Re: Justin Martyr, the Gospel of Luke, and Marcion.
Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:39 am
Good point! Same verb that Justin uses.
Investigating the roots of western civilization (ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on...)
https://earlywritings.com/forum/
Good point! Same verb that Justin uses.
What's interesting is that three of these have weak manuscript support (Luke 3:22, Luke 22:44, Luke 24:27). The fourth one - "about 30" strikes me as something that is likely to have pre-existed the canonical Gospel of Luke, given the variety of interpretations that placed emphasis on Jesus' age being 30.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 amWhat remains:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:38 pmI also read a bit on this, and there seems little question that the fragments "On the Resurrection" didn't come from Justin.Luke 3:22 textual variant (this day have I begotten Thee) // Trypho 103
Luke 3:23 (about 30) // Trypho 88
Luke 3:38 (descent of Mary) // Trypho 100
Luke 22:44 (bloody sweat) // Trypho 103
Luke 24:27 (beginning with Moses and all the Prophets) // Trypho 50 [typo for 1 Apology 50]
Luke 24:32 (see that it is I) // On the Resurrection (?), fragment 9
This part:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 am Justin Martyr, Dialogue 106.1: 1 “The remainder of the Psalm makes it manifest that He knew His Father would grant to Him all things which He asked, and would raise Him from the dead; and that He urged all who fear God to praise Him because He had compassion on all races of believing men, through the mystery of Him who was crucified; and that He stood in the midst of His brethren the apostles — who repented of their flight from Him when He was crucified, after He rose from the dead, and after they were persuaded by Himself that, before His passion He had mentioned to them that He must suffer these things, and that they were announced beforehand by the prophets — and when living with them sang hymns to God, as is made evident in the Memorabilia of the apostles.” / 1 «Καὶ ὅτι ἠπίστατο τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ πάντα παρέχειν αὐτῷ, ὡς ἠξίου, καὶ ἀνεγερεῖν αὐτὸν ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, καὶ πάντας τοὺς φοβουμένους τὸν θεὸν προέτρεπεν αἰνεῖν τὸν θεὸν διὰ τὸ ἐλεῆσαι καὶ διὰ τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ σταυρωθέντος τούτου πᾶν γένος τῶν πιστευόντων ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ὅτι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ ἔστη, τῶν ἀποστόλων, οἵτινες, μετὰ τὸ ἀναστῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν καὶ πεισθῆναι ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ὅτι καὶ πρὸ τοῦ παθεῖν ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς ὅτι ταῦτα αὐτὸν δεῖ παθεῖν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι προεκεκήρυκτο ταῦτα, μετενόησαν ἐπὶ τῷ ἀφίστασθαι αὐτοῦ ὅτε ἐσταυρώθη, καὶ μετ' αὐτῶν διάγων ὕμνησε τὸν θεόν, ὡς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀπομνημονεύμασι τῶν ἀποστόλων δηλοῦται γεγενημένον, τὰ λείποντα τοῦ ψαλμοῦ ἐδήλωσεν.»[/box]
And Justin also claims that the risen Jesus sang hymns to God with the apostles, a detail not found in any gospel of which I am aware (they do sing a hymn after the Last Supper, on the way to Gethsemane).
Does it have to be after the resurrection?before His passion He had mentioned to them that He must suffer these things, and that they were announced beforehand by the prophets — and when living with them sang hymns to God, as is made evident in the Memorabilia of the apostles.
