Investigations III: The Character of the Text Used by Marcion

1. The Character of the Text Used by Marcion.

The critical apparatus yields, first of all, the same principal results for the Gospel that were established above, p. 125*f, under (1)–(6), for the Apostolikon.¹ To the fourth of these, some further points must still be added here.

M.’s Greek and Latin text of the Gospel of Luke² is — apart from his tendentious interventions — [p. 223*] a pure Western text.³ The apparatus offers, chapter by chapter, so many pieces of evidence for this that they need not be listed individually here. But M.’s text stands, specifically, closer to the text in Codex D than to any other text.⁴ Marcion, accordingly, recensed his Gospel only in Rome. When the Latin translation was made, and whether the Marcionite translation may perhaps be the exemplar of the Catholic one, can be determined here with as little certainty as in the case of the Apostolikon; but, as regards the latter question, it is here, as there, in the highest degree improbable that anyone restored the genuine text from M.’s abridged and tendentiously distorted Latin. Nevertheless, M.’s variants, in connection with this question, require an investigation.

If one takes Tischendorf’s text as the basis, and sets aside everything among the variants and excisions that certainly or most probably belongs to Marcion (because it displays his own peculiar tendencies), and further everything else that is otherwise unattested, then the main group of the variants — namely, the 2–300 that he shares in common with the Western text — shows a strong influence of the Matthean text or, as the case may be, of the Markan text. I set out in what follows these variants for the section ch. 4:34–6:21, in order to make possible a judgment about their nature and their affinity to Matthew and Mark:

4:34: ἔα [“ah!”] is missing, with D a b c e f ff² l q, Syriac hr, Coptic, Ethiopic (it is also missing in Mark).

4:41: σύ [“you”] with the majority of Itala manuscripts > ὅτι σύ [“that you”].

4:43: δεῖ με [“it is necessary for me”] with B D e > με δεῖ [reversed order]; the position of the two words in the sentence is also that of the Latin witnesses.

5:12: λεπρός [“a leper”] with D d, Matthew, Mark > πλήρης λέπρας [“full of leprosy”] (so also the Itala and the Vulgate).

5:14: ἄπελθε [“go!”] with D, Itala, Vulgate (the imperative, as in Matthew, Mark) > ἀπελθὼν [“going,” participle] [p. 224*] —5:14: τὸ δῶρον [“the gift”] with Χ b c, Armenian, Matthew > missing.

5:14: ἵνα ᾖ [“that it may be”] with D, Itala, Ambrose > missing.

5:14: ὑμῖν [“to you”] with D and the majority of the Itala manuscripts, Ambrose > αὐτοῖς [“to them”].

5:14: τοῦτο [“this”] with the preceding witnesses > missing.

5:24: ἆρον [“take up”] with ℵ D, Itala, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Matthew, Mark > ἄρας [“having taken up”].

5:24: τὸν κράββατον [“the bed/pallet”] with D c, Coptic, Mark > τὸ κλινίδιον [“the little couch”].

5:34: δύνανται [“they can,” without ποιῆσαι, “to make”] with ℵ* D, Itala, Matthew, Mark > δύνασθε ... ποιῆσαι [“you can ... to make”].

5:34: ἐφ’ ὅσον [“for as long as”] with D e, Matthew > ἐν ᾧ [“while”].

5:38: βάλλουσιν [“they put”] with ℵ* D, Itala, Matthew > βλητέον [“it must be put,” verbal adjective]; and elsewhere too M. seems dependent on Matthew in this verse.

5:39: the verse: καὶ οὐδεὶς πιὼν παλαιὸν θέλει νέον· λέγει γάρ· ὁ παλαιὸς χρηστός ἐστιν [“and no one, having drunk old wine, desires new; for he says: the old is good”], is missing in Marcion; but it is also missing in D a b c e ff²* l, Eusebius, and in Matthew and Mark > the remaining witnesses (thus also > f g¹·² q, Vulgate, ff²).

6:4: εἰσῆλθεν [“he entered”] with B D > ὡς εἰσῆλθεν [“how he entered”].

6:5: with D, after 6:10.

6:17: καὶ (τῆς) περαίας [“and of the region beyond the Jordan”] with ℵ* a b c ff² l q, Armenian > missing.

