The Evangelion, chapters 11 to 15, and the opening of 16 (pp. 473–480)

Zahn’s apparatus

The conclusion, however, must according to Tr. have read substantially as above. For sine cf. Tr. 222 in its translation of Luke 9:30. Yet the fact that Tr. writes deduci instead of induci should probably not, as I assumed in vol. I, 712, be made the basis for a reading ἀπενεχθῆναι [English: “to be carried away”] or κατενεχθῆναι [English: “to be brought down”] instead of εἰσενεχθῆναι [English: “to be brought into”]; for in de orat. 8 Tr. alternates between the two verbs.

5. Ep. schol. 24, evidently abbreviating, has καὶ εἶπε “τίς ... μεσονύκτιον αἰτῶν τρεῖς ἄρτους” καὶ λοιπὸν “αἰτεῖτε” κτλ. [English: “and he said, ‘who ... at midnight asking for three loaves,’ and thereafter ‘ask,’ etc.”]. Tr. 230f. freely reproduces the whole similitudo [English: “similitude”].

9. Ep. schol. 24 has only αἰτεῖτε καὶ δοθήσεται [English: “ask and it will be given”], then immediately v. 11; Tr., however, takes all the parts of vv. 9. 10 into account.

11. Ep. schol. 24 is as above as far as αἰτήσει [English: “will ask”], then passes over ἄρτον — ἢ καί [English: “bread — or also”]; this, however, seems established by Dl. 870 (which is, incidentally, inexact and can be corrected only in part from Latin p. 64). Ep. continues, certainly abbreviating: ἰχθὺν καὶ ἀντὶ ἰχθύος ὄφιν ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ ἢ ἀντὶ ᾠοῦ σκορπίον [English: “a fish, and instead of a fish will he give him a snake, or instead of an egg a scorpion?”]. Tr. 231 likewise briefly: non serpentem pro pisce, nec scorpium pro ovo [English: “not a snake for a fish, nor a scorpion for an egg”].

13. According to Ep. schol. 24 and Dl. 870, ὄντες [English: “being”] with ℵDKM etc. from Matthew 7:11 instead of ὑπάρχοντες [English: “being”]. Ep. continues carelessly: οἴδατε δόματα ἀγαθὰ [English: “you know good gifts”] (in the refut. p. 331, διδόναι τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν [English: “to give to your children”]), πόσῳ μᾶλλον ὁ πατήρ [English: “how much more the Father”] (refut.: ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος [English: “your heavenly [Father]”]). Dl. has as far as “τέκνοις ὑμῶν” [English: “your children”], καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς [English: “and what follows”]. For the conclusion, Tr. 231: Itaque et spiritum sanctum is dabit etc. [English: “Accordingly, he will also give the Holy Spirit,” etc.].

14—18. Tr. uses them freely as evidence.

19a. Tr.: Si ego inquit in Beelzebub (al. Beelzebul) eicio daemonia, filii vestri in quo eiciunt. [English: “If I, he says, cast out demons by Beelzebub (variant: Beelzebul), by whom do your sons cast them out?”] Perhaps 19b was absent.

20. Tr. 231 is exact. ἐγὼ [English: “I”], with D c at this point—which others have after θεοῦ [English: “God”] and ℵA etc. do not have at all—probably derives from Matthew 12:28, where, however, the position is also uncertain.

21f. Tr. 231 is free; at V, 6 p. 291 too, he asks whether Marcion relates this to the Creator God. Because of its position, the quotation in Dl. 836 does not belong here, although a Marcionite is quoting.

27. Tr. 232; there, more exactly, v. 28. Was it ποιούντες [English: “doing”] instead of φυλάσσοντες [English: “keeping”]?

29. Tr. 232 has only signum petentibus non dat [English: “he gives no sign to those who seek one”]. Ep. schol. 25 expressly remarks that the material concerning Jonah, Nineveh, the Queen of the South, and Solomon had been deleted. The senselessly abbreviated quotation ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη σημεῖον οὐ δοθήσεται αὐτῇ [English: “this generation will not be given a sign”] will have to be completed from the refut. as above.

33. Tr. is free.

37ff. Tr. is not precisely verbatim. Was, for example, ἄφρονες [English: “fools”] in v. 40 absent?

41. Tr. 233: Date quae habetis eleemosynam, et omnia munda erunt vobis. [English: “Give what you have as alms, and all things will be clean for you.”] This gives ἔσται ὑμῖν [English: “will be for you”] with D; alongside it, ὑμῖν ἔσται [English: “for you will be”] is less well attested; otherwise the reading is ὑμῖν ἐστιν [English: “for you is”].

