Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 905
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

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

Post by JoeWallack » Sun May 03, 2015 2:30 pm

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:A colt, a room and a passerby
Mark 6:56
And wherever anyhow he entered into villages (κώμας) or into cities (πόλεις) or into fields (ἀγροὺς), in marketplaces they laid those ailing, and begged him that if only the fringe the clothing of him they might touch; and as many as anyhow touched him were saved.
sequence
1. villages (κώμας)
2. cities (πόλεις)
3. fields (ἀγροὺς) - or "farms" or "countryside" or *whatever*

A colt - taken into service
Mark 11:1-2
1 Now when they drew near to Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples
2 and said to them, “Go into the village (κώμην) in front of you, and immediately as you enter it you will find a colt tied, on which no one has ever sat. Untie it and bring it.
A room - taken into service
Mark 14:12-14
12 And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?”
13 And he sent two of his disciples and said to them, “Go into the city (πόλιν), and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him,
14 and wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’
A passerby - pressed into service
Mark 15:21
And they pressed into service (ἀγγαρεύουσιν) a passerby, Simon of Cyrene, who was coming in from the country (ἀγροῦ), the father of Alexander and Rufus, to carry his cross.
JW:
Not just the sequence but the side of service. In the Teaching & Healing Ministry Jesus is serving them. In the Passion Ministry they are serving Jesus (pressed into service).

Give thanks. Give thanks very much. Jesus has left the Tomb.


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 905
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

The Gathering

Post by JoeWallack » Sat May 28, 2016 9:16 am

JW:
Consider "Mark's" (author) jewdicious use of the offending word συνάγονται (gathered) which has a meaning consisting of a combination of a group and someone's effort to create the group:

Usage # Verse Group Location Context Contrivance
1 2
1 And when he entered again into Capernaum after some days, it was noised that he was in the house. 2 And many were gathered together, so that there was no longer room [for them], no, not even about the door: and he spake the word unto them.
Hometowners Home Healing of his Homies "Gathered" is an imprecise word to use here. The group part is present but not the organization part.
2 4
1 And again he began to teach by the sea side. And there is gathered unto him a very great multitude, so that he entered into a boat, and sat in the sea; and all the multitude were by the sea on the land.
Galileans Galilee shore Teaching the Galileans Again, an imprecise word.
3 5
21 And when Jesus had crossed over again in the boat unto the other side, a great multitude was gathered unto him; and he was by the sea. 22 And there cometh one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name; and seeing him, he falleth at his feet, 23 and beseecheth him much, saying, My little daughter is at the point of death: , that thou come and lay thy hands on her, that she may be made whole, and live.
Mixed (Jews/Gentiles) Galilee shore Resurrection And, imprecise again
4 6
Mark 6:30 And the apostles gather themselves together unto Jesus; and they told him all things, whatsoever they had done, and whatsoever they had taught.
Disciples Galilee Results of Disciple Ministry Even farther away and somewhat opposite from the organization part as the Disciples organize themselves.
5 7
1 And there are gathered together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, who had come from Jerusalem, 2 and had seen that some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled, that is, unwashen, hands.
Pharisees/Scribes Galilee Jewish religious leaders opposition Farthest away as now you have an opposition group with a context which is the opposite of being invited/wanted.

JW:
Carefully mark "Mark's" word. These are his only uses of the offending word. Evidence for fiction (contrivance):

1) Usage of the offending word connects to logical progression of the structural development of the Gospel:
  • 1 - Hometown Healing

    2 - Galilean Teaching

    3 - Resurrection

    4 - Disciple Mission

    5 - Jewish Religious Opposition
2) The offending word is forced (an inferior choice to an increasing degree).

3) The author is careful to restrict usage of the word to the above.

4) Usage of the word fits the separated/contrasting themes that in The Teaching & Healing Ministry in Galilee/Gentiles, "they" are gathered to Jesus which contrasts with The Passion Ministry in Judea/Jerusalem where Jesus goes to them but no one gathers to Jesus.

I see this type of careful usage of the offending word as sophistication.


Joseph

The Israeli/Arab Conflict - The Balfour Declaration - 1917

outhouse
Posts: 3525
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

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

Post by outhouse » Sat May 28, 2016 10:13 pm

JoeWallack wrote: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".


Joe no one thinks there were any authors that were witnesses. None that are credible today.

Second there was no institution early on. There was no motivation or intention the authors even intended for its audience, as the context is unknown to some degrees of how this was perceived. Not only that they were used to rhetorical authority and divinity building in text, which had less importance then the diverse oral traditions being shared on the same topics. The text did not spawn the religion, it was a product on its evolution.

And last, "good news" was a term used by Romans already before the gospels existed.

outhouse
Posts: 3525
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: O Cyrenian, Cyrenian! wherefore art thou Cyrenian?

Post by outhouse » Sat May 28, 2016 10:31 pm

maryhelena wrote:
So we have a family of zealots seeking to overthrow the Romans. What family, historically, would that be?
Evidence is in text is all that is required in context. Which gives us a hint from authors very far removed from any actual event.

What evidence would you expect from low life peasants in an illiterate society that's legend went through 40 ish years of cross cultural theology. ??? You never answer, so those question marks in this case are rhetorical.

What about John the Baptist? and someone needing to fill those shoes after his murder?



Why go looking for figures in Josephus, for which there is no evidence for historicity, when Hasmonean history is right there front and center stage?
With that methodology you can imagine any sort of history you like. There is evidence, you have since I have known you, discount it for various unknown reasons.

This is a historical religion because it is grounded in first century theology as Hellenism divorced Judaism after Hellenistic Judaism was accelerated by the opulence of Herods temple and the hundreds of thousands of pilgrims who traveled for months to come to Passover yearly.
If there was no such Hasmonean history
Let that go, it carries no weight or merit, and we don't look there because there is no evidence that ties the text of the later half of the first century, to that cultural period.


The text is all tied to first century Judaism before the temple fell, and the importance of this period is that Judaism spread through out Empire faster then it ever had under Roman oppression.


Hell a decade before jesus supposed birth the whole "son of god" on Hellenism was born with Augustus. As well as probably spawning the birth star mythology.


YOU miss how much of the text was paralleled to the living Emperors divinity to steal converts.

robert j
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

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

Post by robert j » Sun May 29, 2016 9:19 am

outhouse wrote:And last, "good news" was a term used by Romans already before the gospels existed.
OK, but the statement is superficial. Looking to the Greek (the language of the early extant Christian writings) --- various forms of euangeli- as nouns, verbs and adjectives are found occasionally in non-Christian literature of the times, including the LXX.

However, can you cite even just one example of the noun in the singular, neuter occurring with the article --- to euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον --- before Paul?

“The gospel” --- to euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον --- seems to have been a construction crafted by Paul to designate --- not a written biographical account of Jesus --- but rather his “announcement of good news” --- his system that allowed Gentiles to become full participants with the god of Israel, without the benefit of circumcision.

The author of gMark apparently picked-up the construction from Paul.

Can you cite even one use of the noun in the singular, neuter with the article --- to euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον --- outside of the NT and other Christian works prior to single occurrence in the works of Plutarch (writing late 1st C. to early 2nd C. CE)?

note: edited to revise date range of the writings of Plutarch.
Last edited by robert j on Thu Jun 02, 2016 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

outhouse
Posts: 3525
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

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

Post by outhouse » Sun May 29, 2016 9:44 am

The Romans proclaimed evangelion to announce a new Caesar or a birth of a divine heir to the throne.[1]

[1] Chaim Potak, Wanderings, Chaim Potaks’s History of the Jews, Alfred Knopf, New York, 1978, pg 280.



The earliest Christian writings (the first three Gospels in their original translations) used the term in nearly identical fashion to the Roman use:


◦ Mark 1:1 states, “The beginning of the evangel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.”


In Luke 1:19 an angel proclaims evangel announcing the birth of John the Baptist to his father.



In Luke 2:10 an angel proclaims evangel announcing the birth of Jesus to shepherds.
http://www.barrybenning.com/term_gospel.html

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 4169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

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

Post by Ben C. Smith » Sun May 29, 2016 10:19 am

robert j wrote:Can you cite even one use of the noun in the singular, neuter with the article --- to euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον --- outside of the NT and other Christian works prior to the use by Plutarch (writing ~ 75 CE)?
Why is Plutarch irrelevant? Do you think he got the use of the singular (with the article) from Christians? It is also attested later in Appian, as well as in Heliodorus. Did the Christians start this trend that Roman historians, biographers, and novelists picked up on? Or is it possible that most ancient texts are no longer extant, and finding nearly contemporaneous usages of the same term in Plutarch and in Paul may suggest earlier usage of that term rather than direct borrowing by one from the other?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

robert j
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

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

Post by robert j » Sun May 29, 2016 10:56 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
robert j wrote:Can you cite even one use of the noun in the singular, neuter with the article --- to euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον --- outside of the NT and other Christian works prior to the use by Plutarch (writing ~ 75 CE)?
Why is Plutarch irrelevant? Do you think he got the use of the singular (with the article) from Christians? It is also attested later in Appian, as well as in Heliodorus. Did the Christians start this trend that Roman historians, biographers, and novelists picked up on? Or is it possible that most ancient texts are no longer extant, and finding nearly contemporaneous usages of the same term in Plutarch and in Paul may suggest earlier usage of that term rather than direct borrowing by one from the other?
Plutarch is not irrelevant, and there is certainly the possibility that a wider use of that construction has been lost to us with lost works. But the extant texts might be seen as reflecting a unique use of the construction beginning with Paul and the Christian writers. Here's a citation from an essay on the subject by Steve Mason, York University, 2009 (second half of essay) ---

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/mason3.shtml
"To summarize thus far: the singular neuter form euangelion was extremely rare before the NT. Granted that most ancient literature has not survived, it remains clear that the word found no use in major and prolific authors. It is not found with the definite article, as the Christians liked to use it, before Plutarch at the end of the first century. To the extent that classical authors thought to use this root, they preferred the plural without article—just like English “good news.” This might be enough to make us doubt that the Christians were mirroring or playing against some established usage when they spoke so often and thematically of to euangelion."
Mason's article provides more detailed statistics and arguments. One may not agree with all of Mason's conclusions (I don't), but the facts none-the-less provide some support, IMO, for a Pauline solution.

note: the first half of Mason's essay on the early use of the term "Judaism" (Ioudaismos) is also worth a read.

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 905
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Exploratory Post = The Cup of Power

Post by JoeWallack » Fri Jun 10, 2016 6:53 am

JW:
Will no one stay awake with me? Peter, Ben, KK?

Does "Mark" (author) create chiasms based on key words?:

# Verse Commentary
1 7:4
and [when they come] from the market-place, except they 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.)
Ritual cleaning = Physical
2 -----9:41
For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink, because ye are Christ`s, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.
Physical reward of cup
3 ----------10:38
But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I drink? or to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?
The question
4 ----------10:39
And they said unto him, We are able. And Jesus said unto them, The cup that I drink ye shall drink; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:
The answer
5 -----14:23
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they all drank of it.
Spiritual reward of cup
6 14:36
And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me: howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.
Ritual cleaning = Spiritual

JW:
To my eyes "Mark's" usage of the offending word looks contrived. Two usages in the physical part of the Gospel, the Healing Ministry, both usages physical. Two usages in the transitional part of the Gospel, from the Healing Ministry to the Passion Ministry, "on the way" to Jerusalem. Both uses transitional, question and answer. Two usages in the spiritual part of the Gospel, the Passion Ministry, both usages spiritual. No other usage of the word.

Bonus material for Solo = And who was the only significant Christian author before "Mark" who advised to always swear a cup for spiritual protection before going into spiritual activity.


Joseph

The Strange Chapter Of Dr. Jewkyll And Mr. Hymn - Day 1

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 4169
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

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

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:07 am

Well, it is interesting; I will give you that much.

I am not sure I like linking 9.41 to a physical reward. The whole point seems to be that little things, like a cup of water, can lead to genuine, spiritual rewards.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ben C. Smith, Bernard Muller, Charles Wilson, Jax, MrMacSon, Ulan and 87 guests