The Messianic Secret

[Paul the Uncertain]

Greetings, Kunigunde

This automatically leads to Jesus teachings in parables.

I do understand that the teaching in parables is more or less part of the definition of "the messianic secret," or some of the data which the hypothesis sense of the term aspires to explain. This post is not "rebuttal."

Another view of what's on the page, however, possibly complementary rather than competitive, is that Jesus, like other teachers, improves with experience. It follows, then, that early in his teaching career (= here in chapter 4) he can only be less than a perfect teacher (else improvement is logically impossible).

In the boxed 4:10-13, he makes a rookie teaching mistake: his students ask him a question, and he berates them for doing so. This will have consequences: at 4:41, after the calming of the storm, with Jesus right there with them, they ask one another "Who is this?" Why don't they ask Jesus? Because Jesus doesn't take student questions gracefully competently?

There will be further instances of the disciples not asking Jesus questions depite his being physically available to them. There's after the transfiguration. There's when he warns them about the leaven of the Pharisees - OK it's funny that they come up with the interpretation that he's saying they need more bread, but then he goes on about seven of this and twelve of that, berates them for not understanding that, and they still don't ask him "What's up with this seven and twelve business?"

It is also interesting, I think, what it is that neither the disciples nor people outside are undertanding in the metaparable (a teaching about teaching) of the sower. I think the overall message is close to transparent: teaching an open population (as opposed to an elite in-group) will have varying degrees of success in reaching individual listeners ranging from outright failure of connection (the seed on the road) to outright success (the seed on good ground), with partial successes of different kinds in between. Yes, that much is consistent with experience. (In American sports metaphor: you win some, you lose some, and some get rained out.)

But Jesus demands more. The partial successes are to be mapped one-to-one with specific failure modes. Rocky soil means initial favorable reception but falling away under oppression or persecution. Among thorns means being distracted by earthly cares.

Really, Jesus? Assuming we or the disciples guess which two of boundlessly many failure modes you might have had in mind, why wouldn't thorns be a peachy metaphor for being overcome by oppression and rocky soil for being distracted?

(Secondarily, this also goes to the chestnut that Mark depicts the disciples as mental defectives. Umm ... Jesus picked 'em and Jesus taught 'em - maybe the teacher bears some responsibility for disappointing educational outcomes. Maybe Mark is not above being candid about that. But that's a different thread.)

[davidlau17]

"If Jesus did all these miracles, then why is this the first time I've heard about him?" Because he did it in secret. "Ahh. That explains it."

[mlinssen]

imperf ind act 3rd sg : ἐδίδασκεν

Again we get misled by the translations, this is a simple imperfect and most certainly not an enduring action.
παρεπορεύοντο likewise is an imperfect.
It is more likely that he taught his disciples that he didn't want anyone to know that they passed Galilea

No, we are not misled by the translation. It is most certainly an ongoing action. It lasts from Mark 8 to Mark 14 and even then the disciples still didn't understand it (I hope not you too, Martijn). And it's just one from many imperfects in GMark.

Wrede also points out that the second passion/resurrection prediction is the only place in GMark where a reason for secrecy is explicitly mentioned.

Mark 9:30-32 The second passion/resurrection prediction

Having gone forth from there, they were passing through Galilee; and He did not want that anyone should know, for He was teaching His disciples. And He was saying to them, “The Son of Man is delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and having been killed, on the third day He will arise.” And they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask Him.

This automatically leads to Jesus teachings in parables. Note the typical Markan intercalation

Mark 4:10-13
And when He was alone, those around Him with the Twelve began asking Him about the parable.
And He was saying to them, “To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but to those who are outside, everything is done in parables, so that, ‘Seeing, they might see and not perceive; and hearing, they might hear and not understand; lest ever they should turn, and they should be forgiven.
And He says to them, “Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand all the parables?

Wrede wrote

In this text, the thought is expressed with all clarity that Jesus shrouds himself in mystery with his teaching to the people. In this tendency, he speaks to the crowd in parables and only in parables, deliberately offering them everything in this form; because it is essential for this form that it is incomprehensible, that the listener can hear something, but in such a way that they cannot grasp the meaning.

4:11 is just a copy of Thomas 62, and 4:12 a repurposing of that in the Judaising context

No, this is not a copy and not even the same thought (logion 62: Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries. What your right hand does, let not your left hand know what it does.)

In GThomas, Jesus speaks only to the initiates, to no one else. Nobody else should hear it (similarly SecretMark).

In GMark, Jesus speaks to everyone, but in parables. Everyone hears it, but those on the outside will not and should not understand.

I suspect that GThomas is dependent on the Pseudo-Clementines here (Homily XIX. 20.1 "Keep the mysteries for me and the sons of my house.")

You don't understand how redaction criticism works. You look at the content first and the context second - and not the other way around.
Mark takes Thomas, combines it with Tanakh, and thus adds to his story

And he does that over and over and over again

And you can see how Matthew fixes the error that Mark makes, as indeed Mark states, like you acknowledge correctly, that IS intentionally tricks then into not understanding so that he can fulfill the prophecy.
Needless to say, such an overt demonstration of self-fulfilling prophecies didn't go well!

So Mark's 4:12 ἵνα (so that) gets turned into Matthew's 13:17 ὅτι (because).
This has nothing to do with Messianic identity; Mark obviously needs to come with an explanation for the parables, and he does so by picking content from Thomas as well as the Tanakh and drawing the audience to his conclusion.
That pattern, fusing Thomas with the Tanakh, is consistent throughout the Synoptics

And entirely absent in Marcion

[Leucius Charinus]

In GThomas, Jesus speaks only to the initiates, to no one else. Nobody else should hear it (similarly SecretMark).

In GMark, Jesus speaks to everyone, but in parables. Everyone hears it, but those on the outside will not and should not understand.

I suspect that GThomas is dependent on the Pseudo-Clementines here (Homily XIX. 20.1 "Keep the mysteries for me and the sons of my house.")

In which century do you place these two texts?

[andrewcriddle]

4:11 is just a copy of Thomas 62, and 4:12 a repurposing of that in the Judaising context

No, this is not a copy and not even the same thought (logion 62: Jesus said: I speak my mysteries to those [who are worthy of my] mysteries. What your right hand does, let not your left hand know what it does.)

In GThomas, Jesus speaks only to the initiates, to no one else. Nobody else should hear it (similarly SecretMark).

In GMark, Jesus speaks to everyone, but in parables. Everyone hears it, but those on the outside will not and should not understand.

I suspect that GThomas is dependent on the Pseudo-Clementines here (Homily XIX. 20.1 "Keep the mysteries for me and the sons of my house.")

Or alternatively they both depend on a common source. Something like this is a widely found apocryphal saying of Jesus.

Andrew Criddle

[mlinssen]

Or alternatively they both depend on a common source. Something like this is a widely found apocryphal saying of Jesus.

Andrew Criddle

You'd need to come up with that source for the remaining 70 logia that are shared between Thomas and the canonicals - of which there are only 35 in Mark, and a handful of vague and faint ones in John at best

Good luck with that