42. With reference to the whole passage, Tr. 232 vae ingerit Pharisaeis et doctoribus legis [English: “he heaps woe upon the Pharisees and the teachers of the law”]; p. 233, Sic et holuscula decimantes, vocationem autem et dilectionem dei praetereuntes obiurgat. Cuius dei vocationem et dilectionem, nisi cuius et rutam et mentam ex forma legis de decimis offerebant? [English: “Thus he also rebukes those who tithe garden herbs but pass by the calling and love of God. The calling and love of which god, if not of the one to whom they offered rue and mint under the law’s rule concerning tithes?”] Ep. schol. 26: ἀντὶ τοῦ “παρέρχεσθε τὴν κρίσιν τοῦ θεοῦ” εἶχε “παρέρχεσθε τὴν κλῆσιν τοῦ θεοῦ” [English: “instead of ‘you pass by the judgment of God,’ it had ‘you pass by the calling of God’”]. The omission of καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην [English: “and the love”] in itself means

[Apparatus and reconstruction continue on p. 474.]

Zahn’s apparatus (continued)

nothing, because Ep. also omits this in the ecclesiastical text, where it has after all never been absent, and yet in the refut. silently replaces the missing words with τὸ ἔλεος [English: “mercy”]. On account of their content alone, Marcion could hardly tolerate the words in brackets, or else Tr. could not have left them unused. They were also logically impossible, for one cannot “do” “the calling of God.” Since no corresponding reshaping is attested, deletion must be assumed.

43. Tr. 233: Primatum quoque captantes locorum et honorem salutationum cum incusat etc. [English: “when he also accuses those who seek the foremost places and the honor of salutations,” etc.].

46. Tr.: Invehitur et in doctores ipsos legis, quod onerarent alios importabilibus oneribus, quae ipsi ne digito quidem aggredi auderent. [English: “He inveighs also against the teachers of the law themselves because they burdened others with unbearable burdens that they themselves did not dare to touch with even a finger.”] Since importabilia [English: “unbearable things”] recurs afterward as well, perhaps ἀβάστακτα [English: “unbearable”] instead of δυσβάστακτα [English: “hard to bear”] should be assumed; further, οὐδὲ τῷ δακτύλῳ [English: “not even with the finger”], cf. Matthew 23:4, instead of ἑνὶ τῶν δακτύλων ὑμῶν οὐ [English: “with one of your fingers not”]. It is questionable whether the certainly inexact quotation Dl. 824—οὐαὶ ὑμῖν γραμματεῖς [English: “woe to you, scribes”], Latin p. 42 vae vobis scribae et Pharisaei [English: “woe to you, scribes and Pharisees”]—refers to v. 46 or v. 52.

47. Ep. schol. 27 is exactly verbatim: in the first citation μνήματα [English: “tombs”], later μνημεῖα [English: “monuments”]; Tr. 234, monimenta [English: “monuments”].

49—51. These were absent according to Ep. schol. 28 and are not touched upon by Tr. either.

52. Tr.: quam vero clavem habebant legis doctores, nisi interpretationem legis? ad cuius intellectum neque ipsi adibant ... neque alios admittebant [English: “But what key did the teachers of the law have except the interpretation of the law? They neither approached its understanding themselves ... nor admitted others.”].

12:1. Tr. 234: Cavete, inquit discipulis, a fermento Pharisaeorum, quod est hypocrisis. [English: “Beware, he says to the disciples, of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.”] πρῶτον [English: “first”] is otherwise absent only in b vg. Lucifer, ed. Hartel, p. 23, 6.

2. Tr. 234 is exact; v. 3, p. 235, is free.

4. Tr. 235, perhaps translating partly freely: Dehinc conversus ad discipulos “Dico autem, inquit, vobis amicis (meis Pamelius and Rigaltius), nolite terreri ab eis qui vos solummodo occidere possunt, nec post hoc ullam in vobis habent potestatem”. [English: “Then, turning to the disciples, ‘But I say,’ he says, ‘to you, friends’ (‘my friends,’ Pamelius and Rigaltius), ‘do not be terrified by those who can only kill you and after this have no power at all over you.’”] Ep. schol. 29, visibly abbreviating: λέγω (in the second citation δέ) τοῖς φίλοις μου, μὴ φοβηθῆτε ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποκτεινόντων τὸ σῶμα [English: “I say (in the second citation, ‘but’) to my friends, do not fear those who kill the body”], and nothing further.

5. Tr. 235 is exact as in Tischendorf, except itaque dico vobis [English: “accordingly I say to you”], thus perhaps λέγω οὖν [English: “I say, then”] instead of ναὶ λέγω [English: “yes, I say”]. Ep. schol. 29 excerpts only φοβηθῆτε δὲ τὸν μετὰ τὸ ἀποκτεῖναι ἔχοντα ἐξουσίαν βαλεῖν εἰς γέενναν [English: “but fear the one who, after killing, has authority to cast into Gehenna”].

6f. Ep. schol. 29 attests only the absence of v. 6; but v. 7 could not then remain, cf. at 21:18 and Volkmar, p. 95. Tr. has nothing.

