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
27. Luke xvii. 9, 10. The saying, “We are unprofitable servants; we have
done that which was our duty to do,” was perhaps omitted by Marcion, lest
the Gospel should seem to sanction the idea that any obligation whatever
rested on the believer. The received text is thoroughly Pauline,
inculcating the worthlessness of man’s righteousness. Hahn and Ritschl
argue that the whole of the parable, 7‐10, was not in Marcion’s Gospel;
and this is probable, though St. Epiphanius only says that Marcion cut
out, “We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which was our duty
to do.”(467) The whole Parable has such a Pauline ring, that it would
probably have been accepted in its entirety by Marcion, if his Gospel had
contained it; and the parable is divested of its point and meaning if only
the few words are omitted which St. Epiphanius mentions as deficient.
28. Luke xvii. 18: “There are not found returning to give glory to God.
And there were many lepers in the time of Eliseus the prophet in Israel;
and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.” In the Gospel of
the Lord, this passage concerning the lepers in the time of Eliseus occurs
_twice_; once in chap. i. v. 15, as already given, and again here. It has
been preserved in St. Luke’s Gospel in only one place, in that
corresponding with Marcion i. 15, viz. Luke iv. 27.
It is clear that this was a fragmentary saying of our Lord drifting about,
which the compiler of the Sinope Gospel inserted in two places where it
thought it would fit in with other passages. When St. Luke’s Gospel was
revised, it was found that this passage occurred twice, and that it was
without appropriateness in chap. xvii. after verse 18, and was therefore
cut out. But in Marcion’s Gospel it remained, a monument of the manner in
which the Gospels were originally constructed.
29. Luke xviii. 19. Marcion had: “Jesus said to him, Do not call me good;
one is good, the Father;” another version of the text, not a deliberate
alteration.
30. Luke xviii. 31‐34. The prophecies of the passion omitted by Marcion.
31. Luke xix. 29‐46. The ride into Jerusalem on an ass, and the expulsion
of the buyers and sellers from the Temple, are omitted.
Why the Palm‐Sunday triumphal entry should have been excluded does not
appear. In St. Luke’s Gospel Jesus is not hailed as “King of the Jews” and
“Son of David.” Had this been the case, these two titles, we may conclude,
would have been eliminated from the narrative; but we see no reason why
the whole account should be swept away. It probably did not exist in the
original Gospel Marcion obtained in Pontus.
Did Marcion cut out the narrative of the expulsion of the buyers and
sellers from the Temple? I think not. St. John, in his Gospel, gives that
event in his second chapter as occurring, not at the close of the ministry
of Christ, but at its opening.
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