stephan huller

Is Jesus ever depicted as being indoors and did the marcionites recognize those passages?

stephan huller

I think even the walls of the temple were a problem. Too permanent. Did the temple even have a roof?

outhouse

he is said to have preach more in house then temples.

he was a traveling teacher/healer going from village to village for dinner scraps preaching around dinner tables in dimmly lit peasants houses.


not going from synagogue to synagogue in large cities.

stephan huller

Give specific examples

stephan huller

Does it just come down to the meal narratives? Matt 8:14-15; 9:10; 10:10; 14:13-21; 15:33-39; 22:2-3? The Marcionites assumed that Jesus didn't eat food. Why is he depicted as dining in our gospels? Anti-Marcionite editing perhaps. All the scenes in Matthew before the dining narratives are outdoors.

Matthew 8:14 - 15 certainly not in the Marcionite gospel:

14 When Jesus came into Peter’s house, he saw Peter’s mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever. 15 He touched her hand and the fever left her, and she got up and began to wait on him.

16 When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. 17 This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah:

“He took up our infirmities
and bore our diseases.”

stephan huller

Here is Tertullian's reference to Jesus eating at Zacchaeus's house:

and this he was even then doing when he brought the Lord into his house and gave him to eat (Against Marcion 4.36)

The passage:

When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” 6 So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.

7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.”

8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

It's curious don't you think? Why does Jesus have to stay at his house other than the editor wanting to prove Jesus could go over to someone's house?

stephan huller

Does the gospel actually show Jesus going into the house? It starts off with him 'passing through Jericho' and then there is the announcement that he has to stay at his house while passing through:

And when Jesus entered and passed through Jericho, there was a man named Zacchaeus, rich, and chief of the publicans. And he desired to see Jesus who he was; and he was not able for the pressure of the crowd, because Zacchaeus was little of stature. And he hastened, and went before Jesus, and went up into an unripe fig tree to see Jesus: for he was to pass thus. And when Jesus came to that place, he saw him, and said unto him, Make haste, and come down, Zacchaeus: to-day I must be in thy house. And he hastened, and came down, and received him joyfully. And when they all saw, they murmured, and said, He hath gone in and lodged with a man that is a sinner. So Zacchaeus stood, and said unto Jesus, My Lord, now half of my possessions I give to the poor, and what I have unjustly taken from every man I give him fourfold. Jesus said unto him, To-day is salva- tion come to this house, because this man also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man came to seek and save the thing that was lost.

I wonder if the narrative makes more sense without the addition:

And when Jesus entered and passed through Jericho, there was a man named Zac- chaeus, rich, and chief of the publicans. And he desired to see Jesus who he was; and he was not able for the pressure of the crowd, because Zacchaeus was little of stature. And he hastened, and went before Jesus, and went up into an unripe fig tree to see Jesus: for he was to pass thus. And when Jesus came to that place, he saw him ... and he hastened, and came down, and received him joyfully .... So Zacchaeus said unto Jesus, My Lord, now half of my possessions I give to the poor, and what I have unjustly taken from every man I give him fourfold. Jesus said unto him, To-day is salvation come to this house, because this man also is a son of Abraham (= proselyte). For the Son of man came to seek and save the thing that was lost.

In other words, did the 'go over to house bit' come from the original statement 'salvation has come to his house.'

stephan huller

On second thought, Clement sees the taking in of Jesus as a sign of kindness toward the stranger:

Nay, He bids Zaccheus and Matthew, the rich tax-gathers, entertain Him hospitably. And He does not bid them part with their property, but, applying the just and removing the unjust judgment, He subjoins, "To-day salvation has come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son of Abraham." He so praises the use of property as to enjoin, along with this addition, the giving a share of it, to give drink to the thirsty, bread to the hungry, to take the houseless in, and clothe the naked. (QDS 13)

outhouse

he was trying to get tax collectors to quit raping the people, he preached around dinner tables much the same way the early movement did. they were straving peasants who needed to eat!

this story softens the jewish reality of being taxed to death, and add's theology

stephan huller

No that's not what Clement is saying. Jesus is the 'stranger' who will come again in the form of strangers (= proselytes) who manifest his incarnation. It's a paradigm for the future embodiment (or 'ensoulment') of Jesus in people. Read something about the Alexandrian tradition. This part is key - "to give drink to the thirsty, bread to the hungry, to take the houseless in, and clothe the naked."