Horae Synopticae.Demonstration of the NonApostolic Preaching

[JoeWallack]

JW:
Looks like it's time to give a refresher on The Demonstration of Markan Priority:

Horae Synopticae



Ben Smith

Textual excavation at its very finest. The phrase horae synopticae is Latin for synoptic hours. Hawkins named his book after all the time that he spent on the synoptic problem. And it shows. He compiles list after list of textual phenomena: Historical presents, distinctive vocabulary words, doublets, and many, many others.

Hawkins himself subscribed to the two-source hypothesis, but this book is a must-have for anyone interested in the relationship between the synoptics, regardless of position. It is, quite simply, without peer in its field.

JW:
Hawkins wrote HS (Horae Synopticae) in 1898 demonstrating Markan priority and it has not been significantly challenged since. In an irony that the author of GMark would approve of, Hawkins, a Reverend and believer of the historical assertions of orthodox Christianity, made a fundamental historical assertion of orthodox Christianity disappear, that the original Gospel narrative was written by "Matthew", the apostle.

The related, more recent confession of orthodox Christianity is that the original Gospel GMark, originally ended at 16:8, with no resurrection appearances. Subsequent editing of GMark and subsequent Gospels based on GMark added resurrection appearances to their versions.

The problem this creates for orthodox Christianity is that its traditional primary assertion is that Jesus was resurrected and its related traditional primary claim of historical support is that the Gospels provide historical witness to a resurrected Jesus. But without a resurrection appearance in the original narrative, there is no resurrection appearance in the source for subsequent Gospels which added resurrection appearances.

Again, the above is all confessed by Christian Bible scholarship. Christian assertion than, goes back to its roots of Paul/"Mark" (author). Belief in the resurrection is based on revelation/faith and not historical witness evidence.

The average Christian in the street has no idea of the above and thinks the issue is that the Gospels provide multiple first hand witness to a resurrected Jesus and non-Christians just choose not to believe what was written. Skeptics know better but I fear, based on discussions on this unholy Forum, that the average Skeptic here does not appreciate just how good the evidence is for Markan priority.

Since Hawkins wrote, the case for Markan priority has gotten stronger with new arguments developed, but HS is still the starting point. So let the Revelation of the argument for Markan priority begin:

In the first half of the book Hawkins compiles the raw data. In the second half he presents the argument for Markan priority:

Page 117 = Passages that would seem to be problems for orthodox Christianity are more prominent in GMark:

A. Passages seeming (a) to limit the power of Jesus Christ, or (b) to be otherwise derogatory to, or unworthy of, Him.

[Numerous examples]

B. Passages seeming to disparage the attainments or character of the Apostles.

[Numerous examples]

C. Other passages which might cause offence or difficulty.

[Numerous examples]

Since Hawkins wrote, Textual Criticism has determined that there are possibly/likely/probably many more difficult readings in GMark that Hawkins did not identify.

Our own Peter Kirby, The Young Wolf, has a splendid related article here:

The Priority of Mark

for those who prefer the Truth in digest form (so to speak).

Enjoy!

JW:
Hawkins has 7 main categories of evidence favoring Markan priority, none of which have been seriously challenged since.

By the way, Schillingklutz. Weren't you the guy at the front of Caesar's Palace Sports Book repeating in the preseason that the Gophers will never cover the large spreads because they are a running team?


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

[schillingklaus]

So it is just your average party of the Markan Prioritism maffia and can be safely ignored. Nothing in the NT is historically reliable by any strecth whatsoever.

[JoeWallack]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKw10gvBU_M

JW:
One of Hawkins' categories of evidence is "Difficult Readings". The Gospel with the Difficult Readings is more likely to be earlier. The other side of it is creation/development of Apologies is evidence of subsequent Gospels. Starting to look at John the Baptist:

Verse	Theological Problems	Commentary
1 4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins. 5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey. 7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. 9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.	1. The implication is that Jesus confessed his sins. 2. John the Baptist is presented before Jesus. 3. The implication is that Jesus was unreMarkable before the baptism.	-

Joseph

APOLOGIZE, v.i. To lay the foundation for a future offence.

