FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-13-2011, 10:43 AM   #111
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default Chapter 5

5:1 In the liberty wherewith Christ made us free, T Gal.5:1 (Tert., AM V.4): qua libertate Christus nos manumisit, ("the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free,")
5:1 and be not entangled again in the weight of slavery. (T) Gal.5:1 (Tert., AM V.4): et merito non decebat manumissos rursus ingo servitutis, id est legis, adstringi, (And it is properly unsuitable for those set free to turn back to slavery, that being to the law, "entangled”).
5:3 But I testify again that a man circumcised E Gal 5: 3 (Epip.) Marturomai de palin oti anqrwpos peritetmhmenos
5:3 is a debtor to fulfil the whole law. E Gal 5: 3 (Epip.) ofeileths estin olon ton nomon plhrwsai.
5:4 Nothing [ comes ] from Christ, [for] whosoever in law are justified - you have fallen from goodness. Gal.5:4 (Tert., AM V.4): De servitute igitur exemptos ipsam servitutis notam eradere perseverabat, circumcisionem... ("All those, therefore, who had been exempted from the yoke of slavery he would earnestly have to obliterate the very mark of slavery, even circumcision..."). i.e., this is Tertullian's smart-ass commentary, not necessarily what is in Marcion’s Galatians. However, W.C. van Manen regarded Tert.'s statement here as reference to an actual passage from Marcion's version, contained in van Manen's 1888 reconstruction of Galatians ( "Marcions Brief van Paulus ann de Galatiers", Theologisch.tijdschrift , vol.21, p.532 ).
5:6 For in Christ neither circumcision makes any impact, nor uncircumcision; T Gal.5:6a (Tert.) cur etiam praeputiationem negat quicquam valere in Christo sicut et circumcisionem? (why therefore uncircumcision if not anything availeth in Christ even as also circumcision?)
5:6 but faith perfected through love. T (Gal.5: 6b) illius fidei quam dicendo per dilectionem perfici - epiteleiqai for energoumenh ("worketh") ?
5:9 A little leaven spoils the whole loaf. E Gal 5: 9 (Epiph.): Anti tou mikra zumh olon to furama zumoi” epoinse “doloi”. Cf. Tert., AM, I.2.
5:10 But he distressing you shall bear the judgement, T/A Gal 5:10 (Tert.) Qui autem turbat vos iudicium feret. (But the one who troubles you shall bear his judgement). (Ad.) Dial.II.5.25: o tarasswn umas bastasei to krima ostis an h . Rufin.: Qui conturbat uos portabit iudicium,
5:10 whosoever he is. A (Rufinus) Gal.5:10 (Ad.) Dial.II.5.25: Rufin.: ... quicumque est ille
5:12 I would also that they castrated themselves (Hier.) Gal.5:12 , Hieronymus (Zahn, p503): Secretly, they say, Peter lacerated ( lacerat) himself, of whom previously he wrote "to the face resisted". (The suggestion here is that Peter had castrated himself)
5:14 For all the law in you is fulfilled: love thy neighbour as thyself. T/E Gal.5:14 (Tert.): tota enim, inquit, lex in vobis adimpleta est: diliges proximum tuum tamquam te. ("For all" says he, "the law in you is fulfilled by this: 'Thou shalt love thy neighhour as thyself.' ") (Epiph): O gar pas nomos umin peplhrwtai. agaphseis ton plhsion sou ws eauton.
5:19 Now manifest are the works of the flesh, which are fornication, uncleanness, wantonness, E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : (19) Fanera de esti ta erga ths sarkos atina esti porneia, akaqarsia, aselgeia,
5:20 idolatry, enchantment, enmities, strifes, jealousies, furies, contentions, divisions, sects, E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : (20) eidwlolatria, farmakeia, ecqrai, ereis, zhloi, qumoi, eriqeiai, dicostasiai, aireseis,
5:21 envies, drunkenness, revels, E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : (21) fonoi, meqai, kwmoi,
5:21 which I predicted to you as I also said before, E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : a prolegw umin, kaqws kai proeipon,
5:21 that whoever does such things E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : oti oi ta toiauta prassontes
5:21 shall not be enjoying God's kingdom. E Gal 5:19-21 (Epiph.) : basileian qeou ou klhronomhsousin.
5:24 But those of the Christ crucified the flesh E Gal 5: 24 (Epiph.): Oi de tou Cristou thn sarka estaurwsan
5:24 together with the passions and desires. E Gal 5: 24 (Epiph.): sun tois paqhmasi kai tais epiqumiais.
DCHindley is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 10:46 AM   #112
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default Chapter 6! Finis

