The predocetic Luke

I am still processing István Czachesz's bombshell on the Viennese Acts of John. The main followup to the Acts' claims about Jesus' asomatism would appear to be Atkins' dissertation. This is now a book: The Doubt of the Apostles and the Resurrection Faith of the Early Church (2019). There's a preview; and some book-reviews here and there, but most are paywalled (not all!). So I'm going with Google Books.

Atkins argued and still argues that Luke 24 and John 20 do not exist to refute Docetism. Sarx, a word dear to John 1 (carne in Spanish) and to 2 John, is not used in John 20. John 21 is considered an appendix to John but it might be a very early one (we'll get to this).

For the "Gospel of the Acts of John" in the Vindobonensis we care about section B chs 87-93, 103-105; section C is 94-102 but also ch. 109 in the canon. For splitting them into multiple sections this evidence is internal-only on account Second Nicaea witnesses to all sections. Consensus argues for two separate authors for B and C, against Czachesz 2007; Atkins accepts consensus.

Sections A+B were docetic but not necessarily gnostic; C brought pre-Valentinian Syrian gnosticism into the mix, like that infamous hymn ch. 94. Atkins 7n.8 registers continuing questions about whether C was the final editor or if that final editor took a separate (early) gnostic source as to compile chs. 87-105. We care here about B.

Atkins 7.2.1 handles B’s parallels with Luke. For Atkins' text, Google Books only allowed me pp. 292 and 296 but I can extend the arguments 291b-3a, 295b-6 covering three parallels. Here at n.33 Atkins argues that B (ch 88) parallels Luke 5:11's fishery against (say) John 21's (and Tertullian leaves Marcion unchallenged Adv. Marcion. 4.9.9-10). Atkins’ next parallel is that Jesus ate with the Pharisees; which Jesus does thrice in Luke (here too Marcion’s gospel, per Epiphanius’ scholion 10 and Tertullian 4.27) but never in Mark or Matthew. Atkins notes here that B assumes that Jesus is attending Pharisaic symposia, often (ei dé pote); using Luke 7:36-50 as a template. For the final parallel: that Jesus in Transfiguration prays (ch. 90) must reflect Luke 9:28-9.

Evan Powell aside, most solutions of the synoptic Quellenfrage would attribute these Lukan pluses to that authorial hand. Even this incomplete reading convinces me that B used Luke. Marcion – and the western-text – seem to bystand here. Specifically: B confronts Luke, to introduce docetism.