Luke 12
For a side-by-side English translation of the text of this part of Marcion's Gospel of the Lord and Luke, see Luke Chapter 12
Summary:
From Ernest Evans on Adv. Marcion IV: Appendix 2: In ch. 12 he retains verse 5, whom ye shall fear, making it refer to the Creator, but omits vv. 6 and 7 [five sparrows and the hairs of your head], and in verse 8 reads before God instead of before the angels of God: he omits verse 28 [the grass in the field], and in vv. 30 and 32 reads the Father [omitting your]: and in verse 38 reads at the evening watch].
Details:
Luke 12:1 – The Leaven of the Pharisees
In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. [12:1]
At the beginning of his chapter 28 Tertullian quotes:
"Beware," He says to the disciples, "of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy," [12:1b]
Even though Tertullian does not refer to Mcg [Marcion's gospel] 12:1a, nor Epiphanius any of Mcg 12:1, it is reasonable to assume that the whole of this verse was present in Mcg to provide a ‘lead in’ from the previous verse, and so Mcg and Luke were the same here.
Luke 12:2-7 – Sparrows and Hairs
For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. [12:2] Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. [12:3] And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. [12:4] But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him. [12:5] Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? [12:6] But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows. [12:7]
After referring to Mcg 12:1b Tertullian quotes from this passage:
He therefore adds, "There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; neither hid, which shall not be known," [12:2] He then turns to His disciples with these words, "I say unto you, my friends, Be not afraid of them which can only kill the body, and after that have no more power over you." [12:4] "But I will show you whom you shall fear: fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell" (meaning, of course, the Creator); "yea, I say unto you, fear Him." [12:5]
Tertullian does not mention Mcg 12:3, 6-7, and Epiphanius also makes no mention of Mcg 12:3. However, Lk 12:2-7 have direct parallels at Mt 10:26-31, and because these parallel verses include a parallel of Mcg 12:3 it is likely that this verse was present in Marcion. Epiphanius refers to Mcg 12:4, 6 as follows:
I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body. Fear him, which after he hath killed, hath authority to cast into hell. But he did not have, “Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God?” (Scholion 29)
Sense comments:
Epiphanius points out that verse 6, "Are not five sparrows," etc., was not in the Marcionite Gospel (Sch. and Ref., 29); but he says nothing of the following verse, which, however, is closely dependent on verse 6, and would be unintelligible without it. I infer that verse 7 did not exist in the Canonical Gospel of his time, but was subsequently added. Both these verses were hence interpolations.
Sense here ties the quotes by Epiphanius to specific verses, whereas, as we know, Epiphanius did not see our verse divisions. Therefore, as Tertullian refers to what we see as Lk 12:4-5, it is likely that Epiphanius saw the same text, and his quotation from Mcg 12:4 should be taken to cover both these verses. Similarly, his reference to Mcg 12:6 should be taken to include Mcg 12:7. Based on the above information, it is reasonable to suppose that vv. 12:2-5 were in Mcg, but that vv. 12:6-7 were not.
Luke 12:8-9 – The Angels of God
Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: [12:8] But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God. [12:9]
Tertullian refers to the corresponding passage in Marcion as follows:
But this conclusion I can draw also from the following words: "For I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before God." [12:8] … and this forewarning He offers, in order that He might subjoin a clause on the necessity of confessing Him: "Every one that denies me before men shall be denied before God" [12:9] …
Tertullian quotes “before God” at the end of both verses, and Epiphanius confirms this shorter variant in Mcg 12:8:
Instead of "he shall confess before the angels of God", Marcion says "before God". (Scholion 30)
There is evidence that “the angels” was omitted in a small number of mss of Luke. Willker reports the omission in 01*vid and 259, and that:
According to the apparatus of NA, 01* omits [the angels] both times, verse 8 and 9. This is not correct. Timothy A. Brown confirmed this. The omission in verse 9 is also not in Tischendorf, Swanson and IGNTP.