8. Tr. 235: Dico enim [English: “for I say”], etc. A γάρ [English: “for”] otherwise unheard of was fitting after the removal of 6f. ἐνώπιον [English: “before”] before τῶν ἀνθρώπων [English: “men”] is probable, since according to Ep. schol. 30 the second member has ἐνώπιον instead of ἔμπροσθεν [English: “before”], and Tr. likewise has the same coram [English: “before”] four times in vv. 8 and 9. Ep.: ἀντὶ τοῦ “ὁμολογήσει ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ θεοῦ” “ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ” λέγει [English: “instead of ‘he will acknowledge before the angels of God,’ he says ‘before God’”]. That would presuppose καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου [English: “also the Son of Man”], but the text should probably be emended to ὁμολογήσω [English: “I will acknowledge”] in accordance with Tr., confitebor in illo coram deo [English: “I will acknowledge him before God”]. Ep. was concerned only with removing the angels, which Tr. also confirms. The influence of Matthew 10:32 is clear.

9. Tr. 235 is verbatim. Perhaps Marcion wrote καὶ ὃς ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με [English: “and whoever denies me”] entirely in accordance with v. 8, for Tr. translates et omnis qui negaverit me [English: “and everyone who denies me”]. Dl. 824 (also Latin p. 42) gives Matthew 10:33 verbatim and thus can prove nothing. The angels were absent here too, where Marcion does not, as in v. 8

[Apparatus and reconstruction continue on p. 475.]

Zahn’s apparatus (continued)

(ℵ* and one minuscule), have ecclesiastical witnesses on his side; only Codex Veronensis has drawn a similar text here from Matthew 10:33.

10. Thus, according to Tr. 235: Qui dixerit in filium hominis, remittetur illi, qui autem (variant: remittetur, illi autem qui) dixerit in spiritum sanctum, non remittetur ei (variant: ei remissio). [English: “Whoever speaks against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever (variant: ‘will be forgiven; but whoever’) speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven (variant: ‘forgiveness for him’).”] The recurrence of dixerit [English: “speaks”] instead of blasphemaverit [English: “blasphemes”] is also found in b (?) c e ff² i q; the placement of the second dixerit before in spiritum in a e; and αὐτῷ [English: “him”] at the end of the verse in a b ff² i l q—all in accordance with Matthew 12:32, from which Dce even have αὐτῷ οὔτε ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ οὔτε ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι [English: “him neither in this age nor in the one to come”].

11—14. Tr. 236 has exactly only vv. 12 and 14. ἢ μεριστήν [English: “or divider”] was absent, as in D c min.² Sc.

16—21. Tr. 237 has exactly only: Stulte, hac nocte animam tuam reposcent, quae autem parasti, cuius erunt? [English: “Fool, this night they will demand your soul; but the things you prepared, whose will they be?”] It is uncertain whether the reading was ἀπαιτήσουσιν [English: “they will demand”], but certain that, with D and most Latin witnesses—for example Cypr. test. III, 61; de opere et el. 13—it was τίνος [English: “whose”] instead of τίνι [English: “for whom”].

22—28. From Tr. 237 we would not infer with certainty a changed text. It merely seems strange that Tr. does not directly reproach Marcion with the acknowledgment of the Creator God contained in his text, if he found in it in v. 24 καὶ ὁ θεὸς τρέφει αὐτούς [English: “and God feeds them”] and in v. 28 τὸν χόρτον ... ὁ θεὸς οὕτως ἀμφιέζει [English: “the grass ... God so clothes”], and that Tr. instead advances the consideration of what kind of god it might befit to warn in this way against anxiety about food and clothing. Only vv. 22. 23, and at most also v. 26, form the basis of the argument. If, therefore, Tr. in this consideration touches upon all the elements of the passage, including those two sentences et tamen aluntur ab ipso (v. 24) and et tamen vestiuntur ab ipso (v. 28) [English: “and yet they are fed by him”; “and yet they are clothed by him”], it seems most natural to assume that these statements, and everything for which Tr. first seeks to compel Marcion’s acknowledgment through that question, were not present in his text. Now Ep. schol. 31 says οὐκ ἔχει τὸ “ὁ θεὸς ἀμφιέννυσι τὸν χόρτον” [English: “it does not have ‘God clothes the grass’”], thus attesting at least a thorough reshaping of v. 28, and not, as Hilgenfeld, p. 418, thought, an “insignificant variant.” But if it is not to be inferred from Tr. that he found vv. 24—28 substantially unchanged, but rather that these sentences were entirely absent, then there is also no need to infer with Hahn, p. 169, that later Marcionites first struck out the inconvenient sentence that Tr. had still found. They would then at least also have had to strike out the corresponding sentence in v. 24, unless they proceeded wholly thoughtlessly. Here, as so often, Ep. names only one characteristic piece. We do not know how much of vv. 24—28 Marcion left standing. Only ὀλιγόπιστοι [English: “of little faith”] in v. 28 is attested by Tr. 237: cur illos modicae fidei incusat? [English: “why does he accuse them of little faith?”] I conjecture that vv. 24. 27 (the name Solomon should also be noted) and 28 (except for the word just named) were absent. This produced a good connection. V. 25 followed v. 23 extremely well, and the ὀλιγόπιστοι from v. 28 could suitably be added to v. 26. But the deletions, if I understand correctly, are also attested directly by Tr. himself in the sentences cited at 9:3.

30. Verbatim according to Tr. 237 in two paragraphs. ταῦτα

[Apparatus and reconstruction continue on p. 476.]

