DCHindley

DCH,

First thing I notice is that there are significant differences between van Manen's reconstruction, which my pree-cise research establishes was published as "Marcions Brief van Paulus aan de Galatiers" in Theologisch tijdschrift, Leiden, vol.21 (1887), pp.528-533, and Translated into English by D. J. Mahar (1998), and Mahar's own reconstruction, which I have determined with accuracy to have come from a PDF available from Detering's web site, entitled English Reconstruction and Translation of Marcion's version of To The Galatians, by Daniel Jon Mahar, dated Dec. 28, 2000.

As you say, you ignorant fool, any interpretation must take into account the fact that any hint of judgement, justice or wrath associated with God must be associated with Marcion's Just Creator God. References to God the Father or some combination of Lord and/or Jesus with Christ most likely refers to the son of Marcion's Good God. The word Christ alone may refer to the Jewish messiah, which Marcion acknowledged was to come according to the plan of the Creator God.

Duh.

As you blindly include Mahar's note numbers in your third column, why don't you include his footnotes, which refer to these very doctrines?

Notes:
1 Set first in Marcion’s canon, Galatians contains ideas central to Marcion’s theology, i.e., of Gospel vs. Law, of a true Apostle (Paul) vs. “false” apostles (Peter , James and John). This was proabaly the first pauline writing to which Marcion was exposed in his native Pontus . The first bishop of that region, Philologus (cf. Rom.15:15) - possibly Marcion's father - was reported to have been a personal friend of Paul's (p.vii, The Gospel of the Lord, James Hamlyn Hill).
2 Christ raised himself from the dead, the first of many such modalistic expressions present in Marcion’s text.
3 Gal 1:4 “that he might deliver (or, extract) us from this present evil aeon”: Joseph Turmel (Ecrits, vol. III, p.82ff) sites the strong marcionite tendency underlying this passage, suggesting this was originally a marcionite redaction, yet without the “present aeon” (being a later catholic addition) to read: “that he might extract us from the Evil”, or the “Evil one”(cf. Jn.17:15 Eph.6:13). The word “present" indeed stands unattested in the Syriac Peshitta text, but the suggestion that “aeon” is a later insertion is unneccessary if interpreted as a representation of the creator god as was by marcionites with 2Cor.4:4, Eph.2:2, rather than a literal “age”. Turmel refers to Tertullian twice, AM I.23 ( “Such a deliverer...kidnapper...is the character of Marcion’s God, swooping upon an alien world, snatching away man from his God...”) and AM I.25 : “...the good God, in coming to combat sin and death, is of neccessity indisposed against the creator God who is sovereign lord of sin and death, accordingly more so that the good God came to deliver man from the creator God. Thus the marcionite Christ came...to “extract” them...He is given “for our sins” because he delivered us from the death to which the Evil one had condemned us because of our sins...” (Turmel, ibid).
4 Gal 1:7 Origen, ( Comm. in John, V.): “ ...[When] the Apostle says: "According to my Gospel in Christ Jesus;" he does not speak of Gospels in the plural...”. Gal.1:7b, “and would change you unto a different gospel...” cf. Ephrem’s text and Dialogues : (Der Paulustext, Molitor, p.72): You” in Ephr.’s text was the object of the “changing” or “perverting”, not the gospel.
5 Gal.1:13-14 - Tertullian (AM V.1): “Even the book of Genesis promised me the apostle Paul...that Paul would arise out of the tribe of Benjamen, a voracious wolf...as a persecutor of the churches”. But Tert. continues: “Should you disapprove of these types, the Acts of the Apostles...have handed me this career of Paul, which you should not refuse to accept. Thence I demonstrate that from a persecutor he became an apostle...thence do I find reason for rejecting your defence of him”. Herein lies a possible implication that Marcion may not have accepted the portrayal of Paul as a former “persecutor” of the churches, a point which Tertullian is preoccupied to emphasize especially. Marcion either rejected or did not know the book of Acts, at least in the orthodox form which has come down to us. An interesting proposal was set forth by P.L. Couchoud and R.Stahl that Acts was the result of 2 authors, the premier edition consisting of the travels of Paul, occurring mostly in the 2nd half of the book - and the second edition, being the work of an orthodox redactor, who added the material about the 12 apostles (see “Les Deux Auteurs des Actes des Apotres”, Premier Ecrits du Christianisme). A common theory is that the epistle to Galatians underwent orthodox re-editing to comply it to the history in Acts.