He also notes that: "Timothy A. Brown from the Sinaiticus transcription project wrote":
In verse 8 the letters twn ag are written by the first hand over an erasure. What the first hand originally wrote and then erased is not clear. The tou qu at the end of the line appears to have been written by a first hand and then reinforced by a later corrector since the article is certainly a first hand and traces of the associated nomen sacrum appear beneath the corrector's ink. - Amy Myshrall is the other transcriber in the Codex Sinaiticus Project. She has independently concluded the same correction scenario I've outlined above.
The parallel verses in Matthew read as follows:
Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.[Mt 10:32] But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. [Mt 10:33]
The existence of these verses makes it unlikely that Marcion removed “the angels of” from both verses to create the text that Tertullian saw. As noted by Willker:
The omission is probably a harmonization to Mt. There is no reason why the angels should have been added secondarily. The omission by 01 is probably just accidental.
It appears therefore that in Mcg Tertullian saw a version of Lk 12:8-9 that is similar to what we see in Mt 10:32-33, except reading “God” rather than “my Father which is in heaven.” However, Epiphanius makes no comment regarding “Son of Man” in Mcg 12:8, nor anything regarding Mcg 12:9, so we assume that he still saw “God” in Mcg 12:8, but possibly saw the rest of these two verses as we now see them.
Luke 12:10 – Speaking Against and Blaspheming
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven. [12:10]
Epiphanius does not mention this verse, but Tertullian quotes it in his chapter 28:
Whosoever shall speak against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him. [12:10] - [Qui dixerit in filium hominis, remittetur illi, qui autem dixerit in spiritum sanctum, non remittetur ei]
Tertullian has “shall speak against” in two places, instead of “shall speak a word against” and “blasphemeth against.” This is similar to Bezae, which has:
And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this age, nor in that to come. [12:10] - [et omnis qui dixerit uerbum in filium hominis dimittetur illi in spm autem sanctum non demittetur illi neque in saeculo hoc neque in futuro]
The addition at the end of the verse in Bezae makes it very close to the parallel in Matthew:
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. [Mt 12:32]
With the exception noted above, it appears that Mcg had these verses essentially as we see them. Interestingly it appears here that Lk 12:10 in Bezae is closest to the parallel in Matthew, suggesting perhaps that this was the original form in Luke, with the final clause being omitted in Mcg, and with ‘blasphemeth’ then finally replacing ‘speaking against.’
In Lk 12:10 Jesus states that anyone who speaks “against the Son of man” will be forgiven, but blaspheming “against the Holy Ghost” will not. This is similar to Mk 3:28-29, but here Jesus says that “All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness.” Matthew then appears to conflate Mark and Luke, but although both Mark and Luke refer only to blaspheming against the Holy Ghost, Matthew has both that blasphemy (Mt 12:31) and speaking (Mt 12:32) against the Holy Ghost will not be forgiven, with the latter being superfluous.
However, this oddity is readily explainable if Matthew is conflating Mark and Marcion, because Mcg 12:10b has: “shall speak against the Holy Ghost.” Mt 12:31b (blaspheming) therefore comes from Mk 3:39a, while Mt 12:32b (speaking against) comes from Mcg. Luke then removes the redundant text in Matthew, leaving just speaking against the Son of man, and blaspheming against the Holy Ghost in Lk 12:10.
Luke 12:11-12 – The Holy Ghost Will Teach You
And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: [12:11] For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say. [12:12]
Tertullian refers to or quotes from most of the text of these verses:
When "brought before magistrates," and examined, He forbids them "to take thought how they shall answer;" "for," says He, "the Holy Ghost shall teach you in that very hour what you ought to say." [12:11-12]
There is no indication that either Tertullian or Epiphanius saw any differences here.
Luke 12:13-21 – The Rich Fool
And one out of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me. [12:13] And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you? [12:14] And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. [12:15] And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: [12:16] And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? [12:17] And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods.[12:18] And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. [12:19] But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? [12:20] So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God. [12:21]
Epiphanius has no comment on any of these verses, but at the end of his chapter 28 Tertullian refers briefly to most of this passage, but quotes from just Mcg 12:14 and 20:
Christ, on the contrary, when requested by a certain man to compose a strife between him and his brother about dividing an inheritance, refused His assistance, although in so honest a cause. "Who," says he, "made me a judge over you?" [12:13-14] … From Him, therefore, will proceed the parable of the rich man, who flattered himself about the increase of his fields, and to Whom God said: "You fool, this night shall they require your soul of you; then whose shall those things be which you have provided?" [12:16-20]
Tertullian does not appear to refer to Mcg 12:15, 19, 21, in common with Thomas, which has no parallels to these verses:
[A man said] to him: Speak to me brothers, that they may divide my father's possessions with me. He said to him: O man, who made me a divider? He turned to his disciples. He said to them, I am not a divider, am I? [Thomas 72 – Lk 12:13-14]
Jesus said: There was a rich man who had many possessions. [c.f. 12:16] He said: I will use my possessions to sow and reap and plant, to fill my barns with fruit, that I may have need of nothing. [c.f. 12:18?] Those were his thoughts in his heart; and in that night he died. [c.f. 12:20a] He who has ears, let him hear. [Thomas 63 – Lk 12:16-20]
There are two possible Western non-interpolations here, with Lk 12:19 reading as follows in D, it(a, b, c, d, e, ff2), and Lk 12:21 not present in D, a, b, d:
And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods, be merry. [12:19]
Neither of these verses are mentioned by either Tertullian or Epiphanius. However, as Tertullian’s quote from Mcg 12:14 matches the variant seen in D, a (possibly), c, d, Sy-S, Sy-C, it is possible that the above text was also not in Mcg (again, as in Bezae). However, if so, this would leave the question of why Epiphanius would not mention it as an omission.
Luke 12:22-28 - God so Clothe the Grass
And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on. [12:22] The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment. [12:23] Consider the ravens, for they sow not nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much are ye better than the fowls? [12:24] And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? [12:25] If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why take ye thought for the rest? [12:26] Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. [12:27] If then God so clothe the grass, which is today in the field, and tomorrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith? [12:28]
Tertullian begins his chapter 29 by referring to all these verses except for Mcg 12:25-26 and most of Mcg 12:28:
“Who would be unwilling that we should distress ourselves about sustenance for our life, or clothing for our body, [12:22] but He who has provided these things already for man; and who, therefore, while distributing them to us, prohibits all anxiety respecting them as an outrage against his liberality? -- who has adapted the nature of "life" itself to a condition "better than meat," and has fashioned the material of "the body," so as to make it "more than raiment;" [12:23] whose "ravens, too, neither sow nor reap, nor gather into storehouses, and are yet fed"[12:24] by Himself; whose "lilies and grass also toil not, nor spin, and yet are clothed" by Him; whose "Solomon, moreover, was transcendent in glory, and yet was not arrayed like" the humble flower. [12:27] … Meanwhile, how is it that He chides them as being "of little faith?" [12:28] What faith?
Although the English quote above is “toil not, nor spin,” Tertullian’s Latin actually reads “cuius et lilia et foenum non texunt nec nent,” (whose lilies and grass neither spin nor weave). Most bibles read as the KJV in Lk 12:27a: “Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not.” However, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English has “weave” instead of “spin,” and also has “weaving” instead of “spin” in the parallel at Mt 6:28.
