Is the baptism (but not John) interpolated in Mark?

[iskander]

Mark introduces Jesus as a man on his way to join a religious group led by John. It soon becomes apparent that Jesus is a talented student who will greatly influence the outlook of the group. The story is told as if sketched with a broad brush but the image it shows is clear : the teacher hopes this student will eventually lead the people on to greater goals.

Jan Hus and Martin Luther bear the same relation to each other although they never met. Hus died with the same hope voiced by John : he proclaimed, “In 100 years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed.” That man will be Luther. During the disputation of Leipzig Martin Luther identified himself with Jan Hus with his proclamation "Ja, Ich bin ein Hussiten”.

http://www.radio.cz/de/rubrik/spezial/w ... eformation
Wir sind ja alle Hussiten
Danach schreibt Luther einen Brief an einen seiner Freunde, in dem der bekannte Satz steht: „Ohne es zu wissen, sind wir alle Hussiten.“ Der böhmische Reformer ist für Luther nun der Heilige, den die Kirche verbrennen ließ.

We are all Hussites
Luther then wrote a letter to one of his friends, in which the familiar sentence was written: "Without knowing it, we are all Hussites." For Luther, the Bohemian reformer was the saint whom the Church burned.

[Giuseppe]

I have too much respect for Jan Hus to compare him to a phantasma named “Jesus of Nazaret”.

[iskander]

I have too much respect for Jan Hus to compare him to a phantasma named “Jesus of Nazaret”.

The conflict between Jesus and the Temple is like the conflict between Jan Hus and the Vatican.
Jesus was a reformer and his life and teaching forced the Temple clerics to make profound changes to their liturgy to ' protect' their captive faithful from the malignant influence of the talmidei Yeshu.



What do you respect of Jan Hus and his friends ?

[andrewcriddle]

Mark 1:10 refers to the heavens being rent using the same word as the rending of the temple veil, (Matthew and Luke use different words in the baptism pericope). This parallelism between the beginning and end of Jesus' ministry is probably deliberate and supports the originality of the baptism in Mark.

Andrew Criddle

[Giuseppe]

Mark 1:10 refers to the heavens being rent using the same word as the rending of the temple veil, (Matthew and Luke use different words in the baptism pericope). This parallelism between the beginning and end of Jesus' ministry is probably deliberate and supports the originality of the baptism in Mark.

Andrew Criddle

A counter-example:
The episode of the death of John by Herod is an interpolation according to some. But it fits well the context since the contrast seems deliberate (by the interpolator) between the burial (without resurrection) of John and the burial (with resurrection) of Jesus.


Another counter-example:
Mark 13 is an interpolation according to some. But it has deliberate predictions (by the interpolator) that were realized in some details of the scene of the agony and arrest in Getsemani.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
Giuseppe, it's like a memory game. Even little children understand that. Perhaps the "some" never played it.

[Giuseppe]

.
Giuseppe, it's like a memory game. Even little children understand that. Perhaps the "some" never played it.

can you explain it better, please? I don't realize the irony.

I refer to this as "some", for example:
http://michaelturton2.blogspot.com/2005 ... ation.html

And about the Little Apocalypse, it is known that it is a separate source, even if his prophecies are realized via the typical irony of Mark.

[iskander]

The presence of the baptism of Jesus by John in both Matthew and Luke is good evidence, (assuming Marcan priority), that it is original to Mark.

Andrew Criddle

Mark was the first and in Mark's the intellectual ( religious ) development of Jesus is clearly discernible as a man seeking a personal understanding of God.
Mark 1: 4, John the baptizer appeared* in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Mark 1:5 And people from the whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him, and were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins



John and Jesus were on the same side and the temple clerics were their opponents. The clerics run an expensive Temple which they used to sell forgiveness through an elaborate ritual which involved the killing of animals, dressing up in fancy clothes etc.

John claimed to offer all that almost for free etc. Jesus went to John as a customer to be forgiven etc. The clerics visited John and later Jesus as opponents , as enemies of those fraudsters, even as enemies of heretics. Men visited John trusting his capacity to forgive the sins. Jesus was one of those men.


Jesus eventually learned that every man and woman can forgive himself and herself . If the death of an animal in a building can forgive a human and John can forgive in the river Jordan , then God alone can forgive if man repented .


Jesus was a formidable thinker but his disciples eventually replicated the old Mosaic Temple with the new papal Vatican

Re: The personification of the Shekhinah

Post by iskander » Wed May 10, 2017 6:00 pm
The Christian interpretation of the execution of Jesus as an atoning death for the transgression of Adam and Eve is the interpretation of a Jewish convert to Christianity. The thinking of a mind trained to pay the price for sins committed.


But Luke 23:34 is the summary of the entire teaching of Jesus : 34Then Jesus said, Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.

There was no sacrifice .

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1828&p=69706#p69706


Jesus is first introduced into history as a man seeking forgiveness from the cleansing waters of the river Jordan under the tutelage of John the Baptizer . later he rejects that any man could possibly be ' good' , only God is good, and reduces the obligations of man to only ten words uttered by God at Sinai.

Finally in Luke 23:34 , Jesus understands that only the mercy of God is all what is needed to allow mankind to travel safely in this valley of tears : Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.


In Luke 23:34 man and woman are truly free to organize society and their individual behaviour according to the current state of knowledge available to them. The goal of their travails should be a better living conditions for humanity. Death returns humanity to Father as his children .

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
Giuseppe, it's like a memory game. Even little children understand that. Perhaps the "some" never played it.

can you explain it better, please? I don't realize the irony.

I refer to this as "some", for example:
http://michaelturton2.blogspot.com/2005 ... ation.html

And about the Little Apocalypse, it is known that it is a separate source, even if his prophecies are realized via the typical irony of Mark.

Would we argue that the second strawberry is interpolated in the game or the mirror in the background in the painting?



Yes, we could argue that because strawberries ar not really "fruits" (it is a fruits memory) and the light on the mirror looks completely unusual in relation to the rest of the background. That must be interpolations! (A typical way of arguing in a discussion about Christian scriptures.)


On the other hand, in this painting nothing looks unusual.


But we do not only know that it is the work of two painters, but also amongst other things that the bodies are „frescos“ and the clothes are „seccos“. It will still take time in biblical studies to make cases with such technical arguments (style and word choise of the author, typical perspective of storytelling, patterns in the story and so on).

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

.
Some technical arguments

1) Markan style

In a discussion with Michael BG, Ben and I mentioned two typical elements of Markan style

- the use of „καί“ („and“) as introduction of new clauses or phrases
- the use of the historical present

let's have a look at

- the use of „καί“ in Mark 1:9-12

9 (And - καί) in those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And (καί) when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And (καί) a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” 12 (And - καί) the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness.

- the use of the historical present in Mark 1:9-12 (in the English translation the verbs/participles are not in present tense)

9 (And) in those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” 12 (And) the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness.

2) Markan perspective of storytelling

Some actions and events of Mark's story are often presented from the subjective perspective of a character

1:16 Passing alongside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting a net into the sea
1:19 And going on a little farther, he saw James the son of Zebedee and John his brother,
2:5 And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
...
15:39 And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he breathed his last, he said
15:45 And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the corpse to Joseph.
16:5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side

let's have a look at Mark 1:10 and the parallel in Matthew

Mark 1:10 And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open
Matthew 3:16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him

3) repetition of phrases

Mark's OT-allusion LXX Genesis 22:2

He said, “Take your son, the beloved, whom you love, Isaac“
καὶ εἶπεν λαβὲ τὸν υἱόν σου τὸν ἀγαπητόν ὃν ἠγάπησας τὸν Ισαακ

Mark's use of the phrase „beloved son“

1:11 And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; (ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός)
9:7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son (ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός)
12:6 He had still one other, a beloved son (υἱὸν ἀγαπητόν). Finally he sent him to them

4) conclusion

No external hint that the baptism could be an interpolation.
Serious internal arguments that the baptism is not an interpolation.

So far I can see this applies not to the word „Nazaret“ in Mark 1:9. Imho it's not an interpolation, but there are no serious internal arguments against the hypothesis of an interpolation. The word is not related to other verses so that a case on internal arguments cannot be made.