6 Gal.2:2 Couchoud’s rendering: Do I run, or have I run in vain? - not a statement of self -doubt by Paul insofar as his own ministry was concerned, but concerning the coarse of action he was pursuing in going to the Jerusalem apostles- would they be receptive to Paul’s gospel? Or would Paul be wasting his time?
7 Gal.2:9b-10 Hieronymous/ Ambrosiaster/Victorinus and some Greek texts (D,G) all attest to the order of the names, “Peter, James and John” (Zahn, Geschichte, p.499). Such a reading strongly suggests James, (of the triad “Peter, James and John” which appears throughout the synoptic gospels ), the brother of John, who together comprise “the sons of thunder”; one legend has it that when James was executed by Herod in Acts 12, John was executed along with him. (see Enigma of the Fourth Gospel, chaps.15-16,pp.64f; Eisler). If this John was the actual writer of Revelation, then Revelation (at least in a more primitive form) dates back much earlier than assumed.
8 Following Couchoud (The Creation of Christ, v.I, p.53), the sarcastic tone of 2:9b is in keeping with the sense of the context (2:6, “those reputed to be something”, 2:9 those “who consider themselves pillars”), in which there is little justification for switching to a concilatory tone as so oft construed, so that Paul was solemnly bestowed the right hand of the Church. Note : “those reputed (dokountwn) to be something”(v.6) = those reputed (dokountej) to be pillars (v.9, Peter, James, and John), "conferred nothing to me," aside from the empty gesture of the “hand of fellowship” .
9 Gal.2:18 “[those things ] which I pulled down” -what were those things which Paul "destroyed"? The church? -a very tempting possibility, which would resolve the question of authenticity concerning the portrayal of Paul as “persecutor of the churches” in Gal.2:13. Or may those things overthrown represent the OT law and it’s commandments, replaced by the “law of Christ” (Gal.2:19; 6:2; Lao.2:15)?
10 Gal.2:19 - “by [His] law to the [OT] law” = “the law of Christ” (Gal.6:2). cf. Lao.2:15; Col.2:14 ([SyP].).
11 Gal 2:20 Christ “gave himself” as the ransom-price- a doctrinal keystone with Marcion. Eznik (Against Sects): “ [Jesus] took Paul and revealed to him the victory, and sent him to preach, that we were bought with a price, and that all who believes on Jesus, were sold by the Just [God] to the Good [God]”.He bought us evidently as strangers, for no one ever purchases those who belong to him”.
12 Gal.3:1b Hieronymous VII,4:18 (Zahn, Geschichte, p499): “to proegrafe which he covers on the prediction of the OT: “Interrogemus ergo hoc loco Marcionem, qui prophetas repudiat, quomodo interpretetur id quod sequitur”, namely, 3:1”. proegrafe = interpretetur, “openly-portayed”, or “setforth”. conjectural reading: “by those[ or by one] whose before whose eyes” are those who saw Christ crucified” = the Jerusalem apostles.
13 Gal.3:6-9: Hieronymus VII,4:22 (Zahn, Geschichte, p.499 “From this place all the way up to where it is written “they which are of the faith, are blessed with faithful Abraham” (v.9), Marcion erased from his apostle...”. Tert., AM V.3: “...it becomes clear that what the heretic’s industry erased was the mention of Abraham’s name...” [thus missing was 3:6, 8, 9,14a, 16, 18, 29]; (AM V.4): “the last mention of Abraham’s name [4:22] he has left untouched”.
14 Gal 3:11 Note the train of thought with 3:2 ,“This only I wish to learn of you”, and 3:10, “Learn that (etc.). the righteous by faith shall live”. Tert, AM V.3 : quia iustus ex fide vivit (the just out of faith shall live).
15 Gal 3:13a Hieronymus: (Harnack, Beil.III, p73): “In this place Marcion concerning the power of the [cruel] creator...claimed we were ransomed by Christ (nos redemptos esse per Christum), who was the son of the other, good God.