Zahn’s apparatus (continued)

πάντα [English: “all these things”] is also absent in b i l q. Tr. again confirms ὁ πατήρ [English: “the Father”] without ὑμῶν [English: “your”]: prius quaeram, quem patrem intellegi velit Christus. [English: “First I shall ask which father Christ wishes to be understood.”] Thus Ep. schol. 32 again seems to report inexactly: “ὑμῶν δὲ ὁ πατὴρ οἶδεν ὅτι χρῄζετε τούτων” τῶν σαρκικῶν δή [English: “‘but your Father knows that you need these things,’ namely the fleshly things”] (in the second citation δή is absent, so that τῶν σαρκικῶν [English: “the fleshly things”] appears as part of the text). Since, according to Ep. schol. 34, Marcion deleted ὑμῶν in v. 32, it will also have been absent in v. 30. In v. 30 Ep. schol. 32 has only the subject matter in view, says nothing about the text, and gives the Catholic text.

31. Tr. 238: Quaerite (enim inquit) regnum dei et haec adicientur vobis. [English: “Seek (for, he says) the kingdom of God, and these things will be added to you.”] Ep. schol. 33: ζητεῖτε δὲ (δέ is absent in the second citation) τὴν βασ. τ. θ. καὶ ταῦτα πάντα προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν [English: “but seek (with ‘but’ absent in the second citation) the kingdom of God, and all these things will be added to you”]. The enim [English: “for”] belongs to Tr.’s argumentation; according to Ep., therefore, Marcion will have written δέ [English: “but”] with D a instead of πλήν [English: “nevertheless”]. It is, however, questionable whether, according to Ep., he had adopted πάντα [English: “all”] with AD etc. it. vg. from Matthew 6:33. In c. Marc. III, 24 p. 157 too—Et evangelium vestrum quoque habet “Quaerite primum regnum dei et haec adicientur vobis” [English: “And your Gospel too has, ‘Seek first the kingdom of God and these things will be added to you’”]—where Tr. is probably quoting from memory and therefore mixes in primum [English: “first”] from Matthew, this πάντα is nevertheless absent.

32. Ep. schol. 34: ἀντὶ τοῦ “ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν” “ὁ πατήρ” εἶχεν [English: “instead of ‘your Father’ it had ‘the Father’”].

35f. Tr. 238: Sumus servi ... Succingere debemus lumbos ... item lucernas ardentes habere ... atque ita expectare dominum ... unde redeuntem? si a nuptiis etc. [English: “We are servants ... We ought to gird our loins ... likewise to have lamps burning ... and thus to await the Lord ... returning from where? If from a wedding,” etc.]

38. Ep. schol. 35: ἀντὶ τοῦ “δευτέρᾳ ἢ τρίτῃ φυλακῇ” εἶχεν “ἑσπερινὴν φυλακήν” [English: “instead of ‘in the second or third watch’ it had ‘the evening watch’”]; in the second citation, “ἑσπερινὴ φυλακή” [English: “evening watch”]. As far as εὕρῃ [English: “finds”], likewise D (which has εὑρήσει [English: “will find”]), min. 1. 118. 209 (εὕρῃ b c e ff² i l Iren. Latin V, 34, 2; similarly also Sc); but all except b have the second and third watch in addition.

39—45. Tr. 238f. is free, but without any indication of a variant.

46. Ep. schol. 36 gives the canonical text verbatim, only without ἐν ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ — γινώσκει [English: “on the day on which — knows”], which of course cannot have been absent and is established by Tr. 239: qua die non putaverit, hora qua non scierit [English: “on the day he has not supposed, at the hour he has not known”]. When Tr. renders διχοτομεῖν [English: “to cut in two”] six times by segregare [English: “to separate”], this probably does not presuppose another text, but it corresponded to the Marcionite interpretation disputed there.

47f. Tr. 240 gives a brief indication. Dl. 833a: ὁ γὰρ δοῦλος ὁ γνοὺς καὶ μὴ ποιήσας δαρήσεται πολλά ... δαρήσεται ὀλίγα (sic) [English: “for the servant who knew and did not act will be beaten many times ... will be beaten few times” (sic)]. See, however, the note in Delarue. In Dl. Latin p. 66 above, the quotation is absent altogether.

49. Tr. 240: Ignem veni mittere in terram. [English: “I came to cast fire upon the earth.”] Dl. 824 seems to be an inexact blending of Matthew 10:34 and Luke 12:49. 51: “οὐκ ἦλθον βαλεῖν εἰρήνην, ἀλλὰ μάχαιραν” καὶ “οὐκ ἦλθον βαλεῖν εἰρήνην, ἀλλὰ πῦρ” [English: “‘I did not come to cast peace, but a sword,’ and ‘I did not come to cast peace, but fire’”]. The latter appears more exactly, in agreement with Tr. and Luke 12:49, in Dl. Latin p. 42: Ignem veni mittere super terram [English: “I came to cast fire upon the earth”].

50. This was certainly absent here; see at 22:24. First, Tr. could not have let it escape him; second, he attests the immediate connection of v. 51 to v. 49a; see the following note.

