On the Context of αρρητος in 2 Corinthians 12:4

A regular reader of this blog has noticed something about Eznik's report on the Marcionite interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12:4. I wrote in a previous post that it is clear that Eznik knows that the Marcionites blurred the distinction between 'the Apostle' and Marcion. Eznik says that the Marcionites say that it was Marcion who had the heavenly ascent attributed to 'Paul' among the heretics (cf. Hippolytus Refutation of the Heresies V.3) and an anonymous 'man' in our received text.

I have always attributed this heavenly ascent to the third heaven (Eznik also tells us that the Marcionites understood 'the third heaven' to mean 'the heaven above the seventh heaven of the Jewish God') to the Marcionite attribution of the Apostle as original evangelist. I have noted that Clement interprets the passage in relation to the authorship of the gospel.

I am starting to wonder is αρρητος meant to be taken in the 'gnostic' sense - i.e. something unspoken or unpublished because it was meant to be passed by word of mouth (cf. Irenaeus AH iii.2).

Indeed notice what Irenaeus says about the heretics there namely that they allege "that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but viva voce: wherefore also Paul declared, 'But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world.' And this wisdom each one of them alleges to be the fiction of his own inventing, forsooth; so that, according to their idea, the truth properly resides at one time in Valentinus, at another in Marcion, at another in Cerinthus, then afterwards in Basilides, or has even been indifferently in any other opponent, who could speak nothing pertaining to salvation. For every one of these men, being altogether of a perverse disposition, depraving the system of truth, is not ashamed to preach himself."

I have already demonstrated in a previous post that Irenaeus has Clement's Alexandrian tradition in mind when writing these words. The pertinent part of that citation from the Stromata Book vi is:

And the gnosis itself is that which has descended by transmission to a few, having been imparted unwritten by the apostles. Hence, then, knowledge or wisdom ought to be exercised up to the eternal and unchangeable habit of contemplation. [Stromata vi.7,8]

The point then is that there was a real tradition in Alexandria which exactly mirrored the criticism that we just Eznik level against the Marcionites namely that the Marcionites say that the apostle himself was "enraptured to third heaven and heard unspeakable words, ones that we, we comment, precisely, in our sermons" and moreover that because Marcion was the real name of the apostle identified as 'Paul' in the Catholic tradition "it follows that these were unspeakable words were for him, a man who is assuredly the worst of all men, he who, not content to have abandoned the truth of the Spirit, himself sets about again to spread vile fables."

Can we begin to see where Eznik got the idea that Marcion was developing fables? It follows directly from Irenaeus attack against the heretical interpretation of the words of Pauline epistle regarding the existence of a tradition which αρρητος (unspeakable, unpublishable) which is passed on by word of mouth (i.e. what the Jews call 'kabbalah'- viz. 'tradition').

Eznik immediately jumps to deny a claim from the heretics themselves that this 'Marcion' brought back a gospel from his heavenly ascent:

And there he is so emboldened by the spirit that made Satan, that is, to choose to take (only) a half (of the gospel), and the other half, to throw it away as junk. Likewise for what is the apostolic epistles also, and he repudiates the Old Testament in its entirety, as if in thinking, it was the gift of a roguish and not of a good god!

After reinforcing the Catholic claim that Marcion expunged a pre-existing gospel rather than authoring the original gospel Eznik allows a little bit of the original Marcionite understanding to shine forth:

The apostle, he says they are unutterable stirrings the words he heard, and Marcion, said: "Me, I heard them!"

If only to attack this interpretation of 2 Cor 12:4 on the grounds that it is illogical:

So? Is it to the apostle, who takes these words that we must listen as unutterable, or Marcion, who, once he has debased them, they are made to mere topical pass these words?

The point of course is that the Marcionites must have taken the words to mean 'unutterable' to the uninitiated as we see in Irenaeus' report on the various other heretical communities. In other words, one must be prepared to hear these words of 'Marcion.'

In a previous post I have already proved that Marcion is a back-formation of Marcioni, a Semitic gentilic plural meaning 'those of Mark.' Hippolytus attacks the Marcionites for claiming that their founder wrote the original Gospel of Mark.

I hope the reader can see where I am going with this.

I am starting to wonder if the thing which was understood to be αρρητος in 2 Corinthians 12:4 was the Gospel of Mark - a specifically 'unspoken' or hidden gospel of Mark known to the Alexandrian community. Just look at Clement of Alexandria's interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12:4:

To these statements [regarding the highest God being utterly unknowable] the apostle will testify: "I know a man in Christ, caught up into the third heaven, and thence into Paradise, who heard αρρητος words which it is not lawful for a man to speak," -- intimating thus the impossibility of expressing God, and indicating that what is divine is unutterable by human power; if, indeed, he begins to speak above the third heaven, as it is lawful to initiate the elect souls in the mysteries there. For I know what is in Plato (for the examples from the barbarian philosophy, which are many, are suggested now by the composition which, in accordance with promises previously given, waits the suitable time). For doubting, in Timaoeus, whether we ought to regard several worlds as to be understood by many heavens, or this one, he makes no distinction in the names, calling the world and heaven by the same name. But the words of the statement are as follows: "Whether, then, have we rightly spoken of one heaven, or of many and infinite? It were more correct to say one, if indeed it was created according to the model." Further, in the Epistle of the Romans to the Corinthians it is written, "An ocean illimitable by men and the worlds after it." Consequently, therefore, the noble apostle exclaims, "Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God!"

And was it not this which the prophet meant, when he ordered unleavened cakes to be made, intimating that the truly sacred mystic word, respecting the unbegotten and His powers, ought to be concealed? In confirmation of these things, in the Epistle to the Corinthians the apostle plainly says: "Howbeit we speak wisdom among those who are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, or of the princes of this world, that come to nought. But we speak the wisdom of God hidden in a mystery." And again in another place he says: "To the acknowledgment of the mystery of God in Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." These things the Saviour Himself seals when He says: "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven." And again the Gospel says that the Saviour spake to the apostles the word in a mystery. For prophecy says of Him: "He will open His mouth in parables, and will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world." And now, by the parable of the leaven, the Lord shows concealment; for He says, "The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened." For the tripartite soul is saved by obedience, through the spiritual power hidden in it by faith; or because the power of the word which is given to us, being strong and powerful, draws to itself secretly and invisibly every one who receives it, and keeps it within himself, and brings his whole system into unity [Strom. v.80.3]

The point of what Clement is saying here is that the 'third heaven' of 2 Corinthians 12:4 is really the eighth heaven. Eznik put forward that Marcion is said "to have taught that there were three heavens: in the highest dwelt the good God, in the second the God of the Law, in the lowest His angels; beneath lay Hyle, or matter, having an independent existence of its own. [p. 697] In other words Clement is DELIBERATELY AVOIDING saying that the third heaven is really the eighth (i.e. one more than the seven heavens of this world). He instead goes on to talk about Passover which is an eight day festiva.

As such we see Clement speak of the significance of the leaven of the 'spiritual power' - a spiritual power of 'eighthness' of the ogdoad but this is deliberately left unsaid because Irenaeus determined that this discussion was 'heretical.'

The Marcionites also clearly identified their canon as an 'ogdoad' (seven letters + the gospel). Irenaeus makes clear that the heretics identified the ogdoad as αρρητος.

As such it should be no surprise that this canon of writings associated with 'those of Mark' was itself αρρητος. The ogdoad was αρρητος, just as αρρητος was the ogdoad.

So Irenaeus writes that the very same heretical followers of Mark "adduce an αρρητος number of apocryphal and spurious scriptures, which they themselves have forged, to bewilder the minds of foolish men, and of such as are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth." [AH i.20.1]

Indeed isn't it impossible NOT to see that the original (and now 'heretical') use of the term αρρητος had something to do with a gospel which resembled the text of 'Secret Mark' in To Theodore? Well, I guess I should ask everyone other than those who have already made up their minds that the Mar Saba document was a forgery written by Morton Smith ...