16 Gal.3:10-26 - On the “blessing of the spirit”, Couchoud ( Le Premier Edition de Saint Paul ) writes: “The thought is clear. The Christ, hung at the tree and becoming an accursed object, took on the glory of the ancient curse. Immediately we arrive to a blessing which does not apply to the flesh but to the spirit, for in it consists of becoming spiritual sons of God...The [orthodox] edition brings into this passage the blessing given to Abraham (3:6-9).Then it attenuates, in the first line “all those who are under the law” with “all those who are under the curse of the law”. Then it disassociates “the blessing” and “the spirit”. The blessing becomes the one given to Abraham; the spirit becomes the Holy Ghost which descent is reported in Acts. Finally the theme of the blessing to Abraham is developed in eleven verses, to the conclusion.”
Gal.3:21-28 - J.Turmel (Ecrits de St.Paul, v.III,p87) thought to see an incompatibility between those passages concerning“the blessing of Abraham” (3:6-9,14,15-18) and those where the Law served as a “pedagogue”(3:21-28) until the coming of faith, in that the conditions for becoming “sons of God” and “sons of Abraham” differed from one another: with one, the terms are based upon the blessing and promise made to Abraham’s posterity in Genesis, while with the other, by virtue of a “faith to come” escorted by the accompaniment of transgression and Law. In fact, both lines of thought concerning the “blessing of Abraham” and the portrayal of the law as “pedagogue” seem to interrupt the clear train of those lines known to have stood with Marcion. The pedagogual law passages may be a catholic expansion specifically designed to defuse the harsh “curse of the law” and the “elements of the cosmos”(4:3f) passages, to establish against Marcion the providence of the OT Law. It is tempting to believe that Marcion would have found much to use with 3:19 where the law is given by angels, but there’s no indication that he even knew this, and again, 3:19 would interrupt the order of 3:10-12/13/14b/26. The orthodox insertion of the law given by angels (which shares a parallel in Heb.2:2 - the same redactor? ) was originally intended in a positive sense, to convey that the law was only imperfect in the manner in which it was delivered and prescribed, via means of angelic overseers. Needless to say, this catholic interpolation backfired somewhat when the gnostics got a hold of it .
17 Gal.3:15/Gal.4:3 (Tert.,AM V.4):secundum hominem dico: dum essemus parvuli, sub elementis mundi eramus positi ad deseruiendum eis. A natural opening to this section of chapter 4 , w/o vv.1-2. The “Elements of the cosmos”: In reference to angelic beings, evil “matter”, or “rules”. see next page. 18 Gal.4:4 (Tert, AM V.4): cum autem evenit impleri tempus, misit Deus Filium suum. Missing : “made of a woman”, according to Hieronymus, Gal4:4 (p431, Zahn) : Diligenter adtendite, quod non dixit “factum per mulierem”, quod Marcion et ceterae haereses volunt, qui putativam Christi carnem simulant, sed “ex muliere” ut non per illam, sed ex illa natus esse credatur.
19 Gal.4:6 (Tert., AM V.4): misit spiritum suum in corda nostra clamantem: Abba Pater.
20 Gal.4:8-10 An allusion to Genesis 1:14? -( proposed by David Anderson). Gal.4:3-9, THE ELEMENTS OF THE COSMOS (στοιχεαῖ (sic) τοῦ κόσμου) : How did Marcion Interpret this ? Possible interpretations:
a) elements = spirit beings: in both pagan and Jewish cosmologies the forces of nature were in some manner deified; while asserted by some scholars that Gal.4:1ff is concerned only with former pagans, sufficient evidence exists via the OT peudepigrapha concerning angelic forces which govern natural forces to support including adherents of a Jewish background into the scope of Paul’s discussion as well. In Jubilees (2:1f ) we read of “the angels of the spirit of fire..of the wind...of the clouds of darkness...of hail and hoarfrost...of the abysses...of thunder and lightning”, etc.; I Enoch 59:15,20-23, “the spirit of the sea...of the frost...of hail...of snow...of mist...of dew...of rain...”. From II Enoch (16:7): “..and spirits, and elements, and flying angels” (also 12:1;15:1; 19:3; 23). Test. of Sol. (8:2):”We are heavenly elements (esmen stoicheia), rulers of this world of darkness”. see p.969-70, n.8a. in O.T.Pseudepigrapha, v.1, Charlesworth. II Enoch (prologue): “...of the incorporal hosts, and of the ineffable ministrations of the multitude of the elements...”. Hymn I (Qumran scrolls): “Thou hast created all the spirits and hast established a statute and law for all their works...the mighty winds...the stars...the clouds...the thunderbolts and lightnings...treasuries of snow and hail...”