The Leavenworth weekly times., 1879-02-06
The rir.. H,n,e-The Apo.,e,icon.


Correspondence Chicago Tribune, 81
The first collection of any of the books
now cont lined in our New Testament ws-
made by Marcion, but little before the mid
die OF the second century; probably about
hundred years after the crucif xion vi
Christ. As it was prepared for use in con.
nection with the Jewish Scriptures then in
circulation, the whole may very properly
be called the first Bible. 1t was called
"The Gospel" ard the "Apostolicon." 1t
contained ten OF Paul's epistles, the Epis.
tie to the Hebrews and the pastoral epistles
having been omitted. The omitted epis-
ties were then disputed, and the Epistle to
the Hebrews continued to be the subject OF
much controversy for more than thous.
and years afterward in fact, until the
Council of Trent, \. ID. l545.
The Bible OF Msrcion also contained one
and only one-GosIsl. No alusion was
made to Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John,
and no reason was given for excluding them
from the collection. As no writer previous
to the time of NJ arcion had made any men-
ton of either of these Gospels, the infer.
ence il very strong that they had not been
written; or, if the materials existed, that
they we're in . different form and bearing
different titles.
As Marcion was Gnostic, and has there
fore been generally put down - hereto,
his New Testiment was adopted.
He was even accused Of changing the
language of the manuscripts used in his
collection. But from this charge he has
been acquitted by Biblical critics in modern
timer; notably by Westcott in his History
Of the Canon, in the following language:
Tertullian and Epiphanius agree in
affirming that Marcion altered the text OF
the books which he received to suit his own
views; and they quote many various read
ings in support of the assertion. Those
which they cite from the Epis,les are Ger
tainly sufficient to prove the point; and, en-
the contrary, they go far to show that Mar
cion preserved, without alteration, the text
seven readings noticed by Epiphanius, only
two are unsupported by other authority /;
and it is altogether unlikely that Narcion
changed other passages, when, as Epiphan-
ius himseif shows, he left untouched those
which are most directly opposed to his sys-
tem.r-[ History Of the Canon of the New
Testament, BY Brooke Foss Westcott, ID. D.,
Professor Of Divinity, etc. Sd edition, p.
2s4
Marcion's Gospel has been called by the
theologians recension or changed version
of Luke's But if Marcion WAS 30 honest -
to give Paul's writings correctly, even
where they initiated against his own Iecu-
liar views, why would he change the Cos
pei Of Luke, Is it not much more probable
that Luke's Gospel was q recension Of Mar
cion's.
Again: II, a. Is claimed, the four Cos
pels we're then in circulation and generally
acknowledged, is it not Incompreheneible
that Marcion, while accepting all the writ
ings of Paul which were undisputsd,
should attempt to overthrow the four Cos
pels without giving any rsasons for %
doing?
The writings of Marcion, unfortunately,
with nearly everything written during the
6rst two centuries concerning the four
Gospels, or concerning books supposed to
have been the four Gospels, are Lost or
destroyed. But the fact that Marcion had
but one Gospel, and gave no reason for not
having more, while he admitted a. genuine
all the other New-Testament books except
those disputed, furnishes strong preeump,ive
evidence that the four Goepels, in the form
in which we have them, are production
of date not earlier then the middle of the
second century. 1t was doubtless this work
of Marcion which Clement of Alexi ndria
referred to when he spoke of "The Goapel
and Apostolic Instrument" W.