Carrier And Mimesis

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by MrMacSon »

outhouse wrote:
MrMacSon wrote: Unless he was also a disciple of Eusebius?.
Drinking mountainman's coffee way out in left field again ? -- (I put the possessive apostrophe in for you)
No. Partly teasing you.

And alluding to the fact that, as far as I can tell, there is only one mention of a 'Gospel according to Mark' before the time of Eusebius -
  • a mention by Irenaeus. The silence is glaring.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote:And alluding to the fact that there is only one mention of a 'Gospel according to Mark' before the time of Eusebius -
  • a mention by Irenaeus. The silence is glaring.
Wait. Why are you disqualifying the mentions of Mark's gospel by Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, and Victorinus of Pettau?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by neilgodfrey »

winningedge101 wrote:
I'm an amateur asking for the consensus opinion. Am I supposed to apologize? Also why resort to the conspiracy that academia would never hop on to this theory because it's radical? Most critical scholars don't think Moses and the patriarchs probably existed so why couldn't they just hop on this as well? I think mimesis is a lot less radical than getting rid of the whole Torah as a historically reliable source.
I think the usual approach in a discussion is to first read what the other person says and respond to that. Who said anything about a conspiracy? I pointed out that I was simply stating what members of the academy themselves have published -- and their explanation does not hint at conspiracy.

Sounds pretty disingenuous of you to claim to be asking what the consensus is when it is very evident from your response that you knew damn well what it is from the start. Why not just come straight out and say you think MacDonald and Carrier are jerks without all the time-wasting and excuses?

You evidently have no more interest in understanding or discussing the hypothesis any more than most of the academic guild does. That doen't mean you are part of a conspiracy -- just that you are not interested in professional scholarship.
Last edited by neilgodfrey on Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by iskander »

MrMacSon wrote:
iskander wrote:To say that the NT is a ' mimetic' imitation of the Odyssey is an ' ante-mimetic' fantasy.
MrMacSon wrote: No-one is saying 'the NT' in [it's entirety] is a 'mimetic' imitation of the Odyssey.
iskander wrote: Only Mark? It* is then a trivial remark not worth spending time on it.
* Depends on what you mean by 'it'.

If you mean *it* is not worth spending time on someone trolling this thread with simple vague posts, as you are, you are right.
Trolling is what the apologists for pompous trash do in this forum. Flogging the rubbish excreted by some authors is trolling.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote:
MrMacSon wrote:And alluding to the fact that there is only one mention of a 'Gospel according to Mark' before the time of Eusebius -
  • a mention by Irenaeus. The silence is glaring.
Wait. Why are you disqualifying the mentions of Mark's gospel by Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, and Victorinus of Pettau?
I was aware of Origen's mentions of Mark's gospels in passing (in Homilies on Joshua and Homilies on Luke), and the fact that Hippolytus has been proposed by Lightfoot as an author of the Muratorian Fragment.

But I wasn't aware of the others (I hadn't checked Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria; and have never heard of Victorinus of Pettau).

There is still relatively scant reference to it, though (?). Cheers.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote:
Ben C. Smith wrote:
MrMacSon wrote:And alluding to the fact that there is only one mention of a 'Gospel according to Mark' before the time of Eusebius -
  • a mention by Irenaeus. The silence is glaring.
Wait. Why are you disqualifying the mentions of Mark's gospel by Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, and Victorinus of Pettau?
I was aware of Origen's mentions of Mark's gospels in passing (in Homilies on Joshua and Homilies on luke), and the fact that Hippolytus has been proposed by Lightfoot as an author of the Muratorian Fragment.
The Muratorian fragment does not actually mention Mark; it starts at Luke, calling it the third gospel, and then goes on to John, calling it the fourth. So Matthew and Mark were probably there, but the fragment is, well, fragmented. I was referring to Refutation of All Heresies 7.30.1: "When, therefore, Marcion or any one of his dogs barks against the demiurge, bearing forth reasons from a comparison of good and bad, we must say to them that neither the apostle Paul nor stubby-fingered Mark announced these things. For none of these is written in the gospel [according] to Mark."
But I wasn't aware of the others (I hadn't checked Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria; and have never heard of Victorinus of Pettau).
The Latin translation of Clement by Cassiodorus has: "Mark, follower of Peter, while Peter was preaching the gospel openly at Rome before certain Caesarean knights and proferring many testimonies of Christ, was petitioned by them that they might be able to commit what things were being said to memory, and wrote from these things that were said by Peter the gospel which is called according to Mark, just as Luke is recognized by the style both to have written the acts of the apostles and to have translated the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews."