. This concept of elements may also apply to the 7 angels in Rev.16, exercising God’s wrath “upon the earth”(v2), “the sea” (v3), “the rivers and fountains of waters” (v4), “the sun...(v8), “the air” (v17) “thunders, and lightnings, and a great earthquake” (v18), “great hailstones out of heaven”; also “the angel of waters” (v5). This account in John’s Revelation may be all the more pertinent if this circulated in a primitive redaction at the time Paul wrote Galatians, raising the possibility that he was replying to this work ; thus his warning against “another gospel”, if even from “an angel from heaven”(Gal.1:6-8), precisely the source of John’s revelation (Rev.1:1;22:8). Note Jesus’ rebuke of James and John (“the sons of thunder”, so aptly named) in Lk.9:54-55.
Gal.4:8- “ye served those which are in nature (natura) gods” - “nature-gods”? The latin natura can also mean element.
Gal.4:9b- “weak and beggardly elements”-Due to the loss of their authority over the christian as a result of Christ’s cosmic victory over them, the elements are likened to the souls of men which lose their power at death; a common Heb. name for ghosts is rephiam, “feeble ones” ( p.237, L.B.Paton, Spiritism and the Cult of the Dead in Antiquity, 1921).
b) elements = evil matter: Joseph Turmel (Ecrits, v.III, p74): “The cruel god who created the world had also made men the slaves of matter...the stoicheai tou kosmou...designates the material world which the dualistic philosophy held in horror”. Tertullian many times sites the marcionites’ disdain for the creator’s works, but the best known:“To be sure” they say, “the world is a grand production, worthy of a god”(AM, I.13);“Even this handiwork of our God will please you, inasmuch as your own lord, that better god...for your sakes was at pains of descending from the third heaven to these poverty-stricken elements, and for the same reason was actually crucified in this sorry cell of the creator” (AM I.14). In the later marcionite myth reported by Eznik, the world was a joint production of both the Creator and Hyle (matter), and in their competition for worship, “Hyle filled the world with idolatry, so men ceased to adore the Lord of creation”, resulting in the woes of the human race ( pp 246-48, GRS Mead, Fragments of a Faith Forgotten). Cp. also Gal.1:4, “evil aeon”.
c) elements = rules, laws, rudimentary principles : Tertullian (AM V.4): “By the Romans, however, the rudiments of learning are wont to be called elements. He did not seek, by any depreciation of the mundane elements, to turn them away from their God..(Gal.4:9b)...he censured the error of that of physical and natural superstition which holds the elements to be a God. He tells us clearly enough what he means by elements, even the rudiments of the law: “ye observe days, and months, and times, and years” - the sabbaths I suppose, and “the preparations”, and the fasts, and the “high days”...” Initially, one may receive the general impression that this is only Tertullian’s own interpretation, rather than Marcion’s . Seemingly 4:9b (“gods”) presents difficulty for this interpretation being strictly the case. Nonetheless, the interpretation of elements = rudiments, or laws, finds support elsewhere in the NT (Heb.5:12, “the elements of God’s word”; Col. 2:8, “...human tradition, the elements of the cosmos...”;Col 2:20 “since you died with Christ to the elements of the cosmos...why...do you submit to its rules?”; nonetheless there’s much in this same section of Col. which would lend support for elements = spirit beings (Col. 2:15, “principalities and powers”, and 2:18, “worship of angels”).
Which interpretation did Marcion hold ? Given the strength of all three interpretations above, it is tempting to consider that “elements” may have encompassed all three. But the third, elements = rudiments, gains serious momentum on the basis of Marcion’s reconstructed text. . 4:3-10 complements and even mirrors those ideas already expressed in 3:10/12 to 3:14b/26, which in turn, leaves little room for the “law delivered by angels/ law as pedagogue” (3:19-4:2) material; 4:1-2 (in agreement with Zahn, opposite Harnack), had to be missing, considering the combined 3:15/4:3 as it stood in the text. 3:19-4:2 is an orthodox interpolation, designed to water down the text’s harsh portrayal of the law as a curse, by which all were enslaved all to it’s precepts, and to re-assert the OT as imperfect only insofar as it’s angelic system of delivery and execution was concerned, thereby preserving the Law’s providence. When a marcionite read stoicheai tou kosmou , he/she understood “precepts of the creator-god”, permitting that κοσμος is also a synonym for αιονος = OT god.
21 Gal:4:22-23 (Tert.V.4), “the last mention of Abraham's name he left untouched” :
22 Gal.4:24-25 Hieronymus, VII.473 (Zahn, p.502):“Here Marcion and Manichaeus, where the apostle said “which is allegorical”(quae sunt allegorica) and the rest which follows, hesitate not to remove from their codices, thinking the opposite we bequeath, that it is obviously the law which is understood, what is written”.
23 “promises” - Harnack proposed “exhibitions” (Couchoud, "manifestations"); Zahn suggested “promises” (Geschichte, p.502: “επαγγελλεσθαι must set the basis for the repromittere, as επαγγελια = repromissio. It should recall with the Tanfgelubde to cf. Ignatius S.509of, Caspari, Quellen zu Gesch.d.Taufsymbols I.26;63”.
24 The insertion of Eph.1:21 at this place is also also attested with Ephrem (Comm.in Epistolas d. Paul, p.298), as noted by Clabeaux (p.3, A Lost Edition of the Letters of Paul), though inconvieniently overlooked in Molitor’s reconstruction of Ephrem.
25 Gal.4:31 (Tert.V.4): “by reason of which he adds in conclusion”: fratres, non sumus ancillae filii, sed liberae. PL Couchoud, from The Premier Edition de St.Paul, notes the inconsistancies in the orthodox version of Gal.4:46-31: “[The Apostolikon version of 4:24-31] opposes, by two mystical plans, the synogogue of the Jews and the holy church. The [orthodox version] pretends to save the Jews. It replaces the two “manifestations”...radically different, by two “alliances” [ “testaments”] and, in the end, with two Jerusalems. It confuses in striving to explain how Agar, mother of the pagan Arabs, nevertheless represents the Jews. Finally it is no longer the law and grace which are opposed, nor even two alliances, but the Jerusalem slave of the Romans and the Jerusalem on high described in the Apocalypse (Rev.). This perspective is completely warped....”.
26 Gal.5:6a (Tert.) illius fidei quam dicendo per dilectionem perfici (that faith which he says by love is perfected).
27 Gal.5:10 (Tert.) Qui autem turbat vos iudicium feret. (But the one who troubles you shall bear his judgement).
28 Gal.5:12 , Hieronymus (Zahn, p503): Secretly, they say, Peter lacerated ( lacerat), of whom previously he wrote to the face resisted.
29 [Missing!]
30 Gal 5: 24 It is tempting to consider the possibility that 5:19-21, attested by Epiphanius, as a later interpolation, in view of how well the order of passages ( 5:14/6:2) work together if following only Tertullian’s witness: (5:14) For all the law in you is fulfilled: love thy neighbour as thyself. (6:2 ) Bear ye one another's burdens, and thus fulfil the law of Christ. The problem, however, is that 5:19-21 may just as easily be considered a marcionite addition as a Catholic insertion. Indeed, such was Turmel’s opinion (Ecrits, v.III, p.80ff), holding that 5:13-26; 6:7-10 was of marcionite origin, as indicated by “chastity” in v.23 (in view of the celibacy practiced by marcionites), and of the (heavenly) “Kingdom of God” (v.21) promised to the servants of the spirit - “eternal life” (6:8), but without a resurrection of the flesh. The internal, human qualities listed as fruit of the spirit would certainly be considered characteristically Pauline, in contrast to the external, heavy, violent, Holy Spirit characteristic of the Jerusalem apostles in Acts, as noted by Couchoud and Stahl (p.185, “Les deux auteurs des Actes”, Premiers Ecrits).
31 Gal.6:2 “The law of Christ”: the body of those precepts declared in the “Sermon on the Mount”(Lk.6:17ff) abolished the creator’s law: “Having abolished the law of commandments by His own precepts (dogmasi, Laod.2:15).
32 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)”.
33 Gal.6:8-10, Considering the frequency of the word “good” in this section (6:6, 9, 10 ), it is not difficult to see why Turmel (n.45) regarded these passages a marcionite addition !
34 Gal.6:13b (also 6:12, 14; cp. Phil.3:18): Tertullian (AM V.4) makes mention of ."persecutors of Christ" (persecutores vacat Christi), which must allude those rebuked by Paul in 6:12-14. Cp. also 6:17.
35 Gal 6:17 “the others” = the Jerusalem apostles : “The corrector lenified, by suppressing “cause” and by replacing “the others” with “the rest”. “Henceforth I cause no one nuisance”. -PL Couchoud, Le Premier Edition de St.Paul.

