I previously remarked, the devil came to Him--i.e., that power which is called the serpent and Sa-tan--tempting Him, and striving to effect His downfall by asking Him to worship him. But He destroyed and overthrew the devil, having proved him to be wicked, in that he asked to be worshipper as God, contrary to the Scripture; who is an apostate from the will of God. For He answers him, 'It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shall thou serve.' Then, overcome and convicted, the devil departed at that time.
The Luke 4:7-8 reference comes from Dialogue with Trypho 103:
But the part of the answer that says "Be gone, Satan!" or "Get thee behind me, Satan" is unattested in Luke in some of the best witnesses (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus), which could make this a Matthew-only reference. Unless, of course, it had already gotten into Justin's copy.For this devil, when [Jesus] went up from the river Jordan, at the time when the voice spake to Him, 'Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten Thee,' is recorded in the memoirs of the apostles to have come to Him and tempted Him, even so far as to say to Him, 'Worship me;' and Christ answered him, 'Get thee behind me, Satan: thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve.'
The highlighted portion, however, is very interesting. That is a famous textual variant from Luke (refer to Psalm 2.7) which is not found in Matthew or Mark. It is also, however, found in the Gospel of the Ebionites. Nevertheless, this reference is definitely one I need to examine.
Not necessarily the strongest item, I agree:The Luke 4:13 reference comes from Dialogue with Trypho 125:
This is found in both Matthew and Luke. It's slightly closer to Luke, given that Matthew's statement harmonizes to add that angels ministered to him. It seems ambiguous, though, whether Justin's knowledge of this came from Luke.Then, overcome and convicted, the devil departed at that time.
Code: Select all
Matthew: τότε ἀφίησιν αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος
Luke: καὶ συντελέσας πάντα πειρασμὸν ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ
Justin: καὶ ἡττημένος καὶ ἐληλεγμένος ἀπένευσε τότε ὁ διάβολος
Roth counts both the tithing of mint and rue and the love of God as attested for Marcion, too.This requires a closer look.
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοςμον καὶ τὸ πήγανον (Trypho 17 - "tithe mint and rue")
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ πήγανον (Lk. 11:42 - "tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs")
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ ἄνηθον καὶ τὸ κύμινον (Matt. 23:23 - "tithe mint and dill and cumin")
τὴν δὲ ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν κρίσιν οὐ κατανοεῖτε (Trypho 17 - "but love of God and justice, you do not observe")
καὶ παρέρχεσθε τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ (Lk. 11:42 BGT)
καὶ ἀφήκατε τὰ βαρύτερα τοῦ νόμου, τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὸ ἔλεος καὶ τὴν πίστιν (Matt. 23:23 BGT)
These two similarities between Justin and Luke ("and rue," "love of God"), absent from Matthew, suggest a connection between them.
But Justin also omits the part thought to be absent in the Gospel used by Marcion:
Luke 11:42 - "The additional clause in Luke 11.42 - 'These things you were under obligation to do, but those other things not to omit - is unattested for the Evangelion, and was probably lacking, as in Gk ms D and its associated Latin ms d. The United Bible Societies (UBS) text committee considers its absence in D as due to Marcionite influence (Metzger, Textual Commentary, 159), but its presence in the majority of witnesses to Luke is just as likely to be a harmonization to Matthew." (p. 162)
Agreed. This one I had checked before posting.Luke 13:29 is a parallel, but Dialogue with Trypho 76 actually has more in common with Matthew 8:11.
Dialogue with Trypho 120 also has more in common with Matthew 8:11.when He said: 'They shall come from the east[and from the west], and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven: but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.
Likewise Dialogue with Trypho 140.'For they shall come,' He said, 'from the west and from the east, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.'
And our Lord, according to the will of Him that sent Him, who is the Father and Lord of all, would not have said, 'They shall come from the east, and from the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness.'
Unattested either way for Marcion.Dialogue with Trypho 103:
Many manuscripts omit Luke 22:43-44. But I'm not aware of any other gospel text that has this passage.For in the memoirs which I say were drawn up by His apostles and those who followed them, [it is recorded] that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying, and saying, 'If it be possible, let this cup pass:' His heart and also His bones trembling; His heart being like wax melting in His belly: in order that we may perceive that the Father wished His Son really to undergo such sufferings for our sakes, and may not say that He, being the Son of God, did not feel what was happening to Him and inflicted on Him.
Unattested either way for Marcion.Trypho 50 is possibly referring to Luke 24:27:
But I'm not so sure.And beginning with Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
Great start to the matter, Peter. Thanks!