51. Tr. 240: Ipse melius interpretabitur ignis istius qualitatem adiciens “Putatis, venisse me pacem mittere in terram? non, dico vobis, sed separationem”. Machaeram quidem scriptum est. Sed Marcion emendat, quasi non et separatio opus sit machaerae. [English: “He himself will better interpret the character of that fire by adding, ‘Do you suppose that I came to cast peace upon the earth? No, I say to you, but division.’ ‘Sword’ indeed is written. But Marcion emends it, as though division too were not the work of a sword.”]

Zahn’s apparatus (continued)

Tr.’s translation, which is entirely analogous to v. 49, makes it overwhelmingly probable that Marcion gave the above text instead of εἰρήνην παρεγενόμην δοῦναι ἐν τῇ γῇ [English: “I came to give peace on the earth”], under the influence of Matthew 10:34. The mittere [English: “to cast”] in b l q also speaks in favor of such a Lukan text having been widespread early in the West as elsewhere (see Tischendorf). Tr. is certainly mistaken when he declares διαμερισμόν [English: “division”] an arbitrary alteration by Marcion and assumes the μάχαιραν [English: “sword”] from Matthew 10:34 as the ecclesiastical text of our passage—and all the more when, at III, 14 p. 141, among the exempla [English: “examples”] that the opponents too acknowledge, he also adduces this: Hanc et dominus ipse machaeram venit mittere in terram, non pacem [English: “This sword the Lord himself also came to cast upon the earth, not peace”].

53. Tr. 240 is exact; 54—56 are free.

57. Tr. 241: exprobrat etiam quod iustum non a semet ipsis indicarent. [English: “He also reproaches them for not judging what is right from themselves.”] It cannot be said whether Marcion read τί δὲ [English: “but why”] or omitted it with D b (?) Sc.

58. Ep. schol. 37 has μήποτε κατασύρῃ — πράκτορι [English: “lest he drag [you] — to the officer”]. The position of σε [English: “you”] agrees with D and one minuscule.

59. Tr. 241: nisi soluto etiam novissimo quadrante. [English: “unless even the last quadrans has been paid.”] Since D actually offers τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην [English: “the last quadrans”] from Matthew 5:26, in Tr. too, and likewise in all Itala manuscripts, this will not be an inexact translation but this Greek text.

13:1—9. Ep. schol. 38: ἦν παρακεκομμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ “ἦλθόν τινες ἀναγγέλλοντες ... τῶν θυσιῶν αὐτῶν” ἕως ὅπου λέγει περὶ τῶν ἐν τῷ Σιλωάμ, δεκαοκτὼ ἀποθανόντων ἐν τῷ πύργῳ, καὶ ὅτι “ἐὰν μὴ μετανοήσητε”, καὶ ἕως τῆς παραβολῆς τῆς συκῆς, περὶ ἧς εἶπεν ὁ γεωργός, ὅτι “σκάψω καὶ βάλω κοπρία καὶ ἐὰν μὴ ποιήσῃ, ἔκκοψον”. [English: “It had been cut away from ‘some came reporting ... their sacrifices’ as far as where it speaks about those at Siloam, the eighteen who died in the tower, and that ‘unless you repent,’ and as far as the parable of the fig tree, concerning which the gardener said, ‘I will dig and put down manure, and if it does not produce, cut it down.’”] On this basis Hahn, p. 175, and Volkmar, p. 37, rightly maintained that 13:1—9 was absent, and not merely 13:1—5, as Rettig, Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 983, and Hilgenfeld, p. 419, thought. If within this scholion the first ἕως [English: “as far as”] is undoubtedly meant inclusively, then of course so is the second. The same applies to the ἕως ὅπου [English: “as far as where”] in schol. 41 in the Evangelion and schol. 9 in 1 Corinthians, p. 320. Everything after μετανοήσητε [English: “you repent”] would also be entirely superfluous if it were intended merely to repeat what had already been stated quite clearly up to that point, namely that 13:1—5 was absent. Tr. too is silent about 13:1—9.

10ff. Tr. 241: Quaestionem rursus de curatione sabbato facta quomodo discussit: Unusquisque vestrum sabbatis non solvit asinum aut bovem suum a praesepi et ducit ad potum? [English: “How did he discuss the question again concerning a healing performed on the Sabbath? Does not each of you on Sabbaths untie his ass or his ox from the manger and lead it to drink?”] Did v. 15, contrary to all other attestation, read τὸν ὄνον ἢ τὸν βοῦν αὐτοῦ [English: “the ass or his ox”]? Nor can a distinct text for v. 16 be derived from Ep. schol. 39: (ταύτην δὲ θυγατέρα Ἀβραάμ [without οὖσαν ἣν; in the second citation at least ἣν] ἔδησεν ὁ σατανᾶς) [English: “(but this daughter of Abraham [without ‘being whom’; in the second citation at least ‘whom’] Satan bound)”].

