Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fiction

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fiction

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
Time to resurrect my Award winning Thread:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Presentation Of Names As Evidence Of Fiction

Thanks Young Wolf

KK points out an interesting presentation of names in a possible source with good parallels to GMark:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1390
Haman, the son of Hamedatha, by birth an hAmalekite
[Josephus]

Likewise GMark:

From Wallack's criteria for Figurative use of names:
2) Demonstrated style of the author.

A common style of "Mark" is to repeat names, often in a short space.
The offending portion:

Mark 6
14 And king Herod heard [thereof]; for his name had become known: and he said, John the Baptizer is risen from the dead, and therefore do these powers work in him.

15 But others said, It is Elijah. And others said, [It is] a prophet, [even] as one of the prophets.

16 But Herod, when he heard [thereof], said, John, whom I beheaded, he is risen.

17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip`s wife; for he had married her.

18 For John said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother`s wife.

19 And Herodias set herself against him, and desired to kill him; and she could not;

20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was much perplexed; and he heard him gladly.

21 And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, and the high captains, and the chief men of Galilee;

22 and when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she pleased Herod and them that sat at meat with him; and the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.
I can picture "Mark" (author) swinging his grogger every time Herod/Herodiasses are mentioned.

The serious student should know by now that the first place to look for analysis is the Legendary Vorkosigan's:

Mark 6:14-29

The Vorkmeister demonstrates and than some, that while the offending verse is possible, it is implausible (history, not). Of specific interest in this Thread is the extent to which "Mark" invokes the name "Herod" unnecessarily and especially improperly. Such usage will be Marked in red.
14 And king Herod heard [thereof]; for his name had become known: and he said, John the Baptizer is risen from the dead, and therefore do these powers work in him.
Per Josephus it was Herod Antipas the Tetrarch who had John executed. Josephus does sometimes just refer to him as "Herod". Here though "Mark" uses only "Herod" without ever saying "Antipas" or "Tetrarch" thus strengthening the connection to the original Herod the Great (who was King).
17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip`s wife; for he had married her.
Per Josephus, who presumably is recording history, Herodias had nothing to do with John's Passion. So why invoke her name? Herodias was married to Herod the Great's son Herod and not Phillip. That would seem to go against "Mark" deliberately repeating "Herod" but can be explained by "Mark" starting off here with "Herod" instead of "Herod Antipas" and not wanting to say Herod married Herod's wife. Hence Herodias hastened to the next in Lyine, Phillip.
22 and when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she pleased Herod and them that sat at meat with him; and the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.
The textual evidence supports "his daughter Herodias", instead of "the daughter of Herodias herself", meaning Herod's daughter:

Laparola [Mark 6:22]
θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρῳδιάδος] ‭א B D L Δ 565 pc (arm) WH NA
Not to mention the grammatical construction could only support "himself" (Herod):

http://biblehub.com/text/mark/6-22.htm

,
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1525 [e] eiselthousēs εἰσελθούσης having come in V-APA-GFS
3588 [e] tēs τῆς the Art-GFS
2364 [e] thygatros θυγατρὸς daughter N-GFS
846 [e] autēs αὐτῆς of herself PPro-GF3S
3588 [e] tēs τῆς - Art-GFS
2266 [e] Hērōdiados Ἡρῳδιάδος Herodias, N-GFS
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
3738 [e] orchēsamenēs ὀρχησαμένηςhaving danced, V-APM-GFS
700 [e] ēresen ἤρεσεν pleased V-AIA-3S
3588 [e] τῷ - Art-DMS
2264 [e] Hērōdē Ἡρῴδῃ Herod N-DMS

Can't help wondering if the context hints at "pleasured" instead of pleased. Maybe it's just me. So Herod, husband of Herodius, has a daughter Herodius. A tightly knit family. Per Josephus, Herodius was Phillip's daughter. Another sacrifice to history.

In summary, "Mark's" overuse of the name "Herod" here:
  • 1) Naming Herod Antipas just Herod.

    2) Calling this Herod King instead of Tetrarch (connecting to Herod the Great).

    3) Bringing his wife Herodius into the story.

    4) Saying his daughter was Herodius and bringing her into the story.
You're Making Things Up Again Markus

Most would agree that all four are historical errors but this post goes beyond that to claiming that "Mark" has made all these errors intentionally in order to invoke the name "Herod". Note especially that all these Herods/Herodiasses are in close proximity in "Mark's" potential source Josephus, "Mark" is just rearranging them with style.

