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".
I try to understand the man and his hurting. Jesus did not like Judaism and he may have criticised it with anger . When he saw the unclean man knelling in front of him , Jesus remembered how the vicars of G-d on earth had spoken :
"Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their way and by their doings: their way was before Me as the uncleanness of a menstruous woman. So I poured My fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols with which they had defiled it. "
JW:
For the Versional evidence the Latin is normally the most valuable:
[Angry] ὀργισθεὶς] ita itd itff2 itr1
Note that these 4 Manuscripts are c. 4th, 5th and 6th century. Very early in the extant Latin witness so more quality witness along with a little more quantity. Yet again, this fits the pattern of witness for other Difficult Readings = Few but early Latin witness.
JoeWallack wrote:JW:
For the Versional evidence the Latin is normally the most valuable:
[Angry] ὀργισθεὶς] ita itd itff2 itr1
Note that these 4 Manuscripts are c. 4th, 5th and 6th century. Very early in the extant Latin witness so more quality witness along with a little more quantity. Yet again, this fits the pattern of witness for other Difficult Readings = Few but early Latin witness.
Yes you are right, as ever !. Jesus must have said much more than what it has been recorded in the final edition, but the explanatory footnotes are meant to help , to gain a deeper understanding .
Was he ever upset ? yes he must have been upset to live in one of the worst religions ever invented by man . Marcion was also upset; antiquity should have listened to Marcion and bury the Mosaic lunacy where it belongs.
iskander wrote:Cleansing the unclean, see file extracted from
Mark 9 Healing the Leper
Bruce Gore
Mmh, it seems not so easy to me. I would claim there isn't another healing story in GMark, where Mark explicitly wrote, that Jesus had a positive feeling toward a sick one. To be clear, I do not say that Jesus didn't have such feelings, only that Mark never wrote that.
I understand why some think that "moved with anger" is completely impossible, but I must confess that "moved with compassion" is not what I would expect from Mark in this story. Perhaps from Luke ...
iskander wrote:Cleansing the unclean, see file extracted from
Mark 9 Healing the Leper
Bruce Gore
Mmh, it seems not so easy to me. I would claim there isn't another healing story in GMark, where Mark explicitly wrote, that Jesus had a positive feeling toward a sick one. To be clear, I do not say that Jesus didn't have such feelings, only that Mark never wrote that.
I understand why some think that "moved with anger" is completely impossible, but I must confess that "moved with compassion" is not what I would expect from Mark in this story. Perhaps from Luke ...
Compassion and anger are both the dominant emotions of most religious reformers. Mark is about compassion for a humanity in need of the Kingdom of God and anger for the part of that society in need of repentance.
Jesus heals the sick and teaches the Way to God, This new way is based on the divine words spoken at Sinai and excludes the Oral Torah.
Perhaps Mar 1 :41 is about compassion for the ritually unclean like the begging man and the menstruating woman. And perhaps Mk 1:41 is about anger against those who arbitrarily enslaved the thought of men and women for profit.
My copy of the NT has a note in Mk 1:41 which considers different versions of this verse , it is not a big deal.
The story in Mark is the story of a reformer , of pity, of anger. hope, despair and execution. It is the story of many a nan/woman fighting for a change with only their bare thoughts. As is in Die Gedanken sind frei
The issue in question. Note that the five word English translation has one underlying Greek word.
ἐκτείνας
ἐκτείνας
having stretched out
having stretched out
-
τὴν
τὴν
the
the
-
χεῖρα
χεῖρα
hand
hand
-
αὐτοῦ
-
of him
-
First other difference. A common word and no difference in meaning.
ἥψατο
ἥψατο
he touched him
he touched
-
καὶ
-
and
-
Second other difference. No difference in meaning.
λέγει αὐτῷ
αὐτοῦ λέγων
says to him
him saying
-
Θέλω
Θέλω
I will
I am willing
-
καθαρίσθητι
καθαρίσθητι
be you cleansed
be you cleansed
For KK's eyes only. No difference here but note that tragic word.
καὶ
καὶ
And
And
-
εὐθὺς
εὐθέως
immediately
immediately
-
ἀπῆλθεν ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ
-
departed from him
-
Third other difference. No significant difference but "Mark's" (author) extra of "departed from him" is more in line with "Mark's" description of physical illness having evil spiritual source so that the literary image is of a physical and spiritual departure of illness and evil spirit. This is a better fit for "Mark's" probable meaning of "cleaned" here. The leper is supposedly physically cleaned of leprosy but more importantly is spiritually "cleaned" because of faith. "Matthew" of course wants a more historical sounding pericope. Jesus touches a guy with the leprosy and the leprosy is healed, end of story (so to speak).
