Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: the post-resurrection appearance in Galilee

Post by MrMacSon »

Steven Avery wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:44 am
Mark 14:28 (AV)
But after that I am risen,
I will go before you into Galilee.1

Mark 16:7 (AV)
But go your way,
tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee:1
there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.


Since Mark does not write of this appearance, even in the massively supported traditional ending, it is a reasonable understanding that the appearance is available in an existing writing, at the time of the publication of Mark's Gospel.
1 which relates in some way to Mark 1:2,

"as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: “I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way”"

and Malachi 3:1 and 4:5, respectively, -

3:1, Behold, I will send my messenger,


4:5, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: the post-resurrection appearance in Galilee

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Steven Avery wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:44 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:09 pm There are several junctures in the gospel of Mark at which the author/editor seems to presume previous knowledge, on the part of the reader, of significant parts of the overall storyline.
Very fine thread.

Mark 14:28 (AV)
But after that I am risen,
I will go before you into Galilee.

Mark 16:7 (AV)
But go your way,
tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee:
there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.


Since Mark does not write of this appearance, even in the massively supported traditional ending, it is a reasonable understanding that the appearance is available in an existing writing, at the time of the publication of Mark's Gospel. Note: I place the Gospel in the 40s, YMMV.
I agree with this in a way: but the "existing writing," to my mind, was originally a more complete copy of Mark. My preferred view that the ending of Mark was damaged.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Post by Steven Avery »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:09 pm There are several junctures in the gospel of Mark at which the author/editor seems to presume previous knowledge, on the part of the reader, of significant parts of the overall storyline.
Mark 16:9 (AV)
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week,
he appeared first to Mary Magdalene,
out of whom he had cast seven devils.

Luke 8:2 (AV)
And certain women,
which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities,
Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils,


Another one that shows the same type of relationship from the traditional ending and Luke. So now it is becoming a corroborative evidence for the traditional ending! Since you are totally right on the Markan connection to earlier writings.

And the death-knell to Marcan priority. An interesting question, how many of these have been mentioned in earlier "synoptic/priority" writings, of any stripe? Who, where, and what did they say. Please note, I have been mentioning the Galilee one for some years as an evidence for non-Markan priority and the authenticity of the traditional ending.

At any rate, you might include these as a supplement, and leave it to your readers to decide whether they are applicable.
Last edited by Steven Avery on Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

I do not in any way hold to the authenticity of Mark 16.9-20 (= the Longer Ending); and that entire topic honestly bores me at this point, as well.

There is certainly a relationship of some kind between Mark 16.9-20 and our extant gospel of Luke.

I am quite certain that something much like our canonical Mark (without the Longer Ending) predates our canonical Matthew and Luke, but I am also pretty certain that our canonical Mark was not the first gospel narrative.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Post by Secret Alias »

Nous sommes d'accord pour dire que cette estimation est raisonnable.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

seven devils - Mark ending dependent on Luke

Post by Steven Avery »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:09 pm There are several junctures in the gospel of Mark at which the author/editor seems to presume previous knowledge, on the part of the reader, of significant parts of the overall storyline.
Mark 16:9 (AV)
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week,
he appeared first to Mary Magdalene,
out of whom he had cast seven devils.

Luke 8:2 (AV)
And certain women,
which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities,
Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils,


Another one that shows the same type of relationship from the traditional ending and Luke. So now it is becoming a corroborative evidence for the traditional ending! Since you are totally right on the Markan connection to earlier writings.

And the death-knell to Marcan priority. An interesting question, how many of these have been mentioned in earlier "synoptic/priority" writings, of any stripe? Who, where, and what did they say. Please note, I have been mentioning the Galilee one for some years as an evidence for non-Markan priority and the authenticity of the traditional ending.

At any rate, you might include these as a supplement, and leave it to your readers to decide whether they are applicable.
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Post by Steven Avery »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 9:06 amThere is certainly a relationship of some kind between Mark 16.9-20 and our extant gospel of Luke.

I am quite certain that something much like our canonical Mark (without the Longer Ending) predates our canonical Matthew and Luke, but I am also pretty certain that our canonical Mark was not the first gospel narrative.
Yet here the soundest understanding is that Mark with the traditional ending is connected to Luke.

Nicholas Lunn spent a couple of pages on the connection, although from the errant view of Markan priority.

The Original Ending of Mark: A New Case for the Authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 (2014)
By Nicholas P. Lunn
https://books.google.com/books?id=JszwCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA297
Maestroh
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 10:03 am

Re: Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark.

Post by Maestroh »

Just a reminder to the readers here who may not know the lack of education of Steven Avery......

1) he's a KJVOist fundamentalist (which is why he's twisted your words, Mr Smith, and is quoting you elsewhere in his favor - because that's the type of sleaze ball you're dealing with)

2) he can't read Greek, but he's trying to pretend he can draw conclusions as to "whom borrowed what" based on,well, confirmation bias

3) he does this with everybody.

Think Dunning-Krueger and you've got it with this guy.

Thank you. The advice is free, and I enjoy reading your posts.
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: seven devils - Mark ending dependent on Luke

Post by perseusomega9 »

Steven Avery wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 3:07 pmPlease note, I have been mentioning the Galilee one for some years as an evidence for non-Markan priority and the authenticity of the traditional ending.

yeah no, it's an absolutely laughable position, you should feel stupid
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
Steven Avery
Posts: 987
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Presumptions of reader knowledge in Mark - early dating and traditional ending

Post by Steven Avery »

Mark's dependence on Luke - the end of Markan priority - plus support for the traditional ending
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... ding.1308/

This now takes the evidence, and has placed it in the context of early dating of the Gospels, and belief in the full Markan Gospel, including the traditional ending.

Clearly, none of these evidences involve Greek grammar or linguistics, they are historical-chronological analysis. (Apparently Bill Brown did not understand the thread.) With the partial exception of The Second Mary, where Ben has nicely done the heavy lifting showing six possible two-Mary explanations.

And I appreciate Ben opening up this study. I wonder if there has been much of a hint of many of these in any previous writings. Ben mentioned that one was from Gerd Theissen.
Post Reply