Is Luke 24.27 questionable?Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 2:48 pmWhat's interesting is that three of these have weak manuscript support (Luke 3:22, Luke 22:44, Luke 24:27). The fourth one - "about 30" strikes me as something that is likely to have pre-existed the canonical Gospel of Luke, given the variety of interpretations that placed emphasis on Jesus' age being 30.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 amWhat remains:Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:38 pmI also read a bit on this, and there seems little question that the fragments "On the Resurrection" didn't come from Justin.Luke 3:22 textual variant (this day have I begotten Thee) // Trypho 103
Luke 3:23 (about 30) // Trypho 88
Luke 3:38 (descent of Mary) // Trypho 100
Luke 22:44 (bloody sweat) // Trypho 103
Luke 24:27 (beginning with Moses and all the Prophets) // Trypho 50 [typo for 1 Apology 50]
Luke 24:32 (see that it is I) // On the Resurrection (?), fragment 9
Hmm, you may be right about that. I got the idea from Bellinzoni originally, but it is a complex sentence, and as I look at it I do not think we are forced to take anything in that long οἵτινες clause as impacting the timing of what comes after the clause finally ends.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:44 pmThis part:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 am Justin Martyr, Dialogue 106.1: 1 “The remainder of the Psalm makes it manifest that He knew His Father would grant to Him all things which He asked, and would raise Him from the dead; and that He urged all who fear God to praise Him because He had compassion on all races of believing men, through the mystery of Him who was crucified; and that He stood in the midst of His brethren the apostles — who repented of their flight from Him when He was crucified, after He rose from the dead, and after they were persuaded by Himself that, before His passion He had mentioned to them that He must suffer these things, and that they were announced beforehand by the prophets — and when living with them sang hymns to God, as is made evident in the Memorabilia of the apostles.” / 1 «Καὶ ὅτι ἠπίστατο τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ πάντα παρέχειν αὐτῷ, ὡς ἠξίου, καὶ ἀνεγερεῖν αὐτὸν ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, καὶ πάντας τοὺς φοβουμένους τὸν θεὸν προέτρεπεν αἰνεῖν τὸν θεὸν διὰ τὸ ἐλεῆσαι καὶ διὰ τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ σταυρωθέντος τούτου πᾶν γένος τῶν πιστευόντων ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ὅτι ἐν μέσῳ τῶν ἀδελφῶν αὐτοῦ ἔστη, τῶν ἀποστόλων, οἵτινες, μετὰ τὸ ἀναστῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν καὶ πεισθῆναι ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ὅτι καὶ πρὸ τοῦ παθεῖν ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς ὅτι ταῦτα αὐτὸν δεῖ παθεῖν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι προεκεκήρυκτο ταῦτα, μετενόησαν ἐπὶ τῷ ἀφίστασθαι αὐτοῦ ὅτε ἐσταυρώθη, καὶ μετ' αὐτῶν διάγων ὕμνησε τὸν θεόν, ὡς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀπομνημονεύμασι τῶν ἀποστόλων δηλοῦται γεγενημένον, τὰ λείποντα τοῦ ψαλμοῦ ἐδήλωσεν.»[/box]
And Justin also claims that the risen Jesus sang hymns to God with the apostles, a detail not found in any gospel of which I am aware (they do sing a hymn after the Last Supper, on the way to Gethsemane).
Does it have to be after the resurrection? .... Why couldn't that be a reference to a hymn before the crucifixion?before His passion He had mentioned to them that He must suffer these things, and that they were announced beforehand by the prophets — and when living with them sang hymns to God, as is made evident in the Memorabilia of the apostles.
My first instinct is the Gospel of the Hebrews (or one of them, if there is more than one). I have already come to suspect that Luke's concentration on Jerusalem and its environs as the site of (all of) the resurrection appearances may derive from this Gospel, which features an appearance to James in which Jesus gives what I take to be his own burial shroud to the servant of a priest, suggesting to me that we are still in or near Jerusalem and also that we are dealing with a first appearance, since Jesus is still holding his shroud. Furthermore, Jesus serving the bread to James in the Gospel of the Hebrews seems similar to Jesus serving the bread to Cleophas and his nameless companion in Luke 24. So it seems possible to me that the Gospel of the Hebrews is the proximal source of the Jerusalem tradition, and Luke endorsed this geographical datum from that gospel text while simultaneously taking James right out of the picture as connected to Jesus in some direct way (in more ways than one: there is no equivalent to Mark 6.3 in Luke, and neither Luke nor Acts ever suggests that Jesus had a brother named James). I have even wondered whether the Fayyum fragment might not be from the Gospel of the Hebrews, given that it lacks the Galilee prediction in the spot where Mark 14.28 has it but also contains a line ("this very night") in common with Matthew over and against Mark, giving it a medial position between Mark and Matthew which I have noticed before for the Gospel of the Hebrews. In this overall reconstruction, our canonical Mark and Matthew would be all about Jesus appearing "to Cephas, then to the twelve," as per 1 Corinthians 15.5, while the Gospel of the Hebrews would possibly be all about him appearing "to James, then to all the apostles," as per 1 Corinthians 15.7, taking these two phrases as rival traditions in the way similar to that suggested by Robert M. Price.I would consider a hypothesis where all of these are from a source that is neither the gospel used by Marcion nor canonical Luke.