Tertullian and Victorinus both wrote in Latin. Victorinus dates to late century III, shortly before Eusebius. Tertullian writes in Against Marcion 4.5.3: "That same authority of the apostolic churches will stand as witness also for the other gospels, which no less [than that of Luke] we possess by their agency and according to their text, I mean those of John and Matthew, though that which Mark produced is stated to be of Peter, whose interpreter Mark was. The narrative of Luke also they usually attribute to Paul." Victorinus writes : "The four animals are the four gospels. The first, he says, was similar to a lion, the second similar to a calf, the third similar to a man, the fourth similar to an eagle flying, [each] having six wings, eyes roundabout both within and without. And, he says, they do not cease to say: Holy, holy, holy, omnipotent Lord God. .... Mark, the interpreter of Peter, having remembered the things that he taught in his duty wrote it down, but not in order, and began with the word of prophecy announced beforehand through Isaiah. .... Mark starts off thus: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ just as it was written in Isaiah; it begins with the spirit flying, thus it also has the effigy of a flying eagle."

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote:
MrMacSon wrote:And alluding to the fact that there is only one mention of a 'Gospel according to Mark' before the time of Eusebius -
  • a mention by Irenaeus. The silence is glaring.
Wait. Why are you disqualifying the mentions of Mark's gospel by Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, and Victorinus of Pettau?
Tertullian on Mark -

Against Marcion Book IV
Chap 2
[2] Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first instil47 faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterwards.48 These all start with the same principles of the faith,49 so far as relates to the one only God the Creator and His Christ, how that He was born of the Virgin, and came to fulfil50 the law and the prophets. Never mind51 if there does occur some variation in the order of their narratives, provided that there be agreement in the essential matter52 of the faith, in which there is disagreement with Marcion.

Chap 5
[3] ... The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence119 to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means,120 and according to their usage --I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew-- whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter's121 whose interpreter Mark was.

http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-31.htm
Last edited by MrMacSon on Tue Mar 22, 2016 5:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: The Muratorian fragment does not actually mention Mark; it starts at Luke, calling it the third gospel, and then goes on to John, calling it the fourth. So Matthew and Mark were probably there, but the fragment is, well, fragmented. I was referring to Refutation of All Heresies 7.30.1 -
  • "When, therefore, Marcion or any one of his dogs barks against the demiurge, bearing forth reasons from a comparison of good and bad, we must say to them that neither the apostle Paul nor stubby-fingered Mark announced these things. For none of these is written in the gospel [according] to Mark."
Cheers. Yes, Mark (& Matthew) are implied to have been referenced in the Muratorian Fragment. It's date of composition is somewhat disputed, too.
Ben C. Smith wrote:
The Latin translation of Clement by Cassiodorus has:
  • "Mark, follower of Peter, while Peter was preaching the gospel openly at Rome before certain Caesarean knights and proferring many testimonies of Christ, was petitioned by them that they might be able to commit what things were being said to memory, and wrote from these things that were said by Peter the gospel which is called according to Mark, just as Luke is recognized by the style both to have written the acts of the apostles and to have translated the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews."
Tertullian and Victorinus both wrote in Latin. Tertullian writes in Against Marcion 4.5.3:
  • "That same authority of the apostolic churches will stand as witness also for the other gospels, which no less [than that of Luke] we possess by their agency and according to their text, I mean those of John and Matthew, though that which Mark produced is stated to be of Peter, whose interpreter Mark was. The narrative of Luke also they usually attribute to Paul."

