Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:52 pm
Why is the following motif doubled in Mark 13?
Mark 13.5-6 (before anything else in the discourse): 5 And Jesus began to say to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 6 Many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and will mislead many."
Mark 13.21-22 (after the abomination of desolation): 21 "And then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ,' or, 'Behold, He is there,' do not believe him; 22 for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect."
Any ideas?
Ben.
ETA: Here are the Matthean and Lucan parallels:
Matthew 24.4-5 (before anything else in the discourse): And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many."
Luke 21.8 (before anything else in the discourse): 8 And He said, "See to it that you are not misled; for many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not go after them."
Matthew 24.23-25 (after the abomination of desolation): 23 "Then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ,' or, 'There He is,' do not believe him. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. 25 Behold, I have told you in advance."
The operative and key words "come in My name", that is Jesus, and "See to it that you are not misled" and "do not believe him". The concept of false Christs and false prophets (e.g., false Apostles/teachers/deacons) was common among all the sects referring to their rivals.
And indeed answer is to be found in the vitriol of internal Christian debate over the origin and nature of Christ. This is strongly reflected in passages of the Gospel of John, as the author juxtaposes his version of Jesus against that of his sect's rivals. For example John expounds on how his Christ is unknown or unrecognized by his rivals
1) prologue, verse 1:10: "He was in the world ... and the world did not know him. (οὐκ ἔγνω)"
2) John the Baptist comments 1:26, "Among you stands one you do not know (οὐκ οἴδατε) "
3) most pronounced in verses 7:40-42 when schisms (σχίσμα) are noted on the differing opinion of his providence and nature
Some of the crowd having heard these words said,
'This one is truly the prophet.'
Others said, 'This one is the Christ.'
But some said, 'Surely the Christ cannot come from Galilee?
Do not the scripture say that the Christ comes from the seed of David (σπέρματος Δαυίδ)
and from the village of Bethlehem where David was from?'
Therefore a division (σχίσμα) occurred in the crowd (ὄχλῳ) because of him
This is a good point to pause and comment. John's Christ is very different from Matthew's, as we can see he rejects the Bethlehem story and the Davidic descent. The Galilee origin I'd take with a grain of salt, as Jesus is depicted in this Gospel as always an outsider (e.g., a Judean to the Samaritan woman, a Samaritan at one point, and a Galilean at another), but it could be seen as reference to the Marcionite opening of Jesus descending into Capernaum, as opposed to being birthed in Bethlehem.
Now to the believing part, John addresses directly is in verse 5:43
I have come in the name of my father, and you do not receive me.
If another comes in his own name, that one you will receive.
In summary is this is a different Jesus than the one presented in the Synoptic Gospels, especially Matthew. John rejects Matthew's Jesus, sees him as another in his name. One can obviously flip that equation from the sect Matthew represents point of view. The same for the others. What we have reference to here in the mini-Apocalypse is a great diversity from even this early text on who Christ is. The Christ of the other sects is sometimes seen as an anti-Christ, but always as from their Jesus' perspective another "in My name."
Note, there are many more passages that spell out the differences in Jesus and the non-belief by those of other Jesus sects.We do not have to travel outside the internal Christian debate presented in the NT itself to find these others in his name. IMO looking for historical figures is futile and frankly irrelevant.