The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

I have long toyed with the idea, sometimes put forth on this forum (among other venues), that the gospel of Mark means to imply that the disciples, Jesus' inner circle of followers, not only abandoned him at his arrest crucifixion but were also abandoned by him (and by God), never to be restored to any kind of position of authority in the movement which Jesus consciously and deliberately sets in motion throughout the gospel.

But I no longer really toy with that idea. My mind is still open, but I am now very much on the other side of that issue. Simply put, I think that the gospel of Mark in several distinct places makes it very clear that the disciples are going to be restored.

First, there is Mark 1.16-17:

1.16 As He was going along by the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew, the brother of Simon, casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. 17 And Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men.”

It is possible that this promise to turn (at least) Simon and Andrew into fishers of men (a metaphor, obvious though somewhat creepy, for preachers in the nascent movement) is meant to be fulfilled fully in Mark 6.7-13, but I am not sure that a single preaching tour is really what is promised. No matter: there are other indicators, should this one seem insufficient.

Second, there is Mark 2.18-20:

2.18 John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they come and say to Him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” 19 And Jesus said to them, “While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.

This instance, too, allows some wriggle room, since Mark makes clear that there are more disciples than merely the twelve (who are not officially summoned as a body until 3.13-19); nevertheless, Jesus is presuming in this saying that his disciples will be minding the rituals of the movement (fasting, in this case) after his departure.

Third, there is Mark 10.35-40:

10.35 James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, come up to Jesus, saying, “Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask of You.” 36 And He said to them, “What do you want Me to do for you?” 37 They said to Him, “Grant that we may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left, in Your glory.” 38 But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 They said to Him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized. 40 But to sit on My right or on My left, this is not Mine to give; but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”

Drinking the cup and being baptized with the baptism are clear metaphors for martyrdom (refer to Mark 14.36). Jesus is letting James and John know that they will indeed die a martyr's death. The cup and the baptism are Jesus'; I doubt he is thinking that they will convert to some other faith and die as Buddhist or Hindu martyrs; rather, they will die defending the Jesus movement.

Fourth, there is Mark 13.1-37:

13.1 As He was going out of the temple, one of His disciples says to Him, “Teacher, behold what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down.” 3 As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning Him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?”

5 And Jesus began to say to them, “See to it that no one misleads you. 6 Many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He!’ and will mislead many. 7 When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened; those things must take place; but that is not yet the end. 8 For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will also be famines. These things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. 9 “But be on your guard; for they will deliver you to the courts, and you will be flogged in the synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them. 10 The gospel must first be preached to all the nations. 11 When they arrest you and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but it is the Holy Spirit. 12 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and have them put to death. 13 You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should not be (let the reader understand), then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains. 15 The one who is on the housetop must not go down, or go in to get anything out of his house; 16 and the one who is in the field must not turn back to get his coat. 17 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 18 But pray that it may not happen in the winter. 19 For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will. 20 Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days. 21 And then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ’; or, ‘Behold, He is there’; do not believe him; 22 for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect. 23 But take heed; behold, I have told you everything in advance.

13.24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken. 26 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

13.28 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. 29 Even so, you too, when you see these things happening, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 30 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. 32 But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 33 “Take heed, keep on the alert; for you do not know when the appointed time will come. 34 It is like a man away on a journey, who upon leaving his house and putting his slaves in charge, assigning to each one his task, also commanded the doorkeeper to stay on the alert. 35 Therefore, be on the alert—for you do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether in the evening, at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or in the morning— 36 in case he should come suddenly and find you asleep. 37 What I say to you I say to all, ‘Be on the alert!’”

The actual coming of the Son of Man in verses 24-27 is notably devoid of pronouns referring to the four disciples conversing with Jesus at this point in the narrative; but the rest of the chapter is simply teeming with pronominal referents to that inner circle of four. Jesus is not merely commanding them here; he is actually making predictions ("you will stand before governors and kings for my sake"). He is, in short, predicting that they will be persecuted for being part of the Jesus movement. And his predictions have a relentless habit of coming true throughout the rest of the gospel....

