New book by Dennis MacDonald

[Peter Kirby]

(not necessarily Luke?)

well, in Luke's infancy story you have the embryon of John the Baptist who recognizes telepatically the embryon of Jesus the Messiah. Evidently the embryon of John the Baptist was more intelligent than the adult (and doubting) John the Baptist. Moral of the fable: where the inconsistency is removed entirely is in *Ev, not even in Luke. Hence, this is a strong argument to make *Ev precede both Matthew and Luke.

I think I see what you mean, yes.

[Giuseppe]

Very unfortunately, prof Dennis MacDonald introduces the following passage in the his reconstruction of the logoi of Jesus (how he calls his proto-Gospel preceding all the others):

5:1 And John, on hearing about all these things,
sending through his disciples,
5:2 said to him,
“Are you the one to come, or are we to expect someone else?”

Nota bene: in addition to the baptism of Jesus by John.

This is enough to reject the "logoi of Jesus" as another Gospel among the gospels that follow *Ev.

Now there is more none doubt at all: the choice on what was the first gospel is all between Mark and *Ev.

[Ken Olson]

(not necessarily Luke?)

well, in Luke's infancy story you have the embryon of John the Baptist who recognizes telepatically the embryon of Jesus the Messiah. Evidently the embryon of John the Baptist was more intelligent than the adult (and doubting) John the Baptist. Moral of the fable: where the inconsistency is removed entirely is in *Ev, not even in Luke. Hence, this is a strong argument to make *Ev precede both Matthew and Luke. And to examine, more accurately than it has been done until now, the question of John the Baptist in Mark.

We should probably move this to another thread because it no longer has anything to do with Dennis MacDonald's new book.

One of the things that concerns me about the way you (and others) argue for the priority of Marcion to the Synoptic Gospels is that you seem to start with your conclusion and reason from there. You don't seem to be concerned with how the synoptics are related to each other (i.e., the synoptic problem proper) or with the exegesis of the texts themselves independent of how that might affect the priority of Mark vs. the priority of the Evangelion theories.

Have you read what any major commentator on the gospels of Matthew and Luke who wrote in the last fifty or so years has said about John's question and Jesus' answer in Matt 1 and Luke 7 and what their function in the story is?

Now there is more none doubt at all: the choice on what was the first gospel is all between Mark and *Ev.[/b]

Also, do you know the story of the boy who cried wolf?

Best,

Ken

[Giuseppe]

s) argue for the priority of Marcion to the Synoptic Gospels is that you seem to start with your conclusion and reason from there.

I fear that the your answer is so elusive about the real question because you start from the wrong assumption (accused by me of being apologetical in character) that the question by John the Baptist “Are you the one to come, or are we to expect someone else?” is not evidence, per se alone, of a dubitative-skeptical tone about the messianic status of Jesus.

Note that I have not made arguments from Jesus being the messiah of an alien god. I have only said (by quoting the genial Bruno Bauer) what the evidence says clearly, i.e. that John the Baptist, by that precise only question, is a doubting figure.

At this point I am only interested if for you that question has a skeptical-dubitative tone or not.

Without an essential agreement on that premise, the discussion is closed from beginning, friends as before, with all the best intentions by myself.

[Ken Olson]

s) argue for the priority of Marcion to the Synoptic Gospels is that you seem to start with your conclusion and reason from there.

I fear that the your answer is so elusive about the real question because you start from the wrong assumption (accused by me of being apologetical in character) that the question by John the Baptist “Are you the one to come, or are we to expect someone else?” is not evidence, per se alone, of a dubitative-skeptical tone about the messianic status of Jesus.

Note that I have not made arguments from Jesus being the messiah of an alien god. I have only said (by quoting the genial Bruno Bauer) what the evidence says clearly, i.e. that John the Baptist, by that precise only question, is a doubting figure.

At this point I am only interested if for you that question has a skeptical-dubitative tone or not.

Without an essential agreement on that premise, the discussion is close from beginning, friends as before, with all the best intentions by myself.

Okay, then this answer is not for you or for other people who suffer from tunnel blindness in the cause of advocating the priority of Marcion's Evangelion. It is aimed rather at people that want to understand the data and have the best available interpretations of the literature we're looking at.

John asks and Jesus answers:

Matt 11.2 Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 4 And Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: 5 the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them.

Luke 7. 19 And John, calling to him two of his disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?’” 21 In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits, and on many that were blind he bestowed sight. 22 And he answered them, “Go and tell John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good news preached to them.

John asks if Jesus is he who is to come and Jesus answers by listing things he has previously done. How does this answer John's question?

The context for understanding Jesus answer is to be found in the prophecies of Isaiah.

Isaiah 35.4-6:

4 Behold, your God
will come with vengeance,
with the recompense of God.
He will come and save you.”

5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
and the ears of the deaf unstopped;
6 then shall the lame man leap like a hart,
and the tongue of the dumb sing for joy

and Isaiah 61.1:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
because the Lord has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.

The literary function of John's question in Matthew and Luke is to set up Jesus' reply, which is: 'Look at the things I have done. Are they not the things that were foretold by Isaiah?" The things Jesus has done are not exactly and only the things foretold by Isaiah. There is no a precise 1 to1 correspondence with the things foretold in Isaiah (e.g., the deaf mute does not sing), but they are recognizably the things foretold by Isaiah.

Best,

Ken

[Giuseppe]

Okay, then this answer is not for you

I think that I agree with this your answer, i.e. that Jesus confirms that he is the Jewish Messiah because he has done what Isaiah says that the Messiah has to do. Even so, my point is that John the Baptist has doubted, even only for an instant, about the Jesus' messianic status, with that precise question: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?”

Hence Ken I ask to you again: do you agree with me at least that the John the Baptist author of that question is a doubting figure?

If the answer is yes, how do you harmonize it with the previous passages in both Matthew and canonical Luke where John the Baptist, even only as mere embryon, is made to recognize Jesus as Messiah without no doubt at all?

[Giuseppe]

Or, to put the same question under another form:

If, per Ken's answer, someone had to set up Jesus' reply, which is: 'Look at the things I have done. Are they not the things that were foretold by Isaiah?", then why, among all the possible candidates who could set up a such Jesus' reply, just John the Baptist has been chosen as the questioner?

[Ken Olson]

Okay, then this answer is not for you

I think that I agree with this your answer, i.e. that Jesus confirms that he is the Jewish Messiah because he has done what Isaiah says that the Messiah has to do. Even so, my point is that John the Baptist has doubted, even only for an instant, about the Jesus' messianic status, with that precise question: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?”

Hence Ken I ask to you again: do you agree with me at least that the John the Baptist author of that question is a doubting figure?

If the answer is yes, how do you harmonize it with the previous passages in both Matthew and canonical Luke where John the Baptist, even only as mere embryon, is made to recognize Jesus as Messiah without no doubt at all?

The short answer is that John is a literary figure used by the evangelists to set up Jesus' answer. No. I don't think that the author of Matthew (whom I take to be the original author of the question) intended for him to be taken as a doubting figure. But people may take it that way, whether he intended it or not.

I have a question for you. It's based on BeDuhn's reconstruction of the text, but you can substitute Klinghardt's or another's if you like. In Evangelion 7.22 Jesus includes 'the deaf are hearing'. Is there some prior point in the Evangelion where Jesus restores hearing to a deaf person?

Best,

Ken

[Giuseppe]

I don't think that the author of Matthew (whom I take to be the original author of the question) intended for him to be taken as a doubting figure. But people may take it that way, whether he intended it or not.

thank you. Only a last question: have you some hypothesis about why just John the Baptist, and not a different literary figure, had to set up Jesus' answer? Only asking...

I have a question for you. It's based on BeDuhn's reconstruction of the text, but you can substitute Klinghardt's or another's if you like. In Evangelion 7.22 Jesus includes 'the deaf are hearing'. Is there some prior point in the Evangelion where Jesus restores hearing to a deaf person?

no, it is not there. But I think that the mention of people in *Ev 6:18:

...who came to hear him and to be healed of their diseases

...assumed also a numerous group of deaf people coming there.

[Ken Olson]

I don't think that the author of Matthew (whom I take to be the original author of the question) intended for him to be taken as a doubting figure. But people may take it that way, whether he intended it or not.

thank you. Only a last question: have you some hypothesis about why just John the Baptist, and not a different literary figure, had to set up Jesus' answer? Only asking...

John would seem to be the most obvious choice. Matthew 3.1-3 introduces John as fulfilling Isaiah 40.3:

3 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 2 “Repent,[a] for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” 3 For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said,

“The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
Prepare the way of the Lord,
make his paths straight.”

And John also introduces the term 'he who is coming' or 'the coming one' (ὁ ερχόμενος) in Matthew's gospel in Matt 3.11, which is the term used in John's question in Matt 11.3.

Best,

Ken