Victorinus [who dates to late century III, shortly before Eusebius] writes :
  • "The four animals are the four gospels. The first, he says, was similar to a lion, the second similar to a calf, the third similar to a man, the fourth similar to an eagle flying, [each] having six wings, eyes roundabout both within and without. And, he says, they do not cease to say: Holy, holy, holy, omnipotent Lord God. .... Mark, the interpreter of Peter, having remembered the things that he taught in his duty wrote it down, but not in order, and began with the word of prophecy announced beforehand through Isaiah. .... Mark starts off thus: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ just as it was written in Isaiah; it begins with the spirit flying, thus it also has the effigy of a flying eagle."
Ben.
Cheers. The sum total of these references to Mark in all that time are, to me at least, quite underwhelming.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote:
The Latin translation of Clement by Cassiodorus has:
  • "Mark, follower of Peter, while Peter was preaching the gospel openly at Rome before certain Caesarean knights and proferring many testimonies of Christ, was petitioned by them that they might be able to commit what things were being said to memory, and wrote from these things that were said by Peter the gospel which is called according to Mark, just as Luke is recognized by the style both to have written the acts of the apostles and to have translated the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews."
Tertullian and Victorinus both wrote in Latin. Tertullian writes in Against Marcion 4.5.3:
  • "That same authority of the apostolic churches will stand as witness also for the other gospels, which no less [than that of Luke] we possess by their agency and according to their text, I mean those of John and Matthew, though that which Mark produced is stated to be of Peter, whose interpreter Mark was. The narrative of Luke also they usually attribute to Paul."

Victorinus [who dates to late century III, shortly before Eusebius] writes :
  • "The four animals are the four gospels. The first, he says, was similar to a lion, the second similar to a calf, the third similar to a man, the fourth similar to an eagle flying, [each] having six wings, eyes roundabout both within and without. And, he says, they do not cease to say: Holy, holy, holy, omnipotent Lord God. .... Mark, the interpreter of Peter, having remembered the things that he taught in his duty wrote it down, but not in order, and began with the word of prophecy announced beforehand through Isaiah. .... Mark starts off thus: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ just as it was written in Isaiah; it begins with the spirit flying, thus it also has the effigy of a flying eagle."
Ben.
re Mark -
  • The Latin translation of Clement by Cassiodorus has:
    • "Mark, follower of Peter (while Peter was preaching the gospel openly at Rome before certain Caesarean knights and proferring many testimonies of Christ) was petitioned by them that they might be able to commit what things were being said to memory, and wrote from these things -that were said by Peter- the gospel which is called according to Mark ..."
    Tertullian writes in Against Marcion 4.5.3:
    • " ... that which Mark produced is stated to be of Peter, whose interpreter Mark was."
    Victorinus [who dates to late century III, shortly before Eusebius] writes :
    • "... four animals are the four gospels. The first, he says, was similar to a lion, the second similar to a calf, the third similar to a man, the fourth similar to an eagle flying, [each] having six wings, eyes roundabout both within and without .... Mark, the interpreter of Peter, having remembered the things that he taught, in his duty wrote it down, but not in order, and began with the word of prophecy announced beforehand through Isaiah. .... Mark starts off thus: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ just as it was written in Isaiah
They all give priority to Peter.


re Luke & Paul -
  • The Latin translation of Clement by Cassiodorus has:
    • " ..Luke is recognized by the style both to have written the Acts of the Apostles, and to have translated the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews."
    Tertullian writes in Against Marcion 4.5.3:
    • "The narrative of Luke also they usually attribute to Paul."
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Carrier And Mimesis

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote:They all give priority to Peter.
Yes, that is very common. The urge to attribute canonical texts to apostles rather than just to followers of apostles was very strong. Nevertheless, when it comes time to name this particular gospel, they generally call it the "gospel according to Mark".
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply