The Father of the New Testament
It is no secret that for the first 100 years of Christian history there was no New Testament, nor were particular writings of Christian luminaries treated as scripture. On the contrary, only the Old Testament was accorded the status of scripture among the groups which would become the proto-orthodox. Christians interpreted the OT scriptures in many varied and sometimes contradictory ways under the claimed inspiration of the spirit of Christ, but their writings did not carry the weight of scripture. The writings of those believers allegorized the OT and saw Christianity as a continuation and fulfillment of the OT. It was a Judeo-Christian religion, and from the writings of the early non canonical Christian authors, it was more Judeo than Christian.
Meanwhile,another form of Christianity was developing in Asia Minor(the place of Paul's evangelization). It burst onto the pages of history in the first half of the second century. A wealthy man named Marcion from the city of Sinope in the province of Pontus-Bithynia which is adjacent to Galatia emerged as one of the most influential people in Christian history. Marcion, a shipping magnate, spread his version of Christianity into the Mediterranean and along the caravan routes to the east towards Syria and Persia. The dates for Marcion's life are a bit uncertain with estimates ranging from the 70's CE to about 160 CE.
It is unknown whether Marcion innovated his own Christian viewpoints or if he was carrying on a tradition inherited from earlier teachers. His father was himself a bishop. In any event, the emergence of Marcion into the historical record is our first glimpse of Pauline Christianity, the Pauline epistles, and the Gospel of Luke. He considered Paul to be the only authorative teacher of the gospel. He, along with Paul, cursed alternate or competing gospels.
Marcion presented the Christian world with its first New Testament, or canon, ca 140 CE. His New Testament contained ten epistles of Paul and one Gospel which seems to be a short version of the Gospel of Luke which he called simply "Euangelion," or "Gospel" not attributed to an author. The Pauline epistles he brought forth are Romans, Galatians, 1 Cor, 2 Cor, Laodiceans (Ephesiahs), Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thess, 2 Thess, and Philemon. He considered the epistle to the Galatians to be the most important.
Marcion's theology was quite different from that which became orthodox Christianity. He believed that the Old Testament God was not the father of Jesus. Rather, he considered the God of the Jews to be a primitive lower being who created the material world and who had very objectionable characteristics. He was jealous, envious, vindictive, retributative, angry, cruel, intrusive, and judgmental. He was a demiurge who trapped the souls of men in the misery of material bodies. In contrast, Christ made known a previously unknown God of love and benevolence. Marcion didn't deny the reality of the Jewish God, he simply dismissed him as the God of a different religion, and he rejected the Old Testament. He wished the Jews well, but proclaimed that Christianity had no part of the Jewish religion.
The Marcionite name for the heavenly savior was ISU CHRESTOS. Whether the ISU was a form of sacral abbreviation for IESUS or if it was the actual name or title cannot be known. Likewise, the spelling of CHRESTOS may have been original Pauline for the "Good helper" rather than the meaning of anointed as indicated by the familiar Christos spelling which may have been later scribal license. For him, Christ was the sudden savior, a phantom (not an actual man) who descended from God in the form of a fully mature human, snatched believers out of the control of the evil God of the Old Testament, freed them from the bondage of the Torah, and then he ascended back to the Father. He was not the Messiah of Jewish expectations. Marcion and his followers upheld an extremely high moral standard, even believing that sex within marriage was wrong, but they did not subject themselves to the Torah or any of the Jewish practices. His New Testament did not in any way tie the prophecies of the OT to Christ or to the church and its teachings.
Marcion went to Rome ca 140 CE to present his ideas to the church leaders there. They utterly rejected him. He went on to lead his followers into all the known world. Marcionism became the main competitor to emerging orthodoxy. Marcionite churches (called synagogues) could be found throughout the empire. The Marcionites called themselves "Christians" and seemed to hold the trademark for that term. The proto-orthodox groups coalesced around the name "Catholic." The oldest Christian church found by archaeologists was Marcionite, located in Syria and dating from 318 CE. The inscription on this synagogue is dedicated to "The Lord and Savior ISU CHRESTOS." The pervasiveness of Marcionite Christianity was so complete,that if not for the prohibition of sex which precluded organic growth, it could have been the winner rather than catholic orthodoxy. Marcionism persevered alongside catholic Christianity well into the 300's CE.
Marcion's importance for the history and development of Christianity are these:
1. Marcion gives us the first attestation to the Pauline epistles. Without him, Paul's letters may never have been known. The epistles he presented were not identical to those in the orthodox canon. Missing are references to OT prophecies, messiah talk, and even the vague verses which can be construed to be indicate humanness for Jesus.