6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, T Gal.6:2 (Tert. AM V.4) onera vestra inuicem sustinete,
6:2 and thus fulfil the law of Christ. T Gal.6:2 (Tert. AM V.4) et sic adimplebitis legem Christi.
6:6 Let him that is taught in the utterance share with him that teaches in all good. (Hier.) Gal.6:6 (Hieronymus): “Marcion so interprets this place, reckoning this should speak of the faith and catechism together, that the master communicated to his disciples, which is indeed to be the maxim carried forth, in respect to that which follows: “ In all good” (In omnibus bonis)”.
6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: T Gal.6:7 (Tert. AM V.4) Eratis, Deus non deridetur..
6:7 for whatsoever a man may sow, that shall he also reap. T/A Gal.6:7 (Tert. AM V.4)...quae enim seminaverit homo, hoc et metet. (Ad.) Dial.II.5.30: a gar ean speirh anqrwpos touto kai qerisei. Rufin: Quodcunque seminauerit homo hoc et metet.
6:8 For he that sows to his own flesh from the flesh shall reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit from the Spirit shall reap life eternal. (T) Gal.6:8-10,(Tert. AM V.4): (v8,alluded): porro si retributionem praedicat, ab eodem et corruptionis messis et vitae. (Again if he stated beforehand retribution, from the same also the harvest [or, the reaping] of corruption and life).
6:9 But let us not become weary in doing good: (T) Gal.6:8-10,(Tert. AM V.4): (9) bonum autem facientes non fatigemur...
6:9 but in due season we shall reap, (T) Gal.6:8-10,(Tert. AM V.4): (9) ... tempore autem suo metemus.
6:10 As we might have opportunity, let us do good. (T) Gal.6:8-10,(Tert. AM V.4): (10) dum habemus tempus, operemur bonum.
6:12 only they are persecutors of the cross of Christ. (T??) Gal.6:12b (Tert. AM V.4): persecutores vacat Christi, rebuked by Paul in 6:12-14. Cf. also "the others" in 6:17. diwktous for diwkwntai? Such would seem possible if Tert.'s testimony is considered alone.
6:13 For neither they who are themselves circumcised are maintaining law, E Gal 6: 13 (Epiph.): Oude gar oi peritetmhmenoi autoi nomon fulassousi.
6:14 Yet also to me is the world crucified, T Gal.6:14 (Tert. AM V.4): Sed et mihi … mundus crucifixus est,
6:14 and I to the world. T Gal.6:14 (Tert. AM V.4): … et ego mundo.
6:17 As for all the others, not without reason I cause nuisance! A 57 Gal 6:17 (Ad.) Dial.V.22.15-17 : twn d allwn [ allwn for loipou ] eikh copous moi undeis parecesqw. Rufin.: De caetero [ "the rest"= loipou ] nemo mihi molestus sit.
6:17 For I carry the scars of (Jesus) Christ in my body. A(T) 57 Gal 6:17 (Tert. AM V.4) cum vero adicit stigmata Christi in corpore suo gestare se. (Ad.) Dial.V.22.15-17 : egw gar ta stigmata tou Ihsou en tw swmati mou bastazw. Rufin.: Ego enim stigmata domini nostri Iesu Christi in corpore meo porto.

Amen. Now, maybe we will finally hear some commentary that does not include blind speculation that merely supports our romantic preconceived notions about Marcion. Maybe we can cast off the veil that covers our eyes, and ascent to the 3rd heaven and behold god!

Naaaaaaaaah!

DCH
DCHindley is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 11:17 AM   #113
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

I will develop some comments later. I appreciate all the work and am working on a paper on this very subject. But you already know I think it is pointless to pretend that Tertullian and Epiphanius actually have the Apostolikon sitting in front of them as they wrote this stuff out. They are working from a text (probably a Greek translation of a Syriac original) that they received fourth or fifth hand (cf. Against Marcion 1:1) where polemic and original analysis (if there ever was any) ended up getting hopelessly intertwined together to the point that we simply can't tell when the original author (i.e. not Tertullian and not Epiphanius but their source) is witnessing a Marcionite reading. I am not so sure how accurate a reflection of the Apostolikon any of this is.

I just started a post on Schmid's and Clabeaux's analysis (did you know Clabeaux probably lives less than 30 minutes from you? He's from Columbus - just called him yesterday with a question). I think its stupid that Schmid should dismiss Adamantius because it's been used more than a whore in Tijuana but keeps Tertullian and Epiphanius as if they are somehow better. They're both corrupt witnesses.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 11:32 AM   #114
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default For the table challenged among us ...