ἡ λέπρα καὶ ἐκαθαρίσθη
ἐκαθαρίσθη αὐτοῦ ἡ λέπρα
the leprosy and he was cleansed
was cleansed his the leprosy
-
Conclusion = In using GMark as a base "Matthew" mostly uses the exact same words as "Mark" for this pericope. Of the few differences the only one with a significant difference in meaning is the issue in question. If "Matthew" saw "compassion" here in GMark there is no good reason why he would have exorcised it as it is exactly how he saw Jesus. This looks like evidence, before any extant related Manuscripts, that GMatthew, early second century, had no evidence of "compassion" in GMark here.
Strong negative emotion, often associated with anger
846 [e]
autō
αὐτῷ
him,
PPro-DM3S
-
2112 [e]
euthys
εὐθὺς
immediately
Adv
-
1544 [e]
exebalen
ἐξέβαλεν
he sent away
V-AIA-3S
The meaning is to drive/cast out. This is the word used for demon launching. Again, strong negative emotion.
846 [e]
auton
αὐτόν,
him,
PPro-AM3S
-
Note that "Matthew" (author) has exorcised the entire phrase. So we here we have, as the Brits say, the Cruncher. "Matthew" has exorcised words from his Markan source that here indirectly describe Jesus as angry. Since this is "Matthew's" standard here for related editing it would be expected for him to likewise exorcise a direct description of Jesus as angry here. A direct hit for "angry" as original.
For those at a higher Pauyl grade, we have a very good reason for "Mark" showing Jesus as angry here. In line with Paul, in order to crucify your Passions, one must first, above all else, have Passions.
Strong negative emotion, often associated with anger
846 [e]
autō
αὐτῷ
him,
PPro-DM3S
-
2112 [e]
euthys
εὐθὺς
immediately
Adv
-
1544 [e]
exebalen
ἐξέβαλεν
he sent away
V-AIA-3S
The meaning is to drive/cast out. This is the word used for demon launching. Again, strong negative emotion.
846 [e]
auton
αὐτόν,
him,
PPro-AM3S
-
Note that "Matthew" (author) has exorcised the entire phrase. So we here we have, as the Brits say, the Cruncher. "Matthew" has exorcised words from his Markan source that here indirectly describe Jesus as angry. Since this is "Matthew's" standard here for related editing it would be expected for him to likewise exorcise a direct description of Jesus as angry here. A direct hit for "angry" as original.
For those at a higher Pauyl grade, we have a very good reason for "Mark" showing Jesus as angry here. In line with Paul, in order to crucify your Passions, one must first, above all else, have Passions.
You do not understand Mark.
Mark 1:42 ,As soon as Jesus had spoken, the man was cleansed, This verse is a beautiful and powerful statement empowering human liberty and signalling the defeat of Judaism.
The man begging for help belongs to any period of time and to anywhere on earth where slavery is enforced by cruel servants of the occult. His complaint is vague because he may be complaining of a physical condition attracting the wrath of god for some obscure reason e.g. a menstruating woman . But he could be the victim or some spiritual shortcoming as defined by the writers of endless rules.
The man wants liberation from his tormentors who insist on 613 rules or perhaps insist on extra ecclesiam nulla salus or whatever.Mark says the man immediately became cleansed when he realizes that it was in his power to break the chains.
Strong negative emotion, often associated with anger
846 [e]
autō
αὐτῷ
him,
PPro-DM3S
-
2112 [e]
euthys
εὐθὺς
immediately
Adv
-
1544 [e]
exebalen
ἐξέβαλεν
he sent away
V-AIA-3S
The meaning is to drive/cast out. This is the word used for demon launching. Again, strong negative emotion.
846 [e]
auton
αὐτόν,
him,
PPro-AM3S
-
Note that "Matthew" (author) has exorcised the entire phrase. So we here we have, as the Brits say, the Cruncher. "Matthew" has exorcised words from his Markan source that here indirectly describe Jesus as angry. Since this is "Matthew's" standard here for related editing it would be expected for him to likewise exorcise a direct description of Jesus as angry here. A direct hit for "angry" as original.
For those at a higher Pauyl grade, we have a very good reason for "Mark" showing Jesus as angry here. In line with Paul, in order to crucify your Passions, one must first, above all else, have Passions.
You do not understand Mark.
Mark 1:42 ,As soon as he had spoken he was cleansed, This verse is a beautiful and powerful statement empowering human liberty and signalling the defeat of Judaism.
The man begging for help belongs to any period of time and to anywhere on earth where slavery is enforced by cruel servants of the occult. His complaint is vague because he may be complaining of a physical condition attracting the wrath of god for some obscure reason e.g. a menstruating woman . But he could be the victim or some spiritual shortcoming as defined by the writers of endless rules.
The man wants liberation from his tormentors who insist on 613 rules or perhaps insist on extra ecclesiam nulla salus or whatever.Mark says the man immediately became cleansed when he realizes that it was in his power to break the chains.
Jesus said to the man , God is in your heart.
JW:
Not sure if you are a troll or a Christian here regarding Textual Criticism, but what's the difference. You are in denial about the terrible history of your religion. Because of the fiction of Jews killing Jesus you are ignoring the real Christian/Jewish history of Christians murdering innocent Jews for the last two thousand years. Probably more Jews have died as a result of being murdered by non-Jews in the last two thousand years than have died of natural causes. If this is the type of conversation you want, general criticism of Judaism/Christianity, than this is not the place for it. This Thread is for Textual Criticism of a specific verse.
You're just wasting time/distraction here and that is what you want. I hate censorship since that is a Christian thing but I will censor for a combination of being significantly wrong and having an attitude. Actually this is more of a guideline than a rule so I'll make an exception for you, one more combination of general dissing of Judaism and ignoring of the issue at hand, and I'll say fu filter you.
Strong negative emotion, often associated with anger
846 [e]
autō
αὐτῷ
him,
PPro-DM3S
-
2112 [e]
euthys
εὐθὺς
immediately
Adv
-
1544 [e]
exebalen
ἐξέβαλεν
he sent away
V-AIA-3S
The meaning is to drive/cast out. This is the word used for demon launching. Again, strong negative emotion.
846 [e]
auton
αὐτόν,
him,
PPro-AM3S
-
Note that "Matthew" (author) has exorcised the entire phrase. So we here we have, as the Brits say, the Cruncher. "Matthew" has exorcised words from his Markan source that here indirectly describe Jesus as angry. Since this is "Matthew's" standard here for related editing it would be expected for him to likewise exorcise a direct description of Jesus as angry here. A direct hit for "angry" as original.
For those at a higher Pauyl grade, we have a very good reason for "Mark" showing Jesus as angry here. In line with Paul, in order to crucify your Passions, one must first, above all else, have Passions.
You do not understand Mark.
Mark 1:42 ,As soon as he had spoken he was cleansed, This verse is a beautiful and powerful statement empowering human liberty and signalling the defeat of Judaism.
The man begging for help belongs to any period of time and to anywhere on earth where slavery is enforced by cruel servants of the occult. His complaint is vague because he may be complaining of a physical condition attracting the wrath of god for some obscure reason e.g. a menstruating woman . But he could be the victim or some spiritual shortcoming as defined by the writers of endless rules.
The man wants liberation from his tormentors who insist on 613 rules or perhaps insist on extra ecclesiam nulla salus or whatever.Mark says the man immediately became cleansed when he realizes that it was in his power to break the chains.
Jesus said to the man , God is in your heart.
JW:
Not sure if you are a troll or a Christian here regarding Textual Criticism, but what's the difference. You are in denial about the terrible history of your religion. Because of the fiction of Jews killing Jesus you are ignoring the real Christian/Jewish history of Christians murdering innocent Jews for the last two thousand years. Probably more Jews have died as a result of being murdered by non-Jews in the last two thousand years than have died of natural causes. If this is the type of conversation you want, general criticism of Judaism/Christianity, than this is not the place for it. This Thread is for Textual Criticism of a specific verse.
You're just wasting time/distraction here and that is what you want. I hate censorship since that is a Christian thing but I will censor for a combination of being significantly wrong and having an attitude. Actually this is more of a guideline than a rule so I'll make an exception for you, one more combination of general dissing of Judaism and ignoring of the issue at hand, and I'll say fu filter you.