I have found the arguments difficult to follow, but at the very least, they usually involve two stories about Peter (!). You cannot establish an argument to relative priority here unless you can argue that putting one of them first doesn't make sense. I have seen no argument that Mark's story first doesn't make sense. I have seen no argument that Mark's story betrays knowledge of the version in Luke or the version in *Ev.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 2:11 amreally? Then how do you explain the particular joy shown by Joe Wallack (a Markan prioritist) in proving the Markan priority by titling relative threads as "the Simontic Problem" etc?Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 2:00 am I never considered relative Petrine-ism as a criterion here.
How much is Mark distant from Peter?
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8617
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8617
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
It's impossible to show that Mark's story here rehabilitates Peter unless you're already assuming *Ev was first.
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
In the case under exam, is your show of precaution/caution really necessary yet?Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 2:15 amI have seen no argument that Mark's story betrays knowledge of the version in Luke or the version in *Ev.
Possibly the closest example that comes in mind is the episode of the request of the first places in Matthew and Mark. It is so lampant as case study of Markan priority over Matthew that I can remember it by going simply to memory:
- Mark has "James and John";
- Matthew has "the mother of James and John".
- *Ev has "Simon Peter";
- Mark has "Simon the Leper".
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8617
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
Gramaglia (a Catholic priest) has "the pharisee" in *Ev against Klinghardt.Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 2:29 am I think you've made your point as well as you can.
You should really have started by establishing the text of *Ev here. The appeal to Klinghardt is not sufficient.
Nicolotti has "the pharisee" too, but in a note he reports the difference between Gramaglia and Klinghardt.
( post scriptum: I feel some negative prejudices against Nicolotti for two reasons: he has a website where he uses the Testimonium Flavianum as evidence of the historical Jesus; what is worse, he is an intime friend of some Christian apologists who have banned me from an Italian forum).
-
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
First, thank you for clarifying the relationship you see between GMark's Simon the Leper and Marcion's Simon Peter.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:50 pm No, my point is that Mark 14:3–9 has "the Leper":
While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head.
4 Some of those present were saying indignantly to one another, “Why this waste of perfume? 5 It could have been sold for more than a year’s wages[a] and the money given to the poor.” And they rebuked her harshly.
6 “Leave her alone,” said Jesus. “Why are you bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 7 The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want. But you will not always have me. 8 She did what she could. She poured perfume on my body beforehand to prepare for my burial. 9 Truly I tell you, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”
...while the similar episode in *Ev has "Simon Peter":
But one of the Pharisees invited him to dine with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house and laid down. And see, a woman, a sinner in the city, stood behind him at his feet. She bathed his feet with her tears and salved him with ointment.
But when Simon Peter saw this, he said to himself, "If this man was a prophet, he would know who and of what kind the woman is who touches him, for she is a sinner". And Jesus answered, saying to Peter, "Simon, I have something to say to you". He said, "Teacher, speak". And he turned to the woman, saying to Simon, "Do you see this woman? She has washed my feet with her tears, she has anointed and kissed me. Therefore, I say to you, her many sins are forgiven, for she has loved much".
But to her he said, "Your sins are forgiven." And those lying at the table with him brgan to say among yhemselves, "Who is this one who even forgives sins?" But he said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace".
Klinghardt claims that Mark has replaced Simon Peter with anonymous people found there, as authors of the criticism read in them telepatically by Jesus. While in *Ev it is Simon Peter who doubts and is ipso facto reproached by Jesus.
I don't see much parallelism between those two Simons. Put aside the mish-mash that the gospels make of what happened among Jesus, some woman who may or may not have been a notorious sinner, or alternatively may have been in Jesus's debt (as in GJohn), and a bottle of oil, or alternatively the woman's tears.
The two Simons play different roles in the two versions of this story-stew you cite.
Staying with Marcion, how could Peter thinking critically reflect badly on Peter? Just as so often in Mark, Marcion portrays a disciple as having a reasonable question while in the presence of Jesus but failing to ask Jesus the question. Unlike so often in Mark, Jesus gives a straightforward responsive answer to the question anyway.
OK, Jesus is a better teacher in Marcion than in Mark, at least here. How is that Peter's fault?
IMO as always.
-
- Posts: 2110
- Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
- Location: Leipzig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
Sorry guys, but that's just another story by our dear fairy tale uncle Klinghardt. "Simon Peter" is nowhere attested for Marcion's pericope. Pure invention.Paul the Uncertain wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 10:40 amFirst, thank you for clarifying the relationship you see between GMark's Simon the Leper and Marcion's Simon Peter.Giuseppe wrote: ↑Sat Jun 03, 2023 7:50 pm...while the similar episode in *Ev has "Simon Peter":
But when Simon Peter saw this, he said to himself, "If this man was a prophet, he would know who and of what kind the woman is who touches him, for she is a sinner".
Klinghardt claims that Mark has replaced Simon Peter with anonymous people found there, as authors of the criticism read in them telepatically by Jesus. While in *Ev it is Simon Peter who doubts and is ipso facto reproached by Jesus.
Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:11 pm Luke 7.36-50, the anointing of Jesus.
36 Ἠρώτα δέ τις αὐτὸν τῶν Φαρισαίων ἵνα φάγῃ μετ’ αὐτοῦ· καὶ εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Φαρισαίου κατεκλίθη. 37 καὶ ἰδοὺ γυνὴ ἥτις ἦν ἐν τῇ πόλει ἁμαρτωλός, καὶ ἐπιγνοῦσα ὅτι κατάκειται ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ Φαρισαίου, κομίσασα ἀλάβαστρον μύρου 38 καὶ στᾶσα ὀπίσω παρὰ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ κλαίουσα, τοῖς δάκρυσιν ἤρξατο βρέχειν [Marcion: ἔβρεξε] τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ, καὶ ταῖς θριξὶν τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτῆς ἐξέμασσεν, καὶ κατεφίλει τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ καὶ ἤλειφεν τῷ μύρῳ. 39 ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ Φαρισαῖος ὁ καλέσας αὐτὸν εἶπεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ λέγων Οὗτος εἰ ἦν προφήτης, ἐγίνωσκεν ἂν τίς καὶ ποταπὴ ἡ γυνὴ ἥτις ἅπτεται αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν. 40 καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν Σίμων, ἔχω σοί τι εἰπεῖν. ὁ δέ Διδάσκαλε, εἰπέ, φησίν. 41 δύο χρεοφειλέται ἦσαν δανιστῇ τινι· ὁ εἷς ὤφειλεν δηνάρια πεντακόσια, ὁ δὲ ἕτερος πεντήκοντα. 42 μὴ ἐχόντων αὐτῶν ἀποδοῦναι ἀμφοτέροις ἐχαρίσατο. τίς οὖν αὐτῶν πλεῖον ἀγαπήσει αὐτόν; 43 ἀποκριθεὶς Σίμων εἶπεν Ὑπολαμβάνω ὅτι ᾧ τὸ πλεῖον ἐχαρίσατο. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ὀρθῶς ἔκρινας. 44 καὶ στραφεὶς πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα τῷ Σίμωνι ἔφη Βλέπεις ταύτην τὴν γυναῖκα; εἰσῆλθόν σου εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, ὕδωρ μοι ἐπὶ πόδας οὐκ ἔδωκας· αὕτη δὲ τοῖς δάκρυσιν ἔβρεξέν μου τοὺς πόδας καὶ ταῖς θριξὶν αὐτῆς ἐξέμαξεν. 45 φίλημά μοι οὐκ ἔδωκας· αὕτη δὲ ἀφ’ ἧς εἰσῆλθον οὐ διέλειπεν καταφιλοῦσά μου τοὺς πόδας. 46 ἐλαίῳ τὴν κεφαλήν μου οὐκ ἤλειψας· αὕτη δὲ μύρῳ ἤλειψεν τοὺς πόδας μου. 47 οὗ χάριν λέγω σοι, ἀφέωνται αἱ ἁμαρτίαι αὐτῆς αἱ πολλαί, ὅτι ἠγάπησεν πολύ· ᾧ δὲ ὀλίγον ἀφίεται, ὀλίγον ἀγαπᾷ. 48 εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῇ Ἀφέωνταί σου αἱ ἁμαρτίαι. 49 καὶ ἤρξαντο οἱ συνανακείμενοι λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς Τίς οὗτός ἐστιν, ὃς καὶ ἁμαρτίας ἀφίησιν; 50 εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα Ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέν σε· πορεύου εἰς εἰρήνην. 36 One of the Pharisees invited him to eat with him. He entered into the Pharisee’s house, and sat at the table. 37 Behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she knew that he was reclining in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. 38 Standing behind at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and she wiped them with the hair of her head, kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. 39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, “This man, if he were a prophet, would have perceived who and what kind of woman this is who touches him, that she is a sinner.” 40 Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to tell you.” He said, “Teacher, say on.” 41 “A certain lender had two debtors. The one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. 42 When they couldn’t pay, he forgave them both. Which of them therefore will love him most?” 43 Simon answered, “He, I suppose, to whom he forgave the most.” He said to him, “You have judged correctly.” 44 Turning to the woman, he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered into your house, and you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head. 45 You gave me no kiss, but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss my feet. 46 You didn’t anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. 47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But one to whom little is forgiven, loves little.” 48 He said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” 49 Those who sat at the table with him began to say to themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?” 50 He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.”
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8617
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
Good point.Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 11:30 am Sorry guys, but that's just another story by our dear fairy tale uncle Klinghardt. "Simon Peter" is nowhere attested for Marcion's pericope. Pure invention.
-
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
- Contact:
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
Thank you for further clarifying Giuseppe's clarification .Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 04, 2023 11:30 am Sorry guys, but that's just another story by our dear fairy tale uncle Klinghardt. "Simon Peter" is nowhere attested for Marcion's pericope. Pure invention.
Re: How much is Mark distant from Peter?
I should check personally in Klinghardt and in Gramaglia, if really, as Kunigunde insists, there is not even the slightest bit of evidence supporting "Simon Peter".
In whiletime I see with pleasure that a lot of people here fears the implications of a presumed presence of "Simon Peter" in *Ev. It is a fact, and the harmonizations by Peter (not Cephas) vanish in comparison with the only possible rational objection (that raised by Kunigunde)
In whiletime I see with pleasure that a lot of people here fears the implications of a presumed presence of "Simon Peter" in *Ev. It is a fact, and the harmonizations by Peter (not Cephas) vanish in comparison with the only possible rational objection (that raised by Kunigunde)