It depends on the starting point, of course. Marcion's Gospel was about a Jewish man (by appearance) who walked around Galilee and Judea, interacted with Jews, cheesed off the Jewish religious leadership and was crucified by the Romans. His Jesus didn't preach about the Jewish God, but rather a stranger God. Marcion arguably believed that the Gospel derived from Paul's letters and what Paul actually preached.Why not?Why use that Gospel at all?
Was Marcion's Jesus and Higher God anything to do with Judaism? No. So why would Judaizers adopt that Gospel at all? Why would they take Marcion's original Gospel and add Judaising features to it? Why not just leave it alone?
If there were already beliefs about that Jesus -- Jewish man by appearance, who cheesed of Jewish leaders and was crucified by the Romans -- already floating around (just to be clear, I'm not claiming this to be an argument for a historical Jesus), then it might make sense to adopt parts of Marcion's Gospel. But that means Marcion's Gospel writer was building from a pre-existing tradition, whether that be oral or written sources.
I see it more likely that the proto-orthodox cult already believed in a version of a Jewish God's Christ and so objected to Marcion's, rather than Jewish or God Fearers picking up Marcion's non-Jewish God beliefs and deciding that Marcion's Gospel did, in fact, reflect the Jewish Christ.
Statistics: Posted by GakuseiDon — Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:30 pm