19. The above text is a verbatim translation of Tr. 241’s apparently exact (inquit) quotation. The seminavit in horto suo [English: “he sowed in his garden”], which Tr. repeats once more, instead of iecit in hortum suum [English: “he cast into his garden”], derives from Matthew 13:31, apart from κῆπος [English: “garden”] retained from Luke in place of ἀγρός [English: “field”]. Whether, on the other hand, Marcion wrote ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ κήπῳ [English: “in his own garden”], or with ℵB (εἰς κῆπον) ἑαυτοῦ [English: “(into a garden) of his own”], or with D (εἰς τὸν κῆπον) αὐτοῦ [English: “(into the garden) his”], remains uncertain. The fact that Tr., once in the following polemic, writes with emphasis on the possessive cum “in suo horto” dixerit [English: “when he had said ‘in his own garden’”], for that very reason by no means establishes a

[Apparatus and syntax continue on p. 478.]

Zahn’s apparatus [p. 478]

[Apparatus continued from p. 477.]

ἑαυτοῦ [English: “his own”]. | 20f. Tr. 241f.: De sequenti plane similitudine vereor, ne forte alterius dei regno portendat. Fermento enim comparavit illud, non azymis, quae familiariora sunt creatori. [English: “I plainly fear concerning the following similitude, lest perhaps it point to the kingdom of another god. For he compared it to leaven, not to unleavened bread, which is more familiar to the Creator.”] | 25ff. Tr. 242: Cum surrexerit, inquit, pater familiae … et cluserit ostium … Quibus pulsantibus respondebit: „Nescio (perhaps without ὑμᾶς?) unde sitis“, et rursus enumerantibus, quod coram illo ederint et biberint et in plateis eorum docuerit, adiciet „Recedite a me omnes operarii iniquitatis; illic erit fletus et frendor dentium.“ [English: “When the head of the household has risen, he says, … and has closed the door … To those knocking he will answer, ‘I do not know (perhaps without ὑμᾶς [“you”]?) where you are from’; and when they in turn recount that they ate and drank before him and that he taught in their streets, he will add, ‘Depart from me, all workers of iniquity; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”] | 28 Ep. schol. 40: παρέκοψε πάλιν τὸ „τότε ὄψεσθε Ἀβραὰμ — ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ“, ἀντὶ δὲ τούτου ἐποίησεν „ὅτε πάντας (. . . as above in the text . . .) ὑμᾶς δὲ ἐκβαλλομένους“, ἐποίησε (in the second quotation προσέθηκε) δὲ „κρατουμένους ἔξω“ καὶ (in the second quotation without καί) „ἐκεῖ ἐστὶν (later ἔσται) ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων“. [English: “Again he cut out ‘then you will see Abraham — in the kingdom of God,’ and instead of this made ‘when all (. . . as above in the text . . .) but you being cast out’; and he made (in the second quotation, ‘added’) ‘being kept outside,’ and (in the second quotation without καί [‘and’]) ‘there is (later ‘there will be’) weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”]

As always, the substantial alterations in the second quotation are worthless; see above, p. 413. Only ἔσται [English: “there will be”], because it is confirmed by Tr. (see the preceding entry), must be accepted as original in the first quotation as well. The very substantial καί [English: “and”] before ἐκεῖ subsequently introduces a textual element useful for the polemic, which according to Tr. stood in the proper place, immediately after v. 27. Epiphanius carelessly reproduces the Catholic text, for τότε [English: “then”] instead of ὅτε [English: “when”] is unheard of; further, he carelessly provisionally retains ἐκβαλλομένους [English: “being cast out”] in the quotation from Marcion, and retracts it only in parentheses. Epiphanius himself later misunderstood this, hence προσέθηκε [English: “added”] instead of the original ἐποίησε [English: “made”]. Everything substantial is confirmed by Tr. 242: Ergo erit poena, a quo fit exclusio in poenam, cum videbunt iustos introeuntes in regnum dei, se vero detineri foris. [English: “Therefore there will be punishment from him by whom exclusion into punishment occurs, when they see the righteous entering the kingdom of God, but themselves being kept outside.”] Four more occurrences of detinere. The introeuntes, which Epiphanius does not confirm and which among the Latin witnesses is virtually regular here without any basis in a demonstrable Greek text, carries all the less weight because Tr. is not quoting verbatim. | 29—35 Ep. schol. 41 attests complete deletion; Tr. has nothing about it. | 14, 1—11 is entirely without trace in Tr. and Ep. Complete absence might appear questionable because Ep. schol. 41 would then probably have included this pericope too under his παρέκοψε [English: “he cut out”]. On the other hand, in his striving for brevity Marcion could have regarded it as superfluous alongside 6, 6—11; 13, 10—17. If 14, 1—11 was absent, and not perhaps only 14, 2—11, only v. 12 required a slight reshaping at the beginning; for v. 15, which moreover is not attested, had a sufficient basis in the parable, whereas the parable itself needed no such basis. | 12ff. Tr. 242: Ad prandium vel ad coenam quales vocari iubet? [English: “What sort does he command to be invited to luncheon or dinner?”] On v. 14: qui scilicet (et?) humanitatis istius vicem retribuere non possunt. Hanc si Christus captari vetat, in resurrectione eam promittens etc. [English: “who, of course (and?), cannot repay this act of kindness in return. If Christ forbids this to be sought, promising it at the resurrection,” etc.] | 16 Tr. 242f.: Etiam invitatoris parabola. Homo quidam fecit coenam et vocavit multos. [English: “Also the parable of the host. A certain man made a dinner and invited many.”] Only X arm. om. μέγα. | 17ff. Tr. 243 freely. On v. 21: Hoc ut patrifamiliae renuntiatum est, motus tunc (bene quod et motus, negat enim Marcion moveri deum suum, ita et hoc [v. l. hic] meus est), mandat de plateis et vicis civitatis facere sublectionem. [English: “When this was reported to the head of the household, being moved then (rightly, because he too was moved; for Marcion denies that his god is moved, thus this too [variant: ‘this one’] is mine), he commands that a selection be made from the squares and streets of the city.”] Thus certainly not

