Time to resurrect my Award winning Thread:
Mark's DiualCritical Marks. Presentation Of Names As Evidence Of Fiction
Thanks Young Wolf
KK points out an interesting presentation of names in a possible source with good parallels to GMark:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1390
[Josephus]Haman, the son of Hamedatha, by birth an hAmalekite
Likewise GMark:
From Wallack's criteria for Figurative use of names:
The offending portion:2) Demonstrated style of the author.
A common style of "Mark" is to repeat names, often in a short space.
Mark 6
I can picture "Mark" (author) swinging his grogger every time Herod/Herodiasses are mentioned.14 And king Herod heard [thereof]; for his name had become known: and he said, John the Baptizer is risen from the dead, and therefore do these powers work in him.
15 But others said, It is Elijah. And others said, [It is] a prophet, [even] as one of the prophets.
16 But Herod, when he heard [thereof], said, John, whom I beheaded, he is risen.
17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip`s wife; for he had married her.
18 For John said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother`s wife.
19 And Herodias set herself against him, and desired to kill him; and she could not;
20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe. And when he heard him, he was much perplexed; and he heard him gladly.
21 And when a convenient day was come, that Herod on his birthday made a supper to his lords, and the high captains, and the chief men of Galilee;
22 and when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she pleased Herod and them that sat at meat with him; and the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.
The serious student should know by now that the first place to look for analysis is the Legendary Vorkosigan's:
Mark 6:14-29
The Vorkmeister demonstrates and than some, that while the offending verse is possible, it is implausible (history, not). Of specific interest in this Thread is the extent to which "Mark" invokes the name "Herod" unnecessarily and especially improperly. Such usage will be Marked in red.
Per Josephus it was Herod Antipas the Tetrarch who had John executed. Josephus does sometimes just refer to him as "Herod". Here though "Mark" uses only "Herod" without ever saying "Antipas" or "Tetrarch" thus strengthening the connection to the original Herod the Great (who was King).14 And king Herod heard [thereof]; for his name had become known: and he said, John the Baptizer is risen from the dead, and therefore do these powers work in him.
Per Josephus, who presumably is recording history, Herodias had nothing to do with John's Passion. So why invoke her name? Herodias was married to Herod the Great's son Herod and not Phillip. That would seem to go against "Mark" deliberately repeating "Herod" but can be explained by "Mark" starting off here with "Herod" instead of "Herod Antipas" and not wanting to say Herod married Herod's wife. Hence Herodias hastened to the next in Lyine, Phillip.17 For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip`s wife; for he had married her.
The textual evidence supports "his daughter Herodias", instead of "the daughter of Herodias herself", meaning Herod's daughter:22 and when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced, she pleased Herod and them that sat at meat with him; and the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.
Laparola [Mark 6:22]
Not to mention the grammatical construction could only support "himself" (Herod):θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρῳδιάδος] א B D L Δ 565 pc (arm) WH NA
http://biblehub.com/text/mark/6-22.htm
Strong's | Transliteration | Greek | English | Morphology |
2532 [e] | kai | καὶ | and | Conj |
1525 [e] | eiselthousēs | εἰσελθούσης | having come in | V-APA-GFS |
3588 [e] | tēs | τῆς | the | Art-GFS |
2364 [e] | thygatros | θυγατρὸς | daughter | N-GFS |
846 [e] | autēs | αὐτῆς | of herself | PPro-GF3S |
3588 [e] | tēs | τῆς | - | Art-GFS |
2266 [e] | Hērōdiados | Ἡρῳδιάδος | Herodias, | N-GFS |
2532 [e] | kai | καὶ | and | Conj |
3738 [e] | orchēsamenēs | ὀρχησαμένης | ,having danced, | V-APM-GFS |
700 [e] | ēresen | ἤρεσεν | pleased | V-AIA-3S |
3588 [e] | tō | τῷ | - | Art-DMS |
2264 [e] | Hērōdē | Ἡρῴδῃ | Herod | N-DMS |
Can't help wondering if the context hints at "pleasured" instead of pleased. Maybe it's just me. So Herod, husband of Herodius, has a daughter Herodius. A tightly knit family. Per Josephus, Herodius was Phillip's daughter. Another sacrifice to history.
In summary, "Mark's" overuse of the name "Herod" here:
- 1) Naming Herod Antipas just Herod.
2) Calling this Herod King instead of Tetrarch (connecting to Herod the Great).
3) Bringing his wife Herodius into the story.
4) Saying his daughter was Herodius and bringing her into the story.
Most would agree that all four are historical errors but this post goes beyond that to claiming that "Mark" has made all these errors intentionally in order to invoke the name "Herod". Note especially that all these Herods/Herodiasses are in close proximity in "Mark's" potential source Josephus, "Mark" is just rearranging them with style.
"Mark" parallels with External sources as noted above and the above Herod banquet parallels well Internally with Jesus' banquet where evil and wicked Christian mistranslators have hidden the "reclining" connection. I have faith that our own frauline KK is about to give the sacrifices for the Kingdoms parallel as well. Note that John's sacrifice is a dead body while, as that great 20th century philosopher Joker said, Jesus' is "a live one".
Joseph
ErrancyWiki