2. Marcion was the first to suggest that the new covenant represented a separate and new religion. He is in this sense the father of New Testament Christianity. His complete break with the Jewish epic and refusal to see Christianity as the inheritor and fulfillment of that continuing epic was a direct challenge to emerging catholic orthodoxy. Many protestants, especially Baptists, would find this familiar.
3. He is the first Christian to put forward a canon, an authoritative collection of writings intended to be the final arbiter in faith and practice. This "sola scriptura" stance makes him in a sense the first protestant.
4. He broke with the legalism which characterize proto-orthodox Christianity proclaiming that salvation comes through faith only. "Sola Fide" also sounds quite protestant.
5. His Gospel lacked any geneology, birth stories, childhood exploits, and association with John. The ISU of the Gospel was docetic, a heavenly being who burst on the scene only seeming to be a man. The Gospel is a form of Luke, but it is about 1/3 shorter than canonical Luke. His detractors said he shortened the original Luke, however it is just as possible that his version was the original and that orthodox scribes added the material which is now there in canonical Luke. Since Marcion was the first to present Luke's gospel, as far as history knows, it simply cannot be known whether his version was the original and later added to or if he excised objectionable material from the original. This is an interesting conundrum for fundamentalist inerrancy.
6.The reaction against him by the proto-orthodox church in Rome had incalculable implications for the history and development of Christianity, virtually all forms of which derive from that stream.
A. Marcion was roundly denounced by the Roman church. Polycarp called him "the firstborn of Satan." In that Marcionite congregations were called synagogues, and were referred to as Satanic, it is interesting that John the revelator calls a group of churches in Asia Minor (Marcionite territory) "synagogues of Satan."
B. Marcion got the ball rolling on the concept of a canon of authoritative writings by Christian authors. In the next few decades, the proto-canon began to greatly expand. Three more Pauline epistles were written 1 Tim, 2 Tim, and Titus. These epistles which clearly reflect a period when church structure and authority were coming into play make a case for a hierarchical structure and a requirement to be obedient to those in "offices" above. They also imply a much more human Jesus than the Marcionite Paulines. Interpolations into the texts of the ten Marcionite Paulines occurred. 1 Pet, and 2 Pet were written to bolster the case of catholic Christianity. The book of Acts was produced to make a case for apostolic authority, apostolic succession, and to domesticate Paul, that is, to turn him into an apostle in line with the others and even submitting to their authority. Acts created an entirely fictional historiography of the supposed origins and spread of the church previously unmentioned in any of the writings of other Christians. Luke may have been expanded to include a miraculous and human birth account to "prove" the humanity of Jesus to counter Marcion's ghost Jesus.
C. The concept of apostolic succession made possible the authority and preroggatives of the orthodox leadership to issue directives and assign the label "authentic" or "spurious" to Christian writings vying for canonical status. Many gospels, forgeries, and interpolated copies began to appear. Church leaders arbitrarily set up standards for accepting a writing as authentic and authoritative. The critera included a claim to have been written by an apostle, a claim to have been written by someone who knew an apostle, and a writing had to reflect the beliefs of a broad part of the proto-orthodox movement. Another word for this is tradition. Since many of the newly authored writings had no basis for apostolic authorship claims, the church looked for and/or created stories on the thinnest of rationale to claim apostolicity for the various expanded canon. This is a place where protestant adherants to the sola scriptura principle need to take a breath and realize that many of the NT books which were finally declared canonical are there only on account of church tradition. As Bonhoffer put it, "Protestants, in denying the authority of tradition, have cut off the branch on which they sit."
D. The Pauline epistles which make up the bulk of the NT have no historical attestation prior to Marcion. His version of the Paulines may in fact be the original. That is an open question which cannot be answered by detractors or apologists. That the Paulines were interpolated in places is quite evident. Were they even written by Paul? That also cannot be known.Marcion himself could have written them. We just don't know. But we do know that prior to Marcion's emergence in Rome with his Pauline corpus, no Christian group or writer had been referring to Paul as an authority nor to his writings as authoritative. If Marcion's Pauline Christianity was not the original version, or at least an evolved version, then where was it? The proto-orthodox leadership did with Paul what it did with various societal/cultural beliefs and practices; it absorbed rather than rejected. Marcionism/Paulinism became so pervasive that it was easier to absorb Paul, interpolate, redefine, and write in his name than to reject him outright. The result is the Judeo/Christian religion which became Christianity as we know it. Prior to Marcion, most of the other forms of Christianity had been largely Jewish with Platonic influences. Marcion's Paulinism mixed with Jewish Christianity formed a syncretic amalgam, a synthesis of the absorption of two differing streams.
E. The Creeds of the church were not just statements of faith. They became necessary in reaction to alternate and competing beliefs. The first creed "The Roman Symbol" which later evolved into the apostles creed was a reaction to Marcion. Among other things, it points out that God the father is the creator, Jesus was truly man born in the normal manner (albeit with a miraculous conception), and that there will be a final judgment with punishments, all very un-Marcionite concepts. This original creed is thought to originate from the late second century.
It is interesting to note that when Constantine called the first catholic council to accomplish doctrinal unity, the locale chosen was Nicea in the heart of Marcionite country. Since Marcionism was still competing with catholicism, Constantine's choice of Nicea must have been political, as was his legalization of catholic Christianity. The Nicene Creed, while primarily aimed at Arianism, also targets Marcionism.
Today's protestant fundamentalists have Marcion to thank for their doctrine of scripture alone. Prior to him, there was no apparent interest in according authority to any Christian writings, let alone calling them scripture. Marcion's New Testament Christianity with its own scriptures was the work of "the firstborn of Satan," as he was called by the Catholic fathers whose use of the magesterium of tradition gave us so many of the New Testament books which fundamentalists so glibly assume to be simply "the Word of God." The knowledge that the primary theological corpus of the NT, the Pauline epistles, were mediated through a heretic, interpolated by catholic copyists, and added to by creative pseudo-Pauls, should be eye-opening. Irenaeus of Lyon, writing against Marcion ca 190 CE was part of the scramble to create an authoritative canon to counter him and to define the faith. His dubious criteria for choosing just four gospels out of the dozens floating around at his time gave us the "historical Jesus" as we know him. As he said, there can only be four gospels because there are four winds (directions of the compass), seems a bit tenuous as a means of weeding out other gospels. Why just four? "Just because..." None of the four chosen can make a strong case for apostolicity. All except for expanded Luke are anonymous, and Marcion's version of Luke was also anonymous. All four gospels began to get traction in orthodox thought in the decades after Marcion, because they taught a human Jesus, the Messiah of the Jews, and the lynchpin which made Christianity the successor of Judaism. But the acceptance of apostolicity for all of them, as well as the epistles, is a matter of faith! Faith in what? Church tradition.
Thank you for the New Testament Marcion.
Bart Willruth
Meanwhile,another form of Christianity was developing in Asia Minor(the place of Paul's evangelization). It burst onto the pages of history in the first half of the second century. A wealthy man named Marcion from the city of Sinope in the province of Pontus-Bithynia which is adjacent to Galatia emerged as one of the most influential people in Christian history. Marcion, a shipping magnate, spread his version of Christianity into the Mediterranean and along the caravan routes to the east towards Syria and Persia. The dates for Marcion's life are a bit uncertain with estimates ranging from the 70's CE to about 160 CE.
It is unknown whether Marcion innovated his own Christian viewpoints or if he was carrying on a tradition inherited from earlier teachers. His father was himself a bishop. In any event, the emergence of Marcion into the historical record is our first glimpse of Pauline Christianity, the Pauline epistles, and the Gospel of Luke. He considered Paul to be the only authorative teacher of the gospel. He, along with Paul, cursed alternate or competing gospels.
Marcion presented the Christian world with its first New Testament, or canon, ca 140 CE. His New Testament contained ten epistles of Paul and one Gospel which seems to be a short version of the Gospel of Luke which he called simply "Euangelion," or "Gospel" not attributed to an author. The Pauline epistles he brought forth are Romans, Galatians, 1 Cor, 2 Cor, Laodiceans (Ephesiahs), Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thess, 2 Thess, and Philemon. He considered the epistle to the Galatians to be the most important.
Marcion's theology was quite different from that which became orthodox Christianity. He believed that the Old Testament God was not the father of Jesus. Rather, he considered the God of the Jews to be a primitive lower being who created the material world and who had very objectionable characteristics. He was jealous, envious, vindictive, retributative, angry, cruel, intrusive, and judgmental. He was a demiurge who trapped the souls of men in the misery of material bodies. In contrast, Christ made known a previously unknown God of love and benevolence. Marcion didn't deny the reality of the Jewish God, he simply dismissed him as the God of a different religion, and he rejected the Old Testament. He wished the Jews well, but proclaimed that Christianity had no part of the Jewish religion.