[Apparatus continues on p. 479.]

Zahn’s apparatus [p. 479]

[Apparatus continued from p. 478.]

ὀργισθείς [English: “having become angry”]; see above, pp. 452f. | 23 Tr. 243: Dehinc loco abundante praecepit etiam de viis et sepibus colligi. [English: “Then, while room remained, he commanded that people also be gathered from the roads and hedges.”] Thus ἔτι τόπος ἐστίν [English: “there is still room”], v. 22, was not absent either. By contrast, v. 24 is not taken into account, for v. 21 suffices as the basis of the sentence Nec potest iam fastidiosos iudicare, quos nunquam retro invitavit. [English: “Nor can he now judge as disdainful those whom he never invited previously.”] It is impermissible to infer from Ep. refut. 70, as Hilgenfeld, p. 421, does, the presence or even the wording of v. 26; see above, pp. 412—418. | 15, 3ff. Tr. 244: Ovem et drachmam perditam quis requirit? [English: “Who seeks the lost sheep and drachma?”] In v. 10 τῶν ἀγγέλων [English: “of the angels”] was probably absent; see on 12, 8f. Tr. 244: exultare illius est de poenitentia peccatoris … qui se professus est olim malle peccatoris paenitentiam quam mortem. [English: “it belongs to him to rejoice over a sinner’s repentance … who once professed that he preferred a sinner’s repentance to death.”] Thus it is God himself who rejoices. Correspondingly, v. 7 too will have been altered. | 11—32 Ep. 42: πάλιν παρέκοψε πᾶσαν τὴν παραβολὴν τῶν δύο υἱῶν κτλ. [English: “Again he cut out the whole parable of the two sons, etc.”] Tr. has nothing. | 16, 1—13 Tr. 245, reaching back from v. 13 to 1—7, then more precisely v. 9a and again the final clause of 13, thereafter p. 246 v. 11 exactly, without a variant; then v. 12: Et si in alieno fideles inventi non estis, meum quis dabit vobis. [English: “And if you were not found faithful in what belongs to another, who will give you what is mine?”] Since he renders ἐγένεσθε [English: “you became”] in v. 11 exactly with exstitistis, he must have found ηὑρέθητε [English: “you were found”] here. τὸ ἐμόν [English: “what is mine”], instead of τὸ ὑμέτερον (ℵ A D etc.) or τὸ ἡμέτερον (B L), is otherwise found only in min. 157 e i l. Thus only v. 8, 9b, and 10 are without evidence. Dl. 820e, 821a, where v. 13 is quoted but without οἰκέτης, cf. Matthew 6, 24, cannot be considered, on account of the passage’s setting alone. | 14 Tr. 245 freely. | 15 Tr. 246 partly freely, partly exactly. | 16 Ep. schol. 43 gives the above text without ἐξ οὗ εὐαγγελίζεται [English: “from him it is proclaimed as good news”]. That this is arbitrary abbreviation is proved by the εἰς αὐτήν [English: “into it”] that follows in Epiphanius himself. Tr. 246: Lex et prophetae usque ad Joannem, ex quo regnum dei annuntiatur. [English: “The law and the prophets were until John, from whom the kingdom of God is announced.”] Nothing further. Marcion wrote ἕως (Ep.) with A D etc. (against ℵ B L etc.), from Matthew 11, 13. ἐξ οὗ (Tr.) or ἀφ’ οὗ instead of ἀπὸ τότε is otherwise unattested. | 17 Tr. 247: Transeat igitur caelum et terra citius, sicut et lex et prophetae, quam unus apex verborum domini. [English: “Therefore let heaven and earth pass away sooner, as also the law and the prophets, than one serif of the Lord’s words.”] Again: ideo subtexuit facilius elementa transire quam verba sua. [English: “therefore he added that the elements pass away more easily than his words.”] Thus the present text has been altered in accordance with 21, 33. The words sicut et lex et prophetae are naturally Tr.’s addition within the first rendering, which is manifestly free elsewhere too, and are absent from the substantially more exact second one. Hahn, who failed to recognize this, p. 185, would consequently also have had to write παρελθέτω οὖν ὁ οὐρανὸς κτλ. [English: “therefore let heaven pass away, etc.”] | 18 Tr. 247 and 248 twice, first adulterium committit, later ad. commisit; further, et (absent the first time) qui dimissam a viro (a marito dim.) duxerit aeque adulter est. [English: “commits adultery”; “committed adultery”; “and he who has married a woman dismissed by a man (dismissed by a husband) is equally an adulterer.”] Thus almost certainly καὶ (without πᾶς) ὁ ἀπολελ. [English: “and he who (marries) a dismissed woman”], and perhaps ὁμοίως μοιχός ἐστιν [English: “likewise is an adulterer”]. | 19—31 Tr. 249f. treats the whole at length; Ep. schol. 44 gives a brief summary, schol. 45. 46 individual items; Dl. 826ff. (lat. 47f.) gives a complete reading aloud of the pericope with subsequent discussion. | 21 Dl. ἀπὸ τῶν πιπτόντων [English: “from the things falling”], but Latin de micis quae cadebant [English: “from the crumbs that were falling”]; Dl. ἔλειχον (v. l.

