The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by ABuddhist »

rgprice wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 4:24 am Or is this part of a tradition that even predates the idea of twelve disciples? Is there some older story in which there were not twelve disciples, but rather it was just Jesus, Mary and Lazarus? Mark introduced the twelve as a product of its use of scriptural references, but prior to Mark there may have been a narrative that didn't have twelve. Now I'm contradicting my own thesis that Mark was the first narrative about Jesus, but I'm just exploring possibilities here.
If there was a narrative without the 12 but with Mary, then I would assume that it involved James and Peter (and perhaps Cephas), due to their prominence in Paul's letters. And I assume that you regard Paul's reference to "the 12" in Paul as a later interpolation.

I recall reading a certain mythicist (whom I cannot recall) suggesting that the multiplicity of Marys in the Gospels associated with key points in Jesus's life - his mother and witnessing his death and resurrection - may have originated as coded references to a hypothetical female mystic named Mary who was the first to "reveal" (or make up) stories about a heavenly Jesus Christ as dying and rising redeemer. Certainly, the pairing of female mystics and male leaders is not unknown to early Christianity - cf., Simon and Helen, and Apelles and Philumena.
rgprice
Posts: 2037
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by rgprice »

ABuddhist wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 6:05 am If there was a narrative without the 12 but with Mary, then I would assume that it involved James and Peter (and perhaps Cephas), due to their prominence in Paul's letters. And I assume that you regard Paul's reference to "the 12" in Paul as a later interpolation.
Certainly a possibility.
I recall reading a certain mythicist (whom I cannot recall) suggesting that the multiplicity of Marys in the Gospels associated with key points in Jesus's life - his mother and witnessing his death and resurrection - may have originated as coded references to a hypothetical female mystic named Mary who was the first to "reveal" (or make up) stories about a heavenly Jesus Christ as dying and rising redeemer. Certainly, the pairing of female mystics and male leaders is not unknown to early Christianity - cf., Simon and Helen, and Apelles and Philumena.
True. Female mystics and prophetesses played important roles in most Mediterranean traditions, which is why it's not at all an unreasonable proposition.

I'm certainly conflicted on the issue of there being any narrative prior to Mark. On the one hand I've long argued that Mark was the first narrative about Jesus, and that may well be true. It is possible that all of these additional narratives about Mary in john came later. But there are just these few clues that seem to indicate that parts of John may actually pre-date Mark.

Its all very difficult to decipher because it seems that essentially all of the Gospels as we have them have gone through multiple revisions and potential harmonizations so fully understanding their relationships to each other id perhaps impossible.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 4:24 am
But you see the point that John 11 looks very odd, like we should already know who Martha, Mary and Lazarus are. The wedding scene and the way the "mother of Jesus" is used in that scene is also very odd. He talks to his "mother" like she is a stranger whom he doesn't know. It looks like a scene in which Jesus is meeting a woman for the first time.

But, why wouldn't the writer of John have used the name Mary for his mother? Why not use it as an opportunity to clarify the two Marys? Why didn't a potential later reviser do it? All very odd.
I have less of a problem with such isolated units appearing in John in disjointed sequence, as if previous explanatory information is missing, but I am being enticed to look at John's sources in intertextual engagement -- with other gospels and the OT and other scriptural interpretations of the day -- as already mentioned. Whoever wrote or redacted John's gospel clearly had no interest in polished narrative flow. There was a very different technique and agenda at work.

In lines with my take you might be interested in a more recent contribution by Keith Yoder, Gathered Into One: Mary and Judas in John 11–13

I myself keep returning to John's special interest in numbers, gematria: Menken, M. J. J. Numerical Literary Techniques in John: The Fourth Evangelist’s Use of Numbers of Words and Syllables. BRILL, 1985. -- There are factors to consider in questions like yours that are beyond anything we are accustomed to in our non-Jewish narratives. Mary/Miriam had a distinctive numerical value in Hebrew and some "contrarians" have even found reason to think that the Gospel of John was originally written in Hebrew.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 1:22 am Shemot Rabbah/Exodus Rabbah is late (early medieval in its present form). I'm unclear how much of the tradition about Miriam is genuinely ancient.

Andrew Criddle
Just returning to this assertion -- I have decided to collate references to places where numerous scholars have pointed out, in contradiction to proposals by Bauckham et al. who argue for unique forms of Christian exegesis, that certain Jewish writings that we find in the Mishnah and Talmudic literature are very likely to go back to the second and even first centuries and they are evidence that the Christian styles of exegesis were part and parcel of the Jewish methods of the day.

There was a time when I dismissed out of hand any attempt to use rabbinic literature to argue a point in the gospels but I have over the years been compelled to change my mind on that score. Indeed, those rabbinic writings in many instances stand as independent sources for some of the disputes and interpretations that go back to the first century. One of the most obvious examples many of us are aware of is the Toledoth Jeshu, certainly no older in surviving manuscript form than the Middle Ages, but Origen is witness to knowledge of at least part of that larger narrative and we can see evident dialogues between that story and scenes in both the canonical and extracanonical gospels. Further, the idea of a suffering messiah through interpretation of Isaiah 53 is hardly explicable as a Jewish response to Christian views so again we have good reason to believe this concept in the rabbinic literature is also very early and not unique to Christianity.

There is a very large body of scholarly work, both articles and book form, that present arguments along the lines I have just outlined. It has taken me some years to read enough to gradually shift me from initial resistance to the idea of turning to some rabbinic literature to interpret the New Testament writings so I don't have on the top of my head an easy list to present here now. But it is something that I will work on and, the gods willing, write up some sort of annotated bibliography.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by Giuseppe »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 9:50 pmExodus Rabbah
I would like to quote Exodus Rabbah 48, 4 because it would emphasize that Joshua was son of Joseph. Where can I find it? Thanks.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:09 am
What is the point of these names? They are never used again in the story. These aren't historical figures. They make no impact on the narrative. They are completely unnecessary. Their function seems to be entirely doctrinal. It seems that the only point of presenting these names is to reinforce a tradition, but the rest of Mark seems to lack such a motive. Mark is not interested in documenting traditions, it is interested in telling a theological story.
I was reminded of our discussion today when I was reading a chapter by Philip S. Alexander in The Ways That Often Parted. He sees some of the stories in the Toledot Yeshu narratives as beginning as smaller units that were created to address this and that point in the Christian accounts of Jesus. These smaller units were later collected and put together in narrative form. In other words, he sees the creation of those Jewish narratives as following a similar process that led to the gospels.

The point of this is that this model would explain why we get units in the gospels that don't seamlessly fit with the larger narrative (except, as you say, at a doctrinal level).

Most gospel scholars speak of oral traditions being responsible for these smaller story units, but I have problems with that explanation for several reasons, one of which is that many of those units are simply too small to be told as satisfactory stories alone. But once we see how many of those units are actually recreations of Old Testament stories (e.g. John the Baptist and Elijah; etc) then I think we are getting closer to a more satisfactory explanation. That's what was behind my other comment somewhere else about reading a catalogue of small units listed by Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho. It looks like he has a scrapbook of such small units, all of which, as he points out, are based on re-interpretations of the Jewish Scriptures.

Whether before or after Justin, it appears that evangelists also had access to such story-units and wove them into their respective narratives.

So I think the better approach to looking for sources for stories like the Lazarus account in the Gospel of John is to find what he is re-adapting from other accounts -- rather than look for earlier narratives. If it belonged to an earlier narrative then we'd expect a bit more explanation, as you say, in the Gospel where we find it. But there is nothing more, no narrative from which it was lifted, I think.

In the case of Lazarus we have John picking up on the parable of Lazarus that we find in Luke, as some scholars have explained. There are all sorts of symbolic meanings other scholars have found in the other motifs -- Bethany, Mary and Martha, weeping, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 3:09 am
3 Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are His sisters not here with us?”

What is the point of these names? They are never used again in the story. These aren't historical figures. They make no impact on the narrative. They are completely unnecessary. Their function seems to be entirely doctrinal.

Me again on this one, elaborating the same theme I've been proposing from the start.

If we think of this section of Mark's narrative in the same way we read about the rabbis discussing their interpretations of odd points in Jewish Scriptures ...

They ask one another, "Why does the Scripture say this? or That? What was the reason?" and then one of the sages gives some "midrashic" reason to explain some odd detail that other readers like us would think is inconsequential.

Now if that was the sort of thinking among the authors of the gospels -- I have been arguing that it was indeed something like that -- then by mentioning names out of the blue in this episode is meant to invite readers to do just what we are doing: ask ourselves, Why these names? The evidence for that proposal is, as you say, that the names appear out of the blue and have no other narrative function.

We can suggest that Mark is drawing on oral tradition, but then we have to ask why the same oral tradition doesn't say a bit more about those names and why we don't find a little more about them in the narrative.

So like a rabbi I ask myself, Why those names? I read the context again: it is about prophets in the family who are not accepted by their kin. Think and consult the Scriptures.....

Mary/Miriam was a prophetess who led the daughters of Israel in prophetic songs. The unit is enclosed, in good ancient style, by Mary and the sisters.

Then we have two couplets in the middle: Jacob and Joseph are listed together. They are both in the Genesis account depicted as prophesying. They are also both rejected by their brethren. Jacob flees Esau, Joseph we know very well.

Then comes the other couplet, Judah and Simeon. Judah (proleptic of the Judas in the same gospel) plans to sell Joseph for money. He is jealous of Joseph the dreamer so tries to sell him off. Simeon closes the list and is accordingly bracketed with Jacob. On his death bed Jacob reminds everyone how Simeon made his name "stink" in the community where he lived. Simeon forced Jacob to leave his camp in shame and humiliation and disgrace.

Simeon in Genesis is coupled with Levi but to add Levi would spoil the pattern and rabbis were not particularly worried about cutting corners like that to make their explanations sound "true".

Now all of the above could well have nothing more secure to justify it than my own imagination. I have no independent evidence to suggest that that that was in the mind of the author.

My point is that it is possible to draw from the Jewish Scriptures explanations that further the doctrinal message of that little pericope. The names listed, along with their bracketing Mary and sisters, remind one -- at least they have the potential to remind one -- of the prophetic tradition of Israel and the disasters that accompanied that tradition.

I think there are other characters in Mark who can be interpreted by a similar process with a similar effect.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by neilgodfrey »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sun Oct 03, 2021 3:57 pm
Mary/Miriam was a prophetess who led the daughters of Israel in prophetic songs. The unit is enclosed, in good ancient style, by Mary and the sisters.
Thus driving home the irony of the people's mocking Jesus as if he "thinks he's some sort of prophet" -- Miriam prophet led the daughters of Israel singing prophecies and praises of the miracles God had performed.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by ABuddhist »

rgprice wrote: Sat Oct 02, 2021 7:26 am I'm certainly conflicted on the issue of there being any narrative prior to Mark.
With all due respect, do not Paul's writings reveal a narrative about Jesus? Certainly, it seems to have lacked many features in gospels, but it had Jesus crucified after being handed over, following which he was resurrected.
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: The family of Jesus across the Gospels (origin of Mary as mother?)

Post by perseusomega9 »

In response (or addendum) to Neil's last few comments above, I'd just like to reiterate Margaret Barker's observations (along with other 'Two Powers' scholars) which go along way to demonstrating the early diversity of views in Judaism at the time.
Post Reply