The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments RemainBaring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
The Lost and Hostile Gospels: An Essay on the Toledoth Jeschu, and the Petrine and Pauline Gospels of the First Three Centuries of Which Fragments Remain
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
Apocryphal Gospels
This shows plainly enough that Marcion had received the Gospel, probably
from the Church of Sinope, where it was the only one known, and that he
had heard nothing about St. Luke as its author; indeed, knew nothing of
its origin. He treated it with the utmost veneration, and in his
veneration for it attributed its authorship to the Lord himself; supposing
the words of St. Paul, “the Gospel of Christ,”(452) “the Gospel of his
Son,”(453) “the Gospel of God,”(454) to mean that Jesus Christ was the
actual author of the book.
Marcion, it may be remarked, would have had no objection to acknowledging
St. Luke as the compiler of the Gospel, as that evangelist was a devoted
follower of St. Paul. If he did not do so, it was because at Sinope the
Gospel read in the Church was not known by his name.
2. Marcion’s Gospel was without the Preface, Luke i. 1‐4.
This Preface is certainly by St. Luke, but was added, we may conjecture,
after the final revision of his Gospel, when he issued the second edition.
Its absence from Marcion’s Gospel shows that it did not accompany the
first edition.
3. The narrative of the nativity, Luke i. ii., is not in Marcion’s Gospel.
It has been supposed by critics that he omitted this narrative purposely,
because his Christ was descended from the highest God, had no part with
the world of the Demiurge, and had therefore no earthly mother.(455) But
if so, why did Marcion suffer the words, “Thy mother and thy brethren
stand without desiring to see thee” (Luke viii. 20), to remain in his
Gospel?
And it does not appear that Marcion denied the incarnation _in toto_, and
went to the full extreme of Docetic doctrine. On the contrary, he taught
that Christ deceived the God of this World, by coming into it as a man.
The Demiurge trusted he would be his Messiah, to confirm the Law for ever.
But when he saw that Christ was destroying the Law, he inflicted on him
death. And this was only possible, because Christ was, through his human
nature, subject to his power.
It is a less violent supposition that in the Church of Sinope the Gospel
was, like that of St. Mark, without a narrative of the nativity and
childhood of Jesus. It is probable, moreover, that the first two chapters
of St. Luke’s Gospel were added at a later period. The account of the
nativity and childhood is taken from the mouths of the blessed Virgin
Mary, of eye‐witnesses, or contemporaries. “Mary kept all these things and
pondered them in her heart,” and “His mother kept all these sayings in her
heart.”(456) This is our guaranty that the story is true. Mary kept them
in memory, and the evangelist appeals to her memory for them. So with
regard to the account of the nativity of the Baptist, “All they that heard
these things laid them up in their hearts.”(457) To their recollections
also the evangelist appeals as his authority.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account