Recent books & articles about Marcion

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

.
Corrected

Ulrich Schmid (1995) 'Marcion und sein Apostolos: Rekonstruktion und historische Einordnung
  • der marcionitischen Paulusbriefausgabe' (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung 25) Berlin: de Gruyter.
  • translation:
    'Marcion & his Apostolos: reconstruction & historical classification [of] the Marcionite Paul's letter output' (works for NT Textual Research 25)
note: Dieter Roth says the methodology employed there^ by Ulrich Schmid, in his reconstruction of Marcion’s Apostolikon, also has important methodological insights for reconstructing Marcion’s Gospel. eg. Dieter T Roth (2012) below +/- Dieter T Roth (2015)

Henry Chadwick (2001) Marcion' in The Church in Ancient Society: From Galilee to Gregory the Great
  • 'Marcion, a shipmaster from Pontus on the Black Sea, in about 140 AD proclaimed a radical distinction between the law and the gospel, putting a negative interpretation on the Old Testament and its God. His partly Gnostic ideas involved revulsion at the physical world and the total depravity of humankind. The negative reaction to Marcion's ideas in the Church caused him to develop an even sharper distinction between the old and the new, giving all the Old Testament references in the gospels and Paul a negative significance.'

Ulrich Schmid (2003)How Can We Access Second Century Gospel Texts? The Cases of Marcion and Tatian”,
  • in The New Testament Text in Early Christianity/Le texte du Nouveau Testament au debut du christianisme,
    eds. Christian-B. Amphoux and J. Keith Elliott. Lausanne: Editions du Zebre, 143: 139-50.

Joseph B Tyson (2006) Marcion and Luke-Acts: a defining struggle. University of South Carolina Press.
  • makes a case for not only Luke but also Acts being a response to Marcion, rather than Marcion's gospel being a rewrite of Luke.

Dieter T. Roth (2008)Marcion’s Gospel and Luke: The History of Research in Current Debate,”
  • Journal of Biblical Literature 127: 513-27.

Matthias Klinghardt (2008) 'The Marcionite Gospel and the Synoptic Problem: A New Suggestion'
  • Novum Testamentum; 50(1):1-27.
  • Abstract: 'The most recent debate of the Synoptic Problem resulted in a dead-lock: The best-established solutions, the Two-Source-Hypothesis and the Farrer-Goodacre-Theory, are burdened with a number of apparent weaknesses. On the other hand, the arguments raised against these theories are cogent. An alternative possibility, that avoids the problems created by either of them, is the inclusion of the gospel used by Marcion. This gospel is not a redaction of Luke, but rather precedes Matthew and Luke and, therefore, belongs into the maze of the synoptic interrelations. The resulting model avoids the weaknesses of the previous theories and provides compelling and obvious solutions to the notoriously difficult problems.'

    Full article: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B75F1hK ... edit?pli=1

    notes: presents an argument that the Marcionite Evangelion text ('the Gospel of the Lord') more than likely preceded the canonical Gospel of Luke. Klinghardt deduced that the 'Gospel Marcion' had influenced the formation of both the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke.
  • Christopher M. Hays (2008) Marcion vs. Luke: A Response to the Plädoyer of Matthias Klinghardt
    • Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und Kunde der Älteren Kirche. 99(2): pp. 213–232.
      ISSN (Online) 1613-009X, ISSN (Print) 0044-2615, DOI: 10.1515/ZNTW.2008.017

Dieter T. Roth (2009) 'Towards a New Reconstruction of the Text of Marcion’s Gospel:
  • History of Research, Sources, Methodology, and the Testimony of Tertullian.' A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Ph.D. in New Testament and Christian Origins, The University of Edinburgh.

    available online - https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/ ... sequence=1
    • Please note the terms and conditions of use on the first page

      It seems to be an extremely thorough study

Andrew Radde‐Gallwitz (2009) 'Simplicity and the Problem of Contradiction: Ptolemy and the Legacy of Marcion'
  • in Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Transformation of Divine Simplicity, Oxford University Press

    'Chapter 1 focuses on the role divine simplicity played in the debates surrounding Marcion of Sinope, the second‐century theologian who distinguished the God of the Old Testament from the God of the New. After reviewing the responses to Marcion offered by Tertullian and Irenaeus of Lyons, particular attention is given to Ptolemaeus Gnosticus ([wiki]Ptolemy (gnostic)[/wiki]) who, like the others, sought to avoid attributing contradictory motives to God. Ptolemy achieved this by distinguishing between a first God, who is simple and uninvolved with creation, and a second God, who is complex and involved with matter and the created order. The chapter engages a commonplace modern objection to divine simplicity, that the idea is incompatible with the biblical portrayal of God as active in the world. It notes that ancient theologians like Ptolemy had resources for responding to this that are no longer available. Ptolemy could distinguish a first God and second, active God. Most importantly, however, Ptolemy and the modern objector agree that simplicity is inconsistent with activity. It is left to subsequent chapters to demonstrate how Basil and Gregory reject this assumption without falling into contradiction.'

Sebastian Moll (2010) The Arch-Heretic Marcion
  • and Moll's 2009 PhD dissertation: 'At the Left Hand of Christ: The Arch-Heretic Marcion'

    - https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/ ... sequence=2

    Marcion is unanimously acknowledged to be one of the most important and most intriguing figures of the Early Church. In spite of this importance, there is no comprehensive up-to-date study on his life and thought. Thus, the desire to fill this gap within the academic world – which is inconvenient for both students and professors alike – has been my inspiration for writing this thesis. However, this work does not only aim at providing a complete study on Marcion for the twenty-first century, but also at ridding scholarship from several severe misconceptions regarding the arch-heretic. The main argument of my study is that previous scholarship has turned Marcion’s exegesis of Scripture upside down. He did not find the inspiration for his doctrine in the teachings of the Apostle Paul, it is the Old Testament and its portrait of an inconsistent, vengeful and cruel God which forms the centre of his doctrine. Marcion does not understand the Old Testament in the light of the New, he interprets the New Testament in the light of the Old. This insight casts a new light on Marcion’s place within the history of the Church, as the initiator of a fundamental crisis of the Old Testament in the second century. But not only did he have an enormous influence on Christian exegesis, he also stands at the beginning of the epochal fight between orthodoxy and heresy. As the first man to ever officially break with the Church, and whose biography would become a stereotype for future heresiologists, Marcion can rightfully claim the title of ‘arch-heretic’.
    https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/5817

Vincent M (2011) Christ's Resurrection in Early Christianity and the Making of the New Testament; Ashgate Publishing.
"..this book attempts to restore Marcion to pre-eminence among the major contributors to the development of early Christianity." Mark DelCogliano, University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota , USA

"Vinzent provocatively argues that Paul’s strong emphasis on the salvific character of Christ’s resurrection had waned in the second generation of Christianity until the response to Marcion’s “spiritual” gospel began slowly to restore the resurrection of Jesus in Christian theology and worship."
Paul M. Blowers, Emmanuel Christian Seminary, Johnson City, USA


James Carleton Paget (2012) Marcion & the Resurrection: Some Thoughts on a Recent Book Journal for the Study of the New Testament 35(1); 74-102
  • "[MV argues], amongst other things, that Marcion lies behind an apparent rise of interest in the resurrection in the middle of the second century as well as the writing of the canonical Gospels. This review article examines both the way the case is argued and the evidence brought forward to support it."

Dieter T Roth (2012) 'Marcion & the Early New Testament Text'
  • in The Early Text of the New Testament; Charles E Hill & Michael J Kruger eds.
  • This chapter considers the insight that can be gained into the early text of the NT through Marcion’s Apostolikon and Euangelion. Though Adolf von Harnack’s magisterial work on Marcion’s scriptures remains important, recent research has revealed numerous problems with his reconstructions and this chapter seeks to present the results of work done by Ulrich Schmid and the present author on Marcion’s Pauline letter collection and Gospel, respectively. Both Marcion’s Apostolikon and Euangelion reveal affinities to the so-called ‘Western’ textual tradition, though the text is definitely not the ‘D-text’ and likely represents a precursor to the ‘Western’ text. At several points it is shown that Marcion’s text is not as radically emended as has often been assumed, and that in many instances it can be located within and provide insight into the extant textual tradition.

Jason D. BeDuhn (2013) 'The First New Testament: Marcion's Scriptural Canon' Polebridge Press; Paperback
  • "Critics of Marcion like Tertullian and Epiphanius complained that Marcion cut and edited scripture to fit his beliefs. Biblical scholar Adolf von Harnack accepted this claim in his definitive text on Marcion: Marcion: The Gospel of an Alien God (1920). However, Tertullian and Epiphanius lived several generations after Marcion, and they assumed the New Testament they read already existed in Marcion’s era. It didn’t. Marcion’s [early] critics were reading history backward instead of forward: there was no New Testament yet." http://www.westarinstitute.org/blog/mar ... testament/
  • Clayton N. Jefford (2014) The First NT: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon by Jason D. BeDuhn (review) Journal of Early Christian Studies 22(3): pp. 471-472. "BeDuhn has achieved his goal, providing a useable reconstruction of Marcion’s texts that others will find immediately useful. He is careful to acknowledge that his rendering is sometimes secure and at other times..."
'Jason BeDuhn introduces Marcion, reconstructs his text, and explores his impact on the study of Luke-Acts, the two-source theory, and the Q hypothesis.'

“A comprehensive and impressively documented scholarly study of Marcion’s original compilation of sacred scriptures … an essential contribution to personal and academic Christian Studies collections”
—Midwest Book Review

“In this bold undertaking, Jason BeDuhn sets forth, for the first time, a complete English translation of the Bible of Marcion. With a useful introduction to all relevant issues, a readable translation of this First New Testament, and copious notes supporting each textual decision, BeDuhn has provided a work of scholarship that is sure to be both welcomed and controversial. For historians of early Christianity, this will be a book to be reckoned with.”
—Bart D. Ehrman, James A. Gray Professor of Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

“This is an important book that fills a large gap in the resources needed for the study of second-century Christianity and Marcion in particular. It is an exhaustive examination of the relevant sources and a masterful, methodologically sensitive, treatment of Marcion’s significance.”
—Joseph B. Tyson, professor emeritus, Southern Methodist University, author of 'Marcion and Luke-Acts: A Defining Struggle'

http://www.westarinstitute.org/store/th ... testament/

Eric W. Scherbenske (2013) 'Marcionite Paratexts, Pretexts, and Edition of the Corpus Paulinum'
  • in Canonising Paul: Ancient Editorial Practice and the Corpus Paulinum, Oxford University Press

    Chapter 2 contends that Marcion's text of Paul's letters was shaped by Marcion's Antitheses and the so-called “Marcionite prologues” (argumenta). These 'paratexts' introduced the principles by which Marcion edited the text, thereby offering justification for “correcting” the text in accordance with his hermeneutic and introducing interpretations of the text under Marcionite rubrics. As an isagogic work, the Antitheses served to guide readers to a Marcionite interpretation of the text. Particularly important is the investigation of the impact of Marcion's Antitheses and argumenta on the reception of his text: Marcion's paratexts were so influential in shaping readers' perceptions of Marcion's text that his opponents consistently indicted him for corrupting the “authentic” text, even for textual readings he did not create, but merely transmitted.

Vincent M (2014) 'Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels' (Studia patristica supplement 2) Leuven: Peeters.
  • Summary: Are the Synoptic Gospels at odds with Early Christian art and archaeology? Art and archaeology cannot provide the material basis 'to secure the irrefutable inner continuity' of the Christian beginnings (Erich Dinkler); can the Synoptic Gospels step in? Their narratives, however, are as absent from the first hundred and fourty years of early Christianity as are their visual imageries. 'Many of the dates confidently assigned by modern experts to the New Testament documents', especially the Gospels, rest 'on presuppositions rather than facts' (J.A.T. Robinson, 1976). The present volume is the first systematic study of all available early evidence that we have about the first witness to our Gospel narratives, Marcion of Sinope. It evaluates our commonly known arguments for dating the Synoptic Gospels, elaborates on Marcion's crucial role in the Gospel making and argues for a re-dating of the Gospels to the years between 138 and 144 AD.
"One of the most important insights of my 'Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels' (2014) was the discovery that Marcion’s Gospel existed in two different versions, first as a pre-published, presumably stand-alone draft, and secondly as a published edition with the framing of the Antitheses and the 10 Pauline Letters. How did I derive to this conclusion? The key text in this respect is Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem IV 4,2 which, in a second step, I’d like to put into the broader frame of Tertullian’s discussion of Marcion’s Antitheses and his Gospel in Adversus Marcionem IV 1-5, so that we can follow Tertullian’s arguments ..." continued - http://markusvinzent.blogspot.com.au/20 ... ospel.html
"Vinzent’s book doesn’t simply assert priority of Marcions’ Gospel over the canonical text of Luke, but asserts that Marcion’s Gospel preceded all the canonical Gospels." Larry Hurtado blog-post comment
"Vinzent’s views are unique in the renewed debates concerning Marcion’s Gospel in that he believes that Marcion wrote the first Gospel ever written and that all four of our canonical Gospels used Marcion’s Gospel as a source. In his own words, “Marcion, who created the new literary genre of the ‘Gospel’ and also gave the work this title, had no historical precedent in the combination of Christ’s sayings and narratives” (p. 277).
"Vinzent essentially attempts to construct his case on two foundations: first, and foremost, on the basis of his reading of several important sources for and works on Marcion’s Gospel; and second, on the basis of what Vinzent presumes to be the content and readings of Marcion’s Gospel."
- Dieter Roth https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2015 ... n-marcion/

Matthias Klinghardt (2015) Das älteste Evangelium und die Entstehung der kanonischen Evangelien (German) Francke a Verlag, publisher
  • title translation: The oldest gospel, & the emergence of the canonical Gospels

    Volume I: Investigation | Volume II: Reconstruction, Translation, Variants
  • (via Google Translate) "Volume I: The oldest gospel is The Gospel, which was in the 2nd century by Marcion and [which] others received. The exact reconstruction of this text, as well as proof that all canonical gospels are dependent on him, allow significant insights for important fields of New Testament scholarship: The origin, tradition, and history of the Gospels, the New Testament textual history, the emergence of the canon of the New Testament, and the history of Christianity in the 2nd century. Volume 1 contains the investigation that determines the relationship between Luke and the oldest gospel, and a model for the development of the Gospels up to the canonical four gospels book designs.

    Volume II: The reconstruction of the oldest Gospel is the basis of the examination of the canonical Gospels tradition of/for the oldest version to the canonical four gospels book. Volume 2 contains the meticulous reconstruction of the Gospel with the establishment of the text, the distortion of the witnesses, and the interpretations. In the explanation of each reconstruction decision shall be fully explained and the single logia and pericopes Überlieferungsweg traced. This is complemented by a reconstruction translation and a list of variants of the canonical Gospel of Luke, which touch with the text of the oldest gospel."

Judith M. Lieu (2015) Marcion and the Making of a Heretic: God and Scripture in the Second Century
  • Cambridge University Press.
  • "The first comprehensive monograph on the 'heretic' Marcion in nearly a century, this volume offers insight into second-century Christian intellectual debate and traces heresiological development. Judith M. Lieu analyses accounts of Marcion by the major early Christian polemicists who shaped the idea of heresy, including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Epiphanius of Salamis, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Ephraem Syrus. She examines Marcion's Gospel, Apostolikon, and Antitheses in detail and compares his principles to those of contemporary Christian and non-Christian thinkers, covering a wide range of controversial issues: the nature of God, the relation of the divine to creation, the person of Jesus, the interpretation of Scripture, the nature of salvation, and the appropriate lifestyle of adherents. In this innovative study, Marcion emerges as a distinctive, creative figure who addressed widespread concerns within second-century Christian diversity." - from Amazon

    "Lieu is cool because she addresses the Syriac sources" http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopi ... 053#p21053

Dieter Roth (2015) The Text of Marcion’s Gospel. (Leiden: Brill, 2015).
  • "In 'The Text of Marcion’s Gospel' Dieter T. Roth offers a new, critical reconstruction of Marcion’s Gospel including various levels of certainty for readings in this Gospel text. An extensive history of research, overview of both attested and unattested verses in the various sources, and methodological considerations related, in particular, to understanding the citation customs of the sources set the stage for a comprehensive analysis of all relevant data concerning Marcion’s Gospel. On the basis of this new reconstruction significant issues in the study of early Christianity, including the relationship between Marcion’s Gospel and Luke and the place of Marcion in the history of the canon and the formation of the fourfold Gospel, can be considered anew."
"Roth also improves on Harnack’s classic work by giving a fresh and independent analysis of the data, and also by providing detailed comments and explanation for his judgements about the text of Marcion’s gospel ... Roth’s newly released study is now the “go-to” work on Marcion’s text of Luke", says Roth's former PhD supervisor Larry Hurtado

updated 5 Aug 2015 -
  • Having read aspects of Roth's 2009 PhD dissertation on Marcion, I'd have to agree with Hurtado: perhaps all works on reconstructing Marcion from Tertullian's extant works ought to be compared to Roth in the near future; but the reliability of Tertullian's extant works ought to be considered eg.
    • (i) are they true reflections of Tertullian? (to what extent have they been redacted?) and,

      (ii) are they true reflections of Marcion?
.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Mon Dec 27, 2021 11:25 pm, edited 28 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by Giuseppe »

I should clear a point about Marcion that forces me to resize relatively his historical importance (denying everything I have said in my previous posts :D ).

According to prof Klinghardt, the gospel’s origin has nothing to do with Marcion at all; it was only received and read by Marcion and the Marcionites.

This can mean probably only a thing: that the dualist reading (the god Creator versus the Alien god) is not in the intention of original authors but is only later applied on that gospel by marcionites.
This explains why in Mcn Jesus is never explicit about the identity of his Father. Maybe at time that problem was still not arisen.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

.
In 1881 Charles B. Waite, in History of the Christian Religion to the Year Two-Hundred, suggested that Marcion's Gospel may have preceded Luke's Gospel, and John Knox, in 'Marcion and the New Testament' (1942), also agreed with Waite's hypothesis.

So views about Luke being written after Marcion have been around for a while.

With Joseph B Tyson in 'Marcion and Luke-Acts: a defining struggle' (2006), University of South Carolina Press, making a case for not only Luke but also Acts being responses to Marcion, rather than Marcion's gospel being a rewrite of Luke as more widely proposed(?); and Vincent, in 2014 in 'Marcion and the Dating of the Synoptic Gospels' (Leuven: Peeters), arguing 'for a re-dating of the Gospels to the years between 138 and 144 AD', there will be plenty to engage 'the scholars' for a while.

edit to add: Roth, in his 2009 PhD addresses, aspects of Tyson's 'Marcion and Luke-Acts: a defining struggle' (2006).
"it seems that Knox and Tyson have engaged in an interesting exercise, but one that ultimately does not serve to advance the understanding of Marcion’s Gospel text or its relationship to Luke."
Last edited by MrMacSon on Thu Jul 16, 2015 12:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

.
Clayton N. Jefford (2014) The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon by Jason D. BeDuhn (Review)
  • Journal of Early Christian Studies, vol 22, no 3; pp. 471-472.
... a brief excerpt of the content:
Recently renewed interest in Marcion, his history, and contributions to the formation of early ecclesiastical experience provides a ready context for the appearance of this volume. Unlike many other scholars, however, BeDuhn is less attracted to Marcion himself and more to his influence on the development of the Christian canon, stating from the outset that we “know the name of the individual responsible for the first New Testament” (3), and indicating that here we have evidence of the first biblical canon as a “collection of authoritative books” (4). He asserts that both the idea and “distinctive structure” of a New Testament can be associated with Marcion’s efforts (7), thus making this figure a key sponsor for the rise of later considerations about canon and sacred texts. Consequently, BeDuhn seeks to render the two parts of Marcion’s canon (the Evangelion and Apostolikon) into modern prose for the first time.

By way of structure, the volume offers a logical progression of movement. BeDuhn begins by necessity with a brief description and history of Marcion the man in order to set the stage (11–23), followed by a somewhat longer description of Marcion’s “New Testament” and the sources used to reconstruct its design (25–62). He thereafter moves to the intended focus of the investigation, English renderings of the Evangelion (65–200) and Apostolikon (203–319), both of which are provided with useful introductions and notes on the texts themselves. The translations offer specific references in the margins to relevant sources from antiquity (mimicking the style of the Nestle-Aland edition of the New Testament). To close, one finds extensive chapter notes (321–61), bibliography (363–81), and a general index (383–87).

The principal difficulty with BeDuhn’s task becomes evident in the need to sift through ancient literature in order to establish Marcion’s words with precision. BeDuhn acknowledges (with von Harnack) that only three primary sources for this Herculean effort remain: Tertullian, Epiphanius, and a third anonymous author, all of whom write in a polemical tone and “make no attempt to quote every word of Marcion’s text” (34). Otherwise, only a handful of lesser witnesses may be accessed, including the so-called “Marcionite Prologues to the works of Paul” in the Apostolikon.

The most illuminating section concerns reconstruction and significance (46–62), in which BeDuhn defends the approach to his translation, indicating that he is focused on recovery of Marcion’s content rather than exact wording (46–47). Here he reviews the history of research on the question at hand, beginning with the methodology of von Harnack and reviewing scholars who challenge those results. He at last resorts to a multi-step model for his own reconstruction: Inclusion of elements explicitly cited by outside sources; resolution of seeming contradictions; omission of materials expressly stated to be missing from Marcion; omission of unattested materials; and retention of secondary connective content to provide coherent meaning (54–55). Ultimately, he appeals to the fluidity of early Christian literature as typical of Marcion’s own efforts at “rooting authority in text” (61).

BeDuhn’s work in the completion of a most difficult task is hereby applauded. He has clearly identified the scope of the problem with respect to Marcion’s canon—even if many scholars debate the significance of that corpus for later canonical construction—and has provided easily accessible translations that students of biblical exegesis and Christian late antiquity should find quite useful as a point of departure for discussions of canon. In this respect the investigation stands as a unique resource within scholarly literature on Marcion, and thus the appearance of this volume is most welcome. The translation is readable and fluid, while the notes give ready access to the issues of reconstruction. It would be nice to find some presentation of original language sources on pages facing the translation, but this lies beyond the scope of what otherwise is already a hefty achievement and hence must remain a concern for another day.

Ultimately, BeDuhn has achieved his goal, providing a useable reconstruction of Marcion’s texts that others will find immediately useful. He is careful to acknowledge that his rendering is sometimes secure and at other times...
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

.. the Evangelion is much shorter than the Gospel of Luke, and it is not clear whether they were both written by the same person for different communities, or if a later editor added new material to the Gospel of Luke. Also, BeDuhn found that the Marcionite version of Romans 9-11 is completely different, yet this text has been used by some scholars as a key to Pauline theology.

Regardless of how these findings eventually play out in scholarly discussion and debates, BeDuhn identifies four significant contributions of Marcion to Christian history:
  • 1. Christians owe the idea of a “new” testament to Marcion.

    2. Christians owe to Marcion the particular form of the New Testament.
    3. Christians owe to Marcion the prominence of the voice of Paul in the New Testament.
    4. Finally, Christians owe to Marcion a Christian identity built on a special scripture all their own.
http://www.westarinstitute.org/blog/mar ... testament/
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

.
Hurtado is critical of Vincent
Vinzent’s case for the priority of Marcion’s Gospel is built upon a purported reconstructed text of Marcion’s Gospel, and Roth claims that Vinzent doesn’t give adequate basis for the text that he treats as Marcion’s.

https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2015 ... ment-12004
In light of that Dieter Roth (2015) The Text of Marcion’s Gospel. (Leiden: Brill, 2015) would be an interesting read.

Roth more generally emphasizes that there still needs to be work on reconstructing Marcion's texts, and consensus on such reconstructions, before general interpretations about them can be made.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Thu Jul 16, 2015 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

Secret Alias wrote:The task is and always will be to figure out Marcionism beyond the usual retarded discussions of 'whether Luke or the gospel of Marcion was original.' In other words, treat the Marcionites as a 'tribe' a living cultural relic ... Get into their culture, piece together where they came from, where they lived, their cultural habits. Why isn't this done with the Marcionites? ...

http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... 259#p38259
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

Stephan Huller wrote a year ago -
... the Tertullian corpus ...is made up of reworked editions of other people's writings. Take Against Hermogenes for example. Harnack, Grant, and countless others say it is really based on Theophilus's text of the same name. So too with respect to Against the Valentinians it is based on something written by Irenaeus and which survives in a slightly different form in Adv Haer. Even with respect to Adv Marc look again at the opening words I cited. The author implies that he wrote something that was lost to the heretics and then subsequently rescued. But Harnack, Grant, Quispel all say Book Two derives from Theophilus. Book One is not written by the same author as Book Two. Book Three was copied from the same source as Adv Jud (probably something written by Justin). Book Four and Five were written by the same hand.

The point, of course, is that the five works were not written by one author. No one can possibly claim that. But the introduction attempts to suggest that; even though it is a bald face lie. Tertullian did not 'write' the five books from scratch. I promise you that.

viewtopic.php?p=14653#p14653
and, from his next post on that thread -
... I am so suspicious about the Galatians first ordering in Book Five. It isn't that Marcion's canon was Galatians first. Tertullian is citing from an anti-Marcionite treatise where the author simply follows his own tradition's Galatians first canon and Epiphanius has used much the same source uncritically. There was an orthodox Galatians first canon circulating in Syriac speaking countries which was preceded by a Diatessaronic gospel text - something which also helps explain why Tertullian now claims so many times in the companion work (Book Four) that Marcion has cut out things from 'his gospel' which don't appear in Luke.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Thu Jul 16, 2015 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by MrMacSon »

All these people love to write, write, write about Marcion. But if they really wanted to do a service for [human]kind they would arrange for someone to analyze portions of Ephrem's Against Marcion ...

viewtopic.php?p=21053#p21053
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Recent books & articles about Marcion

Post by DCHindley »

MrMacSon wrote:.
Clayton N. Jefford (2014) The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon by Jason D. BeDuhn (Review)
  • Journal of Early Christian Studies, vol 22, no 3; pp. 471-472.
... a brief excerpt of the content:
Recently renewed interest in Marcion, his history, and contributions to the formation of early ecclesiastical experience provides a ready context for the appearance of this volume. Unlike many other scholars, however, BeDuhn is less attracted to Marcion himself and more to his influence on the development of the Christian canon, stating from the outset that we “know the name of the individual responsible for the first New Testament” (Ultimately, BeDuhn has achieved his goal, providing a useable reconstruction of Marcion’s texts that others will find immediately useful. He is careful to acknowledge that his rendering is sometimes secure and at other times...
Beduhn's book is very interesting, but his organization is unnecessarily hard to grasp. The page numbers are approximate:

Intro (pp 3-10)
Ch 1 Marcion (11-24, with end notes to it way back at pp 321-331)
Ch 2 Marcion's NT (25-62, footnotes 332-345)
Ch 3 Evangelion Introduction (65-98, footnotes 346-356)
Evangelion text (99-127, text notes 128-202)
Ch 4 Apostolikon Introduction (203-228, footnotes 356-361)
Apostolikon text (229-259, text notes 260-320)
Bibliography (363-382)
Index (383-388)

All that bobbing & weaving, ugh! Still, his style is easy going and not hard to understand. Not sure, though, why he decided an English translation of the gist of Marcion's Gospel and Pauline books was better than attempting to reconstruct the Greek text ...

DCH
Last edited by DCHindley on Sat Jul 18, 2015 8:24 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Post Reply