Proteus wrote:

The point in referencing Marcion is not to endorse any of his beliefs, but rather note the fact of his having referenced, prior to the third century, Paul's letters.

Marcion pre-dated Paul's letters.  The Fabricated Paul: Early Christianity in the Twilight is a book which claims that the Pauline letters are all 2nd-Century fabrications, Catholically redacted from Marcionite gnostic dualist-god original versions.  Far from Marcion "referencing" Paul's letters most say Marcion was first and Paul's letters came next. . .

"the Pauline letters in their entirety are inauthentic. . .

"If Paul was not the writer of the letters, then who was Paul, i.e., who was the person in whose name the letters were written? Was he a legend, a historical figure, or merely a phantom? . . .

"the fact that Paul says nothing at all about the historical Jesus was very curious — just as strange as the related fact that immediately after receiving the revelation calling him to be an apostle he went to Arabia for three years (Gal 1:17f.) instead of visiting the Jerusalem community, as one might expect, whether to make contact with its leaders or to acquire more information about the life of the person who had appeared to him at Damascus (Acts 9:3f.). Can one imagine that someone who had just experienced the decisive turning-point of his life through a revelation took no notice and had no interest in the earthly past of the one who stood in the center of this revelation? . . .

one must ask why Luke presents a picture of Paul that is entirely different from the picture of the apostle in the letters. Philipp Vielhauer observes, “The writer makes historical mistakes regarding the life of Paul that no companion would make,”. . .

Why is the Catholic Justin in the middle of the second century silent with regard to the Pauline writings? Why do we first encounter a canon of letters with Marcion the heretic?


סופי

And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Bereshit (Genesis) 21:12