When Scholars Tell Me that 'There is No Evidence' that Material Was Ever Taken Out of Canonical Mark I Say 'LEARN TO READ IRENAEUS BETTER!'

I am not referring to Irenaeus' identification of an enthronement ending to Mark (which was subsequently removed). I am not talking about the ridiculous opening of the gospel which is more befitting a ten year old rather than representing the 'handwriting of God' (I think what is now the opening words of John was the opening lines of ALL ancient gospels). Nor am I referring to Irenaeus acknowledgement that there was a contemporary community in his day which 'preferred' the Gospel of Mark to all other texts and understand that Jesus appeared crucified while Christ stood by watching him suffering impassably.

I am talking about THIS statement in Irenaeus:

For the Lord, revealing Himself to His disciples, that He Himself is the Word, who imparts knowledge of the Father, and reproving the Jews, who imagined that they, had God, while they nevertheless rejected His Word, through whom God is made known, declared, "No man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son has willed to reveal." Thus hath Matthew set it down, and Luke in like manner, and Mark the very same [emphasis mine]; for John omits this passage. They, however, who would be wiser than the apostles, write [the verse] in the following manner: "No man knew the Father, but the Son; nor the Son, but the Father, and he to whom the Son has willed to reveal [Him];" and they explain it as if the true God were known to none prior to our Lord's advent; and that God who was announced by the prophets, they allege not to be the Father of Christ.[AH iv.6]

In case anyone out there doesn't know it already - THIS SAYING DOES NOT APPEAR IN SURVIVING MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK.

Of course, the defenders of the status quo have a ready excuse here. Irenaeus just 'slipped up.' But I certainly don't think this is possible. Notice the preciseness of his language. He is the first to cite all four gospels of our canon as an 'edition' (to borrow Trobisch's language). He says the saying is recorded IN THIS PARTICULAR FORM in this, that and the other gospel BUT NOT JOHN against the heretical reading of Marcion.

This in my mind eliminates the possibility that Irenaeus was 'mistaken.' He is very cognizant of which gospels this saying appeared AND IN WHAT FORMS THE SAYING TOOK.

I'd say this is THE STRONGEST PROOF that subsequent generations NOT ONLY REMOVED THE LONGER ENDING but also MATERIAL FROM WITHIN THE TEXT - including quite possibly - the material 'added' to Clement's Secret Gospel ...

Oh, and one more thing. Not only is THE ENDING of Irenaeus' Gospel of Mark different than ours and the middle too but even the VERY FIRST LINE of the gospel isn't the same. Scholars have always puzzled why our canonical Gospel of Mark says:

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'

This is bizarre because about half of the quote isn't even found in Isaiah. Surely Mark would have known this.

Nevertheless Irenaeus cites the first words NOT ONCE BUT TWICE in Book Three of his Against the Heresies as:

The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make the paths straight before our God." Plainly does the commencement of the Gospel quote the words of the holy prophets, and point out Him at once, whom they confessed as God and Lord [Irenaeus AH iii.10.5]

The point again is that somewhere between the time Irenaeus was writing and the fourth century THE BEGINNING, MIDDLE AND END of the canonical gospel of Mark was changed.

Let me 'score it' for sports fans out there. There are no EXPLICIT citations of Mark in Book One of Against the Heresies. There are no EXPLICIT citations in Book Two. There are THREE citations from the gospel of Mark THAT IRENAEUS USED in Book Three AND ALL THREE WITNESS SOME FORM OF TEXTUAL VARIATION from our existing MSS. There is only ONE citation from the Gospel of Mark in Book Four and it happens to be the one just cited above where Irenaeus says that the saying 'No man knew the Father, but the Son; nor the Son, but the Father, and he to whom the Son has willed to reveal' was in his copy of the Gospel of Mark. There are no explicit citations of Mark in Book Five.

I'm sorry folks. There REALLY IS something to this Secret Mark. Let the haters hate. The Gospel of Mark of the second century WAS NOT the Gospel of Mark of the fourth century and even pointing to a 'crazy old fag' discovering the Letter to Theodore can't change any of this ...