Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus Angry?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus Angry?

Post by JoeWallack » Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:02 am

Why Must You Be Such An Angry Young Man

JW:
One of the great Textual Criticism issues of GMark is whether or not Jesus is angry at 1:41:

1:41
And being moved with compassion, he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou made clean. (ASV)
A quick survey of relatively good translations:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... V;NRSV;ESV

American Standard Version (ASV)

And being moved with compassion, he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou made clean.
New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Moved with compassion, Jesus stretched out His hand and touched him, and *said to him, “I am willing; be cleansed.”
New International Version (NIV)

Jesus was indignant.[a] He reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!”

Footnotes:

Mark 1:41 Many manuscripts Jesus was filled with compassion
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

Moved with pity,[a] Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, “I do choose. Be made clean!”

Footnotes:

[a]Mark 1:41 Other ancient authorities read anger
Mark 1:41 Gk he
English Standard Version (ESV)

Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him, “I will; be clean.”

There is surprisingly little Manuscript support quantitatively for angry/indignant. "Angry" has achieved major candidate support here thanks mainly to Bart Ehrman, commonly thought of as one of the all-time great Textual critics, who has championed it. Ehrman's argument has additionally received the blessing of Evangelical Textual Critic Daniel Wallace.

The NIV's selection of "indignant" has made some Christian Bible Scholarship (CBS) angry so there has been a recent increase in CBS attempts, both professional Mark 1:41 and Ehrman and amateur(ish) Mark 1:41 - Angry or Compassionate? to champion "compassionate". To its credit though, there are also many CBS articles accepting Ehrman's argument.

The purpose of this Thread will be to evaluate the likely original of Mark 1:41, "Angry" or "Compassionate".

The main argument for "compassion" is the overwhelming Manuscript support for it. As noted though at my Skeptical Textual Criticism Blog Skeptical Textual Criticism under Skeptical Textual Criticism methodology, a minimum of External evidence combined with The Difficult Reading Principle has the potential to be decisive in determining likely original.

Regarding the limits of "minimum" here logic tells us that in general the more difficult the reading, the less Manuscript support there is likely to be. So let's compare the manuscript support for "angry" with the two other most famous difficult readings for GMark, 1:1 and 16:8 [Greek] http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php :

Difficult Reading Witness
Mark 1:1
omission of [the Son of God]
‭א* Θ 28c 530 582* 820* 1021 1436 1555* 1692 2430 2533
Mark 1:41
angry
vs. compassionate
Bezae
Mark 16:9-20
omission vs. inclusion
א B 304

So how do the above compare in terms of relative difficulty?:

Verse About Jesus? About Jesus' Character? Negative Description of Jesus' Character? Commentary
1:1 Omission of "son of God" Yes Yes No As expected, the least difficult reading has the most Manuscript support. There is no negative issue about Jesus' character.
1:41 Jesus angry Yes Yes Yes A direct negative description of Jesus' character. Jesus' showing negative emotion in reaction to a request for healing. The opposite emotion we would expect. The most difficult reading.
16:8 No resurrection reunion Yes Yes No What is omitted is about Jesus' authority and not character. You could argue that the post resurrection narratives are the most important part of the Gospels and therefore omission would be the biggest difficulty but "difficulty" here is defined by what early Christianity thought and not what we think. In general early Christian attitude was that negative implications were not difficulties compared to the explicit and specifically no post-resurrection reunion here was not much of a difficulty because even though a resurrection reunion was preferred you could just assume that "Mark" (author) only choose to end the narrative there.

So it does look like 1:41 is the most difficult reading and therefore has the least Greek Manuscript support.


Joseph

Skeptical Textual Criticism
Last edited by JoeWallack on Mon Jul 03, 2017 8:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

FransJVermeiren
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by FransJVermeiren » Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:01 am

The leper as an expulsed community member

I believe it is interesting to confront Mark 1:40-45 (‘The Cleansing of a Leper’) with Josephus’ description of the Essenes (War II:120-161) and with a passage from Dalits in Early Buddhism by Paramanshi Jaideva.

Josephus on the expulsion of Essenes from the community:
(143) Men convicted of major offenses are expelled from the order; and the ejected individual often comes to a most miserable end; for being bound by their oaths and customs, he is not allowed to share other men’s food and so he is forced to eat grass, his starved body wastes away and he dies of starvation. (144) This has led them out of a compassion to take many offenders back at their last gasp, since they feel that men tortured to the point of death have paid a sufficient penalty for their misdeeds.

On p. 170 of Dalits in Early Buddhism, the Encyclopedia of Religion of Ethics is quoted on the expulsion prevalent in caste-system:
For the minor violation of the rules of the tribe and its preventions, a sort of purification function is arranged and the tribe members are given a treat. But for the serious crimes or impudence, one is excommunicated from the caste, that is, the members of that tribe have no relation with the punished member. Neither anyone eats food with him, nor does he smoke nor talk with him. The people remain aloof from him just as they do from a leper and his life becomes so miserable that he becomes ready to accept any condition.

I think we can interpret Mark 1:40-45 against this background. A punished Essene, a leper, comes in despair to the Essene priest Jesus, who abolishes his punishment of expulsion (‘he was made clean’). This way he overrules the decision of another Essene priest. The expulsed man is asked to show himself to that priest. It looks as if Jesus is challenging the authority of that other priest, who is too hard-hearted in his opinion. Jesus also asks the man to make an offering for his reintegration in the community.

As Josephus speaks of compassion as motive for the reintegration of punished community members, I believe that the word for compassion in Mark 1:41 is authentic. Anger can have a place in this situation too, but only in a secondary way: maybe Jesus is angry at the other priest because he has protracted a harsh punishment for too long.
www.waroriginsofchristianity.com

The practical modes of concealment are limited only by the imaginative capacity of subordinates. James C. Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance.

iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by iskander » Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:30 am

The dalits in every society hope for a miracle .
The Buddhist revival in India ignited by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar more than fifty years ago has brought millions of the country’s most impoverished and marginalized people to the Buddhist path. There is much we can learn from them, says Alan Senauke.
https://www.lionsroar.com/ambedkars-vision/
Jesus was more like Ambedkar than he was an Emperor.


Untouchables' undergo mass conversion to Buddhism
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/ ... gion.india
The body is not free BUT, DIE GEDANKEN SIND FREI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVc0wBLri1A

A song for Ambedkar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZySa-lTf7Fo

For KK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxUmq2tOQ2Q

Steven Avery
Posts: 614
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by Steven Avery » Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:33 pm

JoeWallack wrote: minimum of External evidence combined with The Difficult Reading Principle has the potential to be decisive in determining likely original.
So, in your world of being hostile to the New Testament

a) the less actual evidence you have, and
b) the more absurd and inconsistent is the reading

the more likely it is to be the authentic autograph.

Bizarro criticism.

Steven

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by JoeWallack » Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:00 am

Steven Avery wrote:
JoeWallack wrote: minimum of External evidence combined with The Difficult Reading Principle has the potential to be decisive in determining likely original.
So, in your world of being hostile to the New Testament

a) the less actual evidence you have, and
b) the more absurd and inconsistent is the reading

the more likely it is to be the authentic autograph.

Bizarro criticism.

Steven
Image


Joseph

Genocide In The Israeli/Arab Conflict

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by JoeWallack » Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:24 am

JW:
The External evidence:

http://www.laparola.net/greco/index.php
[Angry] ὀργισθεὶς] D ita itd itff2 itr1 (Diatessaron) Ephraem

[Compassionate] σπλαγχνισθεὶς] ‭א A B C E F G K L W Δ Θ Π Σ 090 0130 0233 f1 f13 28 33 157 180 205 565 579 597 700 892 1006 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1243 1253 1292 1342 1344 1365 1424 1505 1546 1646 2148 2174 2427 Byz Lect itaur itc ite itf itl itq vg syrs syrp syrh syrpal copsa copbo goth arm eth geo slav Basil Ambrosevid ς WH NA

omit] (see Matthew 8:3; Luke 5:13) 169 505 508 1358 l866 itb
JW:
The star witness here of course is D = Codex Bezae

As noted, generally the 6th best witness to GMark:

Witness Date Text Type NA Rating Commentary
Codex Sinaiticus 350 Alexandrian 1 -
Codex Vaticanus 350 Alexandrian 1 -
Codex Regius 700 Alexandrian 2 -
Codex Washingtonianus 400 Caesarean 3 -
Codex Alexandrinus 425 Byzantine 3 -
Codex Bezae 450 Western 4 -
Codex purpureus Rossanensis 550 Byzantine 5 -
Codex Beratinus 550 Byzantine 5 -
Uncial 064 550 Byzantine 5 -
Codex Basilensis 700 Byzantine Meh -

More specifically, note the cumulative strength of Bezae for the most difficult readings of GMark:

[/td]
Difficult Reading Witness Quality Witness Against Defense Against Significant Difference?
Mark 1:1
omission of [the Son of God]
Sinaiticus
3rd century papyrus
Irenaeus
Origen
Serapion
Basil
Cyril
Epiphanius
Asterius
Severian
Vaticanus
Alexandrinus
Bezae
Washingtonianus
Note that witness here is weakened by its variation
Manuscript = Homeoteleuton (accidental skipping due to similar near words)
Patristic = Abbreviation
Yes. Since GMark starts with Jesus' supposed baptism and Jesus is explicitly ided as the son of God at the baptism the issue of the timing of Jesus' status was/is a crucial issue for Christianity. Especially with GMark being the original Gospel.
Mark 1:2
Isaiah the prophet
vs. "the prophets"
Sinaiticus
Vaticanus
Regius
Bezae
Washingtonianus
Alexandrinus
Rossanensis
Beratinus
064
Basilensis
Copyists wanted to make a general description (in the prophets) specific (Isaiah). Yes. Everyone agrees that the related quote is not only from Isaiah but is a combination of quotes (with editing) from multiple Jewish Bible authors. Hence, unlike supposed claims of history in the Christian Bible with no clear documented history to compare to, Christianity considered the Jewish Bible gospel and therefore a contradiction with it in the Christian Bible is a clear error. From a Christian standpoint.
Mark 1:10
and the Spirit as a dove descending into him:
vs. upon
Vaticanus
Bezae
Sinaiticus
Regius
Washingtonianus
Alexandrinus
Rossanensis
Beratinus
064
Basilensis
The Greek word for "into" can also mean "unto" and the difference between "unto" and "upon" is insignificant. Yes. "Into" is direct evidence for Separationist theology and is the best fit for GMark's preceding implication that there was nothing previously reMarkable about Jesus. Strangely Ehrman states on p. 174 of tOCoS that the consensus is so strong that it is not even mentioned in the Critical Apparatus. But the reason it is not mentioned is because the Critical Apparatus considers it (into/unto/upon)
insignificant difference in meaning.
Mark 1:41
angry
vs. compassionate
BezaeSinaiticus
Vaticanus
Regius
Washingtonianus
Alexandrinus
Rossanensis
Beratinus
064
Basilensis
Mistaken similar word in Version (Latin, Aramaic, Syriac) retro translated to Greek Yes. Based on Christian theology clear expectation that if Jesus had emotion here it would be compassion. "Angry" would be the opposite of expectation (for subsequent Christianity, not "Mark" (author).
Mark 16:9-20 omission vs. inclusion Sinaiticus
Vaticanus
Regius
Washingtoniansus
Alexandrinus
Bezae
Rossanensis
Beratinus
064
Basilensis
Original ending lost Yes. Whether or not the likely original Gospel narrative contained the primary historical assertion of orthodox Christianity, known historical witness to a resurrected Jesus.

Note - Regius has the LE but has notes giving evidence that the LE is not original. Thus the 3 best witnesses testify against the LE. Washingtoniansus, the 4th best witness, has an expanded LE, and variation is a sign of addition. Thus the majority of quality witness for LE was written about twice as long after original GMark than the quality witness against LE.

Bezae is on the right hand of Textual Criticism 3 times above, the same as the holy Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. So Bezae by itself constitutes much progress towards a minimum of External evidence.


Joseph

Genocide In The Israeli/Arab Conflict

iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by iskander » Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:55 am

Steven Avery wrote:
JoeWallack wrote: minimum of External evidence combined with The Difficult Reading Principle has the potential to be decisive in determining likely original.
So, in your world of being hostile to the New Testament

a) the less actual evidence you have, and
b) the more absurd and inconsistent is the reading

the more likely it is to be the authentic autograph.

Bizarro criticism.

Steven
Cleansing the unclean, see file extracted from
Mark 9 Healing the Leper
Bruce Gore
Attachments
mark1.40-45b.PNG
mark1.40-45b.PNG (145.47 KiB) Viewed 13676 times

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by JoeWallack » Wed Jun 14, 2017 8:43 am

JW:
Continuing with the Greek Manuscript evidence for "angry" or neither:

Manuscripts 169 505 508 1358 l866 lack "angry" or "compassionate". So, no direct evidence of either, but evidence of a textual criticism issue at that point in the text.

Greek Patristic evidence:

The key piece of evidence for "angry" = The earliest known Patristic evidence is "Matthew"/"Luke" who both lack either candidate. It's more likely they saw "angry" and omitted than they saw "compassionate" and omitted.

Ephraem 4th century commentary on 2nd century Diatessaron =
If you are willing, you can cleanse me. The formula is one of petition
and the word is one of fear. That you are able to I know, but whether
you are willing, I am not certain.’ Therefore, our Lord showed him
two things in response to this double [attitude]: reproof through his
anger, and mercy through his healing […] [The Lord] was angry
with regard to this line of reasoning and so [he ordered] secondly,
‘Go show yourself to the priests, and fulfill that Law which you are
despising.’ […] It is also said that [the Lord] was not angry with him,
but with his leprosy” (MCCARTHY, 1993, p. 202-203).
Summary of the Greek External evidence favoring "angry" by category:
  • Manuscript = Bezae for "angry". One of the earliest Manuscripts and 6th best witness. 5 Manuscripts with neither, favors "angry" as more likely original.

    Patristic = "Matthew"/"Luke" with neither favor "angry" as more likely. Ephrem 4th century commenting on the 2nd century Diatessaron explicitly and repeatedly cites "angry".

    Authority = Some leading Textual Critics either outright favor "angry" or consider it a significant candidate.
Thus "angry" has very little quantitative evidence but has qualitative evidence in all External categories. Compared to other Difficult Markan readings "angry" has less evidence but this is in line with "angry" perhaps being the most Difficult Reading in GMark.

Next = The Latin evidence.


Joseph

Genocide In The Israeli/Arab Conflict

iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by iskander » Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:14 am

JoeWallack wrote:JW:
Continuing with the Greek Manuscript evidence for "angry" or neither:

Manuscripts 169 505 508 1358 l866 lack "angry" or "compassionate". So, no direct evidence of either, but evidence of a textual criticism issue at that point in the text.

Greek Patristic evidence:

The key piece of evidence for "angry" = The earliest known Patristic evidence is "Matthew"/"Luke" who both lack either candidate. It's more likely they saw "angry" and omitted than they saw "compassionate" and omitted.

Ephraem 4th century commentary on 2nd century Diatessaron =
If you are willing, you can cleanse me. The formula is one of petition
and the word is one of fear. That you are able to I know, but whether
you are willing, I am not certain.’ Therefore, our Lord showed him
two things in response to this double [attitude]: reproof through his
anger, and mercy through his healing […] [The Lord] was angry
with regard to this line of reasoning and so [he ordered] secondly,
‘Go show yourself to the priests, and fulfill that Law which you are
despising.’ […] It is also said that [the Lord] was not angry with him,
but with his leprosy” (MCCARTHY, 1993, p. 202-203).
Summary of the Greek External evidence favoring "angry" by category:
  • Manuscript = Bezae for "angry". One of the earliest Manuscripts and 6th best witness. 5 Manuscripts with neither, favors "angry" as more likely original.

    Patristic = "Matthew"/"Luke" with neither favor "angry" as more likely. Ephrem 4th century commenting on the 2nd century Diatessaron explicitly and repeatedly cites "angry".

    Authority = Some leading Textual Critics either outright favor "angry" or consider it a significant candidate.
Thus "angry" has very little quantitative evidence but has qualitative evidence in all External categories. Compared to other Difficult Markan readings "angry" has less evidence but this is in line with "angry" perhaps being the most Difficult Reading in GMark.

Next = The Latin evidence.


Joseph

Genocide In The Israeli/Arab Conflict
Beloved Wallack,
The abba of Yoyzl Pandrek, the mamzer of a zonah, was a psychopath prone to murdering fits . His boy must have been the victim of false news .
Is it important how Jesus may have been seen by some who remembered the wrath of his father?

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Why Must You Be Such A Angry Young Man/Mark1:41 Jesus An

Post by JoeWallack » Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:46 am

iskander wrote: Beloved Wallack,
The abba of Yoyzl Pandrek, the mamzer of a zonah, was a psychopath prone to murdering fits . His boy must have been the victim of false news .
Is it important how Jesus may have been seen by some who remembered the wrath of his father?
JW:
Finally, the rhinoceros turned to the hippopotamus and said, "Ya know, I can't believe it's only Tuesday".


Joseph

Genocide In The Israeli/Arab Conflict

Post Reply