Matthew 11:20-24:
Even Markus Vinzent wonders about the presence of the woe to the unrepented towns in *Ev:
(Vinzent, Markus. Christ's Torah (posizioni nel Kindle 10984-10989). Taylor and Francis. Edizione del Kindle, my bold).
If, as I think, Marcion is on the top of the iceberg of 'traditions' coming from two rival sects (anti-demiurgists versus Judaizers), i.e. Marcion was the first negotiator who wanted to pacify the two communities (and in this sense the first 'proto-catholic'), then this may explain why a very old Judaizing tradition ended in *Ev, despite of *Ev preceding all the other gospels.
If the death of Jesus was remembered as happened in Capernaum, then this would justify why the tradition hostile to Capernaum ended even in *Ev.
But Capernaum is also the place where in *Ev Jesus descended from heaven, therefore this may be a clue to the original version being composed by the descent, the preaching and the death only in Capernaum. With the introduction by Marcion of the verse *Ev 4:30:
...as an expedient to allow the continuation of the story beyond the short original version.
20 Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades. For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24 But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”
Even Markus Vinzent wonders about the presence of the woe to the unrepented towns in *Ev:
It is disputed in research whether this passage originated in *Ev— all commentators and critics of Marcion pass over the passage, and Harnack is probably correct in pointing out that it is hardly likely that Tertullian would have let slip the opportunity to point out that Marcion speaks of judgment here. 75 Klinghardt, however, has presented good reasons why this passage was nevertheless probably included in *Ev. He shows that, here too, there is no mention of judgment by a judging god, but rather it is an admonition that men should not condemn themselves.
(Vinzent, Markus. Christ's Torah (posizioni nel Kindle 10984-10989). Taylor and Francis. Edizione del Kindle, my bold).
If, as I think, Marcion is on the top of the iceberg of 'traditions' coming from two rival sects (anti-demiurgists versus Judaizers), i.e. Marcion was the first negotiator who wanted to pacify the two communities (and in this sense the first 'proto-catholic'), then this may explain why a very old Judaizing tradition ended in *Ev, despite of *Ev preceding all the other gospels.
If the death of Jesus was remembered as happened in Capernaum, then this would justify why the tradition hostile to Capernaum ended even in *Ev.
But Capernaum is also the place where in *Ev Jesus descended from heaven, therefore this may be a clue to the original version being composed by the descent, the preaching and the death only in Capernaum. With the introduction by Marcion of the verse *Ev 4:30:
But he passed right through the midst of them and went away.
...as an expedient to allow the continuation of the story beyond the short original version.
Statistics: Posted by Giuseppe — Mon May 13, 2024 7:14 am