[Apparatus continues on p. 480.]

Zahn’s apparatus [p. 480]

[Apparatus continued from p. 479.]

ἀπέλειχον) τὰ τραύματα (v. l. ἕλκη) αὐτοῦ [English: “they licked (variant: ‘licked off’) his wounds (variant: ‘sores’)”]. | 22 Dl. ὑπὸ (om. τῶν) ἀγγέλων [English: “by (omitting ‘the’) angels”]. | 23 Dl. as above; Latin: sepultus est in infernum. Elevans autem. [English: “he was buried in hell. But lifting up.”] Marcion thus joined ἐτάφη immediately with ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ, with ℵ (first hand) a c e g¹ i l m vg. (similarly also the Jerusalem Gospel and Tatian, Forsch. I, 177), yet without subsequently inserting καὶ ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ or the like, as a i (Jerusalem Gospel and Tatian) do. ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ (with D it. vg.), according to Dl. (admittedly v. l. ἐν τοῖς κόλποις, but also Latin in sinu), and likewise Tr. 249f. five times in different cases, may, however, refer to v. 22. | 24 Dl. δακτύλου without αὐτοῦ, but Latin digiti sui. | 25 Dl., including the Latin, also has Ἀβρ. δὲ εἶπε. What follows appears twice, Dl. 827b, 828b; from νῦν—Λάζαρος also in Ep. schol. 45. Dl. twice has σύ after ἀπέλαβες (not expressed in the Latin) and omits σου after ἀγαθά (likewise the Latin). Dl. 827 has ὅδε, 828 has ὧδε, but the Latin has iste precisely in the second passage, and this will thus have the same meaning as hic in the first. Ep. schol. 45 also confirms ὅδε, although it is not transmitted there; for why else would Epiphanius have written ὧδε (read ὅδε) παρακαλεῖται, ὁ αὐτὸς Λάζαρος [English: “‘here’ (read ‘this one’) is comforted, the same Lazarus”], except in order to explain the ὅδε torn out of its context? The sharp contrast of σύ—Λάζαρος (see above) was to recur in ὅδε—σύ. Likewise Tatian, Ephraim Graecus (Forsch. I, 177), and a few minuscules. | 26 Dl. ἐπὶ πᾶσι τούτοις [English: “besides all these things”], but Latin in his omnibus [English: “in all these things”]; otherwise both agree in the above text. The deletion of θελόντες [English: “wishing”] will not be accidental. The nonsensical loss of εἶπε δέ in v. 27 in Dl. will be a scribal error; the Latin at least inserted inquit as a substitute. Further variants are for the most part insecurely transmitted in Dl. itself and at the same time insignificant: v. 27 οἰκίαν; v. 28 ἐκεῖ before πέντε and μή without ἵνα and τούτου before τὸν τόπον; v. 29 λέγει αὐτῷ· ἔχουσι (so also Latin); v. 30 om. Ἀβραάμ; further μετανοήσωσιν (Latin tunc poenitebunt [English: “then they will repent”]). | 31 Ep. schol. 46: εἶπεν Ἀβραάμ· ἔχουσι Μωϋσέα καὶ τοὺς προφήτας, ἀκουσάτωσαν αὐτῶν, ἐπεὶ οὐδὲ τοῦ ἐγειρομένου ἐκ (second quotation: ἀπὸ) νεκρῶν ἀκούσωσιν. [English: “Abraham said: They have Moses and the prophets; let them listen to them, since they will not even listen to one raised from (second quotation: ‘from’) the dead.”] According to this, vv. 30. 31 would have been absent. This cannot be refuted from Tr. 251, who renders only v. 29. But Epiphanius, who says nothing here about textual alteration, once again had only a positive interest in the content and compressed it. The inaccuracy of the form is already shown by εἶπεν Ἀβρ., which is otherwise attested neither in v. 29 nor in v. 31. At the end, Epiphanius nevertheless confirms to some degree the above original text, in which Dl. 827 (a false reading in Delarue’s marginal note) agrees exactly with the Latin. Rufinus, and certainly not an erring scribe, also rendered the striking ἀκούσωσιν with audiant (Caspari emends audient). | 17, 1f. Little can be founded upon the rather free allusion in Dl. 830 (πῶς ἔτι,

[Apparatus continues on p. 481.]