Actually it's More of a Guideline than a RuleBen C. Smith wrote: 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.
JW:
My Award winning contra Thread:
"The Simontic Problem". "Mark's" Negative Casting of Peter
still [understatement]more than offsets your claimed points here[/understatement] regarding the fate (so to speak) of Peter and the Disciples as to quality and quantity:
The cruncher as the Brits would say is the ending which typically is the author's own summary of what she wrote;Major Negative Casting:
1) 4:15 The Parable of the Sower specifically refers to Peter as in the category of Disciple Failure.
2) 8:32 Peter is presented as the Opposition to the Passion.
3) 14:30 Jesus predicts that Peter will Deny him Three times.
4) 14:53-72 Peter Denies Jesus Three times.
Minor Negative Casting:
1) 1:29-31 Sickness in Simon's house.
2) 3:16 Jesus gives Simon an extra name, "Peter".
3) 6:3 The name "Simon" is assigned to a brother of Jesus who is presented unfavorably.
4) 14:1-9 A Simon is presented as a Leper.
5) 14:37 Jesus demotes Peter by using his pre-Disciple name, "Simon" to address him.
6) 14:34-42 Peter Fails to Watch out for Jesus.
7) 14:72 Peter mourns the loss of his life for Denying Jesus.
8) 15:21 Peter Simon is figuratively replaced as Leader of Jesus' followers.
In general you would even agree that "Mark's" (author) general tone is condemnation/discrediting of the Disciples. The negative attitude towards the Disciples is more often, more extreme, more specific and more formulaic. In such a situation the Textual Critic should try to interpret the minority based on the majority and not verses-vices.And they went out, and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them: and they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid.
Again, there is potential salvation for your observations. "Mark" is an extremely stylish author making extremely stylish points. Often these points will interSect with one another. So:
- 1) "Mark" may have accepted that Peter/Disciples were promoting Jesus after his death.
2) "Mark's" related point was how they were promoting Jesus. Either no or at least insufficient promoting of his supposed resurrection just like Christ Walking who's gotta have more cross-bells.
Figures Don't Lie But Liars Figure. A Proportionate Response to the Disproportionate Response Claim (Gaza)