GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:

Description GMark GMatthew GLuke GJohn
First significant action in GMark and parallel verse in other Gospels 1
23 And straightway there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24 saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Nazarene? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him.
26 And the unclean spirit, tearing him and crying with a loud voice, came out of him.
27 And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What is this? a new teaching! with authority he commandeth even the unclean spirits, and they obey him.
28 And the report of him went out straightway everywhere into all the region of Galilee round about.
- 4
33 And in the synagogue there was a man, that had a spirit of an unclean demon; and he cried out with a loud voice,
34 Ah! what have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Nazarene? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
35 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst, he came out of him, having done him no hurt.
36 And amazement came upon all, and they spake together, one with another, saying, What is this word? for with authority and power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out.
37 And there went forth a rumor concerning him into every place of the region round about.
-

Joseph
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 2777
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by mlinssen »

How very ironic
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1499
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by JoeWallack »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNiie_zmSr8

JW:

Description GMark GMatthew GLuke GJohn
First significant Jesus action in GMark and parallel verse in other Gospels 1
23 And straightway there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24 saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Nazarene? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
25 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him.
26 And the unclean spirit, tearing him and crying with a loud voice, came out of him.
27 And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What is this? a new teaching! with authority he commandeth even the unclean spirits, and they obey him.
28 And the report of him went out straightway everywhere into all the region of Galilee round about.
- 4
33 And in the synagogue there was a man, that had a spirit of an unclean demon; and he cried out with a loud voice,
34 Ah! what have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Nazarene? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
35 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst, he came out of him, having done him no hurt.
36 And amazement came upon all, and they spake together, one with another, saying, What is this word? for with authority and power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out.
37 And there went forth a rumor concerning him into every place of the region round about.
-
Last significant Jesus action in GMark and in other Gospels 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken
me?
28:9 And behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and took hold of his feet, and worshipped him. 24:50 And he led them out until [they were] over against Bethany: and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. 21:13 Jesus cometh, and taketh the bread, and giveth them, and the fish likewise.

Joseph

For those who need points sharply explained, note that in GMark, Jesus' first significant action is to exorcise the evil spirt from the man. In Jesus' final (so to speak) action, Jesus has the holy spirit exorcised from him. All other Gospels are close to this stylish balanced contrasting irony. So which is more likely, other Gospels are exorcising the irony from GMark or GMark has added to someone elses?

The New Porphyry
schillingklaus
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by schillingklaus »

This proves once more the falsity and absurdity of Markan Prioritism.

Critical scholars like Jean Magne know that all existing gospels are late reworkings of lost pre-synoptic gospels.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 12071
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by Giuseppe »

Jesus' first significant action is to exorcise the evil spirt
One would say rather that Jesus' first significant action in Mark is his submission to John's baptism: the action is significant since one would expect rather the contrary (John submitted to Jesus, not vice versa).

In addition: isn't the extreme attention to ironical details to a so high scale evidence against Markan priority, rather than pro? Don't the better pictures, buildings, performances require usually more time to be realized than the less refined equivalents? And especially: usually the better efforts come after the first attempts, not before.
rgprice
Posts: 1281
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by rgprice »

I completely agree JW. To me it is just unfathomable that Mark could be the product of re-working an existing narrative.

I still don't think many people really grasp just how significant this is, but what you point out here is just one of really hundreds of examples of these types of aspects of Mark.

In order for Mark to be derivative we have to take the following position:

Some story was written down, in which the narrative was not a Pesher on the destruction of the First Temple, in which the actions of Jesus and John were not patterned on Elijah and Elisha, in which various scenes were not constructed from literary references to the Jewish scriptures, in which the order of scenes was not laid out in symbolic and chiastic patterns, and then someone else was able to come along and take that story and re-work it in such a way that introduced all of these patterns and references, while not changing the fundamental character of the story in any way.

It's like saying that I could have a biography of George Washington and re-write it in such a way as to build in word for word literary parallels to the Old Testament and make the whole biography chiastic, and and fit in numerous literary patterns and inside jokes and have his life look like it was patterned on the life of Moses, AND at the same time, make my version of the biography read essentially like the original!

It's absurd! That can't be done.