6:17: καὶ ἄλλων χωρῶν (πόλεων;) ἐληλυθότων [“and having come from other regions (cities?)”] with D.

6:17: Ἱερουσαλήμ [“Jerusalem”] is missing, with D.

6:21: πεινῶντες [“hungering”] with c l, Matthew > πειν. νῦν [“hungering now”].

6:21: χορτασθήσονται [“they shall be filled,” 3rd person] with ℵ* b e ff² g¹ l q, Armenian, Ambrose, and Matthew > χορτασθήσεσθε [“you shall be filled,” 2nd person].

6:21: γελάσουσιν [“they shall laugh,” 3rd person] with e g¹, Armenian, Origen, Eusebius > γελάσετε [“you shall laugh,” 2nd person].

This table is large enough to permit conclusions: with one exception, these variants represent a purely stylistic recension of the text, which is, in half the cases, made after the text of the other two Synoptics — that is, the text of Luke that Marcion found in Rome had already been conformed to the text of Matthew and Mark.⁵ But in one case the Marcion-text has itself influenced the Western text in its earliest history; for the excision of ch. 5:39 is certainly [p. 225*] Marcionitic: intolerable for M. was the clause: ὁ παλαιὸς χρηστός ἐστιν [“the old is good”]. But why should others have expunged it?⁶ What has been demonstrated here with regard to 70 arbitrarily selected verses is found equally in the remaining portions of the Gospel. But to this there are added still rather numerous passages in which M. agrees with Matthew or Mark without being accompanied by any witness of the Western text, or indeed by any witness at all. They are communicated in what follows, in near-complete form:

- 6:1: ἐπείνασαν [“they were hungry”], otherwise unattested for Luke, but with Matthew.

- 6:21: αὐτῶν [“their”], likewise.

- 6:21: νῦν [“now”] is missing, likewise.

- 6:29a: a peculiar mixture from Luke and Matthew.

- 6:29b: likewise.

- 6:43: likewise.

- 8:8: ὁ ἔχων ὦτα ἀκουέτω [“he who has ears to hear, let him hear”], otherwise unattested for Luke, with Matthew.

- 8:21: a peculiar mixture from Luke and Matthew.

- 8:24: θαλάσσῃ [“sea”] with Matthew (and Mark), otherwise unattested for Luke (κλύδωνι τῆς ὕδατος, “the surge of the water”).

- 8:25: θαλάσσῃ [“sea”] with Matthew (Luke: ὕδατι, “water”).

- 8:45: οἱ μαθηταί [“the disciples”] alone with Mark > Luke: ὁ Πέτρος καὶ οἱ σὺν αὐτῷ [“Peter and those with him”].

- 9:18: οἱ ἄνθρωποι [“the men/people”] alone with Matthew > Luke: οἱ ὄχλοι [“the crowds”].

- 9:18: τὸν υἱὸν τ. ἀνθρ. [“the Son of Man”] alone with Matthew, missing in Luke.

- 9:22: probably σταυρωθῆναι [“to be crucified”] with Mark > Luke ἀποκτανθῆναι [“to be killed”].

- 9:40: a mixture from Luke and Matthew.

- 9:41: καὶ διεστραμμένη [“and perverse”] is missing, with Mark > Luke.

- 11:33: ἵνα πᾶσι λάμπῃ [“so that it may shine for all”] with Matthew > Luke.

- 12:8: ὁμολογήσω [“I will confess”] with Matthew > ὁ υἱὸς τ. ἀνθρ. ὁμολογήσει [“the Son of Man will confess”], Luke.

- 12:10: ὅς [“whoever”] with Matthew > πᾶς ὅς [“everyone who”], Luke.

- 12:24: a text mixed with Matthew appears to be present.

- 12:51: Matthew has had an influence.

- 13:19: ἔσπειρεν [“he sowed”] with Matthew > Luke ἔβαλεν [“he threw/cast”]. [p. 226*] - 16:13: οἰκέτης [“a household servant”] is missing, with Matthew > Luke.

- 17:1: a mixed text from Luke and Matthew.

- 18:35: ἰδού [“behold”] with Matthew > missing in Luke.

- 20:41–44: clear influences of Matthew (δοκεῖ, “it seems”; the scribes say, as in Matthew, that the Christ is the Son of David, whereas in Luke it is Jesus who says it).

- 21:12: (“passiones,” “sufferings”), perhaps following Matthew (Mark).

- 21:14: (“apud tribunalia,” “before the tribunals”), likewise.

- 21:19: σώσετε [“you will save”] with Matthew > κτήσεσθε [“you will gain”].

- 22:15: εἶπεν [“he said,” without an object] with Matthew > Luke εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς [“he said to them”].

- 22:19: τοῖς μαθηταῖς [“to the disciples”] with Matthew > Luke αὐτοῖς [“to them”].

- 22:22: ὁ υἱὸς τ. ἀνθρ. [“the Son of Man”] with Matthew > missing in Luke.

- 23:33: ἐλθόντες [“having come”] with Matthew (ἦλθον, “they came”) > Luke ἀπῆλθον [“they departed”].

- 23:33: λεγόμενον [“called”] with Matthew > Luke καλούμενον [“called,” different word].

That in these cases — all of a purely stylistic-lexical nature, and in substance entirely neutral — Marcion himself undertook the conformation with the other Synoptics, is, for that very reason, altogether improbable; for they simply fall in line with the very numerous cases, assessed above, in which the Western text he used already displays these conformations.⁷ That M., within the Western text that he attests, has readings peculiar to himself is, of course, to be expected; for every other one of the witnesses (D, d, a, b, c, etc.) likewise displays such peculiar readings in great number. If these individual readings bear the same features as the readings that the text displays together with its family relatives, then they do not belong to the individual text, but to the family.

[p. 227*] Dogmatically indifferent readings peculiar to Marcion’s text, uninfluenced by Matthew and Mark, are still found, in the text preserved to us, in nearly 90 places.⁸ That these are M.’s own intellectual property, and that he introduced them deliberately, is probable only for a small group of them. For the most part, they too belong to the text as he had already found it. A not inconsiderable portion of them, moreover, will have to be attributed to the uncertain transmission in which we possess M.’s text; so that, in the best case, only a very small portion remains that can be assigned to M. himself. I single out the 6th and the 16th chapter, in order to give an impression of the character of these variants:

- 6:3: Χριστός [“Christ”] > Ἰησοῦς [“Jesus”].

- 6:3: τί [“what”] > ὅ [“what,” relative pronoun].

- 6:9: μή [“not”] > κακοποιῆσαι [“to do evil” — has Tertullian perhaps abridged this arbitrarily?].

- 6:12: τοῦ πατρός [“of the Father”] > τοῦ θεοῦ [“of God”].

- 6:17: κατέβη [“he came down,” finite verb] > καταβάς [“having come down,” participle].

- 6:17: ἐν αὐτοῖς [“among them”] > μετ’ αὐτῶν [“with them”].

- 6:22: ἔσεσθε [“you will be”] > ἔστε [“you are”].

- 6:22: the word order of ὑμᾶς [“you”] altered.

- 6:22: ἀφορίσουσιν ὑμᾶς [“they shall separate you”] is missing.

- 6:27, 28: the 2nd and 3rd members of this saying drawn together into one.

- 6:29: ἐάν τις [“if anyone”] > ὅστις [“whoever”].

- 6:29: ῥαπίσῃ [“should strike”] > ῥαπίζει [“strikes”].

- 6:29: παράθες [“offer,” or πρόσθες, “add”?] > πάρεχε [“offer/present”].

- 6:29: πρόσθες [“add”] > μὴ κωλύσῃς [“do not forbid”].

- 6:31: καὶ καθὼς ὑμῖν γίνεσθαι θέλετε παρὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς [“and as you wish men to do to you, so do also to them”] > καὶ καθὼς θέλετε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε ὁμοίως [“and as you wish that men would do to you, do also likewise”].

- 6:38: σεσαλευμένον [“shaken together”] is missing. [p. 228*] - 6:43: the bad tree placed before the good (this was probably deliberate).

- 6:43: προενεγκεῖν [“to bring forth,” or προενέγκαι, aorist] > ποιεῖν [“to make/produce”].

- 16:12: εὑρέθητε [“you were found”] > ἐγένεσθε [“you were/became”].

- 16:12: transposition of ἀνθέξεται [“will cling to”] and καταφρονήσει [“will despise”].

- 16:16: ἐξ (ἀφ’) οὗ [“from which”] > ἀπὸ τότε [“from then”].

- 16:18: ὁ [“he who,” singular] > πᾶς ὁ [“everyone who”].

- 16:18: ὁμοίως μοιχός ἐστιν [“is likewise an adulterer”] > μοιχεύει [“commits adultery”].

- 16:21: τραύματα [“wounds”] > ἕλκη [“sores”].

- 16:25: Ἀβραάμ [“Abraham”] placed first.

- 16:26: ὑμῶν κ. ἡμῶν [“yours and ours”] > ἡμ. κ. ὑμ. [reversed order].

- 16:27: οἰκίαν [“house”] > οἶκον [“house,” different word].

- 16:28: ἐκεῖ [“there”] > missing.

- 16:29: ἐκεῖ [“there”] > missing.

- 16:31: ὁ δὲ εἶπεν [“but he said”] > εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ [“and he said to him”].

- 16:31: ἀκούσωσιν αὐτοῦ [“they should hear him”] > πεισθήσονται [“they will be persuaded”].

“Χριστός” [“Christ”] instead of “Ἰησοῦς” [“Jesus”], and the placing of the bad tree before the good, may equally be deliberate alterations of M.’s⁹ — like “prodiit” for ἠγέρθη [“was raised”] (7:16) — but apart from these and a couple of other exceptions,¹⁰ the character of these otherwise unattested variants, gathered together here, shows that we are hardly dealing here with M. himself, but rather with his exemplar. For what, indeed, should have moved him to undertake this kind of correction, which so closely resembles those of the Western text?

Thus there remains only the large number of his deliberate omissions and tendentious corrections;¹¹ for that Marcion [p. 229*] —alongside these omissions also undertook a stylistic correction of the text is, on the basis of what has been set out, improbable, and equally so the assumption that he wished to abridge, underscore, or clarify. This may have happened, on one occasion or another, at this or that point, but it is not characteristic of his procedure.¹²

An influence of his text upon the Catholic texts has taken place only to a very slight degree, once one judges M.’s neutral peculiar readings not as his own readings, but as those of the Western text. Attention has already been drawn above (p. 224*) to 5:39. To this may be added, in 23:2, two clauses which, as it seems, have made their way from M.’s text into the ecclesiastical tradition (καταλύοντα τὸν νόμον καὶ τοὺς προφήτας, “destroying the Law and the prophets,” and ἀποστρέφοντα τὰς γυναῖκας καὶ τὰ τέκνα, “turning away the wives and children”);¹³ further, the two additions in 9:54f (ὡς καὶ Ἡλίας ἐποίησεν, “as Elijah also did,” and οὐκ οἴδατε οἵου πνεύματός ἐστε ὑμεῖς, “you do not know of what spirit you are”). Finally, Luke 24:40 must also be reckoned here (καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν (ἐπ)έδειξεν αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τοὺς πόδας, “and having said this, he showed them his hands and feet”). Criticism today, it is true, regards this verse as an interpolation from John 20:20 (but see, against this, Von Soden’s edition of the New Testament); yet the verse is original in Luke (and also in John, who borrowed it from Luke with a slight alteration) and was expunged by Marcion. This becomes evident as soon as one surveys, as a unity, the transmission-history of the pieces gathered together here — of which two contain excisions, and four additions — the former as intelligible from M.’s standpoint as the latter:

- 5:39: struck out, with D a b c e ff²* l, Eusebius > all the remaining witnesses,

- 24:40: struck out, with D a b e ff² l, Syriac cu > all the remaining witnesses,

- 9:54: added, with D a b c e f q, A C, and most majuscules, Coptic, Syriac (but not Syriac cu), Ethiopic, Gothic, Basil, Chrysostom.

- 9:55: added, with D a b c e f g² q, Vulgate, Gothic, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopic, and many Church Fathers.

[p. 230*] - 23:2a: added, with b c e ff² i l q, gat mm > all the remaining witnesses.

- 23:2b: added, with c e > all the remaining witnesses.

At a single glance one recognizes that M.’s text must have entered the Western text immediately, and spread itself, in part, through it. Note that the Codex Palatinus (e) agrees with M. at all these passages, the Colbertinus (c) and Veronensis (b) five times, D and the Vercellensis (a) four times, and so on.¹⁴