Luke 8

For a side-by-side English translation of the text of Marcion's Gospel of the Lord and Luke 8, see Luke Chapter 8

Summary:

From Ernest Evans on Adv. Marcion IV: Appendix 2: Thereafter [Ch 5-7] the narrative continues until in ch. 8 he omits verse 19 [the statement that Christ's mother and brethren were present], but retains vv. 20, 21 [the announcement of their alleged arrival].

Details:

Luke 8:1-3 – The Female Followers of Jesus

Epiphanius makes no mention of these verses, while Tertullian reports the following:

The fact that certain rich women clave to Christ, "which ministered unto Him of their substance," [8:3] amongst whom was the wife of the king's steward, is a subject of prophecy. By Isaiah the Lord called these wealthy ladies -- "Rise up, ye women that are at ease, and hear my voice" -- that He might prove them first as disciples, and then as assistants and helpers: "Daughters, hear my words in hope; this day of the year cherish the memory of, in labor with hope." For it was "in labor" that they followed Him, and "with hope" did they minister to Him.

As Tertullian has no specific comment it is likely that these verses were the same in Marcion's gospel [Mcg] as in Luke.

Luke 8:4-8 – The Parable of the Sower

And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable: [8:4]  A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. [8:5]  And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. [8:6]  And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. [8:7]  And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. [8:8a]  And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. [8:8b]

Tertullian does not mention any details of this parable itself, this being all that he reports:

On the subject of parables, let it suffice that it has been once for all shown that this kind of language was with equal distinctness promised by the Creator. But there is that direct mode of His speaking to the people "Ye shall hear with the ear, but ye shall not understand" [Mt 13:14] -- which now claims notice as having furnished to Christ that frequent form of His earnest instruction: "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." [8:8b] Not as if Christ, actuated with a diverse spirit, permitted a hearing which the Creator had refused; but because the exhortation followed the threatening. First came, "Ye shall hear with the ear, but shall not understand;" then followed, "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

It appears from the above that Tertullian knows the parable, but its content is of no interest to him. Instead, the references used here are purely to illustrate Jesus’ manner of speaking to the people who listened to him. Epiphanius makes no mention of these verses, and so it is likely that they were unchanged in Mcg.

Luke 8:9-15 – The Meaning of the Parable of the Sower

And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? [8:9]  And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand. [8:10] ... [8:11-15]

Neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius mention any of these verses, in which Jesus explains the parable, suggesting that neither saw any difference here. As Tertullian seems to have no interest in the parable itself or its meaning, it is likely that any interest would be in whether Marcion's Jesus has the same explanation is 'his' Jesus. However, at the beginning of Adv. Haer. IV.29, Irenaeus appears to indicate that Lk 8:9-10 was not present in the Gospel used by the Marcionites:

But, say they, God hardened the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants [Ex 9:35]. Those, then, who allege such difficulties, do not read in the Gospel that passage where the Lord replied to the disciples, when they asked Him, Why do You speak unto them in parables? [8:9?] Because it is given unto you to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven; but to them I speak in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not hear, understanding they may not understand [8:10?] ; in order that the prophecy of Isaiah regarding them may be fulfilled, saying, Make the heart of this people gross and make their ears dull, and blind their eyes. But blessed are your eyes, which see the things that you see; and your ears, which hear what you hear [Isa 6:10]

The gospel text that Irenaeus quotes is much closer to Mt 13:11-13 than to Lk 8:9-10 (although it is not quite the same as either), so it is not certain what source he is quoting here. For example, if Matthew was his source then why did he omit Mt 13:11b-12, and does “understanding they may not understand” actually reflect Lk 24:45 instead?

Most reconstructions of Mcg include Mcg 8:4-10 while some omit Mcg 8:11-15 (the meaning of the parable). However, if the above quote does indicate that Mcg 8:9-10 did not exist then it would suggest that if any verses were not present it would be all of Mcg 8:9-15. Given the uncertainty regarding the quote from Irenaeus, as Epiphanius has no comment, and the parable has parallels in both Matthew and Mark, there are really no good grounds on which to suppose that any of these verses were missing in Marcion. Klinghardt comments:

Jesus’ teaching about the function of parables is not reported for Mcn. But since the complete context of this teaching is warranted for in Mcn, it is a safe assumption that Mcn did contain it in its “Lukan” form (Luke 8:9-10).

The text of Lk 8:9-10 is closer to the Markan form of the parallel than that in Matthew, suggesting that here the text in Luke is more ‘primitive’ than that in Matthew.

Luke 8:16-18 – On the Nature of Parables

No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth it under a bed; but setteth it on a candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light. [8:16]  For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither anything hid, that shall not be known and come abroad. [8:17]  Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, even what he seemeth to have shall be taken away. [8:18]

In contrast to Mcg 8:1-15, Tertullian refers to Mcg 8:16-18 in detail, continuing the ‘hearing’ issues regarding Marcion’s god that he began to make with respect to Mcg 8:8. He refers to Mcg 8:18 four times, followed by references to Mcg 8:16-17, although he makes no comment on what might be a change of order in Mcg. However, as Epiphanius does not mention these verses, it is probable that in Mcg these verses were the same as in Luke.

Luke 8:19-21 – Jesus’ Mother and Brothers

Then came to him his mother and his brethren, and could not come at him for the press, [8:19]  And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee. [8:20]  And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it. [8:21]

Epiphanius writes as follows regarding a change here in Mcg:

He did not have, “His mother and his brethren,” but simply, ”Thy mother and thy brethren.” (Scholion 12)

This seems to suggest an improbable change to Lk 8:19, which would then read:

Then came to him thy mother and thy brethren, and could not come at him for the press,

Instead, given what we know of Epiphanius way of expressing himself, it is clear that he is referring to the text that contains these phrases, not just the phrases themselves. In other words he is indicating that Mcg had no parallel to Lk 8:19, but that Mcg 8:20 was present. This is reinforced by Tertullian, who refers to Mcg 8:20 but not Mcg 8:19, and also by Thomas 99, which reads:

The disciples said to him: Your brothers and your mother are standing outside. [c.f. v. 8:20]  He said to them: Those here who do the will of my Father, these are my brothers and my mother; they are the ones who will enter into the kingdom of my Father. [c.f. v. 8:21]

Consequently, most reconstructions of Mcg omit v. 8:19, with for example Baring-Gould writeng:

’Then came to him his mother and his brethren,’ &c., omitted; but the next verse, ‘And it was told him by certain which said. Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.’ This cannot be admitted as a mutilation by Marcion. Had he cut out verse 19, he would also have removed verse 20. Rather is verse 19 an amplification of the original text.

As Baring-Gould suggests, it seems unlikely that aMarcion would have omitted Mcg 8:19 without also omitting Mcg 8:20, so it is likely that he simply did not see a parallel to Mcg 8:19 in the text he used when reconstructing Mcg. Both Epiphanius and Tertullian indicate that Mcg had a different version of v. 8:21, appearing to include a phrase from Mt 12:48. In his chapter 19 Tertullian wrote as follows:

… He was justly indignant, that persons so very near to Him ‘stood without,’ [8:20] while strangers were within hanging on His words, especially as they wanted to call Him away from the solemn work He had in hand. He did not so much deny as disavow them. And therefore, when to the previous question, ‘Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?’ [c.f. Mt 12:48] He added the answer ‘None but they who hear my words and do them,’ [8:21]

Epiphanius refers to the same (apparently Matthean) phrase as if it was in Mcg:

And do not let the Lord’s words, “Who are my mother and brethren?” mislead you. He did not say this to deny his mother, but to check the importunity of the person who spoke when such a large crowd surrounded him… (Elenchus 12)

Head reads these statements as indicating that the phrase we see in Matthew was indeed included in Mcg:

v. 8:19 (the mother and brothers of Jesus coming to him) is omitted. Instead, after a report that his mother and brothers are outside, Jesus asks: 'Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?' The passage closes with the answer: 'those who hear my words and do them'.

Waite (following Volkmar) agrees with Head, but Lardner thinks that Tertullian may have been mistaken:

Tertullian speaks in such a manner as would lead one to think, that Marcion had made an addition to the gospel of St. Luke, by inserting from the gospel of Matthew that answer of our Saviour which we find related by Matthew, chap. 12:48, " Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" For he represents Marcion, as well as all the other heretics, who deny the nativity, as making use of these words, for their most common and favorite argument. But Marcion might use these words against those who allowed the authenticity of Matthew's gospel, without inserting them in his gospel, or Tertullian might quote by memory, and think that to be in Luke, which was only in Matthew, as he has done at least in three instances.

However, here Lardner ignores the corroborative evidence from Epiphanius, which indicates that this phrase (which we no longer find in Luke) was actually in Mcg, and from Tertullian himself in chapter 7 of On the Flesh of Christ, where he suggests to both Apelles and Marcion that this is a normal response to being interrupted in the middle of something:

But whenever a dispute arises about the nativity, all who reject it as creating a presumption in favour of the reality of Christ's flesh, wilfully deny that God Himself was born, on the ground that He asked, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? … Now, I ask you, Apelles, or will you Marcion, please (to tell me), if you happened to be at a stage play, or had laid a wager on a foot race or a chariot race, and were called away by such a message, would you not have exclaimed, What are mother and brothers to me?

Roth also takes up this point:

Luke 8:21, most clearly attested in 4.19.11, contains a curious combination of Matthean/Markan and Lukan elements. The question with which the verse appears to open is found in Matt 12:48/Mark 3:33, though Tertullian’s phrasing does not follow either text precisely. The closing element of the verse is clearly dependent on Luke 8:21. That the Matthean/Markan question appeared in Marcion’s text is confirmed not only by Tertullian’s numerous references to it in 4.19, but also by his refutation of Apelles and Marcion in Carn. Chr. 7, where Tertullian refers back to his discussion in Marc.

As there would appear to be no reason for Marcion to add this Matthean question to the Lukan text, it is most likely that these words were already present in his base text. Tertullian also quotes Mcg 8:21 as following the question above with the answer: “they who hear my words and do them,” instead of “these which hear the word of God, and do it.” Roth comments:

… that Marcion’s text read τοὺς λόγων μου and not the canonical τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ is unintentionally confirmed by Tertullian’s later reference back to this passage in 4.26.13. It seems that the wording of Luke 11:28 reminded Tertullian of the canonical wording of Luke 8:21, though he apparently forgot that Marcion’s text did not refer to the auditores et obsecutores dei.

Of course, Roth does not know exactly what Mcg read here, since we only have Tertullian’s Latin to go on: “Nisi qui audiunt verba mea et faciunt ea.” Nevertheless, Tertullian’s Latin cannot be taken as a translation of what we see in Lk 8:21. Although Epiphanius does not note this difference, it does not necessarily mean that Tertullian was mistaken. Epiphanius may simply have missed it, or perhaps the ending was changed to the form we know before Epiphanius commented on Marcion. Both readings have related verses in Luke:

Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like: [6:47]

“…blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” [11:28]

In Lk 6:47a it is Jesus’ saying or word, and in Lk 11:28 it is God’s, with the ending that Tertullian reports corresponding to Lk 6:47a, and the version that we know corresponding to Lk 11:28b. As both variants exist elsewhere in Luke either could have existed in Mcg 8:21 at some point. It is also possible that the words could have been changed after Mcg was written so as to harmonize with Mcg 11:28. Whichever form Marcion saw, it is unlikely that he would have changed it to the other, since he left text elsewhere corresponding to both forms. Therefore, it is likely that Mcg 8:19 did not exist, and Mcg 8:20-21 were as Marcion found them in his source, reading:

And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee. [8:20]  And he answered and said unto them, Who are my mother and my brethren? None but they who hear my words and do them. [8:21]

Luke 8:22-25 – The Calming of the Storm

Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto them, Let us go over unto the other side of the lake. And they launched forth. [8:22]  But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water, and were in jeopardy. [8:23]  And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, Master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm. [8:24]  And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him? [8:25]

According to Waite, Mcg had a shorter version of Lk 8:23-24: “He was sleeping with the sailors, and he arose, and rebuked the wind, and the sea.” This reading possibly comes from Epiphanius, who wrote:

As they sailed he fell asleep. Then he arose and rebuked the wind and the sea. (Scholion 13)

However, Epiphanius immediately expands on this in his Elenchus 13:

a) Who fell asleep, pray? You won’t dare say this of the Godhead – or even if you should you will be blaspheming against your own head, you madman. But anyone can see that the truly incarnate Christ, needing sleep, fell asleep because of his bodily nature.

b) For those who woke him did not see an apparition, but One truly incarnate. Of course they are bearing witness that they roused him by shaking and calling him!

c) For when it says he “arose” - the God in flesh who had fallen asleep, the One who had come from heaven and donned flesh for us “arose” as man, but as God “rebuked” the sea and caused < a calm >.

It is clear from this that Epiphanius knows that Jesus didn’t just arise, but that he was woken up and rebuked the sea, thus calming the waves. He is not making the point that these verses were shorter in Mcg, but that Marcion’s Jesus had a body that needed to sleep! Moreover, although Epiphanius does not mention Mcg 8:22, 25, indicating that he saw nothing of note here, Tertullian clearly refers to both:

But "what manner of man is this? For He commands even the winds and water!" [8:25] Of course He is the new master and proprietor of the elements, now that the Creator is deposed, and excluded from their possession! Nothing of the kind. But the elements own their own Maker, just as they had been accustomed to obey His servants also …

… As psalm is, in fact, accomplished by this crossing over the lake. [8:22] "The Lord," says the psalmist, "is upon many waters." When He disperses its waves, [8:24] Habakkuk's words are fulfilled, where he says, "Scattering the waters in His passage." When at His rebuke the sea is calmed, [8:24] Nahum is also verified: He rebukes the sea, and makes it dry, [Nah 1:4] including the winds indeed, whereby it was disquieted. [8:24] With what evidence would you have my Christ vindicated? Shall it come from the examples, or from the prophecies, of the Creator?

Although Tertullian quotes from Mcg 8:25, he does not refer to the final clause of Lk 8:25: “and they obey him.” This may be because he just was not interested in these words, but it is more likely that he did not see them, as they are omitted in P75, B, and 700. Willker comments:

It is possible that the words have been omitted due to confusion over the many KAIs. Otherwise difficult to explain, because the words are needed: order - obey. Weiss (Textkritik, p. 180) says that the words must come from the parallels, because an omission is difficult to explain.

There is nothing about this text to have caused either Tertullian or Marcion to have omitted the last clause, so the majority reading in Lk 8:25 is best explained as a conflation of the readings from Mcg and Mark/Matthew. Epiphanius most likely knew the P75/B reading, so did not see a difference here. Apart from this variant there is no reason to suppose that Mcg 8:22-25 were different to what we see in Luke.

Luke 8:26-33 – The Gaderene Devils

And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes, which is over against Galilee. [8:26]  And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode in any house, but among the tombs. [8:27]  When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not. [8:28]  (For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness). [8:29]  And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. [8:30]  And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep. [8:31]  And there was there an herd of many swine feeding on the mountain: and they besought him that he would suffer them to enter into them. And he suffered them. [8:32]  Then went the devils out of the man, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the lake, and were choked. [8:33]

Epiphanius is silent regarding the whole of this passage, suggesting he saw no differences here, but Tertullian in his Chapter 20 has this to say about the devils:

You suppose that He is predicted as a military and armed warrior, instead of one who in a figurative and allegorical sense was to wage a spiritual warfare against spiritual enemies, in spiritual campaigns, and with spiritual weapons: come now, when in one man alone you discover a multitude of demons calling itself Legion, [8:30] of course comprised of spirits, you should learn that Christ also must be understood to be an exterminator of spiritual foes, who wields spiritual arms and fights in spiritual strife; and that it was none other than He, who now had to contend with even a legion of demons.

Tertullian then refers to Mcg 8:30 when he asks: “Now of what God did the Legion testify that Jesus was the Son?” This appears to be a rhetorical question, as he then goes to some lengths to provide an answer, and states that “the demons really knew none other than the Christ of their own God.”

It is possible that the answer that Tertullian saw in both Mcg and his copy of Luke was not the variant given above, as several mss omit either “Jesus” or “God” from the phrase: “Jesus, thou Son of God most high.” In particular, P75 does not have “Jesus,” and D has neither “Jesus” nor “God.” However, as neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius suggest that Marcion was different to Luke here, it is not possible to be sure what either saw..

Luke 8:34-39 – The Swine Feeders Fled

Neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius mention these verses in any way. As these verses have a parallel in Mk 5:14-20 we can assume that they were present in Mcg, and that neither saw anything of note here, even if Mark was not a source of Marcion.

Luke 8:40-42a and 8:49-56 – Jairus’ Daughter

In some reconstructions of Mcg the story of the healing of Jairus’ daughter (Lk 8:40-42a, 49-56) is omitted. It appears that this is entirely due to the fact that neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius mention this episode in any way. However, here it is significant that Tertullian does refer to the story of the woman with the issue of blood that fits between the two halves of the Jairus passage (and perhaps was interpolated into existing text).

Because both stories also exist in Matthew and Mark in a similar format (i.e. with the two parts of the Jairus episode ‘bracketing’ the story of the woman) it seems unlikely that Tertullian would not have known both stories from one or other of these sources. It also makes it likely that it existed in Luke in a similar form in Tertullian’s time, and that therefore he would have expected to find it here in Mcg. Because neither he nor Epiphanius do mention the story, it is in this case therefore an indication that it was present in unchanged form, and that neither saw any reason to mention it.

Luke 8:42b-48 – The Woman with the Issue of Blood

In between the two parts of the story of Jairus’ daughter, Lk 8:42b-48 contains the story of the woman with the issue of blood:

But as he went the people thronged him. [8:42b]  And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, [8:43]  Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. [8:44]  And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me? [8:45]  And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. [8:46]  And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. [8:47]  And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace. [8:48]

This story has parallels in both Mark and Matthew. However, the two parallels differ significantly. While the version at Mk 5:25-34 contains all the salient details that we see in Luke, the parallel in Matthew is much shorter:

And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment: [Mt 9:20]  For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole. [Mt 9:21]  But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour. [Mt 9:22]

Some reconstructions of Mcg contain this story in the longer form that we see in Luke, while others contain a much shorter version, based perhaps on this information from Epiphanius in Scholion 14:

And it came to pass as they went the people thronged him, [8:42b]  and a woman [8:43a] touched him, [8:44a] and was healed of her blood. [8:44b]  And the Lord said, who touched me? [8:45a]  And again, “Somebody hath touched me; for I perceive that virtue hath gone out of me.” [8:46]

In Lk 8:44a mss D, Y, 209*, 1071, pc omit “from behind,” and D, it(a, b, d, ff2) omit “the hem [or border] of.” As Epiphanius reports neither of these details, it appears that the text he saw in Mcg followed, or was close to, that in D, although his only interest here is that the woman touched Jesus (showing that he had a physical body), and the other details are not relevant to him. Tertullian, who assigns half of his Chapter 20 to this story, also appears to have seen a similar shorter version, and like Epiphanius he does not suggest that Marcion had anything different to Luke:

Jesus is touched by the woman who had an issue of blood, [8:43-46] He knew not by whom. ‘Who touched me?’ He asks, when His disciples alleged an excuse. He even persists in His assertion of ignorance: ‘Somebody has touched me,’ He says, and advances some proof: ‘For I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.’ [8:46]

… When Christ approved of the faith of this woman [8:48], which simply rested in the Creator, He declared by His answer to her, [8:48] that He was Himself the divine object of the faith of which He approved. Nor can I overlook the fact that His garment, by being touched, [8:44] demonstrated also the truth of His body; for of course it was a body, and not a phantom, which the garment clothed.”

Tertullian writes about the issue of blood, Jesus’ disciples, and the touching of the garment, but not the details of the time period (“twelve years”) or the physicians in Lk 8:43, which may therefore not have been present in Mcg, as is the case in some mss of Luke:

D, which is supported by an old Egyptian version, exhibits the whole relative clause in five words: ‘whom no one could heal,’ while B and the Sinaitic Syriac version, together with the Armenian (which is dependent on Syriac authority), simply omits ‘had spent . . . physicians,’ so that we have ‘could not’ instead of ‘neither could.’ (Blass, Philology of the Gospels)

Most mss, including the majority of later mss (א[* C] A L W Θ Ξ [Ψ] Ë1,13 33 [1424] Ï [lat syc,p,h]) read here, “having spent all her money on doctors.” Uncertainty over its authenticity is due primarily to the fact that certain important witnesses do not have the phrase (e.g., Ì75 B [D] 0279 sys sa Or). This evidence alone renders its authenticity unlikely. (NET)

The NET also notes that some mss omit “and they that were with him” from Lk 8:45:

Most mss, especially the later ones (א A C*,3 D L W Θ Ξ Ψ Ë1,13 33 Ï latt), also have “and those together with him” (with two different Greek constructions for the phrase “with him”), while several important witnesses omit this phrase (Ì75 B Π 700* al sa). The singular verb εἶπεν (eipen, “he said”) could possibly suggest that only Peter was originally mentioned, but, if the longer reading is authentic, then εἶπεν would focus on Peter as the spokesman for the group, highlighting his prominence (cf. ExSyn 401-2). Nevertheless, the longer reading looks like a clarifying note, harmonizing this account with Mark 5:31.

As neither Tertullian nor Epiphanius refer to Mcg 8:45b we do not know which variants they saw here.

Finally, Bezae omits “be of good comfort” from Lk 8:48. Based on the above information, it is likely that the version in Mcg included all the important details, while omitting some clarifying information and other detail (as in Matthew) that may have been added later:

And a woman having an issue of blood, whom no one could heal, [8:43]  touched his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. [8:44]  And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me? [8:45]  And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. [8:46]  And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. [8:47]  And he said unto her, Daughter: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace. [8:48]

As significant support for such a shorter variant exists in other mss, it is unlikely that aMarcion omitted any text from these verses, but instead just used what he had in front of him.

Next Chapter: Luke 9