Epiphanius, Pan. 30.13.2–3.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 amWhat remains:
1-2.
3.
Luke 3.23: 23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years old, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli....
Justin Martyr, Dialogue 88.2: 2 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 to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown. / 2 καὶ γὰρ γεννηθεὶς δύναμιν τὴν αὐτοῦ ἔσχε· καὶ αὐξάνων κατὰ τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων, χρώμενος τοῖς ἁρμόζουσιν, ἑκάστῃ αὐξήσει τὸ οἰκεῖον ἀπένειμε, τρεφόμενος τὰς πάσας τροφάς, καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη ἢ πλείονα ἢ καὶ ἐλάσσονα μείνας, μέχρις οὗ προελήλυθεν Ἰωάννης κῆρυξ αὐτοῦ τῆς παρουσίας καὶ τὴν τοῦ βαπτίσματος ὁδὸν προϊών, ὡς καὶ προαπέδειξα.
Yes, indeed, the Ebionite Gospel has that. Interestingly, both the Marcionite gospel and the gospel of the Ebionites begin at the synchronicity represented by Luke 3.1, but each gospel names different rulers. All that is attested for the Ebionite is Herod (who is called a king instead of a tetrarch) and Caiaphas, both Jewish rulers. All that is attested for the Marcionite is Tiberius and Pilate, both Roman rulers. Canonical Luke is much fuller, combining both Jewish and Roman rulers, as well as correctly identifying Herod as a tetrarch.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:29 amEpiphanius, Pan. 30.13.2–3.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 amWhat remains:
1-2.
3.
Luke 3.23: 23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years old, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli....
Justin Martyr, Dialogue 88.2: 2 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 to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown. / 2 καὶ γὰρ γεννηθεὶς δύναμιν τὴν αὐτοῦ ἔσχε· καὶ αὐξάνων κατὰ τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων, χρώμενος τοῖς ἁρμόζουσιν, ἑκάστῃ αὐξήσει τὸ οἰκεῖον ἀπένειμε, τρεφόμενος τὰς πάσας τροφάς, καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη ἢ πλείονα ἢ καὶ ἐλάσσονα μείνας, μέχρις οὗ προελήλυθεν Ἰωάννης κῆρυξ αὐτοῦ τῆς παρουσίας καὶ τὴν τοῦ βαπτίσματος ὁδὸν προϊών, ὡς καὶ προαπέδειξα.
[The Gospel which is called with them according to Matthew which is not complete but falsified and distorted, they call it the Hebrew Gospel and in it can be found:]
There was a man called Jesus, about thirty years old, who chose us. And came to Capernaum, he entered the house of Simon, also called Peter, and opened his mouth and said: When I went by the sea of Tiberias I chose John and James, the sons of Zebedee, and Simon and Andrew and Thaddeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the Iskariot and you Matthew, who was sitting at the custom-house; I called you and you followed me. I wish you to be twelve apostles for the testimony to Israel.
Ebionite Gospel | Canonical Luke | Marcionite Gospel |
- - Herod the king of Judea - - Caiaphas the high priest | Tiberius Caesar Pontius Pilate the governor Herod the tetrarch of Galilee Philip the tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene Annas and Caiaphas the high priest(s) | Tiberius Caesar Pontius Pilate - - - - |
This parallels various statements in Tertullian who knew and used the lost work of Irenaeus (which was in fact built from older material). While orthodox sympathizers take Irenaeus at his word - i.e. 'he is saying he is just going to deal with passages from Luke retained in Marcion's gospel' - I see it a little differently. The underlying logic - i.e. that Luke is the pristine version of Marcion's gospel - opens the door to arguments like 'the reason Marcion cut this out is ...' which then leads to many of the statements in Against Marcion.But Marcion, mutilating that according to Luke, is proved to be a blasphemer of the only existing God, from those [passages] which he still retains.
Wherefore also Marcion and his followers have betaken themselves to mutilating the Scriptures, not acknowledging some books at all; and, curtailing the Gospel according to Luke and the Epistles of Paul, they assert that these are alone authentic, which they have themselves thus shortened. In another work, however, I shall, God granting [me strength], refute them out of these which they still retain.
