There are many reasons to conclude that Marcion's scriptures weren't the earliest and that the scriptures used by Marcion weren't created by him.
And there are no reasonable proposals for how you get from *Ev to Mark. It means someone would had to have removed a lot of material from *Ev, and all of that material just happens to have distinct characteristics. Most of so-called "Q" is in *Ev. Aside from a few elements like the temptation scene, its mostly all teachings.
Why does Mark take away the teachings of Jesus? Why remove the sermon on the Plain?
Why is Mark more anti-Peter than *Ev?
The narrative of Mark is just too cohesive and consistent for it to have been the product of redacting *Ev.
And really my model is more like:
Apostolikon (Letters of the Apostle) -> Story about Paul's ministry (Acts of the Apostle) -> Story about Jesus (proto-Mark) -> proto-Luke -> Marcion's collection
It would really have been a matter of starting with the Pauline letter collection, then adding as an introduction to that collection a narrative about Paul, then adding as an introduction to that collection a narrative about Jesus with an ending that was designed to be followed directly by the narrative about Paul.
This is actually typical of how histories were written, where the material covering the most recent material was written first and then then narratives are built upon going back in time, with more and more material being added at later dates to extend the story farther back into time.
I would say the same is true of the material in the "Old Testament" as well, with Genesis likely being the most recently written material, especially Genesis 1-11. Narratives about the Babylonian invasion are likely the oldest, with narratives about the ancient origins of the Israelites being more recent. Same goes with the history of Rome, with accounts covering the 3rd-2nd century BCE being the first material written, then accounts extending back in time to the founding of Roman being more recent stories.
The beginning was Paul and stories about Paul, then from these stories about Paul the narrative was extended back in time. And this continued even with the birth of Jesus, which was the most recent material written about Jesus.
Here is the order of writing and presentation:
Birth of Jesus - 4
Ministry, trial and death of Jesus - 3
[Ministry of the other disciples] - 5
Ministry and trial of Paul - 2
Letters of Paul - 1
And there are no reasonable proposals for how you get from *Ev to Mark. It means someone would had to have removed a lot of material from *Ev, and all of that material just happens to have distinct characteristics. Most of so-called "Q" is in *Ev. Aside from a few elements like the temptation scene, its mostly all teachings.
Why does Mark take away the teachings of Jesus? Why remove the sermon on the Plain?
Why is Mark more anti-Peter than *Ev?
The narrative of Mark is just too cohesive and consistent for it to have been the product of redacting *Ev.
And really my model is more like:
Apostolikon (Letters of the Apostle) -> Story about Paul's ministry (Acts of the Apostle) -> Story about Jesus (proto-Mark) -> proto-Luke -> Marcion's collection
It would really have been a matter of starting with the Pauline letter collection, then adding as an introduction to that collection a narrative about Paul, then adding as an introduction to that collection a narrative about Jesus with an ending that was designed to be followed directly by the narrative about Paul.
This is actually typical of how histories were written, where the material covering the most recent material was written first and then then narratives are built upon going back in time, with more and more material being added at later dates to extend the story farther back into time.
I would say the same is true of the material in the "Old Testament" as well, with Genesis likely being the most recently written material, especially Genesis 1-11. Narratives about the Babylonian invasion are likely the oldest, with narratives about the ancient origins of the Israelites being more recent. Same goes with the history of Rome, with accounts covering the 3rd-2nd century BCE being the first material written, then accounts extending back in time to the founding of Roman being more recent stories.
The beginning was Paul and stories about Paul, then from these stories about Paul the narrative was extended back in time. And this continued even with the birth of Jesus, which was the most recent material written about Jesus.
Here is the order of writing and presentation:
Birth of Jesus - 4
Ministry, trial and death of Jesus - 3
[Ministry of the other disciples] - 5
Ministry and trial of Paul - 2
Letters of Paul - 1
Statistics: Posted by rgprice — Fri May 17, 2024 10:16 am