The Marcionite name for the heavenly savior was ISU CHRESTOS. Whether the ISU was a form of sacral abbreviation for IESUS or if it was the actual name or title cannot be known. Likewise, the spelling of CHRESTOS may have been original Pauline for the "Good helper" rather than the meaning of anointed as indicated by the familiar Christos spelling which may have been later scribal license. For him, Christ was the sudden savior, a phantom (not an actual man) who descended from God in the form of a fully mature human, snatched believers out of the control of the evil God of the Old Testament, freed them from the bondage of the Torah, and then he ascended back to the Father. He was not the Messiah of Jewish expectations. Marcion and his followers upheld an extremely high moral standard, even believing that sex within marriage was wrong, but they did not subject themselves to the Torah or any of the Jewish practices. His New Testament did not in any way tie the prophecies of the OT to Christ or to the church and its teachings.
Marcion went to Rome ca 140 CE to present his ideas to the church leaders there. They utterly rejected him. He went on to lead his followers into all the known world. Marcionism became the main competitor to emerging orthodoxy. Marcionite churches (called synagogues) could be found throughout the empire. The Marcionites called themselves "Christians" and seemed to hold the trademark for that term. The proto-orthodox groups coalesced around the name "Catholic." The oldest Christian church found by archaeologists was Marcionite, located in Syria and dating from 318 CE. The inscription on this synagogue is dedicated to "The Lord and Savior ISU CHRESTOS." The pervasiveness of Marcionite Christianity was so complete,that if not for the prohibition of sex which precluded organic growth, it could have been the winner rather than catholic orthodoxy. Marcionism persevered alongside catholic Christianity well into the 300's CE.
Marcion's importance for the history and development of Christianity are these:
1. Marcion gives us the first attestation to the Pauline epistles. Without him, Paul's letters may never have been known. The epistles he presented were not identical to those in the orthodox canon. Missing are references to OT prophecies, messiah talk, and even the vague verses which can be construed to be indicate humanness for Jesus.
2. Marcion was the first to suggest that the new covenant represented a separate and new religion. He is in this sense the father of New Testament Christianity. His complete break with the Jewish epic and refusal to see Christianity as the inheritor and fulfillment of that continuing epic was a direct challenge to emerging catholic orthodoxy. Many protestants, especially Baptists, would find this familiar.
3. He is the first Christian to put forward a canon, an authoritative collection of writings intended to be the final arbiter in faith and practice. This "sola scriptura" stance makes him in a sense the first protestant.
4. He broke with the legalism which characterize proto-orthodox Christianity proclaiming that salvation comes through faith only. "Sola Fide" also sounds quite protestant.
5. His Gospel lacked any geneology, birth stories, childhood exploits, and association with John. The ISU of the Gospel was docetic, a heavenly being who burst on the scene only seeming to be a man. The Gospel is a form of Luke, but it is about 1/3 shorter than canonical Luke. His detractors said he shortened the original Luke, however it is just as possible that his version was the original and that orthodox scribes added the material which is now there in canonical Luke. Since Marcion was the first to present Luke's gospel, as far as history knows, it simply cannot be known whether his version was the original and later added to or if he excised objectionable material from the original. This is an interesting conundrum for fundamentalist inerrancy.
6.The reaction against him by the proto-orthodox church in Rome had incalculable implications for the history and development of Christianity, virtually all forms of which derive from that stream.
A. Marcion was roundly denounced by the Roman church. Polycarp called him "the firstborn of Satan." In that Marcionite congregations were called synagogues, and were referred to as Satanic, it is interesting that John the revelator calls a group of churches in Asia Minor (Marcionite territory) "synagogues of Satan."
B. Marcion got the ball rolling on the concept of a canon of authoritative writings by Christian authors. In the next few decades, the proto-canon began to greatly expand. Three more Pauline epistles were written 1 Tim, 2 Tim, and Titus. These epistles which clearly reflect a period when church structure and authority were coming into play make a case for a hierarchical structure and a requirement to be obedient to those in "offices" above. They also imply a much more human Jesus than the Marcionite Paulines. Interpolations into the texts of the ten Marcionite Paulines occurred. 1 Pet, and 2 Pet were written to bolster the case of catholic Christianity. The book of Acts was produced to make a case for apostolic authority, apostolic succession, and to domesticate Paul, that is, to turn him into an apostle in line with the others and even submitting to their authority. Acts created an entirely fictional historiography of the supposed origins and spread of the church previously unmentioned in any of the writings of other Christians. Luke may have been expanded to include a miraculous and human birth account to "prove" the humanity of Jesus to counter Marcion's ghost Jesus.
