Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by Giuseppe »

I have always thought that the adoptionism is a first timide reaction against Marcion's Jesus descending from above. Kok gives indirectly new evidence supporting my view:

Contrary to some commentators, I do not see any notion of Jesus’s heavenly pre-existence in Mark, while I would maintain that this view is held by Paul (e.g., 1 Corinthians 8:6; 15:47; 2 Corinthians 8:9; Philippians 2:6; cf. Colossians 1:15-17).

....

We can also look at the later reception of Mark’s Christology. During the Patristic period, there were a number of reports about Jewish Christ followers who may have designated themselves as Ebionites or “poor ones.” Certain Ebionites rejected Jesus’s divinity and pre-existence, insisting that Jesus was an ordinary human being who had been exalted due to his exemplary obedience to the Law of Moses, and the belief in Jesus’s virginal conception was debated among them. Although the Patristic writers conclude that the Ebionites were readers of Matthew’s Gospel (or were later thought to be readers of the “Gospel according to the Hebrews”), their Christology seems much closer to Mark’s than to Matthew’s as Mark lacks the virgin birth and narrates how Jesus was elected to be the Messiah at his baptism. In forthcoming publications I will suggest that the heresiologists referred to diverse Jewish Christ followers as Ebionites and some of them could have been reading Mark and others Matthew, so the ones who rejected the virgin birth likely did not accept Matthew’s infancy narrative. Furthermore, many of the Ebionites detested Paul and Paul’s literary legacy. Cerinthus and Carpocrates may have also been readers of Mark’s Gospel when they denied that Jesus was pre-existent

https://jesusmemoirs.wordpress.com/2022 ... ristology/
RParvus
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 8:16 am

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by RParvus »

Giuseppe,

I’m surprised at you. You are thinking like those “on the outside” (Mk. 4:11) for whom Jesus was just a man, son of Mary. Stop thinking like those “standing outside” (Mk. 3:31). Jesus doesn’t have human mother, brothers, or sisters. You need to look at Proto-Mark like the Simonian insider riddle it was intended to be and you will figure out Jesus’ secret identity. And once you figure that out, you will know what those on the inside know about the pre-existence of the sower named “Hear!” (Mk. 4:3). The cryptic Markan “son of man” sayings can help you by pointing you in the right direction: “How is it that the scriptures say of the son of man that he is to endure great suffering and be treated with contempt?” (Mk. 9:12). Find that scripture about that mysterious son of man and you will be well on your way to insider status.
schillingklaus
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by schillingklaus »

Seeing Mark as Pauline is an error of those who believe in Markkan Prioritism and Pauline Authenticism. Others know that both the epistles and the gospels are late piecemeal, and their relative connections are toop abstruse to fit into any hilariously simplicistic template.
lclapshaw
Posts: 777
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 10:01 am

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by lclapshaw »

schillingklaus wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 12:57 am Seeing Mark as Pauline is an error of those who believe in Markkan Prioritism and Pauline Authenticism. Others know that both the epistles and the gospels are late piecemeal, and their relative connections are toop abstruse to fit into any hilariously simplicistic template.
Aside from Giuseppe (seemingly a chatbot designed to systematicly post (for vetting?) every retarded theory conceiveable), we have all, at one point or another, posted some sort of thesis to express our ideas on this subject.

To the best of my knowledge you have not done this. Are you even able to? Or is just snipping and toop abstruseness all you are capable of? Show us, if you can, any ability to express your ideas in a holistic, coherent, fashion. At all.

Personally, I doubt that you can.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by Giuseppe »

schillingklaus wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 12:57 am Seeing Mark as Pauline is an error of those who believe in Markkan Prioritism
I agree with this. The only reason to have Markan priority is the presumed paulinism of Mark. Without the latter, there is not more the former.
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by gryan »

Giuseppe wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 11:46 pm I have always thought that the adoptionism is a first timide reaction against Marcion's Jesus descending from above. Kok gives indirectly new evidence supporting my view:

Contrary to some commentators, I do not see any notion of Jesus’s heavenly pre-existence in Mark, while I would maintain that this view is held by Paul (e.g., 1 Corinthians 8:6; 15:47; 2 Corinthians 8:9; Philippians 2:6; cf. Colossians 1:15-17).


https://jesusmemoirs.wordpress.com/2022 ... ristology/
Re: Did Paul Think Jesus Was a Pre-existent Being?

In this excellent Mythvision interview, James Tabor PhD argues Paul did not think that!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctrgn185Ok8
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by Giuseppe »

gryan wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 8:59 am
In this excellent Mythvision interview, James Tabor PhD argues Paul did not think that!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctrgn185Ok8
James Tabor is inventing a Christ for himself, and that interview is not excellent at all.

How does he explain the fact that the ebionites could have read Mark? Were the ebionites total idiots, if they read the gospel inspired by their hated enemy called Paul?
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by Giuseppe »

RParvus wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 12:16 am Giuseppe,

I’m surprised at you. You are thinking like those “on the outside” (Mk. 4:11) for whom Jesus was just a man, son of Mary. Stop thinking like those “standing outside” (Mk. 3:31). Jesus doesn’t have human mother, brothers, or sisters. You need to look at Proto-Mark like the Simonian insider riddle it was intended to be and you will figure out Jesus’ secret identity. And once you figure that out, you will know what those on the inside know about the pre-existence of the sower named “Hear!” (Mk. 4:3). The cryptic Markan “son of man” sayings can help you by pointing you in the right direction: “How is it that the scriptures say of the son of man that he is to endure great suffering and be treated with contempt?” (Mk. 9:12). Find that scripture about that mysterious son of man and you will be well on your way to insider status.
Hi Roger, I have not seen your post.

I know that a good argument has been made for the baptism in Mark being a late addition, but as Klaus Schilling says in the same thread:

A Mk without a baptism is not a Mk.

In addition, Mary and the entire family don't appear in Marcion, where the question "there is outside your family who wants to see you" is a lie designed to tempt Jesus, to make he recognize that he has a human family. Contra factum that in Marcion he has not one.

Mark's genius has been to introduce an entire family standing physically there outside, so transforming the lie in a true proposition. Contra Marcionem.
dbz
Posts: 509
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2021 9:48 am

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by dbz »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 9:14 am
gryan wrote: Wed Dec 07, 2022 8:59 am
In this excellent Mythvision interview, James Tabor PhD argues Paul did not think that!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctrgn185Ok8
James Tabor is inventing a Christ for himself, and that interview is not excellent at all.
dbz wrote: Thu Sep 01, 2022 8:16 am
  • Paul's pedagogy (παιδαγωγία 'paidagogía')
Paul says that Jesus, in obedience (FAITH) to first-god, relinquished the perfection of the heavenly realm and humbled himself.

Therefore, for those with FAITH —the dead do not die per se.
Tabor claims that,
[11:12] ... Paul's big religious question is how is it that a human being flesh and blood born of a woman has been exalted into the highest heaven and become ruler of the cosmos and what is that all about and in other words he has a cosmic view of salvation.... [11:38]
Therefore Paul is more Hebrew than Gnostic!
rgprice
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Basic reason why Mark is not pauline

Post by rgprice »

Err, claims like this cannot possible counter the other abundant evidence in the text. However, I think it could be possible that Mark is build on top of some Pauline Gospel. If it is, however, then Mark retains the exact language and Pauline character of it source but adds new non-Pauline elements to it.

But the Pauline elements of Mark certainly cannot be dismissed.
Post Reply