"Mark" parallels with External sources as noted above and the above Herod banquet parallels well Internally with Jesus' banquet where evil and wicked Christian mistranslators have hidden the "reclining" connection. I have faith that our own frauline KK is about to give the sacrifices for the Kingdoms parallel as well. Note that John's sacrifice is a dead body while, as that great 20th century philosopher Joker said, Jesus' is "a live one".


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
I am increasingly afraid with trembling and astonishment that regarding claims of Markan unorthodox use, misuse and abuse of names, that one of the Gospeller's Jesus might actually return before there is ever an objective analysis. In a quick related search of the Net, I see a few lists of names/characters in GMark, some divided in categories, but no quantitative analysis.

I have faith that one could make such lists for starters of say:
  • 1) List of all characters in GMark.

    2) Sub-divide by named verses unnamed.

    3) Count repetition of the same name for different characters.

    4) Ratio of named to unnamed.

    5) Ratio of repetition names to total names.

    6) Ratio of unusual presentation of name to orthodox presentation of name.
Once such a list was constructed one could than compare these ratios to other ancient works. I have faith that this holy task has already been within the range of caulpability of CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) but there was an awareness that such a study for GMark would not prove profitable for Christian assertians, would likely not lead to tenure and would be a magnet for criticism. Thus this burden falls on us and as John said in the classic Kosher Animal House And We're Just the Guys to Do It

Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
1.1 Jesus Christ Named - - Unusual 1 Yes "son of God" not original
1.4 John Named - Normal - 1 No "John the Baptizer" not original
1:16 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:16 Andrew (the brother of Simon) Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:19 James (of Zebedee) Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:19 John (brother of James) Named - Normal - 2 No -
1:20 Zebedee Named - - Unusual 1 No "Zebedee" redundant since "their father" is stated
1:23 A man with an unclean spirit - Unnamed - Unusual - - -
1:30 Simon's mother-in-law - Unnamed - Unusual - - A name would be expected here

1 down (so to speak) and 15 to go. Preliminary observations:
  • 1) The primary character (Jesus) identification keeps changing which is the opposite of what you would expect.

    2) The first invocation of "Simon" is identified as a brother and not a son.

    3) "James" is likewise identified as a brother which makes me think of "brother of the Lord".

    4) Only the unnamed are healing beneficiaries. You'd think it would be the other way around. ReMarkable characters would be named. Is "Mark" (author) trying to tell us something by that?
I think this type (so to speak) of statistical analysis is right up Peter's Allaehy.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by Peter Kirby »

I'd be glad to help if I can. Is there anything more you can tell me about the categories of "Normal" and "Unusual"? Or perhaps just the specific justifications of those readings in all the particular instances that they are found... say, perhaps saying why all the unusual ones are considered unusual.

Essentially all you need to do is to create an exhaustive list separating every item into one of two (or more) categories of the first kind (named/unnamed) [called 'groups' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number in each 'group' being the sum of each row] and one of two (or more) categories of the second kind (normal/not normal) [called 'results' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number for each 'result' within the respective groups counted and placed in columns]. Then the math isn't too hard, and I'd be glad to do it.

So if you could complete the table you had started...
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by JoeWallack »

Peter Kirby wrote:I'd be glad to help if I can. Is there anything more you can tell me about the categories of "Normal" and "Unusual"? Or perhaps just the specific justifications of those readings in all the particular instances that they are found... say, perhaps saying why all the unusual ones are considered unusual.

Essentially all you need to do is to create an exhaustive list separating every item into one of two (or more) categories of the first kind (named/unnamed) [called 'groups' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number in each 'group' being the sum of each row] and one of two (or more) categories of the second kind (normal/not normal) [called 'results' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number for each 'result' within the respective groups counted and placed in columns]. Then the math isn't too hard, and I'd be glad to do it.

So if you could complete the table you had started...
JW:
For starters I've just picked headings based on qualities I think are the most important and will all fit along one row here. I think the Named verses Unnamed is an important characteristic and relatively objective so that should be included in an initial effort. Normal vs. Unusual will be more subjective but the overall objective is to compare Gospels, especially the likely original GMark, with other ancient works, using the same criteria.