Again given that it would have been much more damning - and indeed more natural - to defeat Marcion by demonstrating the passages he erased we have to wonder why Irenaeus and Tertullian proceed in the way they do. The answer is obvious, they never had the Marcionite gospel in their possession. They are forced into this methodology because they must have had a commentary on the gospel which they took to be 'Marcionite' in some form and based their counterarguments based on that treatise.Certainly that is why he has expunged all the things that oppose his view, that are in accord with the Creator, on the plea that they have been woven in by his partisans; but has retained those that accord with his opinion. These it is we shall call to account, with these we shall grapple, to see if they will favour my case, not his, to see if they will put a check on Marcion's pretensions. Then it will become clear that these things have been expunged by the same disease of heretical blindness by which the others have been retained. Such will be the purpose and plan of my treatise, on those precise terms which have been agreed by both parties. Marcion lays it down that there is one Christ who in the time of Tiberius was revealed by a god formerly unknown, for the salvation of all the nations; and another Christ who is destined by God the Creator to come at some time still future for the re-establishment of the Jewish kingdom. (4.6)
Let Marcion's eraser be ashamed of itself: except that it is superfluous for me to discuss the passages he has left out, since my case is stronger if he is shown wrong by those he has retained. (5.4)
Maybe.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:47 amYes, indeed, the Ebionite Gospel has that. Interestingly, both the Marcionite gospel and the gospel of the Ebionites begin at the synchronicity represented by Luke 3.1, but each gospel names different rulers. All that is attested for the Ebionite is Herod (who is called a king instead of a tetrarch) and Caiaphas, both Jewish rulers. All that is attested for the Marcionite is Tiberius and Pilate, both Roman rulers. Canonical Luke is much fuller, combining both Jewish and Roman rulers, as well as correctly identifying Herod as a tetrarch.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 6:29 amEpiphanius, Pan. 30.13.2–3.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:40 amWhat remains:
1-2.
3.
Luke 3.23: 23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years old, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli....
Justin Martyr, Dialogue 88.2: 2 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 to each development, and was sustained by all kinds of nourishment, and waited for thirty years, more or less, until John appeared before Him as the herald of His approach, and preceded Him in the way of baptism, as I have already shown. / 2 καὶ γὰρ γεννηθεὶς δύναμιν τὴν αὐτοῦ ἔσχε· καὶ αὐξάνων κατὰ τὸ κοινὸν τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων, χρώμενος τοῖς ἁρμόζουσιν, ἑκάστῃ αὐξήσει τὸ οἰκεῖον ἀπένειμε, τρεφόμενος τὰς πάσας τροφάς, καὶ τριάκοντα ἔτη ἢ πλείονα ἢ καὶ ἐλάσσονα μείνας, μέχρις οὗ προελήλυθεν Ἰωάννης κῆρυξ αὐτοῦ τῆς παρουσίας καὶ τὴν τοῦ βαπτίσματος ὁδὸν προϊών, ὡς καὶ προαπέδειξα.
[The Gospel which is called with them according to Matthew which is not complete but falsified and distorted, they call it the Hebrew Gospel and in it can be found:]
There was a man called Jesus, about thirty years old, who chose us. And came to Capernaum, he entered the house of Simon, also called Peter, and opened his mouth and said: When I went by the sea of Tiberias I chose John and James, the sons of Zebedee, and Simon and Andrew and Thaddeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the Iskariot and you Matthew, who was sitting at the custom-house; I called you and you followed me. I wish you to be twelve apostles for the testimony to Israel.
Ebionite Gospel Canonical Luke Marcionite Gospel-
-
Herod the king of Judea
-
-
Caiaphas the high priestTiberius Caesar
Pontius Pilate the governor
Herod the tetrarch of Galilee
Philip the tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis
Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene
Annas and Caiaphas the high priest(s)Tiberius Caesar
Pontius Pilate
-
-
-
-
This synchronism has made me wonder whether canonical Luke is combining two different lists. The Hebrew prophetic books often specify the names of those ruling when the prophet had the vision; maybe one of the Jewish Christian gospels specified the King and the High Priest, whereas a more Gentile oriented gospel known to Marcion specified the Roman emperor and governor, and then canonical Luke combined all these names into one list, filled it out with another couple of names, and (as we find in other parts of Luke) also corrects the title of Herod to Tetrarch. Maybe, then, the 30 years actually came from that Jewish Christian gospel and thence into Luke.
If anyone is dissatisfied with the portions of "maybe" I am dishing out here, I have more "maybe" in stock if desired.