It is no use suggesting that all of these pronouns actually refer to the Christian readers of this gospel; the author knows the difference and spells it out plainly in verse 37: "What I say to you I say to all." The obvious consequence is that all of these pronouns do indeed refer primarily to the four disciples and (at least some of them) only secondarily to "all".

The overall force of these passages is that the disciples will, after Jesus' departure, still be participating in the Jesus movement, both in its rituals (fasting) and in its practices (preaching/fishing for humans), and to such a degree that it invites persecution (being dragged before the authorities) and even martyrdom (drinking the cup and being baptized with the baptism). These dominical predictions apply at least to Peter, Andrew, James, and John, and probably also to many of the other disciples. These observations imply that the abandonment of which they are guilty at Jesus' arrest and crucifixion will be remedied; they will be forgiven and restored.

Again, my mind is still open, but this position is the one I currently hold, and I have seen nothing yet which has argued away to my own satisfaction the combined force of the above passages.

Ben.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Sat Jun 03, 2017 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Giuseppe »

About:
1.16 As He was going along by the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew, the brother of Simon, casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. 17 And Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men.”
you seem to agree that it is alone insufficient to do your case.

Second:
2.18 John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they come and say to Him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” 19 And Jesus said to them, “While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.
But Paul would have denied the fasting before, during and after the death of Jesus, since ''fasting'' means observance of months, years, etc. I mean: it is possible that the disciples will fast ''in that day'', but for ignorance of the real fate of Jesus (resurrection): see what Peter does after his betrayal, at the song of roaster. The irony of Jesus would be that the disciples will fall again in the ignorance of the same Jesus's opponents, when Jesus will be not more with them to lead them on the right way.

Third:
10.35 James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, come up to Jesus, saying, “Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask of You.” 36 And He said to them, “What do you want Me to do for you?” 37 They said to Him, “Grant that we may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left, in Your glory.” 38 But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 They said to Him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized. 40 But to sit on My right or on My left, this is not Mine to give; but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
It seems that you are not pointing out enough the implicit irony of Jesus in his prophecy: “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized, but.... Jesus is predicting their vain death ''in the thorns'' of the Parable of Sowner. The fate of the Zealots awaits them, even if they are not Zealots but apparently (they consider themselves) pacifist Christians.

The paradox would be the following:

1) Jesus say that the sons of Zebedee will die surely in future.
2) but, at the crucial moment of the GLORY of Jesus (for the pauline Mark: the same crucifixion of Jesus!), who will be on the left and on the right of Jesus will be two ZEALOTS.
3) therefore: stantibus rebus, the death of the two ZEALOTS on the Golgotha is vain just as the future death that awaits the sons of Zebedee. Basically, to follow the Christ without recognizing really the Son of God is vain just as to follow the Zealot Messianic ideal.

Any different interpretation assumes impliciter that who dies on the left and the right of Jesus is really exalted with him, but I don't think that the two lesthes are exalted with Jesus: their presence is totally vain just as vain is the presence of John and Zebedee (precisely the two ones replaced by the two lesthes) among the disciples of Jesus.

Another example is Simon of Cyrene. He replaces Peter (in bearing of the cross) but only to denigrate Peter, not because really Simon of Cyrene was a legitimate follower of Jesus.



Fourth :
13.1 As He was going out of the temple, one of His disciples says to Him, “Teacher, behold what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down.” 3 As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning Him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?” 5 And Jesus began to say to them, “See to it that no one misleads you. 6 Many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He!’ and will mislead many. 7 When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened; those things must take place; but that is not yet the end. 8 For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will also be famines. These things are merely the beginning of birth pangs. 9 “But be on your guard; for they will deliver you to the courts, and you will be flogged in the synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for My sake, as a testimony to them. 10 The gospel must first be preached to all the nations. 11 When they arrest you and hand you over, do not worry beforehand about what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but it is the Holy Spirit. 12 Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and have them put to death. 13 You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved. 14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should not be (let the reader understand), then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains. 15 The one who is on the housetop must not go down, or go in to get anything out of his house; 16 and the one who is in the field must not turn back to get his coat. 17 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! 18 But pray that it may not happen in the winter. 19 For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will. 20 Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days. 21 And then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ’; or, ‘Behold, He is there’; do not believe him; 22 for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect. 23 But take heed; behold, I have told you everything in advance.

13.24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers that are in the heavens will be shaken. 26 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27 And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

13.28 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. 29 Even so, you too, when you see these things happening, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 30 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 31 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. 32 But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. 33 “Take heed, keep on the alert; for you do not know when the appointed time will come. 34 It is like a man away on a journey, who upon leaving his house and putting his slaves in charge, assigning to each one his task, also commanded the doorkeeper to stay on the alert. 35 Therefore, be on the alert—for you do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether in the evening, at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or in the morning— 36 in case he should come suddenly and find you asleep. 37 What I say to you I say to all, ‘Be on the alert!’”
The disciples will be not ''on the alert'' at Getsemani. Therefore the contrast is evident between the addressing to disciples and only to them in Mark 13, and their betrayal in the final hour.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote:About:
1.16 As He was going along by the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew, the brother of Simon, casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. 17 And Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men.”
you seem to agree that it is alone insufficient to do your case.
It is ambiguous in isolation, yes.
Second:
2.18 John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and they come and say to Him, “Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?” 19 And Jesus said to them, “While the bridegroom is with them, the attendants of the bridegroom cannot fast, can they? So long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast. 20 But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day.
But Paul would have denied the fasting before, during and after the death of Jesus, since ''fasting'' means observance of months, years, etc. I mean: it is possible that the disciples will fast ''in that day'', but for ignorance of the real fate of Jesus (resurrection): see what Peter does after his betrayal, at the song of roaster. The irony of Jesus would be that the disciples will fall again in the ignorance of the same Jesus's opponents, when Jesus will be not more with them to lead them on the right way.
If you want to bring Paul in, you have to actually bring Paul in (rather than merely telling me what you think Paul would say), since Mark himself nowhere mentions Paul, much less how Paul fits into all of this. You need to mount an argument; and my prediction is that such an argument will be full of leaps, speculations, and assorted intangibles.

I have no idea what the disciples' predicted fasting has to do with Peter's cock crow. You will have to spell out your meaning a bit more.

It is indisputable that the disciples let Jesus down in every way. The predictions in Mark which entail their restoration say nothing about how far they do or do not fall before being restored.
Third:
10.35 James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, come up to Jesus, saying, “Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask of You.” 36 And He said to them, “What do you want Me to do for you?” 37 They said to Him, “Grant that we may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left, in Your glory.” 38 But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 They said to Him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized. 40 But to sit on My right or on My left, this is not Mine to give; but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
It seems that you are not pointing out enough the implicit irony of Jesus in his prophecy: “The cup that I drink you shall drink; and you shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized, but.... Jesus is predicting their vain death ''in the thorns'' of the Parable of Sowner. The fate of the Zealots awaits them, even if they are not Zealots but apparently (they consider themselves) pacifist Christians.
How do the thorns relate to James and John? Be specific.
The paradox would be the following:

1) Jesus say that the sons of Zebedee will die surely in future.
2) but, at the crucial moment of the GLORY of Jesus (for the pauline Mark: the same crucifixion of Jesus!), who will be on the left and on the right of Jesus will be two ZEALOTS.
3) therefore: stantibus rebus, the death of the two ZEALOTS on the Golgotha is vain just as the future death that awaits the sons of Zebedee. Basically, to follow the Christ without recognizing really the Son of God is vain just as to follow the Zealot Messianic ideal.
Jesus says more than that James and John will die in the future; he says that they will be martyred in the future. Watering the wording down does not help us interpret the text.

The irony of two bandits being crucified on the left and the right of Jesus has literally no necessary connection to James and John's eventual restoration (or not). In other words, every single thing you write here may well be true, yet it says nothing about whether James and John will be restored, solely by virtue of Jesus' own mercy, after the irony of the disciples' abandonment of Jesus has played out.
Fourth :

....

The disciples will be not ''on the alert'' at Gethsemani. Therefore the contrast is evident between the addressing to disciples and only to them in Mark 13, and their betrayal in the final hour.
Mark 13 is not about Gethsemani.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Marko, Paulo

Post by JoeWallack »

Ben C. Smith wrote:I have long toyed with the idea, sometimes put forth on this forum (among other venues), that the gospel of Mark means to imply that the disciples, Jesus' inner circle of followers, not only abandoned him at his arrest crucifixion but were also abandoned by him (and by God), never to be restored to any kind of position of authority in the movement which Jesus consciously and deliberately sets in motion throughout the gospel.

But I no longer really toy with that idea. My mind is still open, but I am now very much on the other side of that issue. Simply put, I think that the gospel of Mark in several distinct places makes it very clear that the disciples are going to be restored.
JW:
You're getting closer...

As is usually the case, I think The Truth here lies somewhere between Judea and Galilee. "Mark" (author) is just showing the same type of ambiguity towards the Disciples in your examples that his major source Paul showed. "Mark's" primary objective is to show how Jesus should be promoted in "Mark's" time, not Jesus' time, same as Paul.

"Mark's" primary point is not whether Jesus should be promoted but how Jesus should be promoted. I have faith that "Mark's" point was that the Disciples were primarily promoting a Teaching & Healing Jesus and they should have been primarily promoting a supposedly resurrected Jesus (again, just like Paul shows).

For those who need points sharply explained "Mark" does not show any post resurrection reunion narrative because it would not change anything (whether the Disciples would promote the resurrection).


Joseph

Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)

'
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Giuseppe »

If you want to bring Paul in, you have to actually bring Paul in (rather than merely telling me what you think Paul would say), since Mark himself nowhere mentions Paul, much less how Paul fits into all of this. You need to mount an argument; and my prediction is that such an argument will be full of leaps, speculations, and assorted intangibles.
The Paul I am introducing is the Paul of Galatians 4:10, ''You observe days, and months, and times, and years''. Surely the observance of days of fasting is included here among the things that are ''observed''. Therefore Jesus is predicting that after the his death, the disciples will continue to observe the Torah (to be Judaizers) and this is surely not what the Mark's Jesus wants that his readers do.

How do the thorns relate to James and John? Be specific.
I mean: if the ''rock soil'' of the Parable represents Peter, then the ''thorns'' where the Word falls has to represent someone who is attracted by power and material richness, i.e. the sons of Zebedee.
Jesus says more than that James and John will die in the future; he says that they will be martyred in the future. Watering the wording down does not help us interpret the text.
Yes, but their future martyrdom is vain, according to the irony that (at least) I can see in Jesus's words, since that martyrdom cannot raise them to the role of who is ''at the left and at the right'' of Jesus in the glory.
The irony of two bandits being crucified on the left and the right of Jesus has literally no necessary connection to James and John's eventual restoration (or not).
But you agree at least with me that the irony of two bandits is really linked with the replacement of the sons of Zebedee in the place where they would have hoped to be but they can't never be: on the left and the right of Jesus in his glory.
If they can't die on Golgotha with Jesus (differently from the two bandits) then they can't share the glory of Jesus ''on the left and the right of Jesus'', EVEN if they will die in future. But this fact means only that their future martyrdom (different from Golgotha) is entirely vain in the eyes of Jesus, since their martyrdom had to serve uniquely to their future being ''on the left and the right of Jesus''. What I am only assuming is that the crucifixion of the two bandits is a vain crucifixion: even so, vain bandits replace vain sons of Zebedee. To think that the latter will be redeemed is equivalent to think that the former will be redeemed, too. Surely it is not the case.
Idem with Simon Peter replaced by Simon of Cyrene: if the latter is not redeemed, then Peter is not redeemed, too.
The idea would be that you replace x with y only if you think that y is better than x, but clearly for Mark y is not better than x even if y replaces x: therefore the only possible conclusion is that the value of x and of y is equivalent and is zero.
Mark 13 is not about Gethsemani.
I mean: many things of Mark 13 are realized in the episode of Getsemani: for example, the disciples sleep and are alerted in vain by Jesus. For example, so I read from Vridar:
There is nothing new about noticing that the prophecy of the “last days” that Jesus delivered to his inner disciples in Mark 13 contains allusions to events in the ensuing narrative Christ’s suffering and crucifixion. I addressed one of these points in the previous post. There are others.
I invite you to read these other points.

http://vridar.org/2014/04/19/jesus-cruc ... jerusalem/

Therefore if all the commands of Jesus in Mark 13 are denied by the disciples during the end of the Gospel, then it means that all the emphasis put by you about the Jesus addressing ONLY AND ONLY the disciples in Mark 13 is only reason in more to condemn the disciples, not to save them in extremis after the resurrection of Jesus.
"Mark's" primary point is not whether Jesus should be promoted but how Jesus should be promoted. I have faith that "Mark's" point was that the Disciples were primarily promoting a Teaching & Healing Jesus and they should have been primarily promoting a supposedly resurrected Jesus (again, just like Paul shows).
I disagree with the your ''faith'' about it. The Pillars were predicting the crucified-and-resurrected Jesus - just as Paul - but with the observance of Torah as religious duty of all the Christians. The Torah was for Paul and for Mark what would have done vain the Christianity of the Pillars, anything they would have preached (was it even the same epistles of Paul).
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Marko, Paulo

Post by Ben C. Smith »

JoeWallack wrote:
Ben C. Smith wrote:I have long toyed with the idea, sometimes put forth on this forum (among other venues), that the gospel of Mark means to imply that the disciples, Jesus' inner circle of followers, not only abandoned him at his arrest crucifixion but were also abandoned by him (and by God), never to be restored to any kind of position of authority in the movement which Jesus consciously and deliberately sets in motion throughout the gospel.

But I no longer really toy with that idea. My mind is still open, but I am now very much on the other side of that issue. Simply put, I think that the gospel of Mark in several distinct places makes it very clear that the disciples are going to be restored.
JW:
You're getting closer...
Closer to what?
As is usually the case, I think The Truth here lies somewhere between Judea and Galilee. "Mark" (author) is just showing the same type of ambiguity towards the Disciples in your examples that his major source Paul showed. "Mark's" primary objective is to show how Jesus should be promoted in "Mark's" time, not Jesus' time, same as Paul.

"Mark's" primary point is not whether Jesus should be promoted but how Jesus should be promoted. I have faith that "Mark's" point was that the Disciples were primarily promoting a Teaching & Healing Jesus and they should have been primarily promoting a supposedly resurrected Jesus (again, just like Paul shows).
So Mark underscores this critique of the disciples' teaching and healing ministry... how? By pointing out that it was Jesus himself who gave them a teaching and healing ministry (Mark 3.13-19; 6.7-13; 13.11) in the first place? (If this ministry was valid only during Jesus' lifetime and invalid afterward, where or how does Mark make this clear?)
For those who need points sharply explained "Mark" does not show any post resurrection reunion narrative because it would not change anything (whether the Disciples would promote the resurrection).
Apparently I belong to the category of those who need points sharply explained. Are you suggesting that, according to Mark, Jesus did make a resurrection appearance to the disciples, but they continued to promote a teaching and healing ministry instead of a resurrection ministry anyway? Or are you suggesting that, according to Mark, Jesus did not make a resurrection appearance to the disciples, and that is precisely why they promote a teaching and healing ministry instead of a resurrection ministry?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote:
If you want to bring Paul in, you have to actually bring Paul in (rather than merely telling me what you think Paul would say), since Mark himself nowhere mentions Paul, much less how Paul fits into all of this. You need to mount an argument; and my prediction is that such an argument will be full of leaps, speculations, and assorted intangibles.
The Paul I am introducing is the Paul of Galatians 4:10, ''You observe days, and months, and times, and years''. Surely the observance of days of fasting is included here among the things that are ''observed''.
Why is this sure? Why can Paul not be in favor of occasional fasting, just so long as it remains occasional (that is, for the occasion) rather than in adherence to a calendar?
I mean: if the ''rock soil'' of the Parable represents Peter, then the ''thorns'' where the Word falls has to represent someone who is attracted by power and material richness, i.e. the sons of Zebedee.
This is waaay too speculative for me, sorry. You are welcome to such lines of inquiry, but I will not be joining you.
Yes, but their future martyrdom is vain, according to the irony that (at least) I can see in Jesus's words, since that martyrdom cannot raise them to the role of who is ''at the left and at the right'' of Jesus in the glory.
You are interpreting the fact that martyrdom is "unable to confer seats on the right and the left" as meaning that martyrdom is "vain", and I simply could not disagree more. Only two people can sit on the right and the left, but there are far more martyrs than just two.
But you agree at least with me that the irony of two bandits is really linked with the replacement of the sons of Zebedee in the place where they would have hoped to be but they can't never be: on the left and the right of Jesus in his glory.
The concepts are linked, yes. But you are going far beyond them being linked, and in ways that I do not yet understand (mainly because there are just soooo many assumptions lying behind virtually every point you make).
I mean: many things of Mark 13 are realized in the episode of Getsemani: for example, the disciples sleep and are alerted in vain by Jesus. For example, so I read from Vridar:
There is nothing new about noticing that the prophecy of the “last days” that Jesus delivered to his inner disciples in Mark 13 contains allusions to events in the ensuing narrative Christ’s suffering and crucifixion. I addressed one of these points in the previous post. There are others.
I agree that there are allusions. There is much foreshadowing and plenty of prefiguration, not only between Mark 13 and the ensuing passion narrative but all throughout the gospel, really. But none of those devices in any way means that the passion fulfills the predictions of Mark 13. I also hold that Jesus' passion actually foreshadows the destruction of Jerusalem. Does that mean that Jesus' passion is the destruction of Jerusalem? Of course not. The apostle Paul held that Israel's travails in the desert prefigured Christian praxis and ritual. Does that mean that Israel crossing the Red Sea is the same thing as Christian baptism, to Paul's mind? Of course not. Likewise, Mark 13 being connected to the passion narrative does not mean that the passion narrative is what Mark 13 is predicting.
Therefore if all the commands of Jesus in Mark 13 are denied by the disciples during the end of the Gospel, then it means that all the emphasis put by you about the Jesus addressing ONLY AND ONLY the disciples in Mark 13 is only reason in more to condemn the disciples, not to save them in extremis after the resurrection of Jesus.
Do you see the subtle shift there? I spoke of predictions; you responded with commands. I sincerely hope this was unintentional on your part, because it feels pretty sneaky to me. Commands and predictions are not the same thing. Commands can be disobeyed, even dominical commands (refer to Mark 1.43-45, for instance). But can dominical predictions be stymied?
"Mark's" primary point is not whether Jesus should be promoted but how Jesus should be promoted. I have faith that "Mark's" point was that the Disciples were primarily promoting a Teaching & Healing Jesus and they should have been primarily promoting a supposedly resurrected Jesus (again, just like Paul shows).
I disagree with the your ''faith'' about it. The Pillars were predicting the crucified-and-resurrected Jesus - just as Paul - but with the observance of Torah as religious duty of all the Christians. The Torah was for Paul and for Mark what would have done vain the Christianity of the Pillars, anything they would have preached (was it even the same epistles of Paul).
Joe wrote that, not I. It can make threads confusing to read when you fail to mark the new correspondent by name.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Giuseppe »

Excuse me Ben if I don't quote Joe Wallak by his name, in my post above. But yes, it was unintentional on my part to talk about commands instead of predictions. I would continue the discussion only about the martyrdom of John and James and what it means. You write about my specific interpretation of Parable of Sowner:
This is waaay too speculative for me, sorry. You are welcome to such lines of inquiry, but I will not be joining you.
At any way, you recognize that an element is soundly in common in both the ''thorns'' allusion and the request by the two brothers: the desire of (apparently) material glory.
Only two people can sit on the right and the left, but there are far more martyrs than just two
Surely you don't think that the two thieves were two Christian martyrs, but the fact remains that they and only they are the two guys who will fulfill the prophecy of Jesus (or better, of the God of Jesus): to sit on the right and the left of the Son in the days ''of his glory'' (i.e.: his crucifixion, in a Pauline interpretation of Mark).

Therefore, my question for you is: if the two thieves are not very exalted (even if they are apparently exalted during the day of the maximum exaltation of Jesus: on the cross - being very ''on his left and right'' in that day!!!), then how can you think that the future martyrdom of John and James will be worthy of a future reward and redemption?

It remembers the parable of the fool rich in Luke: even if he did a lot of work, his work was vain. Idem with the Pillars: even if they will be martyred, their mission will be vain, because they didn't die the same day of their Lord.

And I read a bit of the same irony of Acts 9:16 (but it is only my wild speculation): even there Paul will be a martyr, but that martyrdom seems (with a bit of real sarcasm) more a correction of the marcionite Paul :D :D :)
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote:Excuse me Ben if I don't quote Joe Wallak by his name, in my post above. But yes, it was unintentional on my part to talk about commands instead of predictions. I would continue the discussion only about the martyrdom of John and James and what it means. You write about my specific interpretation of Parable of Sowner:
This is waaay too speculative for me, sorry. You are welcome to such lines of inquiry, but I will not be joining you.
At any way, you recognize that an element is soundly in common in both the ''thorns'' allusion and the request by the two brothers: the desire of (apparently) material glory.
No, I do not. I do not see any substantive connection between thorns and a thirst for glory.
Surely you don't think that the two thieves were two Christian martyrs....
Of course not.
...but the fact remains that they and only they are the two guys who will fulfill the prophecy of Jesus (or better, of the God of Jesus): to sit on the right and the left of the Son in the days ''of his glory'' (i.e.: his crucifixion, in a Pauline interpretation of Mark).
The two thieves being hung next to Jesus is not a fulfillment of any prediction that two people would sit next to Jesus in his glory. The two things are connected, yes. But the one does not fulfill the other without remainder.
Therefore, my question for you is: if the two thieves are not very exalted (even if they are apparently exalted during the day of the maximum exaltation of Jesus: on the cross - being very ''on his left and right'' in that day!!!), then how can you think that the future martyrdom of John and James will be worthy of a future reward and redemption?
This is like asking why living in a mansion is fancy if living in a hovel is not....
It remembers the parable of the fool rich in Luke: even if he did a lot of work, his work was vain. Idem with the Pillars: even if they will be martyred, their mission will be vain, because they didn't die the same day of their Lord.
Why are you bringing in Luke???
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: The restoration of the disciples in Mark.

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Ben C. Smith wrote:I have long toyed with the idea, sometimes put forth on this forum (among other venues), that the gospel of Mark means to imply that the disciples, Jesus' inner circle of followers, not only abandoned him at his arrest crucifixion but were also abandoned by him (and by God), never to be restored to any kind of position of authority in the movement which Jesus consciously and deliberately sets in motion throughout the gospel.

But I no longer really toy with that idea. My mind is still open, but I am now very much on the other side of that issue. Simply put, I think that the gospel of Mark in several distinct places makes it very clear that the disciples are going to be restored.
"To be restored" and "not to be abandoned" could be two different things. Mark 10:31 (But many who are first will be last, and the last first) may also point to the assumption that they are not completely abandoned.

Ben C. Smith wrote:First, there is Mark 1.16-17:

1.16 As He was going along by the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew, the brother of Simon, casting a net in the sea; for they were fishermen. 17 And Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men.”

It is possible that this promise to turn (at least) Simon and Andrew into fishers of men (a metaphor, obvious though somewhat creepy, for preachers in the nascent movement) is meant to be fulfilled fully in Mark 6.7-13, but I am not sure that a single preaching tour is really what is promised. No matter: there are other indicators, should this one seem insufficient.
I think the text points to the first option.

Mark 1:17 ποιήσω ὑμᾶς γενέσθαι ἁλιεῖς ἀνθρώπων
Mark 1:17 I will make you become fishers of men.

Mark 3:13 καὶ ἐποίησεν δώδεκα
Mark 3:13 and he made twelve
Mark 3:16 καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς δώδεκα
Mark 3:16 and he made the twelve

Mark 6:7 And he called the twelve and began to send them out two by two,
Mark 6:30 The apostles returned to Jesus and told him all that they had done and taught.

This seems to be a perfect fulfillment of the promise "to be made" und to become different one's
Post Reply