Re: Having It Both Ways With Secret Mark
Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2021 5:30 am
Thanks. It sounds like it is suggesting that the early Mark document could have differed from the canon because it's called a Notebook by Roberts.
Investigating the roots of western civilization (ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on...)
https://earlywritings.com/forum/
See The Codexrakovsky wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 3:51 am Andrew, Can you be more specific about Roberts' original theory in 1954?
Was he theorizing that a copy of Mark's canonical Gospel came to Egypt early on, like 50 AD, and then retracted this idea and then retracted the idea of an early date? Or was he theorizing that an early version or edition of Mark's gospel, different from the canonical gospel came out in Egypt in the early period, ie. 1st to 2nd century AD, and then retracted the idea of an early version?
Thanks for the link. In that page, Roberts theorizes that Mark in Rome, per Tradition, wrote down Peter's memories around the time of Peter's death, ie. 63-67 AD, and that this was probably in a more informal tablet/parchment form than what was found in the early 2nd century in Alexandria in a codex form.
That fits with what Smith reportedly said to Robert M. Price. It also fits with the guru persona he was putting on in the life of Jesus BBC series.rakovsky wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:13 pm I just read in Peter Jeffrey's The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled that M. Smith chose for one of his publishers "Da Free John", the leader of a strange sex cult in the Pacific islands accused of sexual exploitation of members. This choice would seem quite strange for such a respectable Columbia University professor writing very serious academic literature. Sometimes things like this are wholly out of step with expectations.
Thanks for reminding me of Morton Smith's veiled admission in Price's article. The evidence like this piles up. I forgot to include it in my list of reasons why it's spurious.gryan wrote: ↑Sat Apr 24, 2021 2:36 pmThat fits with what Smith reportedly said to Robert M. Price. It also fits with the guru persona he was putting on in the life of Jesus BBC series.rakovsky wrote: ↑Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:13 pm I just read in Peter Jeffrey's The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled that M. Smith chose for one of his publishers "Da Free John", the leader of a strange sex cult in the Pacific islands accused of sexual exploitation of members. This choice would seem quite strange for such a respectable Columbia University professor writing very serious academic literature. Sometimes things like this are wholly out of step with expectations.
Do you know what "Da Free John" published from M. Smith's writings?
https://beezone.com/adida/firegospel/th ... ospel.htmlThis is the secret Teaching. Baptism is the secret method. Recently we published a book called The Secret Gospel, by Morton Smith, about a fragment of a letter by Clement of Alexandria, who lived in the second century. It contains a brief description of a secret process of Initiation or Baptism engaged by Jesus with his intimate circle, those who had passed through the initial process of listening, who had been converted and who had shown the evidence of a true response, who were eventually brought to either Jesus or one of his empowered disciples and Baptized spiritually.
Adi Da Samraj was a weirdo all right, but I don't see drooling sex pervert in the words above. Them new agers ...In 1973, Morton Smith, a professor of ancient history at Columbia University, published two books about what he called the “Secret Gospel” of Mark.1 The gospel that he had (by his own report) discovered in the library of a Greek Orthodox monastery in the Judean desert comprised fragmentary passages that were stated to be drawn from a longer (or “mystical”) version of the Gospel of Mark. The gospel passages appeared as quotations in a letter purportedly written by Clement of Alexandria in the second century — a letter (written in Greek) that Smith found in the monastery library in a hand-written copy dating (based on paleographic evidence) from the eighteenth century. Ever since the publication of Smith’s two books on “Secret Mark”, there has been much scholarly controversy over the authenticity of — and the motives behind — Smith’s research.
As of the publication date of this [edition of the] book (early 2011), certain fundamental questions have been answered with a great (or even an absolute) degree of definitiveness — as a result of which there is a strong case for accepting Smith’s original evaluation of the second-century letter as an authentic Clementine document and his evaluation of the quotations contained therein as authentic remnants of a longer version of Mark that is otherwise lost.2
Many years ago, Avatar Adi Da identified “Secret Mark” as a document of particular importance. Its importance lies in its clear suggestion that there was an esoteric (and, literally, secret) form of Spiritual initiation given by Jesus of Galilee to his qualified disciples. Thus, in writing His Rendering of the New Testament gospel story (in Part Six of The Pneumaton, pp. 299–331), Avatar Adi Da chose to include “Secret Mark” among the texts that He drew on.
Clement’s letter was the starting point for section 1, and the quotations from “Secret Mark” were the starting point for section 18, in Adi Da’s writing of Part Six."
Yes, the reasoning could have been like the other New Age gospels that Smith was defending to Roberts as authentic because of their faith, except that Smith was far more skilled, being an expert on Clement of Alex.gryan wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 8:58 am In 1957, Smith became a teacher at Columbia University.
https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/872354
Also, in 1957, "Avatar Adi Da's mysterious impulse to 'Learn Man' brought Him to attend Columbia University, where He received His bachelor's degree in philosophy."
https://www.adidam.org/adi-da/biography-2
I myself became somewhat familiar with Adi Da's teachings by reading a book by one of his students-- David Deida's fictional, but semi-autobiographical book, "Wild Nights" (2005).
For what it is worth, although Smith is oh so much more literate than little me, and although I am not endorsing what he did, I think I get where he was coming from (in psycho-sexual-mystery-religious terms) when he so expertly and convincingly IMHO forged Secret Mark.
Robert M. Price wrote:rakovsky wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:12 amYes, the reasoning could have been like the other New Age gospels that Smith was defending... except that Smith was far more skilled, being an expert on Clement of Alex.gryan wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 8:58 am In 1957, Smith became a teacher at Columbia University.
https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/872354
Also, in 1957, "Avatar Adi Da's mysterious impulse to 'Learn Man' brought Him to attend Columbia University, where He received His bachelor's degree in philosophy."
https://www.adidam.org/adi-da/biography-2
It seems a different mindset than what I'm familiar with. Do you want to wrote a few words more?