C. The concept of apostolic succession made possible the authority and preroggatives of the orthodox leadership to issue directives and assign the label "authentic" or "spurious" to Christian writings vying for canonical status. Many gospels, forgeries, and interpolated copies began to appear. Church leaders arbitrarily set up standards for accepting a writing as authentic and authoritative. The critera included a claim to have been written by an apostle, a claim to have been written by someone who knew an apostle, and a writing had to reflect the beliefs of a broad part of the proto-orthodox movement. Another word for this is tradition. Since many of the newly authored writings had no basis for apostolic authorship claims, the church looked for and/or created stories on the thinnest of rationale to claim apostolicity for the various expanded canon. This is a place where protestant adherants to the sola scriptura principle need to take a breath and realize that many of the NT books which were finally declared canonical are there only on account of church tradition. As Bonhoffer put it, "Protestants, in denying the authority of tradition, have cut off the branch on which they sit."
D. The Pauline epistles which make up the bulk of the NT have no historical attestation prior to Marcion. His version of the Paulines may in fact be the original. That is an open question which cannot be answered by detractors or apologists. That the Paulines were interpolated in places is quite evident. Were they even written by Paul? That also cannot be known.Marcion himself could have written them. We just don't know. But we do know that prior to Marcion's emergence in Rome with his Pauline corpus, no Christian group or writer had been referring to Paul as an authority nor to his writings as authoritative. If Marcion's Pauline Christianity was not the original version, or at least an evolved version, then where was it? The proto-orthodox leadership did with Paul what it did with various societal/cultural beliefs and practices; it absorbed rather than rejected. Marcionism/Paulinism became so pervasive that it was easier to absorb Paul, interpolate, redefine, and write in his name than to reject him outright. The result is the Judeo/Christian religion which became Christianity as we know it. Prior to Marcion, most of the other forms of Christianity had been largely Jewish with Platonic influences. Marcion's Paulinism mixed with Jewish Christianity formed a syncretic amalgam, a synthesis of the absorption of two differing streams.
E. The Creeds of the church were not just statements of faith. They became necessary in reaction to alternate and competing beliefs. The first creed "The Roman Symbol" which later evolved into the apostles creed was a reaction to Marcion. Among other things, it points out that God the father is the creator, Jesus was truly man born in the normal manner (albeit with a miraculous conception), and that there will be a final judgment with punishments, all very un-Marcionite concepts. This original creed is thought to originate from the late second century.
It is interesting to note that when Constantine called the first catholic council to accomplish doctrinal unity, the locale chosen was Nicea in the heart of Marcionite country. Since Marcionism was still competing with catholicism, Constantine's choice of Nicea must have been political, as was his legalization of catholic Christianity. The Nicene Creed, while primarily aimed at Arianism, also targets Marcionism.
Today's protestant fundamentalists have Marcion to thank for their doctrine of scripture alone. Prior to him, there was no apparent interest in according authority to any Christian writings, let alone calling them scripture. Marcion's New Testament Christianity with its own scriptures was the work of "the firstborn of Satan," as he was called by the Catholic fathers whose use of the magesterium of tradition gave us so many of the New Testament books which fundamentalists so glibly assume to be simply "the Word of God." The knowledge that the primary theological corpus of the NT, the Pauline epistles, were mediated through a heretic, interpolated by catholic copyists, and added to by creative pseudo-Pauls, should be eye-opening. Irenaeus of Lyon, writing against Marcion ca 190 CE was part of the scramble to create an authoritative canon to counter him and to define the faith. His dubious criteria for choosing just four gospels out of the dozens floating around at his time gave us the "historical Jesus" as we know him. As he said, there can only be four gospels because there are four winds (directions of the compass), seems a bit tenuous as a means of weeding out other gospels. Why just four? "Just because..." None of the four chosen can make a strong case for apostolicity. All except for expanded Luke are anonymous, and Marcion's version of Luke was also anonymous. All four gospels began to get traction in orthodox thought in the decades after Marcion, because they taught a human Jesus, the Messiah of the Jews, and the lynchpin which made Christianity the successor of Judaism. But the acceptance of apostolicity for all of them, as well as the epistles, is a matter of faith! Faith in what? Church tradition.
Thank you for the New Testament Marcion.
Bart Willruth