Mark.How Much Ironic Contrast,Transfer&Reversal Did He kraM?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
arnoldo
Posts: 858
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 6:10 pm
Location: Latin America

Re: Mark.How Much Ironic Contrast,Transfer&Reversal Did He kraM?

Post by arnoldo » Sat May 12, 2018 10:06 pm

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Ironically, Thomas needs evidence before he can believe like some of us.

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Is It True That When You Say Noah You Really Mean Yeshua?

Post by JoeWallack » Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:27 pm

JW:
Verse Witness Context Commentary
14
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
The High Priest The Ultimate Jewish Religious Leader/The Highest Roman Religious Leader 1. The High Priest(HP) is Judge and Prosecutor (Just like Neil Godfree with Israel).
2. The first HP question is whether Jesus is the Christ, a Jewish context. The setting context indicates it's a question. We'll look at the actual/literal Greek later. Either way the HP does use the literal words to describe Jesus as the Christ.
3. The second HP question is whether Jesus is the son of God, a Greek context. This looks anachronistic as "son of God" was generally a Roman thing and not a Jewish thing. It's very unlikely an HP would have asked this as Jews in general would have considered it Pagan superstition. The only reason for the HP to ask Jesus this is if he had previously read "Mark's" gospel. But again, the HP does use the literal words to describe Jesus as the son of God.
4. In Jesus' trial this is the only meaningful question asked. The HP, who would be the second best possible witness here, uses words saying that Jesus is the Christ and son of God. That's one witness.
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.
Jesus The Ultimate Jewish Religious Leader/The Highest Roman Religious Leader 1. Jesus, the best possible witness, testifies that he is the Christ and son of God.
2. You now have the two best possible witnesses both use words to describe Jesus as the Christ and son of God. So there are your two witnesses.
3. The trial then ends with no further witness testimony.
4. Hugely ironic is that HP uses testimony which proves Jesus innocent as proving him guilty and the HP is one of the witnesses.
15
2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
Pilate Political -
And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest.
Jesus Political -


Joseph

Skeptical Textual Criticism

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

That's What Shekinah Said

Post by JoeWallack » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:24 am

JW:
Verse Witness Context Commentary
14
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
The High Priest The Ultimate Jewish Religious Leader/The Highest Roman Religious Leader 1. The High Priest(HP) is Judge and Prosecutor (Just like Neil Godfree with Israel).
2. The first HP question is whether Jesus is the Christ, a Jewish context. The setting context indicates it's a question. We'll look at the actual/literal Greek later. Either way the HP does use the literal words to describe Jesus as the Christ.
3. The second HP question is whether Jesus is the son of God, a Greek context. This looks anachronistic as "son of God" was generally a Roman thing and not a Jewish thing. It's very unlikely an HP would have asked this as Jews in general would have considered it Pagan superstition. The only reason for the HP to ask Jesus this is if he had previously read "Mark's" gospel. But again, the HP does use the literal words to describe Jesus as the son of God.
4. In Jesus' trial this is the only meaningful question asked. The HP, who would be the second best possible witness here, uses words saying that Jesus is the Christ and son of God. That's one witness.
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.
Jesus The Ultimate Jewish Religious Leader/The Highest Roman Religious Leader 1. Jesus, the best possible witness, testifies that he is the Christ and son of God.
2. You now have the two best possible witnesses both use words to describe Jesus as the Christ and son of God. So there are your two witnesses.
3. The trial then ends with no further witness testimony.
4. Hugely ironic is that HP uses testimony which proves Jesus innocent as proving him guilty and the HP is one of the witnesses.
15
2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
Pilate Political 1. Pilate is Judge and Prosecutor.
2. The question is whether Jesus is the King of the Jews, a political context. The setting context indicates it's a question. We'll look at the actual/literal Greek later. Either way Pilate does use the literal words to describe Jesus as the King of the Jews.
3. In Jesus' trial this is the only meaningful question asked. Pilate, who would be the second best possible witness here, uses words saying that Jesus is the King of the Jews. That's one witness.
And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest.
Jesus Political 1. Jesus, the best possible witness, testifies that he is the King of the Jews. "You said it" = "asked and answered".
2. You now have the two best possible witnesses both use words to describe Jesus as the King of the Jews. So there are your two witnesses.
3. The trial then ends with no further witness testimony.
4. Hugely ironic is that Pilate uses testimony which proves Jesus innocent as proving him guilty and Pilate is one of the witnesses.


Joseph

Skeptical Textual Criticism

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

How Does "Mark" Make It Look Like The High Priest Is A Witness?

Post by JoeWallack » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:21 am

So You Are The Christ

JW:
How Does "Mark" Make It Look Like The High Priest Is A Witness?:

14
57 And there stood up certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.
59 And not even so did their witness agree together.
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
Note that the witnesses stand up assuming testifying position and then the High Priest also stands up. Subsequent Gospellers increasingly undo the parallel:
  • "Matthew" = False witnesses "come forward".

    "Luke" = No one stands up.

    "John" = Jesus morphs into Barry Meson.
Now how bout them actual Greek words "Mark" uses.


Joseph

The New Porphyry

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

What Other Witness Do We Need?

Post by JoeWallack » Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:26 am

JW:
14:61


2532 [e] καὶ kai and Conj
3004 [e] λέγει legei says V-PIA-3S
846 [e] αὐτῷ autō to Him, PPro-DM3S
4771 [e] Σὺ Sy You PPro-N2S
1510 [e] εἶ ei are V-PIA-2S
3588 [e] ho the Art-NMS
5547 [e] Χριστὸς Christos Christ, N-NMS
3588 [e] ho the Art-NMS
5207 [e] Υἱὸς Huios Son N-NMS
3588 [e] τοῦ tou of the Art-GMS
2128 [e] Εὐλογητοῦ; Eulogētou Blessed [One]? Adj-GMS

JW:
There is nothing in the above statement by the High Priest to Jesus that indicates it is a question. The use of the Indicative Mood for "are" indicates it is a generally accepted statement of fact (Ben?). Of course the surrounding context indicates it is a question but the statement by itself sounds like it was the holy spirit speaking. Note that "Matthew"/'Luke" both also use the Indicative but edit the related statement by the High Priest here to explicitly make it a question all by itself.


Joseph

Skeptical Textual Criticism

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Working Without A Net

Post by JoeWallack » Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:43 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTXLhEk3J8E

JW:
For KK:

GMark Greek 1:16 GMark English GMatthew Greek 4:18 GMatthew English Commentary
Σίμωνος of Simon - - On an unrelated note, right before "Matthew" adds "Simon who is called Peter". Relatively good evidence for Markan priority ("Matthew" had read GMark).
ἀμφιβάλλοντας casting βάλλοντας casting France states as fact that the Markan word is "shorthand" for fishing. That's possible but this word is unique in the Christian Bible and if so then apparently everyone but "Mark" (and "Matthew") knew that because he immediately explains that it means they were fishermen. In any case (so to speak) this word definitely lacks the following word (net) in GMatthew.
- - ἀμφίβληστρον a net Note that GLuke/GJohn exorcise the entire story because presumably it sounds too much like a Fish Tale.
ἐν into εἰς into -
τῇ the τὴν the -
θαλάσσῃ sea θάλασσαν sea -

JW:
In summary the likely original Gospel narrative GMark said here:

"Simon was casting into the Sea".

The Superior Skeptic should note that by not using "net" here potentially the offending phrase parallels better with other parts of GMark also describing people being cast into (or out of) the sea/water. Where's Wall do this?

Hint for Solo = Only one person in GMark is cast out of the water (not easy to Sea, so read carefully).


Joseph

""We do not want to eject even one Arab from either the left or the right bank of the Jordan River. We want them to prosper both economically and culturally." - Jabotinsky

Skeptical Textual Criticism

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1421
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Mark.How Much Ironic Contrast,Transfer&Reversal Did He kraM?

Post by Charles Wilson » Fri Jan 17, 2020 3:55 pm

Hello Joe W --

Please excuse the interruption here but, as usual, you have Posted something that resonates. There is another verse in this grouping that begs for analysis:

Mark 1: 20 (RSV):

[20] And immediately he called them; and they left their father Zeb'edee in the boat with the hired servants, and followed him.

Two things are noticeable but not emphasized. This is supposedly a fishing boat (by implication, as you point out by transition from Mark to Matthew). There are servants, more specifically HIRED servants. This must be some boat! It is big enough for fishermen but there are also "servants", plural. Now, there will always be Apologetix (tm) that would be able to justify having the Queen Mary floating about to provide fishing abilities and a taxi Service (Because "Jesus") but this is another small pointer to the words "Casting", "Crossing Over", etc. having another meaning than "Fishing". Similar to the Youth fitted with a linen garment who runs away, there are other possibilities for meaning. There may be a "Prior Story" that is rewritten here. Matthew "smoothes" the Transvalued Story by writing "Net".

The Original would tell of the obtaining of the recruits in the Temple before this "fishing" activity was disrupted. (See Thackaray Translation of Josephus over the corrupted Whiston Translation.)

The other interesting aspect of this is "Zebedee".

From the ever-Politicized Wiki-P:

"Zeb:

"Zeb (variant spelling Zebb) is both a masculine given name and a surname. As a given name, it may be a short form of Zebulon, Zebadiah or Zebedee, but is now more common as a given name in its own right. In fact, it can also be an alternate spelling of the Hebrew word ze'ev (זְאֵב), meaning "wolf"..."

The Jewish Encyclopedia, under "Bilgah", has an interesting entry:

"Bilgah alone received his share in the south, his ring being nailed down, and his wall-closet tightly sealed, as a punishment for the apostasy of a woman of that house by the name of Miriam, who, during the Greek dominion under Antiochus Epiphanes, had denied her faith and married a hipparch (Tos., Suk. iv. 28; Suk. 56b; Yer. Suk., end; "Rev. Et. Juives," xxxix. 54). It is further related that when the Greeks forced their way into the Temple, this woman beat her sandals upon the altar, crying: "Wolf, wolf [Λύκος, λύκος], thou hast swallowed the substance of Israel, but hast deserted us in the day of our need!"..."

Those who are aware of prior Postings from me know that I could write a lot more on this but the upshot of this is simple.

Even "Fishing" may be the subject of Indirection here, Big Time. YMMV.

Thnx,

CW

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Throw me A Fricken Stone

Post by JoeWallack » Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:58 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56hqrlQxMMI

JW:

GMark Greek 1:16 Background = Calling of Simon/Peter to be Disciple GMark English GMark Greek 9:42 Background = Calling out bad Disciples GMark English Commentary
Note that both backgrounds deal with Disciples. 1:16 shows how it starts. 9:42 shows how it ends.
ἀμφιβάλλοντας casting βέβληται cast
ἐν into εἰς into -
τῇ the τὴν the -
θαλάσσῃ sea θάλασσαν sea -

Note that the phrases are the same so this suggests a relationship of the verses was intended in general. Also note again the lack of an object in 1:16, Simon/Peter is casting into the Sea. This then is closer to the subject of 9:42, the failed Disciple being cast into the Sea.

I especially note with interest here:

9:42
And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones that believe on me to stumble, it were better for him if a great millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
  • 1) Question for KK, who could possibly be the "little one" that "Mark" refers to?

    2) Bonus material for Solo. Did this little one try to make people believe in Jesus?

    3) Question for Ben. Who could (great) "millstone" possibly refer to?

    4) Rhetorical question for me. Is having Simon/Peter called while he is casting into the sea and then having him called off by casting him into the sea ironic?

    5) Open question. Spiritually, who was really hung?
Note to self - add to "The Simontic Problem". "Mark's" Negative Casting of Peter


Joseph

The New Porphyry

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Simon Didn't Saay

Post by JoeWallack » Fri Jan 31, 2020 11:35 am

Paul/Simon's Fifty Ways To Leave Your Saviour

JW:

GMark Greek 1:16 Background = Calling of Simon/Peter to be Disciple GMark English GMark Greek 9:22 Background = Demon possession and Disciple failure GMark English GMark Greek 9:42 Background = Calling out bad Disciples GMark English Commentary
Note that the approximately same phrases, cast into the sea, share the subject of Discipleship to Jesus in neat order:
1) Calling of the Greeneric disciple Simon/Peter.
2) Illustration of Disciple failure.
3) Consequences of Disciple failure
ἀμφιβάλλοντας casting ἔβαλεν casts βέβληται cast
ἐν into καὶ and εἰς into -
τῇ the εἰς into τὴν the -
θαλάσσῃ sea ὕδατα waters θάλασσαν sea -

Consistent with his genre of Greek Tragedy "Mark" has placed his (negative) model Disciple Peter's calling before the Transfiguration, during the Teaching & Healing Ministry (The Physical) and placed Peter's failure and condemnation after the Transfiguration (The Spiritual). For those who need points sharply explained, Peter "saves" his physical self but destroys his spiritual self while Jesus is verse-vices. "Get thee behind me Satan", not a Trump plea for support. Peter is explicitly identified as demon possessed at the Transfiguration (reversal of Fortune) point in the story.

Also, in support of KK here, this is typical Markan extant, where ungrammatical phrases (GMatthew/GLuke edit the hell out of it, so to speak) are reMarkably well preserved after 1,900 years. Micro evidence that we likely have the basic original Gospel narrative.

Bonus material for Solo = Obviously GMark has a theme of negative definitions while the subsequent Gospellers try to convert to positive definition. What related, earlier religion also had a theme of negative commandments?


Joseph

The New Porphyry

Post Reply