Throwing out a conclusion before it is formally supported or possibly not formally supported, CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) takes GMark as containing significant witness evidence. Yet my reading of GMark notes that its characters who react positively to its Jesus are more likely to be unnamed than named. If the intent of "Mark" (author) was to provide significant witness evidence I find it strange/bizarre/macabre that the best potential witnesses per narrative would be unnamed. The further problem for the claim that the Gospels in general do contain significant witness evidence is that the Gospels subsequent to GMark, which clearly want to present significant witness evidence, have to use GMark as a base, suggesting there was no/little supposed witness evidence available to them.

Now that I've gotten that out, on to Chapter 2.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
On to Chapter 2:

Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
2:5 Sick of the palsy - Unnamed Normal - - - -
2:14 Levi (son) of Alphaeus, tax collector Named - Normal - 1 Yes "Levites" were the Priests of Israel and responsible for collecting the religious tax


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

JoeWallack wrote:
  • 1) List of all characters in GMark.
    Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
    1.1 Jesus Christ Named - - Unusual 1 Yes "son of God" not original
    1.4 John Named - Normal - 1 No "John the Baptizer" not original
    1:16 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:16 Andrew (the brother of Simon) Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:19 James (of Zebedee) Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:19 John (brother of James) Named - Normal - 2 No -
    1:20 Zebedee Named - - Unusual 1 No "Zebedee" redundant since "their father" is stated
    1:23 A man with an unclean spirit - Unnamed - Unusual - - -
    1:30 Simon's mother-in-law - Unnamed - Unusual - - A name would be expected here

:?:
Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
1:36 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:40 a leper - Unnamed - Unusual (?) - - -

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by Peter Kirby »

Peter Kirby wrote:I'd be glad to help if I can. Is there anything more you can tell me about the categories of "Normal" and "Unusual"? Or perhaps just the specific justifications of those readings in all the particular instances that they are found... say, perhaps saying why all the unusual ones are considered unusual.

Essentially all you need to do is to create an exhaustive list separating every item into one of two (or more) categories of the first kind (named/unnamed) [called 'groups' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number in each 'group' being the sum of each row] and one of two (or more) categories of the second kind (normal/not normal) [called 'results' in applied statistics when used for science, with the number for each 'result' within the respective groups counted and placed in columns]. Then the math isn't too hard, and I'd be glad to do it.

So if you could complete the table you had started...
Or, if you knew how to arrive at that table, you could skip the middleman and use an online calculator:

http://in-silico.net/tools/statistics/chi2test

I'm too lazy to do the numbers without using a spreadsheet or calculator. ;)
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by JoeWallack »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
JoeWallack wrote:
  • 1) List of all characters in GMark.
    Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
    1.1 Jesus Christ Named - - Unusual 1 Yes "son of God" not original
    1.4 John Named - Normal - 1 No "John the Baptizer" not original
    1:16 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:16 Andrew (the brother of Simon) Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:19 James (of Zebedee) Named - Normal - 1 No -
    1:19 John (brother of James) Named - Normal - 2 No -
    1:20 Zebedee Named - - Unusual 1 No "Zebedee" redundant since "their father" is stated
    1:23 A man with an unclean spirit - Unnamed - Unusual - - -
    1:30 Simon's mother-in-law - Unnamed - Unusual - - A name would be expected here

:?:
Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
1:36 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:40 a leper - Unnamed - Unusual (?) - - -

JW:
Thanks KK, let me try again:

I am increasingly afraid with trembling and astonishment that regarding claims of Markan unorthodox use, misuse and abuse of names, that one of the Gospeller's Jesus might actually return before there is ever an objective analysis. In a quick related search of the Net, I see a few lists of names/characters in GMark, some divided in categories, but no quantitative analysis.

I have faith that one could make such lists for starters of say:
  • 1) List of all characters in GMark.

    2) Sub-divide by named verses unnamed.

    3) Count repetition of the same name for different characters.

    4) Ratio of named to unnamed.

    5) Ratio of repetition names to total names.