There are several other variants at this point in Luke, mostly in the Old Latin and Syriac, and almost all including “weave.” Willker reports that D, a, d, (it), Sy-S, Sy-C, aeth, Cl(!), the Diatessaron (per Ephrem), Marcion (per Tertullian), Tischendorf, and Weiss all read "they neither spin nor weave" in Lk 12:27, but this is not quite accurate in all details, with the following differences noted:
D, d: “how they neither spin, nor weave”
c: “how they grow, they neither spin, nor weave”
b, l, r, ff2, i: “how they grow, they neither toil, nor spin, nor weave”
a “how they neither weave, nor spin”
As Tertullian does not mention the lilies and grass ‘toiling,’ he is here agreeing with Bezae. Although he does not mention the rest of Mcg 12:28 directly, he may be alluding to Mcg 12:28a when he states that the lilies and grass “yet are clothed." We should also note that at the beginning of his chapter 21 Tertullian writes with respect to the sending forth of the disciples in Mcg 9:1-6:
Who would have given such a commandment as this, but He who feeds the ravens and clothes the flowers of the field? [12:24, 28a]
Most reconstructions of Mcg omit the whole of Mcg 12:28. For example: “He omits verse 28 [the grass in the field]” (Evans); and “He seems to have left out the whole 28th verse” (Lardner). These comments are based on Epiphanius, who wrote::
He does not have, “God so clothe the grass” (Scholion 31).
Based on his behavior elsewhere, it is reasonable to assume that Epiphanius means that some text beginning with “God so clothe the grass” was not in Mcg. However, both Evans and Lardner go too far in assuming that this includes the whole of Mcg 12:28, as we do not know what additional text division Epiphanius may be including. Because Tertullian refers to the end of Mcg 12:28 it is likely that Epiphanius was not referring to the whole of this verse, so that Mcg 12:27-28 probably read:
Consider the lilies and grass: they toil not, nor spin, and yet are clothed. I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these; [12:27] If so, how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith? [12:28]
Even if Tertullian did see this shorter form in Mcg, there appears to be no reason for Marcion to make made such a change.
Luke 12:29-32 – Your Father Knoweth
And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind. [12:29] For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. [12:30] But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you. [12:31] Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. [12:32]
Tertullian quotes all of Mcg 12:30-31 but does not mention Mcg 12:32. Epiphanius comments on all three verses, indicating a difference only in Mcg 12:32:
“And your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things,” meaning material things. (Scholion 32)
“But seek ye the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Scholion 33)
Instead of, “Your Father,” Marcion had, “Father.” (Scholion 34)
The NET has this note regarding Lk 12:31:
Most mss (Ì45 A D1 Q W Θ 070 Ë1,13 33 Ï lat sy) read τοῦ θεοῦ (tou qeou, “of God”) instead of αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”; found in א B D* L Ψ 579 892 pc co). But such a clarifying reading is suspect. αὐτοῦ is superior on both internal and external grounds. Ì75 includes neither and as such would support the translation above since the article alone can often be translated as a possessive pronoun.
Both Tertullian and Epiphanius report that Marcion had “of God.” Therefore, apart from the possible omission of “your” from Mcg 12:32, it appears that these verses were unchanged in Marcion.
Luke 12:33-34 – Treasure in Heaven
These verses are not mentioned either by Tertullian or Epiphanius, but do have parallels in Mt 6.19-21. It is therefore reasonable to assume that these verses were present in Mcg, and that neither saw anything of note.
Luke 12:35-38 – The Evening Watch
Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning; [12:35] And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. [12:36] Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. [12:37] And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. [12:38]
Tertullian continues his chapter 29 by quoting from Mcg 12:35-36a, but he does not mention Mcg 12:36b-38:
We ought "to have our loins girded:" [12:35] in other words, we are to be free from the embarrassments of a perplexed and much occupied life; "to have our lights burning," [12:35] that is, our minds kindled by faith, and resplendent with the works of truth. And thus "to wait for our Lord," [12:36] that is, Christ. Whence "returning?" If "from the wedding," He is the Christ of the Creator, for the wedding is His.
Epiphanius reports nothing of this passage, except for a minor difference in Mcg 12:38:
Instead of, “in the second or third watch,” he had, “in the evening watch.” (Scholion 35).
Several Bibles have slight variations on “in the second or third watch,” but others have: “in the middle of the night or just before dawn,” “just after midnight or in the very early morning,” or similar. In addition, Bezae appears to try to combine both, reading: “And if he shall come in the evening watch, and find them so, and if he come in the second or third watch they are blessed.” The NET comments:
The second or third watch of the night would be between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m. [two 3-hour watches] on a Roman schedule and 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. [two 4-hour watches] on a Jewish schedule. Luke uses the four-watch schedule of the Romans in Acts 12:4, so that is more probable here.
