Page 10 of 15

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:21 pm
by perseusomega9
John is still fairly sudden in Mark, about as sudden as Jesus

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:31 pm
by Ben C. Smith
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:21 pm
John is still fairly sudden in Mark, about as sudden as Jesus
Mark gives him the epithet, "the Baptist," which generally suffices to introduce somebody in an ancient text. In our extant version of Mark, he is also given an entire verse from Isaiah, but I am skeptical that this verse is original to Mark.

But in Luke 5.33 John is not even called "the Baptist." Suddenly there is a question about John's disciples, begging the question: "Who is John?" This seems more sudden an introduction than in Mark. Obviously, there is the question of what the text actually had. Maybe it had "the Baptist" and Tertullian still thought it was too sudden because it lacked the verse from Isaiah. But he gives us no clue in this direction, and our extant text of Luke lacks any epithet for John.

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:38 pm
by perseusomega9
Is part of the argument that Tertullian also lacks the epithet? I'll admit it's as clear as mud as anything in NT studies, but we have a range of interactions/accomodations between jesus and john groups in the literature can we really say which direction the dependency runs?

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:57 pm
by Ben C. Smith
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 5:38 pm
Is part of the argument that Tertullian also lacks the epithet? I'll admit it's as clear as mud as anything in NT studies, but we have a range of interactions/accomodations between jesus and john groups in the literature can we really say which direction the dependency runs?
Everything is difficult when it comes to Marcion.

The argument is simply that Tertullian seems to say that Marcion has John at Luke 5.33 in the same way that Luke 5.33 currently reads. If so, then his introduction into the gospel is rather sudden. This implies either (A) that this gospel takes it for granted that its readers will know who John is or (B) that this gospel has cut something out about John which came earlier.

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:10 pm
by perseusomega9
Is Terts reading from unpublished Markion, published Markion, or what he thinks Markion says using GLuke

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:14 pm
by Ben C. Smith
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:10 pm
Is Terts reading from unpublished Markion, published Markion, or what he thinks Markion says using GLuke
Good question. I imagine from published Marcion. But I am not sure.

You can see what Tertullian, Epiphanius, and others have to say about each separate passage here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1765.

What evidence makes you think that Mark borrowed from (proto-)Marcion?

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:34 pm
by perseusomega9
Mark is reworking a previous narrative story, incorporating the messianic secret motif to explain why jesus IS also the Israelite messiah AND son of god. adding the empty tomb concept whereas previous resurrection stories ran the gamut of heavenly ascension of the initiate to witnessing jesus direct acension. Things along those lines.

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:39 pm
by Ben C. Smith
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:34 pm
Mark is reworking a previous narrative story, incorporating the messianic secret motif to explain why jesus IS also the Israelite messiah AND son of god. adding the empty tomb concept whereas previous resurrection stories ran the gamut of heavenly ascension of the initiate to witnessing jesus direct acension. Things along those lines.
I agree that Mark is reworking an existing narrative; trouble is, I perceive Marcion to be reworking a previous narrative, as well, insofar as I am able to tell at all. And I am not sure how to pick an unpublished version from the published version.

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:39 pm
by Ben C. Smith
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:34 pm
Mark is reworking a previous narrative story, incorporating the messianic secret motif to explain why jesus IS also the Israelite messiah AND son of god. adding the empty tomb concept whereas previous resurrection stories ran the gamut of heavenly ascension of the initiate to witnessing jesus direct acension. Things along those lines.
The highlighted portion is interesting. Can you expand on that?

Re: Ancient notices of the differences between Matthew and Mark?

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:48 pm
by perseusomega9
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:39 pm
perseusomega9 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:34 pm
Mark is reworking a previous narrative story, incorporating the messianic secret motif to explain why jesus IS also the Israelite messiah AND son of god. adding the empty tomb concept whereas previous resurrection stories ran the gamut of heavenly ascension of the initiate to witnessing jesus direct acension. Things along those lines.
I agree that Mark is reworking an existing narrative; trouble is, I perceive Marcion to be reworking a previous narrative, as well, insofar as I am able to tell at all. And I am not sure how to pick an unpublished version from the published version.
Is Markion reworking a tradition whose texts are hymn/liturgical books, various OT texts/apocrypha, and philosophic style debates, or a similar gospel style written narrative? Mark seems to be doing the latter. Markion may be creating this new style gospel, where our idea of gospel switches from a christian preaching/evangelism/revelation to this new concept of a narrative life of jesus.