In case all that looking at 6 pages of tables is too much eyestrain, here is Galations in regular everyday sentences and paragraphs.

Actually makes a bit of sense, and I can see where Platonic/Gnostic ideas might be manifested here, but there are also other passages that don't seem to fit right.
Marcionite Galatians per Mahar

1:1 Paul an apostle, 1:1 not of men nor through man, T 1:1 but through Jesus Christ, T 1:1 who awakened himself from the dead; 2 (Hier.) 1:6 I marvel that you are so quickly transferred T 1:6 from Him Who called you in His goodness T 1:6 unto a different gospel: T 1:7 Which is not entirely another T/A 1:7 according to my gospel ; A/O/Chrys. 1:7 but there are some who trouble you A 1:7 and would change (you) A Ephr. 1:7 unto a different gospel of Christ. A

1:8 But even if an angel out of heaven T 1:8 should announce another gospel [to you], T 1:8 let him be accursed! T 1:9 As I said before, so I say now again, 1:9 If any one announces another gospel to you A(Rufin.) 1:9 let him be accursed. A(Rufin.)

1:15 But when was well-pleased, A 1:15 the (Supreme) God A. 1:15 having selected me A 1:15 from my mother's womb, A 1:16 immediately I did not confer with flesh and blood. Hier. 2:1 I went up to Jerusalem; T 2:1 After fourteen years T 2:2 and I set before them T 2:2 the canon of the gospel T 2:2 (fearing) that for nothing (T) 2:2 I should go or had gone (T)

2:3 But not even Titus, T 2:3 who was with me, T 2:3 being a Greek, T 2:3 was compelled to be circumcised: T 2:4 But because of those who crept in T 2:4 to spy out this liberty of ours T 2:4 which we enjoy in Christ, T 2:4 so that they might enslave us - T 2:5 To these not even for an hour T 2:9d Gave to [me] the right hands of fellowship, T 2:9b Peter and James and John, T 2:9c who seemed to be pillars, T 2:9e that [I] should go unto the Gentiles, T 2:9f and they unto the circumcision: T 2:10 Only that he should be mindful of the poor T

2:11 I confronted Peter to the face, [for he was acting contrary to the good news] T 2:11 because he was to be blamed. (T) 2:12 being afraid of those of the circumcision. T 2:14 When I saw they walked not honestly T 2:16 Not by the works of the law, is a man justified but by the faith. T

2:18 Because if I build again those things T 2:18 which I overthrew, T 2:20 That life which I now live in the flesh A 2:20 I live by the faith of the Son of God, A 2:20 who ransomed himself for me. A

3:1 O senseless Galatians - (T) 3:1 who bewitched you ? (T) 3:1 Jesus Christ was long portrayed as crucified (Hier.) (3:6 - 3:9) Omitted (Hier) 10+12 Learn that the righteous by faith shall live. E/T 3:10 All those under the Law are under a curse; E 3:10 and the one doing those things lives in them. E 3:13 The Christ ransomed us A/(Hier.) 3:13 Being made a curse for us; (T) 3:13 "Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree". T/E 3:14 14b We receive therefore the blessing of the Spirit through faith, T 3:26 For all, you are sons by the faith. T 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Eznik?)

3:15 As a man I say, T 4:3 when we were barely-born, T 4:3 we were enslaved T 4:3 under the elements of the cosmos. T 4:4 But when the fulness of the time came, T 4:4 God sent forth his Son, T/(Hier.) 4:5 That he might purchase those under law, T 4:5 and that we may receive adoption. (A) 4:6 God sent forth the Spirit of his Son T 4:6 into your hearts, crying, T 4:6 "Abba, Father". T 4:8 How is it then, when ye knew not God, (T) 4:8 you served those which are nature- gods, T 4:9 to the weak and beggarly elements, T 4:10 Ye observe days and months and times and years. T

4:19 My children, (T) 4:19 of whom I travail in birth again (T) 4: 22 For Abraham had two sons, T 4:22 the one by a slave-maid, the other by a free-woman. T 4:23 But he who was of the slave-woman was born after the flesh; T 4:23 but he of the free-woman was by promise. T/E 4:24 This is allegorized: T/(Hier.) 4;24 these are two covenants (revelations), T 4:24 indeed the one from Mount Sinai T 4:24 +is the synagogue of the Jews, T 4:24 giving birth, into slavery; T 4:25 ?? (Ephr.) 4:26 The other gives birth into freedom, (Ephr.) [Eph. 1:21] Above every Principality, Power, Dominion, of every name that is named, not only in this destiny, but also in that which is to come T 4:26 -the holy assembly promised to us, which is our “mother”. T 4:31 We are not children of the slave-woman, but of the free. T 5:1 In the liberty wherewith Christ made us free, T 5:1 and be not entangled again in the weight of slavery. (T)

5:3 But I testify again that a man circumcised E 5:3 is a debtor to fulfil the whole law. E 5:4 Nothing [ comes ] from Christ, [for] whosoever in law are justified - you have fallen from goodness. 5:6 For in Christ neither circumcision makes any impact, nor uncircumcision; T 5:6 but faith perfected through love. T 5:9 A little leaven spoils the whole loaf. E 5:10 But he distressing you shall bear the judgement, T/A 5:10 whosoever he is. A (Rufinus) 5:12 I would also that they castrated themselves (Hier.)

5:14 For all the law in you is fulfilled: love thy neighbour as thyself. T/E 5:19 Now manifest are the works of the flesh, which are fornication, uncleanness, wantonness, E 5:20 idolatry, enchantment, enmities, strifes, jealousies, furies, contentions, divisions, sects, E 5:21 envies, drunkenness, revels, E 5:21 which I predicted to you as I also said before, E 5:21 that whoever does such things E 5:21 shall not be enjoying God's kingdom. E 5:24 But those of the Christ crucified the flesh E 5:24 together with the passions and desires. E 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, T 6:2 and thus fulfil the law of Christ. T

6:6 Let him that is taught in the utterance share with him that teaches in all good. (Hier.) 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: T 6:7 for whatsoever a man may sow, that shall he also reap. T/A 6:8 For he that sows to his own flesh from the flesh shall reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit from the Spirit shall reap life eternal. (T)

6:9 But let us not become weary in doing good: (T) 6:9 but in due season we shall reap, (T) 6:10 As we might have opportunity, let us do good. (T) 6:12 only they are persecutors of the cross of Christ. (T??) 6:13 For neither they who are themselves circumcised are maintaining law, E 6:14 Yet also to me is the world crucified, T 6:14 and I to the world. T

6:17 As for all the others, not without reason I cause nuisance! A 6:17 For I carry the scars of (Jesus) Christ in my body. A(T)
DCH
DCHindley is offline  
Old 11-13-2011, 11:50 AM   #115
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Stephen,

I throw it out for discussion, and I did use cautious language. Learning what someone was supposed to have believed and wrote, based only on often straw-man characterizations of their enemies, is always iffy.

However, although dirt is rubbing off their picture of the Marcionite version of this letter, I am not quite ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
A mother was bathin' her baby one night
The youngest of ten, a poor little mite
The mother was fat and the baby was fin
T'was nawt but a skellington wrapped up in skin

The mother turned round for the soap from the rack
She weren't gone a minute, but when she got back
Her baby had gone, and in anguish she cried
"Oh, where is my baby?", and the angels replied

Your baby has gorn dahn the plug'ole
Your baby has gorn dahn the plug
The poor little thing was so skinny and thin
He shoulda been bathed in a jug

Your baby is perfik'ly happy
He won't need no bathin' no more
He's workin' his way through the sewers
Not lost, just gone on before

Your baby has gorn dahn the drainpipe
And the chlorine is bad for his eyes
He's havin' a swim, and it's healthy for him
He needed the exercise

Don't worry 'baht 'im, just be 'appy
For I know he is suff'rin' no pain
Your baby has gorn dahn the plug'ole
Let's hope he don't stop up the drain
DCH

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephan huller View Post
I will develop some comments later. I appreciate all the work and am working on a paper on this very subject. But you already know I think it is pointless to pretend that Tertullian and Epiphanius actually have the Apostolikon sitting in front of them as they wrote this stuff out. They are working from a text (probably a Greek translation of a Syriac original) that they received fourth or fifth hand (cf. Against Marcion 1:1) where polemic and original analysis (if there ever was any) ended up getting hopelessly intertwined together to the point that we simply can't tell when the original author (i.e. not Tertullian and not Epiphanius but their source) is witnessing a Marcionite reading. I am not so sure how accurate a reflection of the Apostolikon any of this is.

I just started a post on Schmid's and Clabeaux's analysis (did you know Clabeaux probably lives less than 30 minutes from you? He's from Columbus - just called him yesterday with a question). I think its stupid that Schmid should dismiss Adamantius because it's been used more than a whore in Tijuana but keeps Tertullian and Epiphanius as if they are somehow better. They're both corrupt witnesses.
DCHindley is offline  
Old 11-14-2011, 08:51 AM   #116
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dixon CA
Posts: 1,150
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv View Post
Marcion's gospel was a substratum of Luke. Canonical Luke is a redacted verion of Marcion's gospel. Whatever the actual percentages, a major portion of the Lukan Sondergut can be viewed as anti-Marcionite material. This includes the nativity and the anti-docetic resurrection appearances. The Sondergut also tends to make Jesus appear more Jewish. (John Knox). The best explanation to me is that most of the Sondergut was added last. In other words, the ecclesiastical redactor added anti-Marcionite material to Marcion's gospel. Hence, Marcion’s gospel was more original than the catholic/canonical version.

It is possible that Marcion's gospel was a source for both canonical Luke and canonical Matthew. Matthias Klinghardt has suggested this solution to the synoptic problem with Marcion's gospel at an early stage (and no Q!). “The Marcionite Gospel and the Synoptic: A New Suggestion,” NovT 50 (2008): 1-27. This solves quite a few of the synoptic problems that plague both the Two Document Hypothesis and the Farrer/Goulder/Goodacre alternative.
I asked Dr. Mark Goodacre if he was familiar with Klinghardt's work, and he replied that he was, and "found it stimulating even if ... not yet persuaded by it. "

Probably no simplified solution to the synoptic problem can be more than an approximation. It may be that the priority of Mark only indicates that canonical Mark more closely reflects an urgospel than canonical Luke and canonical Matthew. This was Lachman’s observation so many years ago, and the so called “Lachmann Fallacy” is itself a misunderstanding by those (B. C. Butler, W. R. Farmer, Matthew priortists et. al.) who thoroughly misinterpreted Lachmann’s work.

A recent trend is to return to the later dates for the New Testament texts already established by 19th century rationalism. Richard Pervo has demonstrated a strong case that Acts is a second century composition. Joseph Tyson has presented a plausible case that Luke/Acts were composed in response to Marcion, with canonical Luke being a redaction of Marcion's gospel. Indeed, no one had ever mentioned a gospel attributed to Luke before Irenaeus about 180 CE.

We may have a hint of this when Tertillian accused Marcion of omitting "M" material from his gospel! If Klinghardt is correct, the need for an unknown "Q" document (and all the hypothetical communities created to write it) disappear.

Best Regards,
Jake
I have now read the 2008 Novum Testamentum article by Klinghardt touted above. It is not represented as a solution to the Synoptic Problem, but as a suggestion that Klinghardt himself admits he has not fully thought out. He presents no evidence that Marcion affected gMatthew, even though he includes a diagram that shows that it did.
That gLuke is a redaction of Marcion is not any conclusion of mid-19th Century Rationalism, just Baur's. Tyson and Klinghardt want us to go back to the opinion in 1852 of one scholar who held to what all his fellows abandoned. That's the history of science; the old men cling to disproven views that the young men overturned.
Adam is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 10:22 PM   #117
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dixon CA
Posts: 1,150
Default

Joseph Tyson has many scholarly publications, I learned from the July 2008 review In Catholic Biblical Quarterly by David M. Scholer of his Marcion and LUke-Acts. However, his severely late dates are based solely on Knox and Pervo. Dieter Roth shot down Knox, so how good is Pervo?
Adam is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 10:54 PM   #118
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

DCH

For what it's worth I told Trobisch I am working on a paper to demolish the construction of his friend Ulrich Schmid. I told him my methodology and my line of attack. He sounded approving. I think he knows how much bullshit there is in all this. It doesn't make sense. Show me one line anywhere in Tertullian that says he has the Apostolikon.
stephan huller is offline  
Old 11-20-2011, 12:16 AM   #119
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Joseph Tyson has many scholarly publications, I learned from the July 2008 review In Catholic Biblical Quarterly by David M. Scholer of his Marcion and LUke-Acts. However, his severely late dates are based solely on Knox and Pervo. Dieter Roth shot down Knox, so how good is Pervo?
It is not clear to me that Dieter Roth "shot down" Knox. I haven't read through everything, but it appears that the most that Roth established was that there was no consensus of earlier German scholars on a late date for Acts.

Richard Pervo has devoted his scholarly life to Acts. He dates it to about 110 CE, which is not a severely late date - I think other scholars have dated it to 150 CE or later.
Toto is offline  
Old 11-20-2011, 01:41 AM   #120
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
Default

Aside from the hyperbole, I think this recent post at my blog is pretty important to help identify Irenaeus as Tertullian's source for Books Four and Five and most importantly that Irenaeus wasn't actually citing from the Marcionite Bible directly but - curiously - from what Irenaeus's says 'is the portion of the original scriptures' that Marcion retained

http://stephanhuller.blogspot.com/20...ence-that.html
stephan huller is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:43 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.