CEJ, I am of the same opinion as BDE regarding the cutting of source content. Since Bart took the liberty of clearing Marcion of removing some of the source material. I’ll do it for Luke and Matthew. They didn’t cut anything.
Either they had a shorter version of Mark or they had a selection of sources. They may have had a full Mark and another gospel that didn’t have that material. They decided that the latter is more important and has some precedence over Marek.
As a supporter of the works of B. Lourie and H. Detering on a small apocalypse, I still do not rule out any of these scenarios

Paul undermines the credibility of partners by spreading denigrating doubts invented by himself and having nothing to do with reality. Something bad didn’t happen, but it could have. Usual social engineering slandering the other side indirectly.
It’s as if I visited you and after that visit wrote that I was pleased and even though I’m Polish, I wasn’t robbed, I wasn’t raped and I wasn’t beaten.
This is a literary ploy to sow doubt in the reader as to the intentions of the other party.
Even at the cost of the author’s credibility in the eyes of other readers. Paul cares about only one group of recipients.
Father Rydzyk, the founder of Radio Maryja, said the following about the rival radio station of the Episcopate, Radio Józef – “Don’t listen to them. They are not Catholics.”
Of course, most commentators were outraged. Only Rydzyk did not speak to the majority but to his audience. And he knew exactly what he was saying and why he was saying it.
Just like Paul.

Paul’s existence is one thing, the dating and authenticity of the letters is another, and the veracity of this story is a third issue. In this discussion, I challenge the veracity of this story.
There was no such meeting and no such arrangements. Paul creates a non-existent problem to seize the Hellenistic market for himself with the supposed consent of his competitors, whom he ridicules and slanders.
He didn’t meet anyone, didn’t talk to anyone, and didn’t arrange anything. No one was going to run after uncircumcised Greeks with a knife. Paul’s message is simple – so what if they are pillars, that one of them is the brother of Jesus. They are a bunch of ignorant people who not only despise you, but also want to enslave you forcibly. But just in case, for your sake, which is in the first place for me, it’s veni, vidi, vici…
New heroes of Christianity appeared: the historical man Jesus (whom Paul didn’t know), the disciples of Jesus, the brother of Jesus. The author of the character of Paul knew that it was the same fabrication as his creation. He couldn’t do more to support his hero against them. To deny the existence of those would be counterproductive and ineffective.
Circumcision has always been associated with prohibitions and commands in North Africa, not only in Judaism. The problem with circumcision is completely the opposite of what Paul portrays. Paul creates a non-existent threat to be used among the ignorant gentile Greek speaking market.

Gal 2:3-4 ? In Gal Paul uses circumcised, circumcision 12 times when talking about fear, about enslavement, about agitators he’d rather see castrated, and about the pressure of some party he invented. This knife is a metaphor for the mental terror that Paul offers his audience.

Paul is a literary expert on circumcision because he writes more about it than all the other authors of the NT, LXX combined. He demonstrates an understanding of the importance of the Law and circumcision, their relationship to each other. Everything you write is true – Paul builds up his authority in this regard, relentlessly in most of his letters. There is no greater specialist. It also shows respect for law and custom.
Why is he doing this?
One purpose is to exalt the old covenant to show the greatness of his new covenant proposal.
But there is also the purpose of cynically oppressing the opponents, after making them recognize him as an apostle, allowing him to act wherever he wants.
And it is the adversaries who produced gospels that suited the pagans because they were written in Greek.
I don’t know. Fiction smells from a mile away.

Matthew does what Paul does. He shows his superiority. As an expert in Hebrew, Tanakh, Palestine, Judaism. He certainly hits the Jews the hardest, he wants to take Tanakh away from them because they don’t deserve it. Judeo-Christianity is anti-Jewish. It sets an aggressive collision course followed by the likes of Barnabas and Melito. And it wins over the competition, because its offer coincides with the feelings of the recipients. Finding and branding a “public enemy” never gets old. The evangelists more or less took into account the feelings of the recipients.
Paul uses it too, but in a more sophisticated, veiled way, which is what we’re discussing. Only Paul wants to sell his and protect it from the competition (he also stigmatizes competition using anti-Jewish sentiment – the circumcision party). Matthew wants to brutally take everything he can from the Jews.
All this is happening in the Greek-speaking market as the Jewish-Greek conflict becomes more and more brutal.

The authors of Paul’s epistles and the authors of the gospels operated in the same market. There was no market other than the Greek-speaking proselytes, pagans. They all felt the lack of content that came to them in the form of oral tradition, through preachers, later some pamphlets with teachings, prayers, creeds. Great revelations like the Shepherd. It was a very diverse offer.
Someone invented Paul hoping it was the best idea to know Jesus through his apostle and revelation. According to the author, this was to be the closest contact with Jesus. The author of the letters did not suppose that someone would write a biography of Jesus with disciples and teaching directly from Jesus. It was a novelty for Paul’s author, he didn’t trust. But he saw the market reaction and he protected his hero as best he could.
Therefore, not only a circumcision party was created, but also a fictitious circumcised market.
All early Christian writings were written for the same market. Their authors compete with each other through the characters of their heroes. And there is no fair play here as you can see.

So are you now distinguishing these three steps?
1. Invention of some letters by a fictitious person named Paul
2. Invention by someone else of a biography of Jesus, including his teachings and disciples
3. The inventor of Paul and his letters then created a fictitious group of circumcised believers in Jesus and a circumcision party

1. The legend of Jesus – born of a woman, suffered, was crucified, resurrected. Proofs – predictions in the LXX (Hellenistic exegesis) and the revelation of the resurrected Jesus. Oral tradition.
2. Revelations and Hellenistic exegesis provide teachings, prayers, mysticism. Overall content. oral tradition.
3. Selection of oral tradition and change of form to written form. Gathering selected teachings and exegeses, assigning them to an apostle who had contact with Jesus/God. Pauline Corpus. Shepherd written by Hermas.
4. The appearance of Jesus’ earthly biography, disciples, mother and historical figures. A later idea based on an oral tradition unknown to the author of Paul’s letters.
5. Neither Paul’s author nor competing authors are interested in the circumcised market. Even if they operate in North Africa, their market is the Hellenic diaspora. There is no target circumcised market treated separatelly in special way.

For the sake of this discussion, let’s assume that Gal is in the original Corpus Pualine. This year, Vinzent wants to show that only Marcion had Gal in the original Pauline Corpus. The vertical line from Gal to Marcion with a question mark in Zuntz’s drawing also indicates some dilemmas. The Dutch Radical scholars discussion also seems serious. As a reminder, the original Pauline Corpus is 10 letters by 2/3 authors. In Poland, I have not yet found a classical philologist who would claim that 2 Thess was written by another author. Linguistically, it’s flawless. What I personally believe is that the letters entered the market after editing and compilation as an anthology of alleged correspondence. This is their original edition.

Exactly. Gal and the entire Pauline Corpus is a reaction to the actions of others. And how profitable it is for one person to write and publish, it is profitable for others as well. Because the conditions justifying the use of the publishing and the sale of content have been created for everyone. All writing started at the turn of the century at the earliest. or later

Be filled with the Spirit.