klewis wrote: ↑Sun Dec 08, 2019 8:07 amSo at the worse, my idea has been destroyed...
Not exactly and give yourself some credit. If Jay Raskin's Theory has merit - and it does - John IS filling in some blanks, the blanks that the Markan Author created. There is a War between these Authors of the Markan Story and the rewritten remains of the Original.
It is conceivable that "Our Mark" was written by one person, a person who composed with a Literary Chiastic Structure. Indeed, the Redactions to Mark are painfully obvious in many places since the Redactor(s) abandon the Chiastic Structures when they overwrite the material to bring Mark into later Orthodoxy.
John is a product of many hands. Again, see Howard Teeple,
Literary Origins.... You don't have to agree with him but do notice that there are identifiable differences in Text.
Mark, Jesus became the Son of Man somehow. In John, Jesus is the pre-existing God.
Very important point. As soon as the Prologue in John is finished, the entirety of the New Religion changes.
Period. It is not the Story of a person challenging the Authorities or a Wandering Preacher. It is the Story of GOD. The Gospel Stories of the wandering "Jesus" don't matter in the least anymore. Even the prattling of Pauline "Christ Jesus" don't matter except that there must be some tying of the boat to some dock somewhere. The Prologue in John shows evidence of a particular Author among several. The New Religion is changed.
In Mark, Jesus died after Passover, in John, Jesus was the Passover Lamb
Here is the War. There
are two Passover Stories and John corrects Mark as to which Crucifixion was the "Real" one. This may be the Central Cause of Division between the Markan and Johannine Groups although we may never be completely sure. John corrects but then shows a crucial misunderstanding. "Jesus" is now an Eternal God but by misunderstanding "Lamb of God", John re-institutes human sacrifice and this ties everything in Early Christianity in knots, to say nothing about Jewish Sensibilities.
John doesn't even have the Last Supper but has "Jesus" telling of drinking blood and eating flesh (See: Dio,
Epitome 64). The Authors of John know the Story of the Ascension of the Flavians but are less concerned with the Judaic History they attempt to present.
Good Stuff, Klewis.
CW