Skeptical Textual Criticism

[JoeWallack]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgA6LBz7biM

JW:
One of Hawkins' categories of evidence is "Difficult Readings". The Gospel with the Difficult Readings is more likely to be earlier. The other side of it is creation/development of Apologies is evidence of subsequent Gospels. Starting to look at John the Baptist:

Verse	Theological Problems	Commentary
1 4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins. 5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey. 7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. 9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.	1. The implication is that Jesus confessed his sins. 2. John the Baptist is presented before Jesus. 3. The implication is that Jesus was unreMarkable before the baptism.	-
14 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,	Odd that there is no other information provided at this time like, I don't know, who, what, where, when, why.	This looks like a set-up of an after-the-fictional-fact claim of prophecy fulfillment. The claim(s) of prophecy fulfillment regarding John the Baptist will be made after the supposed fictional-facts. This TempOral (so to speak) abuse of reality also parallels John the Baptist to the Jesus backwards claims of prophecy fulfillment. To the Superior Skeptic, do I really need to tell you whose thang this was before "Mark".

Joseph

APOLOGIZE, v.i. To lay the foundation for a future offence.

Skeptical Textual Criticism

[Paul the Uncertain]

One of Hawkins' categories of evidence is "Difficult Readings". The Gospel with the Difficult Readings is more likely to be earlier. The other side of it is creation/development of Apologies is evidence of subsequent Gospels.

While I do not dispute that the priority of GMark is more likely true than false, I think that there is less justified confidence in that belief than the apparent consensus level of confidence.

I happily accept arguendo that GMark is by far the least naively apologetic gospel in the canon. By naive I mean what the phrase "accentuating the positive" connotes IRL, perhaps even "preaching to the choir." If you need a more rigorous definition than that, then I'll gladly oblige.

My point of concern is whether being more or less naively apologetic is a reliable heuristic guide to temporal order of composition.

For other differences among the canonical gospels, the guild seems generally to accept that each gospel arose from a distinct "community" and reflected that group's needs, interests, and beliefs. I propose a consequence of that hypothesis, that each gospel author had a distinctive "target audience" in mind.

Suppose Mark's target audience included non-believers (perhaps some were prospects for conversion; perhaps mere tolerance from non-believers was a sufficient goal), educated people, and intelligent people, united by shared interest in what Christians were on about. If so, then it would be unremarkable that Mark would avoid naive apologetics, based on his estimate that an intelligent educated non-believer would not sit still for it, and would not listen to him.

That doesn't imply that Mark couldn't have had apologetic ambitions. A Jesus who plainly tells the truth that Jairus's daughter wasn't dead displays diagnostic competence in the eyes of a 1st Century gynecologist. Such a Jesus displays integrity in declining to claim credit for a supernatural feat that he hadn't performed, and in insisting on the true situation even in the face of ridicule. In that, Jesus is also a model of tenacity for Christians who might themselves face ridicule for their beliefs.

Jesus raised a girl from the dead is naive apologetics compared with Jesus saved a girl from premature burial because of his untutored competence and while exhibiting personal integrity. The latter is also apologetics, more sophisticated apologetics than making a far-out claim that educated audience members of the time would scoff at.

It seems to me that sophistication can arrive on the scene early or late. It may be neck-and-neck, or a matter of utter happenstance who publishes first, the zealot who could profit among some readers from more moderation or the moderate whose arguments might be ramped up to draw a wider albeit down-market crowd.

[JoeWallack]

GMark itself is free of contradictions. John is handed over when Jesus begins his mission (GMark 1:14), John's disciples are now without a bridegroom and must fast (GMark 2:20) and in a flashback it is told that Herod killed John (GMark 6:16ff).

JW:
Great observation. JtB'S primary function in GMark is to foreshadow Jesus. As Christianity converts Revelation into supposed historical witness, by the last Gospel, GJohn, JtBS is fully converted from primarily foreshadow to primarily supposed witness. All of GMark is after the supposed fact prophecy fulfillment (I meant to do that). Revelation. In the subsequent Gospels Jesus is placed before JtB (sorry Marcion, it originally was not all about Ev).

Per The Skeptical Critical Commentary - Gospel of Mark orginal GMark starts:

1:4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.

foreshadows nicely with:

1:9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.

First mention of each with no back story.

Bonus material for KK. Note that in addition to the fasting story tying into JtB the nearby forgiveness of sins story also ties to JtB.

Bonus material for Solo: Note well that in GMark no one besides Jesus believes that Jesus will be resurrected. In lion with Revelation, After
Jesus is resurrected, one person now believes that Jesus was resurrected. Now who could that possibly parallel?


Joseph

"In order to e an interpreter of GMark, one must, above all else, not be a believing sheep." - Wallack/Einstein

The New Porphyry

[JoeWallack]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy47g4FtiSU

JW:
One of Hawkins' categories of evidence is "Difficult Readings". The Gospel with the Difficult Readings is more likely to be earlier. The other side of it is creation/development of Apologies is evidence of subsequent Gospels. Starting to look at John the Baptist:

Verse	Theological Problems	Commentary
1 4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins. 5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey. 7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. 9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.	1. The implication is that Jesus confessed his sins. 2. John the Baptist is presented before Jesus. 3. The implication is that Jesus was unreMarkable before the baptism.	-
14 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,	Odd that there is no other information provided at this time like, I don't know, who, what, where, when, why.	This looks like a set-up of an after-the-fictional-fact claim of prophecy fulfillment. The claim(s) of prophecy fulfillment regarding John the Baptist will be made after the supposed fictional-facts. This TempOral (so to speak) abuse of reality also parallels John the Baptist to the Jesus backwards claims of prophecy fulfillment. To the Superior Skeptic, do I really need to tell you whose thang this was before "Mark".
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. 23 And he sware unto her, Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. 24 And she went out, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the Baptizer. 25 And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, I will that thou forthwith give me on a platter the head of John the Baptist. 26 And the king was exceeding sorry; but for the sake of his oaths, and of them that sat at meat, he would not reject her. 27 And straightway the king sent forth a soldier of his guard, and commanded to bring his head: and he went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 and brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the damsel; and the damsel gave it to her mother. 29 And when his disciples heard [thereof], they came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.	1. Herod believes in the resurrection of the righteous. The Disciples do not. 2. Herod believes in the supernatural powers of the righteous. The Disciples do not. 3. Herod believed John was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. The Disciples did not think Jesus was a righteous and holy man, and did not keep him safe. 4. Herod is willing to give away half his Kingdom. 5. Herod keeps his oath. Peter...pfttt. 6. JtBS disciples receive his body and tome, er, tomb it.	"Mark" literally places Jesus' supposed disciples immediately before and after the Herod story. One can only wonder if there could possibly be anything in the original to make it clearer that the primary point is contrasting Jesus' disciples behavior with that of Herod/JtB's disciples.

Joseph

APOLOGIZE, v.i. To lay the foundation for a future offence.

Skeptical Textual Criticism

[Paul the Uncertain]

Greetings, Joe

Yes, Footloose. Great soundtrack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2lpV4uopr4

Getting down to business:

Again, I'm fine with Markan priority and I share your overall concern about the thinness of evidence with which we approach any question about early Christianity. That includes, of course, the hypothesis of Markan priority.

I was curious about what you bolded in chapter 1 of GMark.

1:4 John came ... the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
1:5 confessing their sins
1:9 Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.

with commentary that the implication (suggestion maybe?) was that Jesus confessed his sins, and the invitation for your reader to infer that this was a marker of priority. And yet if we compare chapter 3 of GMatthew, we find:

3:1,2 John the Baptizer came ... saying ... "Repent..."
3:6 confessing their sins
3:13 Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him.

It seems whatever suggestion there is in GMark about Jesus confessing sins is also in GMatthew. In neither gospel does Jesus confess his sins, in explicit contrast to the other baptizees in both gospels.

This "doing one thing confessed sinners also did, but silence on another thing" doesn't seem to be a marker of priority, seeing how closely the two accounts coincide on this point. In any case, the concern of both authors seems to be the relative stature of Jesus and John. In both works (1:7,8; 3:11) John describes himself as coming before somebody of higher status. Not much difference there, either.

We have in the past discussed the literary "forward" at GMark 1:14. We can put aside that Mark's reader finds out in the author's good time who (Herod Antipas), what (arrest for seditious speech about an affair of state, the sovreign's divorce and remarriage), where (John goes to prison), when (after the remarriage, before Antipas's birthday), why (domestic tranquility). Good writing (e.g. the use of forwards) is not an obvious marker of priority.

Mark's Herod does see Jesus as John returned or resurrected. It is unclear, however, whether that belief is exclusively bound up with Herod's perception of John's righteousness. There is the confounding matter of Herod's role in John's unjust killing. It is unclear how Antipas indulging an apparent drunken lust for his stepdaughter parallels Simon Peter's situation. Angry ghosts and haunted murderers were familiar tropes even in ancient times (Pliny's letter to Sura, Plutarch's Brutus and Julius Caesar, for examples).

The contrast between Jesus's disciples and John's is uncontroversially a feature of GMark. Perhaps in future installments we shall learn how that becomes a temporal marker in your view.

[JoeWallack]

I'm An Idea man

One of Hawkins' categories of evidence is "Difficult Readings". The Gospel with the Difficult Readings is more likely to be earlier. The other side of it is creation/development of Apologies is evidence of subsequent Gospels. Starting to look at John the Baptist:

Verse	Theological Problems	Commentary
1 4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins. 5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey. 7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. 8 I baptized you in water; But he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit. 9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in the Jordan.	1. The implication is that Jesus confessed his sins. 2. John the Baptist is presented before Jesus. 3. The implication is that Jesus was unreMarkable before the baptism.	-
14 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,	Odd that there is no other information provided at this time like, I don't know, who, what, where, when, why.	This looks like a set-up of an after-the-fictional-fact claim of prophecy fulfillment. The claim(s) of prophecy fulfillment regarding John the Baptist will be made after the supposed fictional-facts. This TempOral (so to speak) abuse of reality also parallels John the Baptist to the Jesus backwards claims of prophecy fulfillment. To the Superior Skeptic, do I really need to tell you whose thang this was before "Mark".
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. 23 And he sware unto her, Whatsoever thou shalt ask of me, I will give it thee, unto the half of my kingdom. 24 And she went out, and said unto her mother, What shall I ask? And she said, The head of John the Baptizer. 25 And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, I will that thou forthwith give me on a platter the head of John the Baptist. 26 And the king was exceeding sorry; but for the sake of his oaths, and of them that sat at meat, he would not reject her. 27 And straightway the king sent forth a soldier of his guard, and commanded to bring his head: and he went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 and brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the damsel; and the damsel gave it to her mother. 29 And when his disciples heard [thereof], they came and took up his corpse, and laid it in a tomb.	1. Herod believes in the resurrection of the righteous. The Disciples do not. 2. Herod believes in the supernatural powers of the righteous. The Disciples do not. 3. Herod believed John was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. The Disciples did not think Jesus was a righteous and holy man, and did not keep him safe. 4. Herod is willing to give away half his Kingdom. 5. Herod keeps his oath. Peter...pfttt. 6. JtBS disciples receive his body and tome, er, tomb it.	"Mark" literally places Jesus' supposed disciples immediately before and after the Herod story. One can only wonder if there could possibly be anything in the original to make it clearer that the primary point is contrasting Jesus' disciples behavior with that of Herod/JtB's disciples.
8:27 And Jesus went forth, and his disciples, into the villages of Caesarea Philippi: and on the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Who do men say that I am? 28 And they told him, saying, John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but others, One of the prophets. 29 And he asked them, But who say ye that I am? Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ. 30 And he charged them that they should tell no man of him. 31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 And he spake the saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.	Some believe in resurrections. Peter and the Disciples do not.	In typical (so to speak) style "Mark" contrasts the contrast by placing them next to each other.

Joseph

"I believe in free speech unless..." - Elon Musk

Skeptical Textual Criticism