Oh, and his source symbols:

The abbreviations which occur most often:
T.- Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem, Bk.V.
E. - Epiphanius, Adversus Haeresies, Section.42.
A.- Adamantius, Dialog (Parts I, II, V).
Rufin - Rufinus' Latin version of Adamantius' Dialog.
O. - Origen
Hier.- Hieronymus, cited from the notes of Zahn/Harnack in their reconstructions.
[SyP] = variant reading from the Syriac Peshitta.

Skippy
(your evil twin!)

Sheshbazzar

Or the content of 'Paul' was cribbed from Clement, and Clement was redacted to make it look the other way around.

Consider 1 Clement 31:1-32:4
Clement makes the well known 'Pauline' argument that justification comes through faith and not through works.

And yet here is the peculiar thing, Clement is not simply quoting 'Paul' and he nowhere in these faith versus works arguments gives even the least bit of credit to any writings or sayings of any 'Paul' as being the source of this doctrine.
Now if Clement had been aware of this distinctively Pauline doctrine as having originated with 'Paul', it is quite inconceivable that he would not have presented it as being from 'Paul'. This in a glaring contrast to those sections where he is falling all over himself in fawning over 'Paul'.

As it is if Clement was aware of any such previous 'Pauline' Faith versus Works doctrine, he is engaging in some mighty willful and -extreme- plagiarism in giving the earlier 'Apostle' no credit at all as the teacher of this imporatant doctrine.-

No, it appears that Clement was first on the scene with this reasoning, and that a latter 'Apostle Paul' cribbed his writings and argument, edited and cleaned them up a bit and presented them as 'his' own, then produced a revised heavily interpolated version of the earlier Clement's writings to make it appear that this late and fake 'Apostle Paul' had preceded Clement in the Christian faith.

There are many paragraphs like this in Clement, that the orthodox tradition wishes us to believe Clement received from the Pauline traditions.
But the internal evidence of way they are written, not as quotations, but as thoughts originating with Clement himself strongly argues that his writings were plagiarized by the latter church writers and used to fashion a fake 'Apostle Paul' and 'Pauline' Epistles.

mountainman

Thanks for the analysis Shesh.

The Clementine literature is a minefield and the recent discoveries of the non canonical texts of the heretics are Gnosticking time bombs. The high technology of the codex was used to bind together the Bible, itself a product and an instrument of war against Egypto-Graeco-Roman paganism, Plato, Pythagoras, Hippocrates ... an instrument of war against The Legacy of Greece

Any CLAIMED "original" writings of Marcion, Clement, Origen, Mani, Apollonius, Ammonias, Josephus, and many others may not have been either authentically transmitted or transmitted by their own mutilations of earlier original texts. Another option is that all these claimed original writings were themselves MUTILATED at a later date. What does Occam say?

stephan huller

But Clement references Paul in the same epistle. I admit there are strange things in the epistle but I think there are a number of places where he cites directly from the Pauline letters.

Sheshbazzar

Pull out 1 Clement chap 5 for example, and the text and thought will flow just as clearly as if it had never been there in the first place.
Which I sincerely doubt it was.

If the work is later edited, revised, and interpolated, THAT is exactly what is to be expected.
MAKE it conform to latter ideas and inventions. IE. The 'Apostle 'Paul' and 'his' ersatz 'Epistles'.

stephan huller

I agree that there is a lot of additional material to the text. A similar pattern to what you are speaking of occurs in the Ignatian epistles too. It is hard to know what to make of these examples.

Sheshbazzar

Chapters 42-44 & 47 of 1 Clement are likewise inserted. The rest of the texts constant frame of reference is personages and situations exclusively drawn from the OT.
These chapters fawning over NT characters, and othodox control propaganda and dogma stand out from the continuity of the rest of Clements reasoning like so many festering tumors.
Slice 'em out, and his text and his reasonings regarding Christ and the Faith never skip a beat.




.

