This is the image I get of the strange scene described in Mark
I assume Jesus was standing. But again there is very little introduction to the scene but basically there are twelve disciples seated around Jesus and then those who are at a distance. Marcion as you know understood that the crowd was ridiculing Jesus. But they must have been ridiculing him because of the strange scene being described by the twelve seated apostles encircling Jesus - viz. he is declaring himself to be a god - the scene suggests it hence the 'bading' of the crowd.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
My point is that even though it is obliquely referenced here there seems to be something going on that prompts the initial declaration in 3.21. The crowd is looking at a mystery rite. Gregory Thaumaturgus bishop of Pontus, and Basileios bishop of Caesarea preserve the same ideas as Clement here. Something like the ring-dance of the Acts of John:
We do find the following [in Gregory's writings]: 'He who has done everything preserved and prescribed by Providence in its secret mysteries, reposes in Heaven in the bosom of the Father and in the cave in the bosom of the Mother (Christ Jesus). The ring-dance of the angels encircles him, singing his glory in Heaven and proclaiming peace on earth.' In his Four Sermons (10:1146) he quotes a curious legend, 'Today (Christ's birthday) Adam is resurrected and performs a ring-dance with the angels, raised up to heaven'.12
In [Basileios'] writings there are several references to the existence of the dance in early Christianity. Thus he says of one who has died in blessedness (Letter 40): 'We remember those who now, together with the Angels, dance the dance of the Angels around God, just as in the flesh they performed a spiritual dance of life and, here on earth, a heavenly dance.' Thus life in this temporal world, were it is lived in righteousness, may be described as a spiritual heavenly dance. In another letter (ad 1:2) he writes 'Could there be anything more blessed than to imitate on earth the ring-dance of the angels and at dawn to raise our voices in prayer and by hymns and songs glorify the rising creator.'
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
And it is clear from the mention of the 'twelve tribes condemning Israel' in Matthew that there is significance in the Jesus standing in the middle of twelve thrones. Consider that Jesus also ends up before the Sanhedrin who condemn him. Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:3, which states that "the Sanhedrin was arranged like the half of a round threshing-floor so that all might see one another."
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
I guess if I was to bring this long digression to a close (I have to catch a flight too) I'd say that there is some evidence that twelve was the traditional number of the Sanhedrin - possibly modeled after a heavenly model (cf. Joseph M. Baumgarten, "The Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin", JBL 95 (1976), 59-78.— B. examines the Qumran pesher on Is. 54:11-12 and offers his own reconstruction. Then, following Flusser, he compares 4QpIsad with Rev. 21 and notes that both allude to two groups of twelve exercising judgement in the same eschatological setting, the New Jerusalem. B. shows how in the judicial sphere heavenly tribunals were conceived as modelled on earthly structures, as illustrated by the writers of the New Testament use of both the Qumran notions of the duodecimal principle employed in their ruling councils, as well as a variety of other traditions concerning the greater and lesser Sanhedrin) which had twelve seats. In other words, the Sanhedrin was modeled after the zodiac.
There is a parallel then between this scene and Jesus's eventual judgement before the Sanhedrin (which probably had twelve members regardless of what the later Mishnah says). The duodecimal nature of the apostles was clearly very early and part of a deliberate attempt to parallel some activity in the heavens and the earth (cf. The Twelve Apostles and the Zodiac In the Homilies on the Psalms of Asterius the Sophist, published by Marcel Richard at Oslo in 1956, there is a curious passage on Judas's betrayal. It occurs in a commentary on Psalm II. 2: “There is no righteous man. He has maimed the clock (opoxóyov) of the apostles. Of the disciples' twelve-hour (603ekéopov) day he has made a day of eleven hours. He has shown the Lord's year (éviovrév) deprived of one month. And for that reason it is in the lament over the Twelfth.” And then, referring to the apostles' forsaking of Christ: “With the three hours [Peter, John, Thomas] the other hours of the apostles fled the day and took refuge in the night.... The hours of the day became hours of the night at the Passion, when the day itself, which shows the image of the apostles, was changed into darkness” (xx, 14, 15–16; pp. 157, 158). We are here confronted by an allegory in which the twelve apostles are compared to the twelve hours of the day and the twelve months of the year."
I would imagine then that the chiastic structure you have uncovered is very real and very old and possibly part of a lost ur-gospel written in verse which emphasized the "duodecimal drama" of the narrative. Let's not forget that Irenaeus already mentions also that the Marcosians had a numerological interest in the gospel and that the betrayal of Judas was part of a some plot involving the loss of a letter (the sixth) and so on. The Transfiguration is similarly read as a "numerological drama" and this tradition is known to Clement of Alexandria, possibly connecting it to a secret gospel of Mark (the section in Irenaeus about the Marcosians is often a verbatim copy of the numerological speculation that appears in Stromata Book 6). In short I think what you've discovered might be part of some wider evidence that a "less historical" gospel might lie beneath Mark.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
I can only tell you what I put in my book namely that the four creatures of Ezekiel/Apocalypse line up with the four cardinal signs of the zodiac. Clearly there would have to be female disciples (= the Virgin) for this to work with the apostles.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2017 7:13 am
I can only tell you what I put in my book namely that the four creatures of Ezekiel/Apocalypse line up with the four cardinal signs of the zodiac. Clearly there would have to be female disciples (= the Virgin) for this to work with the apostles.
Would this be an existing book, or an upcoming release?
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
A1 31 And His mother and His brothers arrived, and standing outside they sent word to Him, and called Him.
B1 32 And a multitude was sitting around Him and said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You."
C 33 And answering them, He said, "Who are My mother and My brothers?"
B2 34 And looking about on those who were sitting around Him in a circle, He said, "Behold, My mother and My brothers!
A2 35 For whoever does the will of God, he is My brother and sister and mother."
Every single item in the chiasm contains a tight variation of "mother and brothers," and the B1 and B2 lines contain two other agreements ("was/were sitting around him" and "behold"), each of them quite unessential in nature, yet still striking to ear and eye.
Also of note, the standard versification of this passage seems to have recognized at least something of its natural structure, dedicating a new verse division to every new element of the chiasm.
I am well pleased that you have become increasingly receptive to the sophistication of "Mark" (author). Regarding the chiasm at hand, as the vampire said to Kolchak in the classic Kolchak, "I'm afraid it's even worse than that.":
σου καὶ αἱ ἀδελφαι σου] AD E F H M S U Γ Ω 124 180 700 954 1006 1010 1195c 1216 1230 1242 1243 1253 1344 1646 Byzpt Byz2005 l184 l185 l292 l514 l1761 (l1552) ita itb itc itd itf itff2 itq vgmss syrh(mg) goth slavmss
We have pretty good Western support for the missing "ἀδελφαι" (sister) and now your chiasm is complete. My Skeptical guess is that "sister" is original here (again, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are both after The Lucian Recension and likely often contain the unoriginal where there is a Difficult Reading). Glad to see you notice that Markan contrivance goes beyond the major to also include the trivial/unnecessary. Here it looks like every subject/object in the chiasm is either paralleled or contrasted and it's difficult to find one that sticks out as not paralleled or contrasted. The related efficiency of the author here is what's remarkable, getting so many thematic parallel/contrasts in such a short space (and the English translations often hide some that are in the original Greek). Here's a few more:
1) Jesus' physical family (which included James by The Way) is outside. Jesus' spiritual family is inside.
2) Jesus' physical family is standing (and not in their right mind). Jesus' spiritual family is sitting and in their right mind.
3) Jesus' physical family is calling the physical. Jesus is calling the spiritual.
4) The middle has the key question, who is your real family?
5) No mention of the expected family question, who is your father?
6) You also have the group with Jesus in the B lines.
7) The group is surrounding Jesus in the B lines
"Mark" is like the Baruch Lee of Gospels. Minimum effort, maximum force. I think that "Mark" would really appreciate the irony that it takes a Skeptic to understand that what is truly reMarkable about GMark is not GMark's Jesus but "Mark's" literary skill. As everything in GMark, including Jesus, is subservient to Style, this makes me think that GMark was primarily intended as literature and not religious writing.
