You Took The Words Right Out Of My Mouth
The purpose of this Thread is to Inventory evidence that "Mark" used Paul as a Source.
- 1) "Mark" is primarily fiction so its sources are primarily not historical.
2) "Mark" has significant sources other than his imagination.
3) "Mark's" literary Intent was one of the following:
- 1 - Promote Paul's themes
2 - Use Paul's themes to write a really good story (most likely)
3 - Make fun of Paul's themes.
- 1 - Promote Paul's themes
Clark's criteria for valid parallels
Neal discusses criteria for valid parallels:
The initial contribution to this Thread is inspired by Neal's recent discovery of my recent discovery of Joel Watts' secret life as a "Mythicist":1. Similarity in content
Too vague to stand on its own as a criterion of authorial intention for passages to be read in parallel. May complement other similarities.
2. Similarity in language
Lexical repetitions or synonyms. Rare words are more likely to be significant. Consider synonyms, too. Are compound forms forms apparently used as intentional parallels to their original forms?
3. Literary form
May not stand on its own but can complement other similarities. Healings of paralytics by Peter (Acts 3:1-10) and Paul (14:8-10) share a common literary form as both contain information about the place, action of the man, word of healing, gesture of healing, immediate occurrence of healing, demonstration of healing, and effect on the crowd (from Ludemann, Early Christianity ( via: Amazon UK ), 53).
Sometimes better to speak of distinct literary motifs in common: example, the double visions in each of the conversions of Saul (9:1-19) and Peter (10:1-48).
The more extensive a sequence is the stronger it is as an indicator of intentional parallelism. Sequences may not always be in the same strict order, however.
Larger parallel structures, even though not always perfectly matched, are another strong indication of an intent to create a double pattern. Examples: Talbert's 32 parallels of content and sequence between the Gospel of Luke and Acts; between Acts 1-12 and Acts 13-28. The parallel structures suggest an intention to highlight a theme of continuity between Jesus and his disciples, and between the apostles and Paul.
Another complementary criterion that carries weight when in conjunction with other criteria. Perhaps also an essential criterion.
Also note: Disruption of the text
If the flow of the text is disrupted, or if a pericope is awkward internally, where a parallel appears, this is a strong indicator that the parallel was an important feature in the author's mind.
Joel Watts Acclaims Thomas Brodie a Scholarly "Giant" and His Work "A Masterpiece"
and according to the apparently Broadie standards of McGwrath as to what qualifies as a "Mythicist", portraying large chunks of Gospel narrative as large chunks of a source(s) that is not history, makes you a largely (SH, look out!) "Mythicist". Regarding the current relationship of McGwrath to Watts, last I heard McGwrath's attitude was still pretty far from okay.
So in an irony that the author of "Mark" would really appreciate, Godfree and Watts are now on the same side of the HJ/AJ/MJ issue. Me, Godfree, Bob Dole and the American public know it. Watts does not.
Not as important is that Watts' Mimetic Criticism and the Gospel of Mark ( via: Amazon UK ) has provided the Bridge for me to answer a question which has long eluded Christian Bible scholarship, Who was that Marked Young Man? While Christian guesses have contributed nothing to scholarship they have made significant contributions to comedy. Bauckham concludes that because the identity of the young man is unknown the identity of the young man is known.
The key to finding something lost is to start looking for it in the "right" places:
|The Jewish Bible||Paul||Markan Failure||Markan Success||Commentary|
|2 Kings 2:13 "He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, and stood by the bank of the Jordan."||Galatians 3:27 "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ."||14:51 "And a certain young man followed with him, having a linen cloth cast about him, over [his] naked [body]: and they lay hold on him; but he left the linen cloth, and fled naked. "||16:5 "And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, arrayed in a white robe; and they were amazed. "||Per Markan Failure the Young Man loses the garment of Christ, the linen, which the sacrificed Christ was wearing, by abandoning Christ. Per Markan Success, the Young Man gains the garment of Christ, the white robe, which the transformed Christ was wearing, by proclaiming the resurrected Christ|
So let the Reader understand (Yahwan). Of course my greatest wish here is that I could charge you guys for this but a distant second is that we could all persuade The Legendary Vorkosigan to resurrect his "Mark" sight so he could add swell stuff like this.
Regarding source in general and specifically here, CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) has traditionally assumed that there is a historical source behind Markan pericopes and Paul was not a source. Contra CBS though I point out (again) that there is no known extant source for the Jesus narrative before "Mark" but there is a significant Christian author before, Paul. CBS is starting to accept that "Mark" is not a simple narrative but has style. The next step is to demonstrate the quality parallels between Paul and "Mark" and keep repeating that "Mark" is exponentially more likely to have a source which has extant evidence for existence than a source which has none.