Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by iskander » Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:52 am

Romans 9:4-5 is another understanding of the Gospel of Mark:

Romans 9:4-5, these verses explain the background of the New Testament : the story in the NT is a development of the religion of the Israelites who are sons of God and used to the presence of God in their midst as partner , overseer ,
maestro and Santa.

From this people by sexual intercourse [ kata sarka , natural descent] a Messiah was born .This Messiah is a precious gift of the one who is above all.


NT verses chosen:
Romans 9:4They are descendants of Israel, chosen to be God's sons; theirs is the glory of the divine presence, theirs the covenants, the law, the temple worship, and the promises.

Romans 9:5 The patriarchs are theirs, and from them by natural descent came the Messiah. May God, supreme above all , be blessed forever! Amen.


In the Gospel of Mark , king David is nothing, Jesus is a man...

Giuseppe
Posts: 5428
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Giuseppe » Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:29 am

Stefan Kristensen wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:43 am
Consider this then: Mark thinks the Christians are the sons of God, with Jesus as their divine king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, God.
At the Triumphal Entry, the crowd think they are the sons of David, with Jesus as their Davidic king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, David.
I believe that the reason for their very strange shout, "our father, David", is to be explained as Mark wishing to juxtapose these two realities, or use this 'historical' scene with the misunderstood messianic concept to reflect the spiritual truth about the real messianic concept.
This sounds of genuine marcionite antithesis.

Could Mark be correcting a previous Gospel where:
1) there was the same misunderstanding of Jesus as davidic Messiah by the people,
2) but there was not the (harmonizing) justaposition of these two realities (Jesus as being both davidic and 'more-than-davidic') but in his place an antithesis without middle terms between the true identity of Jesus (as the Messiah of an alien God) and the general conception of Jesus (as one "who was called Christ": only "called").
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.

outhouse
Posts: 3551
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by outhouse » Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:04 am

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:47 am

My only point was that I think GMark is with regard to the relationship between Jesus and David not about what Jesus is (possibly a "son of David"), but about how we should see Jesus (as the "Lord"). I think Mark would say: Perhaps Jesus was a descendant of David, but that plays absolutely no role and is completely misleading. (Paul: "every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord")
Hell no. No way the authors could ever know, we know they fictitiously plagiarized concepts building this deity.


Your bringing Markan text and now Pauline mixing it all up. They factually used fiction to build the deity of Christ/Jesus in which they plagiarized the previous text of Judaism they placed so much importance on.

They sold Jesus as deity and messiah

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1328
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:53 pm

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:47 am
outhouse wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:10 pm
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:51 pm
And there's no way to come around and to get an answer to the question whether and in which sense Jesus was the son of David.
The authors were marrying the OT textual traditions found valuable, to show without question he was the messiah as described in the previous text.

If your saying we cannot know the context, I disagree.
They took and stole the previous context of lineage.
I agree that we know the context. imho the context is explicitely mentioned in GMark
Mark 12:35 And as Jesus taught in the temple, he said, “How can the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?


I would disagree that Mark adopt the view of the context as his own. Mark's Jesus explicitly questioned the older view.

Mark 12:37 David himself calls him Lord. So how is he his son?


My only point was that I think GMark is with regard to the relationship between Jesus and David not about what Jesus is (possibly a "son of David"), but about how we should see Jesus (as the "Lord"). I think Mark would say: Perhaps Jesus was a descendant of David, but that plays absolutely no role and is completely misleading. (Paul: "every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord")
outhouse wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:04 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:47 am
My only point was that I think GMark is with regard to the relationship between Jesus and David not about what Jesus is (possibly a "son of David"), but about how we should see Jesus (as the "Lord"). I think Mark would say: Perhaps Jesus was a descendant of David, but that plays absolutely no role and is completely misleading. (Paul: "every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord")
Hell no. No way the authors could ever know, we know they fictitiously plagiarized concepts building this deity.

Your bringing Markan text and now Pauline mixing it all up.
They factually used fiction to build the deity of Christ/Jesus in which they plagiarized the previous text of Judaism they placed so much importance on.

They sold Jesus as deity and messiah
Okay :scratch: Many thanks for your well argumented discussion

Stefan Kristensen
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 1:54 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Stefan Kristensen » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:39 pm

Giuseppe wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:29 am
Stefan Kristensen wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 8:43 am
Consider this then: Mark thinks the Christians are the sons of God, with Jesus as their divine king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, God.
At the Triumphal Entry, the crowd think they are the sons of David, with Jesus as their Davidic king, and awaiting the kingdom of their father, David.
I believe that the reason for their very strange shout, "our father, David", is to be explained as Mark wishing to juxtapose these two realities, or use this 'historical' scene with the misunderstood messianic concept to reflect the spiritual truth about the real messianic concept.
This sounds of genuine marcionite antithesis.

Could Mark be correcting a previous Gospel where:
1) there was the same misunderstanding of Jesus as davidic Messiah by the people,
2) but there was not the (harmonizing) justaposition of these two realities (Jesus as being both davidic and 'more-than-davidic') but in his place an antithesis without middle terms between the true identity of Jesus (as the Messiah of an alien God) and the general conception of Jesus (as one "who was called Christ": only "called").
Mark could be, I suppose, if it's correct concerning this antithesis. But if it is, I'd prefer not to leave Mark's narrative just yet, but rather keep pursuing this line of thought in gMark a litte more.

outhouse
Posts: 3551
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by outhouse » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:30 am

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:53 pm
Okay Many thanks for your well argumented discussion
Something you cannot refute or address.

Because authors used fiction and rhetorical prose does not mean the temple or Jerusalem or Pilate or Caiaphas or the political climate of oppression, or Jesus is also a fictional character.

Your dismissal and avoidance of the topic is a sign of failure on your part to address Jesus actual historicity, and why.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6217
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:26 pm

Stumbled upon this today while in search for something else:

Clementine Homilies 18.13a: And Peter said: "I shall reply to that which you wish me to speak of — namely, the passage, 'No one knows the Father but the Son, nor does any one know the Son but the Father, and they to whom the Son may wish to reveal Him.' First, then, I am astonished that, while this statement admits of countless interpretations, you should have chosen the very dangerous position of maintaining that the statement is made in reference to the ignorance of the Creator (Demiurge), and all who are under him. For, first, the statement can apply to all the Jews who think that David is the father of Christ, and that Christ himself is his son, and do not know that He is the Son of God. Wherefore it is appropriately said, 'No one knows the Father,' since, instead of God, they affirmed David to be His father; and the additional remark, that no one knows even the Son, is quite correct, since they did not know that He was the Son."

Sounds rather like Barnabas 12.10.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

robert j
Posts: 671
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by robert j » Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:19 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:42 am

But what about Mark? No genealogy is given, and the only statements related to Davidic descent in the gospel can be taken in more than one way.

What do you think? Did Mark regard Jesus as a physical descendant of David, as a spiritual descendant of David, as both, or as neither?

Ben.
Bernard Muller wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:52 pm
I think there is a pattern: "Mark" seemed to concede to Jewish Christian beliefs, and then have them crushed;
The 3 examples:

... 3) The blind beggar calls repeatedly Jesus, son of David, with no narrated objection from Jesus but later the psalm episode denies it ...
Yes (well, sort of)
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sun Nov 19, 2017 9:27 am

Okay, Bernard ... The thing is, I agree with you that Mark 12.35-37 is probably against Jesus being David's son ...
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:19 am
... what about just plain old fashioned good storytelling techniques? ...
Yes.

I think the conundrum of the “son-of David question” can be clarified by interpreting the relevant passages in terms of storytelling.

Like many good storytellers, the author of gMark set-up expectations for both the characters in his story, and for his readers. This set the stage for a dramatic reversal --- the dashing of those expectations exposing a deeper truth.

Here are the most relevant passages in the order presented in Mark’s story (using the NASB for no particular reason) ---

... And as He was leaving Jericho with His disciples and a large crowd, a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the road. When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Many were sternly telling him to be quiet, but he kept crying out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him here.” So they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take courage, stand up! He is calling for you.” Throwing aside his cloak, he jumped up and came to Jesus. And answering him, Jesus said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” And the blind man said to Him, “Rabboni, I want to regain my sight!” And Jesus said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road. (Mark 10:46-52)


Those who went in front and those who followed were shouting:

“Hosanna!
BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD;
Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David;
Hosanna in the highest!”

Jesus entered Jerusalem and came into the temple; and after looking around at everything, He left for Bethany with the twelve, since it was already late. (Mark:11:9-11)

The author of gMark set the expectations of the many here. A blind man expecting a “son-of-David” and an expectant crowd hoping for the establishment of a kingdom of David --- a political kingdom to expel the Romans and establish a kingdom of God on earth.

And Jesus began to say, as He taught in the temple, “How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?
“David himself said in the Holy Spirit,

‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,
“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET.”’

“David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?” And the large crowd enjoyed listening to Him. In His teaching He was saying: “Beware of the scribes who like to walk around in long robes, and like respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.” (Mark 12:35-40)

I think the plain meaning of the text is the intended meaning here.

Jesus himself dashed the expectations --- the scribes are wrong --- he is not the expected Davidic messiah. Mark’s Jesus Christ is a different kind of anointed savior --- a different kind of redeemer.

And I don’t think the author of Mark broke ranks with Paul here, unless of course one is willing to accept the funny-business of the early catholics in the first and 15th chapter of Romans, and with 2 Timothy.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6217
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:29 pm

robert j wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:19 pm
I think the conundrum of the “son-of David question” can be clarified by interpreting the relevant passages in terms of storytelling.

Like many good storytellers, the author of gMark set-up expectations for both the characters in his story, and for his readers. This set the stage for a dramatic reversal --- the dashing of those expectations exposing a deeper truth.
I disagree with the terms I have highlighted here. There is nothing dramatic at all about the perceived reversal between Bartimaeus and the Psalm episode. The crowds, including Bartimaeus, seem to assume that Jesus is the son of David, and no one contradicts them, not even Jesus himself; later on Jesus' argument on the basis of the Psalm seems to assume that the Messiah cannot be the son of David, but this assumption is posed precisely as a puzzling question, one which goes unanswered in the pericope itself (as well as in the rest of the gospel). The reversal, if there is one (and I think there is), is rather subtle. It is far from "dramatic." Because there is no dramatic reversal, then, no expectations are actually dashed. Intelligent exegetes on both sides of the question (yes, Mark thought he was the son of David; no, Mark thought no such thing), to this day, are able to mount good arguments for their position from the text of Mark. It would have been so easy for Mark to have resolved this issue. That he does not might mean something important. To me the best two candidates for what this might mean are: (A) he left the question open-ended on purpose, perhaps so as not to offend either side, and (B) the question was not on his mind in the first place: the materials in the distinct pericopes hail from different quarters of early Christianity, and Mark's reasons for including them did not extend to resolving this particular question.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

robert j
Posts: 671
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Is Jesus the descendant of David in Mark?

Post by robert j » Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:54 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:29 pm
robert j wrote:
Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:19 pm
I think the conundrum of the “son-of David question” can be clarified by interpreting the relevant passages in terms of storytelling.

Like many good storytellers, the author of gMark set-up expectations for both the characters in his story, and for his readers. This set the stage for a dramatic reversal --- the dashing of those expectations exposing a deeper truth.
I disagree with the terms I have highlighted here. There is nothing dramatic at all about the perceived reversal between Bartimaeus and the Psalm episode. The crowds, including Bartimaeus, seem to assume that Jesus is the son of David, and no one contradicts them, not even Jesus himself; later on Jesus' argument on the basis of the Psalm seems to assume that the Messiah cannot be the son of David, but this assumption is posed precisely as a puzzling question, one which goes unanswered in the pericope itself (as well as in the rest of the gospel). The reversal, if there is one (and I think there is), is rather subtle. It is far from "dramatic." Because there is no dramatic reversal, then, no expectations are actually dashed. Intelligent exegetes on both sides of the question (yes, Mark thought he was the son of David; no, Mark thought no such thing), to this day, are able to mount good arguments for their position from the text of Mark. It would have been so easy for Mark to have resolved this issue. That he does not might mean something important. To me the best two candidates for what this might mean are: (A) he left the question open-ended on purpose, perhaps so as not to offend either side, and (B) the question was not on his mind in the first place: the materials in the distinct pericopes hail from different quarters of early Christianity, and Mark's reasons for including them did not extend to resolving this particular question.
Then I suppose we'll just disagree on how dramatic the reversal is. Drama can be subtle. I see it as dramatic from the point of view of the widespread expectations on such a pivotal question. Now whether there actually was a widespread expectation for the arrival of a Davidic-messiah among the Jews of the time, or whether this was just an assumption by the author of gMark, or even if Jesus as a Davidic redeemer was gaining traction among Mark's own compadres --- Mark clearly presented it as a widespread expectation in his story.

And even if Mark chose to close-the-door on the expectation with a subtle rebuke of the scribes, I see the turn-of-events on such an important issue as dramatic.

As for the current differences of opinion on the question among NT scholars--- I suspect at least some apologetics are at work in order to defend the position of many NT scholars that are heavily invested in the concept that Jesus was of the seed of David.

Post Reply