    6) Ratio of unusual presentation of name to orthodox presentation of name.
Once such a list was constructed one could than compare these ratios to other ancient works. I have faith that this holy task has already been within the range of caulpability of CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) but there was an awareness that such a study for GMark would not prove profitable for Christian assertians, would likely not lead to tenure and would be a magnet for criticism. Thus this burden falls on us and as John said in the classic Kosher Animal House And We're Just the Guys to Do It

Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
1.1 Jesus Christ Named - - Unusual 1 Yes "son of God" not original
1.4 John Named - Normal - 1 No "John the Baptizer" not original
1:16 Simon Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:16 Andrew (the brother of Simon) Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:19 James (of Zebedee) Named - Normal - 1 No -
1:19 John (brother of James) Named - Normal - 2 No -
1:20 Zebedee Named - - Unusual 1 No "Zebedee" redundant since "their father" is stated
1:23 A man with an unclean spirit - Unnamed - Unusual - - -
1:30 Simon's mother-in-law - Unnamed - Unusual - - A name would be expected here
1:40 A leper - Unnamed - Unusual - Yes Per the Jewish Bible lepers were not supposed to come into towns. The leper comes into town and is healed by Jesus and than everything else is also reversed. The leper now goes out of town and into every other town while Jesus is now converted effectively into a leper (as KK pointed out out) in that he can not go into towns. Now everyone goes out of towns to see the "leper" Jesus (think Isaiah 53).



1 down (so to speak) and 15 to go. Preliminary observations:
  • 1) The primary character (Jesus) identification keeps changing which is the opposite of what you would expect.

    2) The first invocation of "Simon" is identified as a brother and not a son.

    3) "James" is likewise identified as a brother which makes me think of "brother of the Lord".

    4) Only the unnamed are healing beneficiaries. You'd think it would be the other way around. ReMarkable characters would be named. Is "Mark" (author) trying to tell us something by that?

    5) Generally in the Jewish Bible the physical/literal ritual is symbolic for the spiritual/figurative. The command to keep the sick leper outside of the town is representative of the commands to keep sin/sinners outside of town. Paul/"Mark" have flipped that so that the physical/literal is contrasted with the spiritual/figurative instead of complimentary.

    6) In GMark the positive characters generally come into town and the negative go out. Here the positive leper character comes into town to Jesus. The negative disciple characters are explicitly sent out of town from Jesus. This coordinates (so to speak) with Paul in that supposed historical witness, that witnessed in Jesus' supposed time, did not properly promote him. Subsequent promoters of Jesus, after Jesus supposed time, went out and properly promoted him.
[/list]

I think this type (so to speak) of statistical analysis is right up Peter's Allaehy.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
On to Chapter 3:

Verse Identity Named Unnamed Normal Unusual Count Context Commentary
3:3 Man with the withered hand - Unnamed - - - - -
3:16 Simon and an added name by Jesus, "Peter" Named - - Unusual 1 - "Named by" Jesus is "laid upon" in the Greek. The same word used for "the laying of hands" in healing context. Note in the previous pericope of the withered hand the implication of "laying of hands" to heal a hand. The figurative comparison is Jesus laid hands on the unnamed man to heal him and all Jesus laid on Simon was a name (understand dear Reader?)
3:17 and James the [son] of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and them he surnamed Boanerges, which is, Sons of thunder: Named - - Unusual - Yes I'll just note for now that both times this James was invoked he was identified as a "brother". The nickname implies they were in some way loud.
3:18 Philip Named - Normal - 1 - -
3:18 Bartholomew Named - Normal - 1 - -
3:18 Matthew Named - Normal - 1 - -
3:18 Thomas Named - Normal - 1 - -
3:18 James the [son] of Alphaeus Named - Normal - 1 - Go back to 2:14 and "Levi the [son] of Alphaeus". So the name "James" has been invoked 3 times so far and every time it is explicitly or implicitly as a brother. Reminds this one of Antony's "They are "honorable" men". He was the "brother" of the Lord.

To be continued...


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Names Use As Evidence of Fic

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Hi, Joe.
JoeWallack wrote:Normal vs. Unusual will be more subjective but the overall objective is to compare Gospels, especially the likely original GMark, with other ancient works, using the same criteria.
It might help to keep a running tally of the individual criteria you are using to place the name (or lack thereof) into either the normal or the unusual category. It is not always clear (to me, at any rate) what criterion you are using. For example, you note in your observations:
Only the unnamed are healing beneficiaries. You'd think it would be the other way around. ReMarkable characters would be named.
Yet you do not count the unnamed man sick with the palsy as unusual; he qualifies as normal. The unnamed leper in 1.40 you do count as unusual, but the (lengthy) comment about lepers and towns seems to imply that it is not the name or lack of a name that is what prompted you to make that call. So it is not always even clear to me, despite the title of the thread, that it is something about the name of a character that you are saying is unusual.

If you had a numbered list of criteria to which you could refer (by number) in each case, it might be easier to follow.

Also, what is the context column tracking?

Thanks.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply