OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Source

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

JoeWallack wrote:We have good parallels here between the ending of GMark and the beginning of Paul:
This reminds me that according to the Muratorian fragment 1 Corinthians was placed at the beginning of Paul's letters.
Ulan
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Ulan »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
JoeWallack wrote:We have good parallels here between the ending of GMark and the beginning of Paul:
This reminds me that according to the Muratorian fragment 1 Corinthians was placed at the beginning of Paul's letters.
Which makes sense, as 1 Cor contains what I would call "Paul's gospel".
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
We've been saying for years here that Paul was likely a major source for GMark and it looks like CBS (Christian Bible Scholarship) is finally taking note. In an irony than that the author of GMark would really appreciate, CBS should be doing more reading (of this amateur Forum) and less writing (in professional Forums).

Romans 1
1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called [to be] an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

2 which he promised afore through his prophets in the holy scriptures,

3 concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh,

4 who was declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; [even] Jesus Christ our Lord,

5 through whom we received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all the nations, for his name`s sake;
Note the major assertions here:
  • 1) Paul's method for determining authority is Revelation.

    2) Paul's authority is (dead) Jesus/God.

    3) Paul's source for his (dead) Jesus promotion is...himself.

    4) Paul's reference guide for his source is The Jewish Bible.
Consistent with the above is that in Paul's writings, the supposed evidence to support Paul's conclusions is whatever Paul says it is. It may be a proper quote in context from The Jewish Bible or it may be edited slightly or significantly or at an extreme, it may even have the opposite meaning from the context of The Jewish Bible.

Normally one starts with the evidence and uses it to form a conclusion. In the above, Paul does the opposite. He starts with his conclusions and than adjusts the evidence to support his conclusions. As opposed to Apologists though, such as Steven Avery, Paul makes no Apology. He explicitly and repeatedly tells us that he starts with his Revelations and conclusions and than forms his evidence. He owns it. His promotion of Jesus is based on Faith and not evidence. Evidence is the enemy of Faith. If you believe based on evidence or even are trying to believe based on evidence than you are not believing based on Faith. This is the primary theme of GMark. Note that the unnamed immediately have positive results because they have Faith while the Disciples who are constantly looking for and receiving evidence have negative results because they lack Faith. Hence The Ending of GMark where the Disciples never believe the only important thing they were supposed to believe, that Jesus was supposedly resurrected, because they never had Faith. Ironically, due to a lack of Faith, Apologists such as Avery and Snapp, have to apologize about an obviously forged ending(s). 16:8 though is just where Paul/"Mark" (author) wanted it. You believe in the resurrection because of Faith in Paul/"Mark" and not because there was evidence of historical witness to it. Boom!

GMark's presentation of supposed evidence for Jesus in The Jewish Bible follows Paul. Excerpts from The Jewish Bible supposedly predicting Jesus are presented:
  • 1) In a misleading manner

    2) By misquotes

    3) Out of context
As evidenced from the start in GMark:

Mark 1:3
Pro Error #1 = Misleading quote of Jewish Bible

Summary of Error

Mark 1:3 in connection with the surrounding verses implies that Jesus is the one being referred to in the prophecy of this part of "Mark". The related prophecy from The Jewish Bible refers to God. The Hebrew uses two different words to refer to God here, the English "God" and "Lord". The Hebrew word for "Lord" is ambiguous as to an English meaning of "God" but the Hebrew word used here for "God" is unambiguous. Therefore, both Hebrew words in the context of the Hebrew prophecy refer to the English "God". Mark 1:3 only quotes the Hebrew "Lord" word to avoid the unambiguous meaning of "God" from The Jewish Bible here.
Pro Error #2 = Misquote of Jewish Bible

Summary of Error

Mark 1:3 presents a supposed quote from Isaiah 40:3. In Isaiah 40:3 though the referred to location, wilderness/desert, is part of the prophecy spoken by the prophet. In Mark 1:3 the wilderness refers to the location of the prophet.
Pro Error #3 = Presentation of quote from Jewish Bible out of context

Summary of Error

Mark 1:3, supposedly quoting from Isaiah 40:3, presents Isaiah as referring to a prophet giving a prophecy in the wilderness and giving instructions to make a path for God. Isaiah 40:3 though has a historical context of the Babylonian Exile and return to Israel. In Isaiah, Isaiah is the prophet and the "wilderness" is the journey between Babylon and Israel. The "path for God" is the path for God's people (Israel).

Joseph

ErrancyWiki
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

1) Paul, Mark, John and the human Jesus

Philippians 2:5-8
Mark 14:70-71
Mark 15:39
John 19:5
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man (ἄνθρωπος), he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
70 ... And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto.
71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man (ἄνθρωπον) of whom ye speak.
39 And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this (οὗτος) man (ἄνθρωπος) was the Son of God. 5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! (ἄνθρωπος)

Note that the markan the use of “οὗτος“ (houtos – this) indicate, that the stressed term in Mark 15:39 is not “Son of God”, but “man”. John understood this. Mark avoids first to describe Jesus as a human being, especially in Mark 4:41, where one would expect the word “man” and many translations add it automatically.

2) “οὗτος“ (houtos – this) in Mark

Mark used the word only in direct speech or in quotations of the scriptures (all other evangelists also in the narration of the story with the voice of the narrator). No place in the gospel of Mark, in which the word „οὗτος” does not display a special emphasis. Mark used the word „οὗτος” never accidentally or thoughtlessly, but always carefully considered and deliberately.

2:7 Why does this (οὗτος) man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?
3:35 For whoever does the will of God, he (οὗτος) is my brother and sister and mother.
4:41 Who then is this (οὗτος), that even the wind and the sea obey him?
6:3 Is not this (οὗτος) the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James
6:16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, “John, whom I beheaded, he (οὗτος) has been raised.”
7:6 This (οὗτος) people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
9:7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This (οὗτος) is my beloved Son ...
12:7 But those tenants said to one another, ‘This (οὗτος) is the heir. Come, let us kill him
12:10 The stone that the builders rejected this (οὗτος) has become the cornerstone
13:13 And you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one (οὗτος) who endures to the end will be saved
14:69 And the servant girl saw him and began again to say to the bystanders, “This (οὗτος) man is one of them.”
15:39 And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he8 breathed his last, he said, “Truly this (οὗτος) man was the Son of God!
User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Blood »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Note that the markan the use of “οὗτος“ (houtos – this) indicate, that the stressed term in Mark 15:39 is not “Son of God”, but “man”. John understood this. Mark avoids first to describe Jesus as a human being, especially in Mark 4:41, where one would expect the word “man” and many translations add it automatically.
Great observation.
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: The Source of The Messianic Secret - Revealed

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

JoeWallack wrote:Mark 8
...
32 And he spake the saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.
Mark 8:32a
καὶ παρρησίᾳ τὸν λόγον ἐλάλει
[wiki][/wiki] Parrhesia
Foucault (1983) sums up the Ancient Greek concept of parrhesia as such:
...
To summarize the foregoing, parrhesia is a kind of verbal activity where the speaker has a specific relation to truth through frankness, a certain relationship to his own life through danger, a certain type of relation to himself or other people through criticism (self-criticism or criticism of other people), and a specific relation to moral law through freedom and duty. More precisely, parrhesia is a verbal activity in which a speaker expresses his personal relationship to truth, and risks his life because he recognizes truth-telling as a duty to improve or help other people (as well as himself). In parrhesia, the speaker uses his freedom and chooses frankness instead of persuasion, truth instead of falsehood or silence, the risk of death instead of life and security, criticism instead of flattery, and moral duty instead of self-interest and moral apathy.
Both Matthew and Luke rejected the Parrhesia. It might be interesting to see the use of Parrhesia by John and the author of Acts :mrgreen:
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Ian J. Elmer "Robbing Paul to Pay Peter: The Papias Notice on Mark" in "Paul and Mark: Comparative Essays Part I Two Authors at the Beginnings of Christianity"
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Clare K. Rothschild, "Sovereign debt crisis: Faithlessness of Eyewitnesses in the Gospels of Mark and Paul"
a nice summary that Mark is a pauline gospel
can downloaded here

one of the interesting details
3. Son of Man Prediction Sayings

The three Son of Man predictions are a very important element of the Gospel of Mark. With these predictions, the author emphasizes that Jesus knows his fate. Does Paul ever divulge that Jesus knows his fate? In fact, he does. In the "words of institution" in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul presents Jesus as correctly prognosticating his death: "For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when had given thanks, he broke it and said, 'This is my body ..." Like Mark's three suffering Son of Man sayings, Paul presents Jesus as aware that he will die. Contrast the Markan disciples who refute both the veracity and necessity of this teaching - three times!
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:

6:38[per Sinaiticus]

Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
3588 [e] ho - Art-NMS
1161 [e] de δὲ and Conj
3004 [e] legei λέγειhe says V-PIA-3S
846 [e] autois αὐτοῖς to them, PPro-DM3P
4214 [e] Posous Πόσους How many IPro-AMP
2192 [e] echete ἔχετε ⇔ have you V-PIA-2P
740 [e] artous ἄρτους; loaves? N-AMP
5217 [e] hypagete ὑπάγετε go, V-PMA-2P
3708 [e] idete ἴδετε. see. V-AMA-2P
2532 [e] kai καὶ And Conj
2064 [e] elthontes ἐλθόντες having come [back] V-APA-NMP
3004 [e] legousin λέγουσιν they say, V-PIA-3P
4002 [e] Pente Πέντε, Five, Adj-AMP
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1417 [e] dyo δύο two Adj-AMP
2486 [e] ichthyas ἰχθύας. fish. N-AMP

JW:
In the "miracle feeding" stories of GMark, the problem is how to "feed" many with a few/very few/one (think The Parable of the Sower). "Mark" (author) makes clear and than some that:
  • 1) The solution to the problem is Jesus.

    2) The Disciples never understand (understand at the text level, "accept" at the sub-text level) 1).
It's generally accepted that Paul wrote before "Mark". Here is the Pauline parallel:

1 Corinthians 10:17

[b]
Strong's Transliteration Greek EnglishMorphology
3754 [e] hoti ὅτι Because [there is] Conj
1520 [e] heis εἷς one Adj-NMS
740 [e] artos ἄρτος, loaf, N-NMS
1520 [e] hen ἓν one Adj-NNS
4983 [e] sōma σῶμα body, N-NNS
3588 [e] hoi οἱ the Art-NMP
1520 [e] hen ἓν one Adj-NNS
4983 [e] sōma σῶμα body, N-NNS
3588 [e] hoi οἱ the Art-NMP
4183 [e] polloi πολλοί many Adj-NMP
1510 [e] esmen ἐσμεν· we are; V-PIA-1P
3588 [e] hoi οἱ - Art-NMP
1063 [e] gar γὰρ for Conj
3956 [e] pantes πάντες all, Adj-NMP
1537 [e] ek ἐκ of Prep
3588 [e] tou τοῦ the Art-GMS
1520 [e] henos ἑνὸς one Adj-GMS
740 [e] artou ἄρτου loaf, N-GMS
3348 [e] metechomen μετέχομεν. we partake. V-PIA-1P

JW:
Note that GMark in total looks like a prequel to Paul. What happened before Paul that could have been the setting for Paul's writings. GMark gives the Jesus story = what got attention in Jesus' supposed time was his Teaching & Healing Ministry. But the important part of the Jesus' story, his supposed Passion, did not get attention, and no supposed historical witness promoted it. GMark has no prophecy/prediction that anyone will promote Jesus' supposed Passion. This leaves open that Paul is the one to promote Jesus' Passion through revelation, not historical witness. "Mark"/Paul agree that belief based on historical witness is not faith. Belief based on revelation is.

Using the standard criteria for parallels GMark parallels well with Paul above:
  • 1) Theme = Jesus is the solution.

    2) Context = Multitude in the desert setting feeding on one food (Exodus)

    3) Words = Loaf, many, break
The teaching relationship of GMark/Paul is:
  • GMark = Presents the question to the disciples of how many loaves they have. As always "Mark" shows the disciples thinking physically/literally and trying to take a physical inventory, never understanding/refusing to accept the question as spiritual/figurative.

    Paul = Subsequently provides the answer through revelation. The spiritual answer is one loaf, Jesus.


Of course in the current Canon, with multiple Gospels and supposed commentaries the connection here is harder to see. But try to think of when GMark is first written and the only other significant Christian writings are Paul's. The only Gospel is GMark and there are fewer Pauline Epistles. GMark and Paul agree that the historical disciples should be discredited. The connection above is much clearer.

Than comes Marcion, the first identified user of a Gospel, per the orthodox! Marcion appears to have the first Canon consisting of a version of GLuke and the likely authentic Pauline Epistles. Was Marcion's GLuke specifically written to be in a Canon with the Pauline Epistles?


Joseph

ErrancyWiki
outhouse
Posts: 3574
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: OutSourcing Paul-Contract Labor of Love-Paul=Markan Sour

Post by outhouse »

JoeWallack wrote: . But try to think of when GMark is first written and the only other significant Christian writings are Paul's.
Joe this is a bit of either ignorance or idiocy.

Mark was a compilation of traditions oral and written that probably predated pauls communities writings.

Paul himself tells us there were other traditions that were being spread in their time. How could Pauls community combat other traditions and practices unless these multiple practices were already well established.

Then to claim Pauls writing was significant within 15 years of completion, and all that is known, is not any sort of acceptable claim.




We only have a fraction of what once existed, and we only have the popular versions that fit the later agenda.

These book evolved much like biology shows as a bush not a ladder. Its not a FKN ladder where we go Paul then mark then luke/acts and matthew.

There was no center of the movement and in the first century it was wide and diverse and geographically spread out far and wide due to Passover traditions and those who traveled months to get there and return home every year with new mythology/theology.

Was Marcion's GLuke specifically written to be in a Canon with the Pauline Epistles?
No canon existed at that time.
Post Reply