Steven Avery
Administrator
Primary sources.
Tertullian
Adversus Marcionem (Against Marcion)
Roger Pearse - superb page
http://www.tertullian.org/works/adversus_marcionem.htm
(1885) Translated by Peter Holmes. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0312.htm
The Marcion Problem: Tertullian (Part I) (2015)0
Jacob J. Prahlow
https://pursuingveritas.com/2015/06/02/the-marcion-problem-tertullian-part-i/
Epiphanius
2. Epiphanius Against the Marcionites Being an account of the followers of Marcion, and the errors of his gospel
The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: Book I (sects 1-46)
https://books.google.com/books?id=IKyxt9kyys8C&pg=PA294
https://books.google.com/books?id=-O15DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA228
https://books.google.com/books?id=U_cFEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA210
Peter Kirby
Recent books & articles about Marcion
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1688&start=10#p38364
Anonymous
All give insights on Marcion’s Apostolikon and Euangelion.
Ephraim should be added, below in separate post.
===========================================
Clayton Jefford review
============================================
Scholarship Review - very nicely done
Marcion's Gospel - Editorial for special issue of Journal of Ancient Christianity (2017)
Uta Heil
https://www.academia.edu/33271772/M...cial_issue_of_Journal_of_Ancient_Christianity
============================================
This page
PBF
Marcion is popular with scholars who theorize a 2nd-century New Testament
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ho-theorize-a-2nd-century-new-testament.1737/
============================================
Then they can come up with absurd theories, like BeDuhn and Markus Vinzent. Thus Reviews by Ehrman et al will be positive.
Wikipedia has the Marcion hypothesis, a type of Marcion priority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_hypothesis
Since Luke was written to the high priest Theophilus, c. 41 AD, this is all nonsense.
Even if you do not accept the Theophilus proposal, Luke was written by 50 A.D.
And the terminus ante quem has to be before Acts, ergo. 60 AD although that really does not work.
====================================
BCHF -
Recent books & articles about Marcion
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1688
The Marcionite Research Library - Recommended Books
http://www.marcionite-scripture.info/Books.html
Marcion
David Ingliss
https://sites.google.com/site/inglisonmarcion/Home/marcion/
====================================
Tertullian
Adversus Marcionem (Against Marcion)
Roger Pearse - superb page
http://www.tertullian.org/works/adversus_marcionem.htm
(1885) Translated by Peter Holmes. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0312.htm
The Marcion Problem: Tertullian (Part I) (2015)0
Jacob J. Prahlow
https://pursuingveritas.com/2015/06/02/the-marcion-problem-tertullian-part-i/
In comparison to all other extant ancient works, the writings of Tertullian of Carthage against Marcion remain the fullest and most precise rejection of Marcion’s theology. Tertullian composed as least six works against Marcion, including his Prescription against Heresies and Five Books against Marcion which are extant today.[37] In the Prescription against Heretics, Tertullian made a number of accusations concern Marcion’s use of scripture, canon, and authority, perhaps the most clear being that Marcion had induced a schism within Catholic church authority.[38] (continues)
Epiphanius
2. Epiphanius Against the Marcionites Being an account of the followers of Marcion, and the errors of his gospel
The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: Book I (sects 1-46)
https://books.google.com/books?id=IKyxt9kyys8C&pg=PA294
https://books.google.com/books?id=-O15DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA228
https://books.google.com/books?id=U_cFEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA210
Peter Kirby
Recent books & articles about Marcion
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1688&start=10#p38364
In general terms, most of what is believed to be likely to be the exact Greek text of Marcion's NT, which doesn't come from the manuscripts of the NT themselves (in any case), are the quotations found in the Panarion of Epiphanius, in part of book 1 about Marcion.
Anonymous
All give insights on Marcion’s Apostolikon and Euangelion.
Ephraim should be added, below in separate post.
===========================================
Clayton Jefford review
BeDuhn acknowledges (with von Harnack) that only three primary sources for this Herculean effort remain: Tertullian, Epiphanius, and a third anonymous author, all of whom write in a polemical tone and “make no attempt to quote every word of Marcion’s text” (34). Otherwise, only a handful of lesser witnesses may be accessed, including the so-called “Marcionite Prologues to the works of Paul” in the Apostolikon.
============================================
Scholarship Review - very nicely done
Marcion's Gospel - Editorial for special issue of Journal of Ancient Christianity (2017)
Uta Heil
https://www.academia.edu/33271772/M...cial_issue_of_Journal_of_Ancient_Christianity
============================================
This page
PBF
Marcion is popular with scholars who theorize a 2nd-century New Testament
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ho-theorize-a-2nd-century-new-testament.1737/
============================================
Then they can come up with absurd theories, like BeDuhn and Markus Vinzent. Thus Reviews by Ehrman et al will be positive.
Wikipedia has the Marcion hypothesis, a type of Marcion priority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_hypothesis
Biblical scholars as varied as Johann Salomo Semler, Johann Gottfried Eichhorn, Albert Schwegler, Albrecht Ritschl, John Knox,[8] Paul-Louis Couchoud, John Townsend, Joseph B. Tyson,[9] Jason BeDuhn, Markus Vinzent, Matthias Klinghardt,[10] and David Trobisch[11] have dissented from the traditional view that the Gospel of Marcion was a revision of the Gospel of Luke (this traditional view may be called the "patristic hypothesis"). They argue that at least the Gospel of Luke is either a later redaction of the Gospel of Marcion ("Schwegler hypothesis"), or that both gospels are redactions of some prior gospel –a "proto-Luke" – with Marcion's text being closer to the original ("Semler hypothesis"). Several arguments have been put forward in favor of those two latter views. Vinzent and Klinghardt argue that all four canonical gospels post-date the Marcionite gospeltext (though they differ on who might have written it).
Since Luke was written to the high priest Theophilus, c. 41 AD, this is all nonsense.
Even if you do not accept the Theophilus proposal, Luke was written by 50 A.D.
And the terminus ante quem has to be before Acts, ergo. 60 AD although that really does not work.
====================================
BCHF -
Recent books & articles about Marcion
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1688
The Marcionite Research Library - Recommended Books
http://www.marcionite-scripture.info/Books.html
Marcion
David Ingliss
https://sites.google.com/site/inglisonmarcion/Home/marcion/
====================================
Last edited: