Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Evidence Of Intentional Fiction

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

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

Post by Charles Wilson » Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:24 am

Dio, Epitome 64:

"...Now they would all shout together on one side the name of Vespasian and on the other side that of Vitellius, and they would challenge each other in turn, indulging in abuse or in praise of the one leader or the other. Again one soldier would have a private conversation with an opponent: "Comrade, fellow-citizen, what are we doing? Why are we fighting? Come over to my side." "No, indeed! You come to my side." But what is there surprising about this, considering that when the women of the city in the course of the night brought food and drink to give to the soldiers of Vitellius, the latter, after eating and drinking themselves, passed the supplies on to their antagonists? One of them would call out the name of his adversary (for they practically all knew one another and were well acquainted) and would say: "Comrade, take and eat this; I give you, not a sword, but bread. Take and drink this; I hold out to you, not a shield, but a cup. Thus, whether you kill me or I you, we shall quit life more comfortably, and the hand that slays will not be feeble and nerveless, whether it be yours that smites me or mine that smites you. For these are the meats of consecration that Vitellius and Vespasian give us while we are yet alive, in order that they may offer us as a sacrifice to the dead slain long since."

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Exploratory Post = The Cup of Power

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:01 pm

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

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.
Very good Joe. The chiasm is clearly there.

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

"Mark's" (author) Connection of "Elders" With Tradition

Post by JoeWallack » Thu Jun 23, 2016 7:13 am

JW:
  • Theory =
    1) Paul was a major source for GMark
    2) Paul has a primary theme that his source is God and his competition's source is man
"Mark's" conversion of this theology is to show that the Jewish "Elders" are always connected to "tradition" as authority and "Mark's" related contrast is:

Jewish Elders accept tradition (men) as their authority

Verses:

Jewish Elders reject God as their authority
:

Mark

Use (all) of "Elders"

Verse Commentary
7:3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands diligently, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders; The "Jews" accept (hold) the tradition of men
7:5 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? The Jewish teachers teach the tradition of men
8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. Prophecy that the Jews will reject the authority of God (God's word in Jewish Bible is that you will identify authorized Prophet if their prophecy comes true)
11:27 And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders;
11:28 and they said unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? or who gave thee this authority to do these things?
Jewish recognition that Jesus is doing what an authorized Prophet does
14:43 And straightway, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. The "Jews" recognize/know that Jesus is an authorized prophet based on God as an authority. Because their authority is the tradition of men they have already decided to reject Jesus before they hear him. Thus it is the Jewish tradition of men that ironically causes them to reject the authority (word) of God. In the culminating physical rejection of Jesus here "Elders" is invoked the obligatory three times.
14:53 And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and there come together with him all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes. -
15:1 And straightway in the morning the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council, held a consultation, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him up to Pilate. -

I think it's also safe to say that this is an intentional anachronism. The author's observation of Jews rejecting the promotion of Jesus in the author's time because of a supposed holding of tradition.


Joseph

Star Of David Trek

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 » Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:22 am

JW:
Mark's Story of Jesus by Werner Kelber

Kelber argues (well) that GMark is largely sophisticated literary contrivance and that a primary theme of "Mark" (author) was to discredit the Disciples. One of the related narrative blocks that Kelber sees is 8:22 to 10:52 which Kelber describes as "The Way" to Jerusalem. The primary purpose of this section per Kelber is to make the Disciples "see" (understand/accept) the supposed necessity of Jesus suffering.

Kelber describes two healing of blindness stories in this section, one at the beginning and one at the end:

8
21 And he said unto them, Do ye not yet understand?
  • 22 And they come unto Bethsaida. And they bring to him a blind man, and beseech him to touch him.

    23 And he took hold of the blind man by the hand, and brought him out of the village; and when he had spit on his eyes, and laid his hands upon him, he asked him, Seest thou aught?

    24 And he looked up, and said, I see men; for I behold [them] as trees, walking.

    25 Then again he laid his hands upon his eyes; and he looked stedfastly, and was restored, and saw all things clearly.

    26 And he sent him away to his home, saying, Do not even enter into the village.
27 And Jesus went forth, and his disciples, into the villages of Caesarea Philippi: and on the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Who do men say that I am?
Note that the blind healing story is framed by questions to the Disciples about Jesus.

10
46 And they come to Jericho: and as he went out from Jericho, with his disciples and a great multitude, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the way side.

47 And when he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me.

48 And many rebuked him, that he should hold his peace: but he cried out the more a great deal, Thou son of David, have mercy on me.

49 And Jesus stood still, and said, Call ye him. And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be of good cheer: rise, he calleth thee.

50 And he, casting away his garment, sprang up, and came to Jesus.

51 And Jesus answered him, and said, What wilt thou that I should do unto thee? And the blind man said unto him, Rabboni, that I may receive my sight.