DCHindley

I been going through the tables above and have collected the passages found in the received version of Galatians that are not in Mahar's. They are:

1:5 to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. [that’s Creator God talk …]

10 Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ.

13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it;
14 and I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and remained with him fifteen days.
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord's brother.
20 (In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!)
22 And I was still not known by sight to the churches of Christ in Judea;
23 they only heard it said, "He who once persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy."
24 And they glorified God because of me.

2: 8 (for he who worked through Peter for the mission to the circumcised worked through me also for the Gentiles),
13 And with him the rest of the Jews acted insincerely, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their insincerity.
15 We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners,

21 I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose. [this may be part of Marcion's text, but uncited by the sources]

3:5 Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?
6 Thus Abraham "believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
7 So you see that it is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed."
9 So then, those who are men of faith are blessed with Abraham who had faith.

12 but the law does not rest on faith, for "He who does them shall live by them."
15 … no one annuls even a man's will, or adds to it, once it has been ratified.
16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many; but, referring to one, "And to your offspring," which is Christ.
17 This is what I mean: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.
18 For if the inheritance is by the law, it is no longer by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.
19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained by angels through an intermediary.
20 Now an intermediary implies more than one; but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not; for if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.
22 But the scripture consigned all things to sin, that what was promised to faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
23 Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed.
24 So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian;
27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
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.
29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.
4:1 I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no better than a slave, though he is the owner of all the estate;
2 but he is under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father.
7 So through God you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son then an heir.

12 Brethren, I beseech you, become as I am, for I also have become as you are. You did me no wrong;
13 you know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first;
14 and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus.
15 What has become of the satisfaction you felt? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me.
16 Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth?
17 They make much of you, but for no good purpose; they want to shut you out, that you may make much of them.
18 For a good purpose it is always good to be made much of, and not only when I am present with you.

25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.
27 For it is written, "Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and shout, you who are not in travail; for the children of the desolate one are many more than the children of her that is married."
28 Now we, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise.
29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now.
30 But what does the scripture say? "Cast out the slave and her son; for the son of the slave shall not inherit with the son of the free woman."

5:5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we wait for the hope of righteousness.
25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.
26 Let us have no self-conceit, no provoking of one another, no envy of one another.
6:1 Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Look to yourself, lest you too be tempted.
3 For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.
4 But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor.
5 For each man will have to bear his own load.

16 Peace and mercy be upon all who walk by this rule, upon the Israel of God.

This material strikes me as all about justice, law and covenants, which are supposed to be the bailiwick of the Creator God of the Jews. It is all fairly internally consistent, so might either be what Marcion thought had been added to the "real" Paul by the Judaizing proto-orthodox, and subsequently removed by him, OR woven into Marcion's "original" version by the proto-orthodox. For these options to be true, any "original Paul" had to be already oriented towards Marcion's POV, either by nature or by invention.

If he invented it whole cloth, it would make no sense unless the proto-orthodox already held a Paul in high esteem. The only such Paul tradition we have, independent of the letters, is from Acts. This Paul is a full fledged proto-orthodox christian preaching a Christ who is son of the Jewish God. Even Gnostic traditions in which Paul is venerated, there is nothing particularly "Marcionite-ish" about them. He would have been developing a counter-Paul, which is like pushing a rock uphill!

If he got hold of actual letters of Paul that are already suspiciously congenial to Marcion's POV, I'd think he would just say so, and a church father would call attention to this fact or at very least suggest he was a faker. There is no such claim recorded or rebutted.

However, if he was presented with letters of Paul already published by the proto-orthodox, but found them at variance with what his own research on the OT was developing, he may well suspect that they were tampered with by Judaizers among the proto-orthodox, while also seeing things that accorded with his own speculations. Ever the critic, he set out to get rid of the passages he felt were added. This is the man described by the proto-orthodox fathers.

DCH

jakejonesiv

Hi David,

Very nice job with the tables. That shows an admirable amount of determination to present the evidence in the easiest to read format.
Please allow me to also recommend Dr. Hermann Detering's
THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS – EXPLANATIONS which fortunately for the readers of FRDB has been translated into English by Frans-Joris Fabri.

It shows exactly how the Marcionite text of Galatians is recreated.
Indeed, for those who are curious about Dutch Radical Criticism, there is a web page of Articles, reviews and books in English

Best,
Jake Jones IV

mountainman

Have a little think about forgery.