Although the translations of Luke vary somewhat in the time that they mention, they all suggest two late watches or periods of time after a traveler is likely to be expected to arrive. Mcg has the single more general term ‘evening watch,’ which suggests an earlier arrival time, e.g. 6 p.m. to 9 or 10 p.m., depending on the schedule. It is clear that Epiphanius did not know the differences in these schedules, as in Elenchus 35 he adds:
The oaf stands convicted of stupidly distorting the sacred words in accordance with his own opinion. Watches are not kept in the daytime but at night, and extend successively from evening until the first hour—not from dawn till evening, as he is caught tampering with them.
Here he castigates Marcion for making a stupid mistake, whereas the reality is that it is Epiphanius who has made the mistake. As Marcion would have no reason to make such a change it appears that he simply knew a different schedule. Apart from this one difference, there is no evidence to suggest that these verses differed in Mcg.
Luke 12:39-40 – A Thief in the Night
And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through. [12:39] Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not. [12:40]
Tertullian reports:
In the next parable also he makes a flagrant mistake, when he assigns to the person of the Creator that "thief, whose hour, if the father of the family had only known, he would not have suffered his house to be broken through." [12:39] … Again, when He indicates to us that the devil is "the thief," whose hour at the very beginning of the world, if man had known, he would never have been broken in upon by him, He warns us "to be ready," for this reason, because "we know not the hour when the Son of man shall come" [11:40].
Tertullian does not mention the father watching, an omission found in several mss, as noted in the NET:
Most mss (א1 A B L Q W Θ Ψ 070 Ë1,13 33 Ï lat syp,h sams bo) read “he would have watched and not let” here, but this looks like an assimilation to Matt 24:43. The alliance of two important and early mss along with a few others (Ì75 א* [D] e i sys,c samss), coupled with much stronger internal evidence, suggests that the shorter reading is authentic.
There is no reason why Marcion would have wanted to remove these words, but if Mcg (with the shorter reading) pre-dates Matthew (to which these words were added) then it can be easily seen how the assimilation could have taken place as part of the process that resulted in other text from Matthew being added to Mcg to form Luke. Willker points out that in Bezae the end of Lk 12:39 is missing as well:
The later omission by D, d must be accidental, because it makes no sense: "If he had known the hour the thief comes, he would not (come)." It is possible that D, d have omitted one line.
Tertullian’s text indicates that Marcion here sides with several early mss, including both Bezae and P75, in not mentioning the watching. As Epiphanius does not mention these verses it appears that he also saw this variant in his copy of Luke.
Luke 12:41-48 – The Faithful Steward
Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all? [12:41] And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? [12:42] Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. [12:43] Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath. [12:44] But and if that servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming, and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; [12:45] The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. [12:46] And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. [12:47] But he that knew not, and did did things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For to whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom they have committed much, of him they will ask the more. [12:48]
Tertullian summarizes this passage in his chapter 29, referring or alluding to every verse:
When, therefore, Peter asked whether He had spoken the parable "unto them, or even to all," [12:41] He sets forth for them, and for all who should bear rule in the churches, the similitude of stewards. That steward who should treat his fellow-servants well in his Lord's absence, would on his return be set as ruler over all his property; [12:42-44] but he who should act otherwise [12:45] should be severed, and have his portion with the unbelievers, when his lord should return on the day when he looked not for him, at the hour when he was not aware [12:46] — even that Son of man, the Creator's Christ, not a thief, but a Judge… Whom else than the God of retribution can I understand by Him who shall "beat His servants with stripes," either "few or many," [12:47-48] and shall exact from them what He had committed to them?
It may be significant that Tertullian does not refer to the lord’s will in Mcg 12:47, as is also the case in Adamantius, who has:
The servant who knew and did not shall be severely beaten, but he who knew not and did things worthy of stripes shall be lightly beaten.
Epiphanius quotes parts of Mcg 12:46, without indicating that he saw a difference:
The Lord of that servant will come and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. (Scholion 36)
With the possible exception of references to the lord’s will, there is no reason to believe that any of these verses differed in Mcg.
Luke 12:49-50 – Fire on the Earth
I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? [12:49] But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straightened till it be accomplished! [12:50]
Tertullian quotes from Mcg 12:49a (I have come to send fire on the earth), and does not mention Mcg 12:49b-50, while Epiphanius has no mention of either verse. We therefore have no evidence of any difference here between Mcg and Luke.
Luke 12:51-53 – The Family Divided (by a Sword?)
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: [12:51] For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. [12:52] The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. [12:53]
Epiphanius has no comment on any of these verses, while Tertullian quotes the whole of Mcg 12:51, 53, but not Mcg 12:52:
But He will Himself best explain the quality of that fire which He mentioned, when He goes on to say, "Suppose that I have come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." [12:51] It is written "a sword," but Marcion makes an emendation of the word, just as if a division were not the work of the sword… He says at last, "The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law." [12:53]
Tertullian states that Marcion had changed Mcg 12:51 so that the “division” was not by “a sword,” indicating that he expected to see “sword,” perhaps as in the parallel at Mt 10:34-35:
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. [Mt 10:34] For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. [Mt 10:35]
While there are no known variants of Lk 12:51 in which a sword is mentioned, Sy-C has this variant in Mt 10:34:
I have not come to lay tranquility in the earth, but division of minds and a sword.
In addition, Thomas 16 reads:
Jesus said: Perhaps men think that I am come to cast peace upon the world; and they do not know that I am come to cast dissensions upon the earth, fire, sword, war.
Although it is possible that Tertullian is mistaken regarding seeing sword, it is conceivable that his copy of Luke did contain this word. In addition, as Tertullian does not mention Mcg 12:52, and it does not have an equivalent in the Matthean parallel, it is possible that Mcg did not have this verse. However, the lack of comment from Epiphanius makes it more likely that Mcg contained these verses as we see them in Luke.
Luke 12:54-56 – Discerning the Time
And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise up out of the west, straightway ye say There cometh a shower; and so it is. [12:54] And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass. [12:55] Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time? [12:56]
Directly following his reference to Mcg 12:53 (above), Tertullian states:
On this account He pronounced them "hypocrites," [12:56] because they could "discern the face of the sky and the earth, but could not distinguish this time," [12:56] when of course He ought to have been recognized …
There is a variant in Lk 12:56b. The NET reads “but how can you not know how to interpret the present time,” and adds this comment:
Most mss (Ì45 A W Ψ Ë1,13 Ï lat) have a syntax here that reflects a slightly different rhetorical question: “but how do you not interpret the present time?” The reading behind the translation, however, has overall superior support: Ì75 א B L Θ 33 892 1241 pc.
According to Tertullian, Marcion here sides with D, 515, 1505, it, Sy-S, Sy-C, sams, bomss, and also Thomas 91:
They said to him: Tell us who you are, that we may believe in you. He said to them: You test the face of the sky and of the earth, and him who is before you you have not known, and you do not know (how) to test this moment.
In common with the KJV, both Mcg and Thomas have: “the sky and the earth,” while the NET and some other bibles have: “the earth and sky.”
Tertullian does not mention Mcg 12:54-55. However, as all three verses have parallels in Mt 16:1-3, and Epiphanius does not comment on any of them, there is no indication that they differed in Mcg.
Luke 12:57-59 – No Get Out of Jail Free
Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right? [12:57] When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, as thou art in the way, give diligence that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison. [12:58] I say unto thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite. [12:59]
Tertullian refers to all three of these verses in sufficient detail to suggest that he saw them as we do in Luke, and Epiphanius quotes directly from Mcg 12:58:
Lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer (Scholion 37)
There is therefore no indication that these verses in Mcg differed from those in Luke.
Next Chapter: Luke 13