Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction

Post by JoeWallack » Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:20 am

"Mark's" DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction In The Original Gospel. Part II

JW:
This Thread is a continuation of my Award winning Thread:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction In The Original Gospel

where I demonstrate and than some that Literary Criticism of "Mark" provides revelation of multiple evidence of intentional fiction:
1) Presentation of names:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Presentation Of Names As Evidence Of Fiction

Joseph of Arimathea 15:43

2) The theme of the disciples "following" Jesus.

3) The use of numbers.

4) The story of the Jews washing their hands with fists.

5) Extreme irony.

6) The story of taking up your cross (before the cross had been taken up).

7) Use of "Let the reader understand".

8) Balanced but contrasting structure.

9) Communications at Text versus Sub-text level.

10) Use of transliteration as code.
In defiance of CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) I have actually developed criteria to help detect evidence of Literary Contrivance:
Qualitative:
  • 1) Parallels in potential sources

    2) Similarity in language
    • 1 "Mark" as a whole

      2 Specific story
    3) Common Theme

    4) Unusual choices of words/phrases to get closer to subject
Quantitative:
  • 1) Repetition
    • 1 "Mark" as a whole

      2 Specific story
    2) Relative amount of story with subject

Joseph

ErrancyWiki

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by JoeWallack » Sun Aug 24, 2014 10:31 am

JW:
It's already been demonstrated Ad Nazorean here that GMark has parallels to Paul as to themes. One of Paul's major themes is to contrast the supposed physical with the supposed spiritual for the same subject.

1 Corinthians 12
13 For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit.
The offending word:

1 Corinthians 12:13
907 [e] ebaptisthēmen ἐβαπτίσθημεν, were baptized, V-AIP-1P
The false prophet Paul's supposed point is that the physical baptism (water) does not make someone righteous. It is the spiritual baptism (spirit) that does. The theme is baptism and the contrast is physical baptism verses spiritual baptism.

"Mark" (author) gives narrative birth to the theme. Of specific interest here is that "Mark" invokes the brave and influential prophet from The Jewish Bible, Isaiah, by name twice, in order to connect Paul's baptism theme in GMark:

Mark 1
2 Even as it is [7]written in [5]Isaiah the [6]prophet, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way.

3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight;

4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.

5 And [1]there went out unto him [3]all the country of Judaea, and all they of [2]Jerusalem; And they were [4]baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.
Mark 7
1 And there are [1]gathered together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, who had come from [2]Jerusalem,

2 and had seen that some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled, that is, unwashen, hands.

3 For the Pharisees, and [3]all the Jews, except they wash their hands diligently, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders;

4 and [when they come] from the market-place, except they [4]bathe themselves, they eat not; and many other things there are, which they have received to hold, washings of cups, and pots, and brasen vessels.)

5 And the Pharisees and the scribes ask him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with defiled hands?

6 And he said unto them, Well did [5]Isaiah [6]prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is [7]written, This people honoreth me with their lips, But their heart is far from me.
So note that in all of GMark there are only two invocations of "Isaiah". Both involve supposed prophecy regarding baptism (7:4 has the same offending word). "Mark's" supposed point is that the physical baptism does not make anyone righteous. The first invocation of Isaiah in Chapter 1 shows all "The Jews" receiving a physical baptism. The subsequent narrative though shows that no one becomes righteous based on that. Jesus is the only one who has a physical baptism who becomes righteous but the text is clear that the cause is the "baptism" by the spirit. The second invocation of Isaiah at Chapter 7 has "Mark's" Jesus make the point explicit. All "The Jews" have physical (water) ritual baptism but that does not make them righteous. The further implication is that it actually causes unrighteousness because it makes "The Jews" think they are righteous. It is the spiritual baptism of Jesus' teaching (revelation) that makes one righteous.

Of course the irony here (and one that I think the author of "Mark" would have really appreciated) is that (the) holy spirit failed to tell Paul that this teaching of the supposed danger of physically washing your hands would end up costing the lives of millions of Believers during the Black Plague and even worse that the survivors would falsely accuse and murder untold numbers of Jews of blessed memory for holding fast to the command of God and washing before they ate.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

Solo
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:10 am

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by Solo » Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:54 am

duplicate
Last edited by Solo on Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Solo
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:10 am

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by Solo » Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:56 am

Solo wrote:
JoeWallack wrote:JW:
It's already been demonstrated Ad Nazorean here that GMark has parallels to Paul as to themes. One of Paul's major themes is to contrast the supposed physical with the supposed spiritual for the same subject.

1 Corinthians 12
13 For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit.
The offending word:

1 Corinthians 12:13
907 [e] ebaptisthēmen ἐβαπτίσθημεν, were baptized, V-AIP-1P
The false prophet Paul's supposed point is that the physical baptism (water) does not make someone righteous. It is the spiritual baptism (spirit) that does. The theme is baptism and the contrast is physical baptism verses spiritual baptism.
Actually, Paul was not a false prophet. It's just that you don't get the baptism by the holy spirit. Matthew added "and with fire", which is a significant clue of how he read the verse of Mark. The "fire" of course is what is known as "manic fever", in which one acquires prophetic powers and becomes. in Thomas'es idiom, Jesus' twin. It should be clear that Paul and Mark (and Matthew) were ones Touched with Fire.

Paul's drinking metaphor vis-à-vis baptism in 1 Cor 12:13 is extremely interesting, btw. It is another diagnostic indicator but that is beside the point here. If you really grasp the process of allegorizing spiritual phenomena Mark effected you will find the reference to this verse on the lips of Jesus in Mark when he scolds the Zebedees:

10:39 "The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized".

You see what Mark was doing with Paul's mytho-poetic figures ?

Best,
Jiri

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by JoeWallack » Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:50 am

JW:
3:21
And when his friends heard it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.

Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
2532 [e] kai καὶ And Conj
191 [e] akousantes ἀκούσαντες having heard [of it], V-APA-NMP
3588 [e] hoi οἱ those Art-NMP
3844 [e] par’ παρ’ [1]belonging to Prep
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ him PPro-GM3S
1831 [e] exēlthon ἐξῆλθον went out V-AIA-3P
2902 [e] kratēsai κρατῆσαι [2]to seize V-ANA
846 [e] auton αὐτόν· him; PPro-AM3S
3004 [e] elegon ἔλεγον they said V-IIA-3P
1063 [e] gar γὰρ indeed, Conj
3754 [e] hoti ὅτι - Conj
1839 [e] exestē ἐξέστη. [3]He is out of his mind. V-AIA-3S

[understatement]An interesting choice of words here by "Mark" (author) in the Greek[/understatement]:

[1] http://biblehub.com/greek/3844.htm
  • 3844 pará (a preposition) – properly, close beside. 3844 /pará ("from closely alongside") introduces someone (something) as very "close beside."
    What exactly "Mark" meant here is something of a mystery to CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) but it's fair to say that literally "with" (those with him (Jesus)) is as good a meaning as any.
[2] http://biblehub.com/greek/2902.htm
  • Cognate: 2902 kratéō – to place under one's grasp (seize hold of, put under control). See 2904 (kratos).
    What exactly "Mark" meant here is something of a mystery to CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) but it's fair to say that literally "take with" (take with them) is a fair meaning.
[3] http://biblehub.com/greek/1839.htm
  • 1839 eksístēmi (from 1537, ek, "out of," and 2476, histēmi, "to stand") – literally, "to remove from a standing (fixed) position," put out of place; i.e. "beside oneself," showing someone as flabbergasted (completely stupefied); at a total loss to explain or account for something; overwhelmed, astonished (amazed).
    What exactly "Mark" meant here is something of a mystery to CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) but it's fair to say that literally "he is not with himself" is not a large stretch.
Putting the above together you have:

And when those with him heard it, they went out to take him with them: for they said, He is not with himself.

I note with amazing interest that in all places of the offending text here with and without Jesus, "Mark" has chosen ambiguous wording that literally or figuratively can mean "with" in a pericope who's primary purpose is asking the question:

Who is really "with" Jesus?


Joseph

Errancywiki

lsayre
Posts: 231
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by lsayre » Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:46 pm

Could Mark have intended: And when those with him heard it, they went out to take him with them: for they said, He is not (or perhaps 'is') the standing one.

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by JoeWallack » Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:30 am

JW:
There is currently another Thread here:

Simon, from Cyrene

But regarding "Simon, from Cyrene" what does the likely original Greek say?:

Mark 15:21

Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
2532 [e] kai καὶ And Conj
29 [e] angareuousin ἀγγαρεύουσιν they compel, V-PIA-3P
3855 [e] paragonta παράγοντά passing by V-PPA-AMS
5100 [e] tina τινα one, IPro-AMS
4613 [e] Simōna Σίμωνα Simon N-AMS
2956 [e] Kyrēnaion Κυρηναῖον of Cyrene, N-AMS

The superior Skeptic should note that there is no genitive form here indicating "from/of" Cyrene. Literally, the offending phrase reads as a name "Simon Cyrenian". Brown, in his classic Death uses "Simon the Cyrenian". There is no definite article either (the) although usage of the Greek definite article is not as strict as in English. The English translations https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ;NASB;NRSV add a little wording to get to a genitive meaning even though it is not directly supported by the Greek.

So what would GMark's audience likely make of the phrase "one Simon Cyrenian"? The best we can do now is look at GMatthew:

27:32

"Matthew" (author) has rightly divided between the location Cyrene and the name Simon.

On to GLuke:

23:26

"Luke" (author) has also rightly divided. Likewise Acts rightly divides with the definite article 13:1.

Thus the lack of any genitive in the offending phrase and the modifications by "Matthew"/"Luke" suggest that they either saw the offending phrase as not literally meaning "from/of" Cyrene or at least ambiguous.

Nota bene for our very own Peter, the Young Wolf, who wants to take 15:21 as support for HJ. Observe that in a work that really does not want to name names ("14:9 And verily I say unto you, Wheresoever the gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, that also which this woman hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.") the name "Simon" is all over the place (so to speak):
  • Simon Peter

    Simon the Cananaean

    Simon (brother of Jesus)

    Simon the leper

    Simon Cyrenian
Historically at this time people were generally referred to by their given name and if necessary were further distinguished by who they were the son of. Strange/bizarre/macabre that in a work that is short on names but long on "Simons", none of these Simons are referred to by their father. Looks to me like the identifications above have a literary motivation rather than historical source. For those who need points sharply explained (like outhouse), the added references to the many Simons of GMark appears to have a purpose of distinguishing them from each other in the story and not giving what they were historically called.

This does not take me to 15:21 as rock solid quality evidence for MJ but I can see it from here.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:54 pm

JoeWallack wrote:The superior Skeptic should note that there is no genitive form here indicating "from/of" Cyrene. Literally, the offending phrase reads as a name "Simon Cyrenian". Brown, in his classic Death uses "Simon the Cyrenian". There is no definite article either (the) although usage of the Greek definite article is not as strict as in English. The English translations https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ;NASB;NRSV add a little wording to get to a genitive meaning even though it is not directly supported by the Greek.
Agreed. I also think that "Simon Cyrenian" is a name. There are two forms in Mark for the combination of name and place of origin or residence. The first is "the": Simon the Cananaean, Mary the Magdalene. The second is "the from": Joseph, the from Arimathaea. The closest parallel to "Simon Cyrenian" in Mark seems to be the "Jesus Nazarene" in Mark 1:24.

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by JoeWallack » Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:44 am

JW:
If some Skeptics are taking Mark 15:21 as quality evidence of historical witness than I think this Thread needs to back up and present the evidence for "Mark's" (author) fictional use of names:

Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Presentation Of Names As Evidence Of Fiction

JW:
Background:
There is no quality Source Criticism evidence that GMark has a source of historical witness (GMark is anonymous so there is no first, second or any hand (or foot) witness). 2,000 year old claimed historical witness by a biased, uncredible institution with strong motivation to claim historical witness is not "good news". Claiming Peter as the source is not just likely wrong but comical. This prepares the Way for fiction to make a comPeting claim in source.

Since GMark is primarily a story of the impossible and improbable the work as a whole is likely fiction. Thus the default position for any individual story in GMark is that it is fiction. Therefore, possible information in the story, such as names, should be doubted as historical more than names used in a story primarily of the possible with all other factors being equal.

General categories indicative of fictional use of names are:
  • 1) Names that have meanings/spellings that are or at least are close to themes/points of the author.

    2) Multiple use of the same name supportive of themes/points of the author.

    3) Names which are the same or similar to famous people or objects at the time written.

    4) Presentation of Names in unusual ways.

Joseph

STORY, n.
A narrative, commonly untrue. The truth of the stories here following has, however, not been successfully impeached.

ErrancyWiki

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fict

Post by JoeWallack » Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:41 am

JW:
The offending verse:

15:21

,
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
2532 [e] kai καὶ And Conj
29 [e] angareuousin ἀγγαρεύουσιν they compelV-PIA-3P
3855 [e] paragonta παράγοντά passing by V-PPA-AMS
5100 [e] tina τινα one, IPro-AMS
4613 [e] Simōna Σίμωνα Simon N-AMS
2956 [e] Kyrēnaion Κυρηναῖον of Cyrene, N-AMS
2064 [e] erchomenon ἐρχόμενον coming V-PPM/P-AMS
575 [e] ap’ ἀπ’ from Prep
68 [e] agrou ἀγροῦ, the country, N-GMS
3588 [e] ton τὸν the Art-AMS
3962 [e] patera πατέρα father N-AMS
223 [e] Alexandrou Ἀλεξάνδρου of Alexander N-GMS
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
4504 [e] Rhouphou Ῥούφου, Rufus, N-GMS
2443 [e] hina ἵνα that Conj
142 [e] arē ἄρῃ he might carry V-ASA-3S
3588 [e] ton τὸν the Art-AMS
4716 [e] stauron σταυρὸν cross N-AMS
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ. of him. PPro-GM3S

Note that the offending word ἄρῃ is mistranslated as he might carry. The meaning is http://biblehub.com/greek/142.htm "take up".

"Mark's" (author) Jesus had previously provided a formula for disciple success to another Simon:

8:34

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_8
33 But he turning about, and seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan; for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.

34 And he called unto him the multitude with his disciples, and said unto them, If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Same offending Greek word here, this time correctly translated. So "Mark" has first shown his Jesus providing a figurative formula for disciple success of "taking up the cross" to his disciple Simon and after a major theme Ad Nazorean of the first being the last, the real family being those who are "with him" and the insiders being the outsiders and the outsiders being the insiders, shows another Simon who was the last to follow Jesus, who was not family but "with Jesus" and came from the outside and took up Jesus' cross.

Nota bene - "Matthew"/"Luke" predictably change the offending word to try and move from the figurative connection made by "Mark" to a more supposedly historical sounding story ("carry").


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

Post Reply