It is far more likely that the original story contained all of these patterns and references and that as others copied the story and made derivative works they degraded the patterns and references that were part of the original. You can't take a story written without all of this symbolism and hidden meaning in mind and then introduce all of that to it. It has to be part of the foundation.
schillingklaus
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 11:17 pm

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by schillingklaus »

It is only absurd in the minds of right-wing fundamentalist apologists like Goodacre.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1812
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

rgprice wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 4:46 am It is far more likely that the original story contained all of these patterns and references and that as others copied the story and made derivative works they degraded the patterns and references that were part of the original. You can't take a story written without all of this symbolism and hidden meaning in mind and then introduce all of that to it. It has to be part of the foundation.
Yes, I think so, too. It also seems striking to me that there are several patterns on very different levels: the form and structure of the pericopes, a consistent and recurring use of words, recurring metaphors and motifs (as just demonstrated by Joe), references to the LXX, an enormous narrative speed, a pronounced schematism, small puzzling details, etc. These are all found intertwined in GMark from start to finish.

One can observe how these patterns appear in the other gospels when they contain or are based on Markan material. But in their own material all or at least some of these typical markers are always missing.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1812
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

.
I'll give another example

The man with the withered hand and Caesar's taxes

One would probably not suspect that there is a very close connection between the story of the healing of the man with the withered hand (Mark 3:1ff) and the question of paying taxes to Caesar (Mark 12:13 ff). Digging into the details, however, the connections between the two pericopes of Mark's gospel are evident.

1)
The "Herodians" appear as persons and as a word

- only in these two pericopes (Mark 3:6, 12:13) and
- are mentioned in each pericope together with the Pharisees.
- the opponents both try to lure Jesus into a trap that revolves around a legal issue. (Mark 3:2 And they were watching Him, whether He will heal him on the Sabbaths, in order that they might accuse Him / Mark 12:13 And they send some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Him, that they might catch Him in discourse.)

2)
In both pericopes
- a question is asked which begins with "Is it permitted..." (Ἔξεστιν - Exestin),
- it is an "or" question in each case and
- it contains a kind of repetition.
(Mark 3:4 Is it lawful to do good or evil on the Sabbath, to save life or to kill? / Mark 12:14 Is it lawful to give taxes to Caesar or not? Should we give them or not ? )

3)
In the first pericope a single case is discussed (healing of this man on the Sabbath), but Jesus defends himself with a general legal question ("Is it lawful to do good or to do evil on the Sabbath..."). In the second pericope a general question of law is raised ("Is it lawful to pay taxes..."), but Jesus decides it on an individual case ("Bring me a denarius, that I may see it!... Whose is this image and the inscription ? But they said ... of Caesar.")

4)
In both pericopes, Jesus' opponents focus on "human" law, but in doing so violate the ten commandments. In the first story they decide to kill Jesus, in the second they bring a Roman denarius with the image of the “deified” Caesar into the temple, thus profaning the sanctuary.
rgprice
Posts: 1281
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: GMark's Stylish Balanced & Contrasting Irony as Evidence of Markan Priority

Post by rgprice »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 11:49 am
rgprice wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 4:46 am It is far more likely that the original story contained all of these patterns and references and that as others copied the story and made derivative works they degraded the patterns and references that were part of the original. You can't take a story written without all of this symbolism and hidden meaning in mind and then introduce all of that to it. It has to be part of the foundation.
Yes, I think so, too. It also seems striking to me that there are several patterns on very different levels: the form and structure of the pericopes, a consistent and recurring use of words, recurring metaphors and motifs (as just demonstrated by Joe), references to the LXX, an enormous narrative speed, a pronounced schematism, small puzzling details, etc. These are all found intertwined in GMark from start to finish.

One can observe how these patterns appear in the other gospels when they contain or are based on Markan material. But in their own material all or at least some of these typical markers are always missing.
Exactly and they are often broken up or degraded. There are so many examples. The simple one: The Crucifixion. Only Mark's perfectly uses Psalm 22, all the rest degrade the references in minor or larger ways. More importantly, the Temple Cleansing scene.

Only Mark has it framed with the Fig Tree to make the reference to Hose 9 clear. Everyone else drops it or moves the fig tree around to degrade the reference. Can anyone really propose that the Temple Cleaning scene was not originally based on Hosea 9, but then Mark was able to take the scene that originally had no connection to Hosea 9 and make it perfectly fit? How and why would this be so? How could it be that someone else originated the scene without Hosea 9 in mind, and then Mark was able to tie it to Hosea 9? And he did this dozens of times. And not only was he able to find literary refences that fit the existing scenes, but those literary reference also all have a coherent theme of relating to the destruction of the First Temple.

Yeah, just no...

So as much as people like the idea that Marcion's Gospel was first and it was about some Second God, the evidence just doesn't support it. You can't convince me that the first Gospel was about a Second God and that "Mark" was able to take a story about an alien god and turn it into a pesher on the destruction of the First Temple while retaining all of basically the same scenes. I mean just no way.

All of these other cool theories may be interesting, and I think the idea of Marcionite priority would be very interesting, but Mark is just so intricate a creation that it has to be the first.
Post Reply