Christian Texts and History • Re: Priority of Luke over Marcion's Gospel

Lk 22:19-20 is found in Sy-P, L32, two Sahidic mss, and one Bohairic ms (a bread-cup sequence), which also happens to be close to the presentation given by Justin Martyr (in the choice of elements and their order, as noted by Inglis):

And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, This is my body [Lk 22:19a] [cf. 1 Cor 11:23-24]
given for you; do this in remembrance of me. [Lk 22:19b] [cf. 1 Cor 11:24]
In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, [22:20a] [cf. 1 Cor 11:25]
This cup is the new covenant in my blood, [22:20b] [cf. 1 Cor 11:25]
which is shed for you. [22:20c] [cf. Mk 14:24]

The old Latin variant in b and e has only this text (a bread-cup sequence), which is very different, overlapping only in 19a, lacking 19b-20, and containing verses 17-18 instead:

And he took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body. [Lk 22:19a] [cf. Mk 14:22]
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: [Lk 22:17] [cf. Mk 14:23]
For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. [Lk 22:18] [cf. Mk 14:25]

Bezae has this text (a cup-bread sequence), which is the same text but in reverse (i.e., canonical Luke) order:

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: [Lk 22:17] [cf. Mk 14:23]
For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. [Lk 22:18] [cf. Mk 14:25]
And he took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body. [Lk 22:19a] [cf. Mk 14:22]

This, further, is in the majority text (a cup-bread-cup sequence), i.e. the "Western non-interpolation" (which has both: the cup-bread sequence of canonical Luke 17-19a and also the bread-cup sequence of 19-20, elsewhere found separately):

which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. [22:19b] [cf. 1 Cor 11:24]
Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, [22:20a] [cf. 1 Cor 11:25]
This cup is the new testament in my blood, [22:20b] [cf. 1 Cor 11:25]
which is shed for you. [22:20c] [cf. Mk 14:24]

A simple way to summarize the above is that we have a sequence mostly based on Mark 14:22-25 (i.e. Lk 22:17-19a) and another sequence mostly based on 1 Corinthians 11:23-25 (i.e. Lk 22:19-20), which overlap with a shared "hinge" in the verse of Luke 22:19a. This shared "hinge" verse allows sometimes one half and sometimes the other half to be absent from the text, or sometimes both to be present.

If we agree with Ehrman et al. that the combined majority text is posterior, then it would seem that we need to decide that either one (Lk 22:17-19a) or the other (Lk 22:19-20) was the more original text, which was expanded to make the majority text.

However, if we take the view that's often proposed where both the Marcionite gospel and the canonical Luke had effects on the textual tradition of Luke in our manuscripts, then, on such a view, it would not be surprising if both were "original" and that the majority text conflates them. Which is to say, it would not be surprising if canonical Luke had one of these shorter readings and that the Marcionite text had the other.

Along with other scholars, Ehrman makes an interesting point here:

[The] view that Jesus death was “for others” is precisely a view not found otherwise in Luke’s Gospel or the book of Acts. Luke has in fact eliminated that kind of language from the passages he inherited from his predecessor Mark. Luke otherwise (in his Gospel or in Acts) does not present a doctrine of atonement as a way of understanding Jesus’ death. But this passage does.

According to this view, Luke changed a prior version of the passage that had this kind of language. Then it's argued that Luke's version of the passage did not have it because this is more consistent with the rest of Luke-Acts. Accordingly, it views the Bezae variant not as the original version of this passage but as the original version of this passage in Luke-Acts. Ehrman maintains that Luke-Acts modified an earlier version of this passage, which he identifies as the passage in Mark.

It's a compelling point. If there's an author of Luke-Acts (and it makes a lot of sense) who revised earlier gospel material, and if this is his tendency, then the Bezae version here may belong to this author who created Luke-Acts.

If we subscribe to Ehrman's argument here, if we also take the view that the Marcionite gospel contributed to variants in the textual tradition of manuscripts of Luke, and if we also view the majority text as posterior to the shorter readings, then we can agree with Ehrman that the original text of Luke-Acts was Lk 22:17-19a (as in Bezae). Then we can propose, on the other hand, that Luke 22:19-20 was in the text of the Marcionite gospel. This text was also in Sy-P, L32, two Sahidic mss, one Bohairic ms, and possibly was used by Justin Martyr.

Then, in accordance with Ehrman's argument, the author of Luke-Acts was omitting not only Mk 14:24 but also Lk 19:20c. The author was also omitting all of Lk 19b, 20a, and 20b, which is to say, the author was omitting everything corresponding to 1 Cor 11:24-25. We already know from Ehrman the reason for omitting Lk 19:20c. The reason for omitting the rest could have something to do with the views of the author of Luke-Acts on the epistle writer Paul. We know, for example, that Acts never mentions the letters of Paul and also that the use of Paul by Marcionites was a source of controversy in the second century.

In short, the text of Marcion's gospel may have matched Justin's, the Peshitta, and some other Latin or Coptic manuscripts (as well as 1 Cor 11:23-25). The text of canonical Luke-Acts may have matched Bezae and some old Latin manuscripts (as well as Mk 14:23, 25, 22). The majority text may have combined them, with the orthodoxy of the Marcionite gospel variant not in question due to the orthodox acceptance of the letters of Paul, a position not necessarily shared by the author of Luke-Acts.

Statistics: Posted by andrewcriddle — Tue Feb 06, 2024 9:56 am