52 And Jesus said unto him, Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole. And straightway he received his sight, and followed him in the way.
Per Kelber the successful healing of the blindness of non-Disciples at the start and end of the Section is intended to help demonstrate the unsuccessful healing of the Disciples' spiritual blindness in between.

Note the apparent contrast then in the manner of following. The Disciples are physically following to Jerusalem but not spiritually following. Those healed of blindness are spiritually following but presumably not physically following (since we hear no more about them).

As always, what I find ReMarkable here is that even though in popular culture the supposed healing of the blind is thought to be one of, if not the most famous types of Jesus' healings, the above are the only two mentions of a blind person in GMark. The carefully controlled invokations of "blind" in GMark help emphasize the literary contrivance and related point.

GMatthew expands the use of "blind" to general teachings but this just dilutes the use as a criticism of the Disciples:

"Matthew", Ya Just Don't Get It


Joseph

The Israeli/Arab Conflict - Who is Easier to Demonize as Naziish?

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

International Treasure

Post by JoeWallack » Sat Jul 02, 2016 8:51 am

JW:
"Mark's" (author) use of "hands":

Mark

Verse Healing Ministry Teaching Ministry Passion Ministry Commentary
1:31 and he came and took her by the hand, and raised her up; and the fever left her, and she ministered unto them. Healing - - Jesus is with the Jew. Foreshadows resurrection.
1:41 And being moved with compassion, he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou made clean. Healing - - Anger is more likely original than "compassion". This would frame Jesus' Galilean Ministry with Jesus' passion of anger at the beginning and end of it. Jesus heals the Jew by request.
3:1 And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there who had his hand withered.
2 And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him.
3 And he saith unto the man that had his hand withered, Stand forth.
4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful on the sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? to save a life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth; and his hand was restored.
Healing Teaching - Jesus provides teaching regarding his healing
5:23 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.
...
41 And taking the child by the hand, he saith unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise.
Healing - - Foreshadows resurrection explicitly with rising from death
6:2 And when the sabbath was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, Whence hath this man these things? and, What is the wisdom that is given unto this man, and [what mean] such mighty works wrought by his hands?
...
5 And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.
Healing - - Jewish resistance to Jesus' healing
7:2 and had seen that some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled, that is, unwashen, hands.
3 For the Pharisees, and 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 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?
- Teaching - Contrast between the Jews physical use of hands and Jesus' spiritual use of "hands".
7:32 And they bring unto him one that was deaf, and had an impediment in his speech; and they beseech him to lay his hand upon him. Healing - - After conflict with Jews, healing of Gentile (think Paul).
8:23 And he took hold of the blind man by the hand, and brought him out of the village; and when he had spit on his eyes, and laid his hands upon him, he asked him, Seest thou aught?
24 And he looked up, and said, I see men; for I behold [them] as trees, walking.
25 Then again he laid his hands upon his eyes; and he looked stedfastly, and was restored, and saw all things clearly.
Healing - - Healing of blind man (for his Disciples to see)
9:27 But Jesus took him by the hand, and raised him up; and he arose. Healing - - Foreshadows resurrection explicitly with rising from death
9:31 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and when he is killed, after three days he shall rise again. - Teaching - Prediction of Passion
9:43 And if thy hand cause thee to stumble, cut it off: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than having thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire. - Teaching - Teaching regarding Passion
10:16 And he took them in his arms, and blessed them, laying his hands upon them. Healing - - Spiritual healing in preparation for Passion
14:41 And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough; the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. - - Passion Observation of contrast. Disciples are asleep and will fall. Jesus is awake and will rise.
14:46 And they laid hands on him, and took him. - - Passion The Passion has been transferred from Jesus to the Jews. Where Jesus was passionate and the Jews were silent in the Teaching & Healing Ministry, now Jesus is silent and the Jews are passionate in the Passion Ministry.

Note "Mark's" carefully controlled usage of "hands" to help identify and develop the distinct stages of the narrative:
  • Healing Ministry

    Teaching Ministry

    Passion Ministry
In the process "hands" performs a range of meanings, literal and figurative. At the same time "hands" is never used in a casual non-thematic sense such as:
  • "Hey, can you hand me a camel cigarette?"

    "Jesus, looked at his hand, three Kings (all hearts) and two jokers."

    "Jesus (played by Nicholaus Cage) put his hands on the handle Bars and said, "That's praise from on High!"

Joseph

The Strange Chapter Of Dr. Jewkyll And Mr. Hymn - Day 2

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 Jul 03, 2016 5:42 am

JW:
7:3

Strong'sTransliteration Greek English Morphology
3588 [e] hoi οἱ - Art-NMP
1063 [e] gar γὰρ indeed Conj
5330 [e] PharisaioiΦαρισαῖοι [the] Pharisees N-NMP
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
3956 [e] pantes πάντες all Adj-NMP
3588 [e] hoi οἱ the Art-NMP
2453 [e] Ioudaioi Ἰουδαῖοι Jews, Adj-NMP
1437 [e] ean ἐὰν if Conj
3361 [e] μὴ not Adv
4435 [e] pygmē πυγμῇ carefully N-DFS
3538 [e] nipsōntai νίψωνται they wash V-ASM-3P
3588 [e] tas τὰς the Art-AFP
5495 [e] cheiras χεῖρας hands, N-AFP
3756 [e] ouk οὐκ not Adv
2068 [e] esthiousin ἐσθίουσιν, eat, V-PIA-3P
2902 [e] kratountes κρατοῦντες holding V-PPA-NMP
3588 [e] tēn τὴν the Art-AFS
3862 [e] paradosin παράδοσιν tradition N-AFS
3588 [e] tōn τῶν of the Art-GMP
4245 [e] presbyterōn πρεσβυτέρων, elders; Adj-GMP

JW:
Many interesting issues here but starting with the bolded offending word:

4435 [e] pygmē πυγμῇ carefully N-DFS

What is the proper translation? The word normally means "fist". How do you wash hands with the fist? In order to avoid using a translation of fist Christian translations try to use everything else:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ;NRSV;KJ21

New International Version (NIV) American Standard Version (ASV) New American Standard Bible (NASB) New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
ceremonial diligently carefully thoroughly oft

The difference in translations suggests that the translators are refusing to use what the word normally means.

Textual Criticsim, http://www.willker.de/wie/TCG/TC-Mark.pdf, while showing the offending word as likely original, likewise shows significant textual variation with significant competing candidates.

When this was looked at at ye olde FRDB it was noted that there was a usage (one) of the offending word describing Persian military attire that seemed to refer to the wrists (this is included in Willker's textual criticism discussion). I remember spin opining that he/she/they/it thought that this usage supported avoiding a translation of "fist" here.

Regarding Internal evidence haven't we seen many times now that "Mark" (author) often deliberately uses a related but inferior word in order to make a non-literal point? In this section of GMark the basic lesson is not only that the emphasis on "cleaning" should be on the inside but not the outside, but that cleaning the outside can actually be an obstruction to cleaning on the inside because just cleaning on the outside makes you think you are clean when you really are not. What better illustration (so to speak) could "Mark" give here than claiming "The Jews" have a tradition, not a commandment, that washing their hands with their fists makes their hands clean, when washing with the fists would make the outside of the hands clean but not the inside.

What say you Ben, KK, spin?


Joseph

The Strange Chapter Of Dr. Jewkyll And Mr. Hymn - Day 2

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 Jul 03, 2016 6:29 am

JoeWallack wrote:Regarding Internal evidence haven't we seen many times now that "Mark" (author) often deliberately uses a related but inferior word in order to make a non-literal point? In this section of GMark the basic lesson is not only that the emphasis on "cleaning" should be on the inside but not the outside, but that cleaning the outside can actually be an obstruction to cleaning on the inside because just cleaning on the outside makes you think you are clean when you really are not. What better illustration (so to speak) could "Mark" give here than claiming "The Jews" have a tradition, not a commandment, that washing their hands with their fists makes their hands clean, when washing with the fists would make the outside of the hands clean but not the inside.

What say you Ben, KK, spin?
I actually really like your inside/outside idea. Still thinking about it, but the commentaries, while giving the obligatory rundown of suggestions (cupping water, forming one hand around the other in a fistlike manner, washing up to the wrist, and a couple of others), all seem to stamp this word with a huge question mark. I like your suggestion better than any of the options I have seen therein.

As you noted, there are textual variants. Here is LaParola:

πυγμῇ] A B (D πυκμῇ) E F G H K L X Θ Π Σ 0131 0274 f1 f13 28 33 157 180 205 565 (579) 597 700 892 1006 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1243 1253 1292 1342 1344 1365 1424 1505 1546 1646 2148 2174 Byz Lect itc itff2 iti itq itr1 syrh(mg) arm geo slav Origen Epiphanius ς WH NR CEI ND Riv (TILC) Nv NM
πυκνά] ‭א W (itb subinde) (itf itl vg crebro) syrp syrh copbo goth arm (eth) Diatessarona Dio
πυκνὰ πυγμῇ] itaur
momento] ita
primo] itd
omit] Δ (2427 omit verses 3-4) syrs copsa Diatessaronp

The variants seem to me to best be explained as ancient scribes not knowing what to make of πυγμῇ, either.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

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

ThAlma and BetuLouise

Post by JoeWallack » Sun Jul 31, 2016 7:52 am

JW:
In The Beginning

Mark 1:1

Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
746 [e] ArchēἈρχὴ [The] beginning N-NFS
3588 [e] tou τοῦ of the Art-GNS
2098 [e] euangeliou εὐαγγελίου gospel N-GNS
2424 [e] Iēsou Ἰησοῦ of Jesus N-GMS
5547 [e] Christou Χριστοῦ Christ, N-GMS
5207 [e] Huiou Υἱοῦ Son N-GMS
2316 [e] Theou Θεοῦ. of God. N-GMS

JW:
Many unorthodox items here, even by Markan standards, but starting at the beginning... Note that "Mark" (author) begins his Gospel with the word "begin". Usage of the Greek definite article does not have rules as strict as the English definite article but I have faith that starting with an anarthrous noun here would be considered unorthodox (Ben?). So is this style or slop? It seems like quite a coincidence to me to that the word that begins the Gospel is "begin". [sarcasm]And of course GMark does not also have an unorthodox ending[/sarcasm].

I find it interesting that there is something of a parallel in Hosea:

Hosea 1:2

Str Translit HebrewEnglish Morph
8462 [e] tə-ḥil-laṯ תְּחִלַּ֥ת The beginning Noun

Note that the offending Hebrew word "תְּחִלַּ֥ת" (beginning) also lacks the definite article. Hebrew definite article usage is more like the English than the Greek. I also note with great interest (but less evidence) that Hosea here has a primary context that is reMarkably similar to a primary theme of GMark. A figurative relationship between God and Israel with a non-traditional father. So too does GMark show a figurative relationship between God and Jesus with a non-traditional father.

Regarding this thematic development in Christianity, it looks to me like it would go something like this:

Paul
  • 1. No mention of Jesus' traditional father.
    2. Says Jesus was born of a woman
    3. Emphasizes that Jesus was the son of God
Conclusion at the time = Jesus' traditional father was either unknown or unimportant.

"Mark"
  • 1. No mention of Jesus' traditional father.
    2. Says Jesus had a mother.
    3. Emphasizes that Jesus was the son of God

Conclusion at the time = Jesus' traditional father was either unknown or unimportant.

Original GMatthew (no virgin birth)
  • 1. Explicit mention of Jesus' traditional father.
    2. Says Jesus had a mother.
    3. Emphasizes that Jesus was the son of God

Conclusion at the time = While GMark is confirmation of Paul, GMatthew is contradiction. Implication that Jesus did not have a traditional father is undone by Explicits that he did.

Edited GMatthew (virgin birth)
  • 1. Explanation of why Jesus' lacked traditional father.
    2. Says Jesus had a mother.
    3. Emphasizes that Jesus was the son of God

Conclusion at the time = Reconciliation with Paul/GMark. Agreement that Jesus did not have a traditional father but negation of possible reason that Jesus was a Marmzer.


Joseph

The Strange Chapter Of Dr. Jewkyll And Mr. Hymn - Day 2

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: ThAlma and BetuLouise

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Sun Jul 31, 2016 11:22 am

JoeWallack wrote:Many unorthodox items here, even by Markan standards, but starting at the beginning... Note that "Mark" (author) begins his Gospel with the word "begin". ... So is this style or slop? It seems like quite a coincidence to me to that the word that begins the Gospel is "begin". [sarcasm]And of course GMark does not also have an unorthodox ending[/sarcasm].
I like this too.
JoeWallack wrote:Usage of the Greek definite article does not have rules as strict as the English definite article but I have faith that starting with an anarthrous noun here would be considered unorthodox (Ben?).
Matthew followed Mark
Βίβλος γενέσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ υἱοῦ Δαυεὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβραάμ.
book (of) genealogy (of) Jesus Christ, son (of) David, son (of) Abraham


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

Re: ThAlma and BetuLouise

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Aug 03, 2016 5:57 pm

JoeWallack wrote:Note that "Mark" (author) begins his Gospel with the word "begin". Usage of the Greek definite article does not have rules as strict as the English definite article but I have faith that starting with an anarthrous noun here would be considered unorthodox (Ben?). So is this style or slop? It seems like quite a coincidence to me to that the word that begins the Gospel is "begin". [sarcasm]And of course GMark does not also have an unorthodox ending[/sarcasm].
I am honestly not sure, since starting a sentence and starting an entire work may be two very different things. (I have more knowledge of Greek sentences than I do of the specifics of how Greek texts start or finish in their entirety.)

"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ" has been on my radar for some time, however, since it has a feel to it that I am not sure about. It almost comes off as a title, but it is not quite a title. I am also suspicious of the Isaianic quotation right off the bat, as Mark does not major on introducing explicit scriptural references elsewhere in his gospel, so why does John the baptist merit one right at the beginning of the entire piece? I have no answers to these questions as of yet, and they are definitely questions in my mind.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ben C. Smith, Bernard Muller, Charles Wilson, Jax, MrMacSon, Ulan and 84 guests