Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
rgprice
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by rgprice »

@MrMacSon Yeah, I'm aware of Klinghardt's proposals. I agree with a lot of what he says, but I disagree that Marcion's Gospel was the first and that Mark is derived from it. Mark was still first, or rather some form of proto-Mark. I agree also with the notion of a final redactor who created the canonical versions of them all.

I'm quite certain that Mark precedes Marcion. The structure of the scriptural references in Mark and the chiasms aren't something that could have been imposed upon Marcion's narrative, where those structures don't exist. We can explain the relationship between these structures going from Mark to Marcion as a degradation, but we can't explain how scenes without these structures in Marcion could have so thoroughly been converted to have these structures over and over again in Mark. And the scriptural references provide the motivation for the narrative. The whole narrative of Mark is driven by the scriptural references. These references don't exist in Marcion. To imagine that someone could take Marcion's narrative (essentially Luke 3-23) which would have been written without these scriptural references in mind , and then be able to just come up with ways to restructure all of the scenes to precisely align with scriptures is beyond believable.

So Mark had to come before Marcion. What then was the motivation for writing Mark and writing it the way that it was written? Mark is clearly pro-Pauline and against Peter. Later orthodox Christians championed Peter over Paul, so Mark can't be proto-orthodox.

It seems to me that Mark falls into a grey area prior to the Gnostic/orthodox split. But I'm still unclear of the writer's attitude toward Judaism and the Jewish scriptures.
rgprice
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by rgprice »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 2:08 am But Peter is given hope at the end when the women are told to report to him. Yes, the women fail their mission, but none of the characters is historical here. They are all symbolic actors in a symbolic narrative. So little of it makes any sense if we try to read it "realistically".
I'm highly skeptical of this ending. See my recent thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8479

I think that ending was added either later by a different writer.
There are in fact many women said to be at the crucifixion scene, but again I have come to strongly suspect that that "standing far off" phrase is a flag to read these women as latter-day Miriams who are there to see to the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus -- "Miriam stood afar off", also, to "see what would happen" to the future saviour who appeared to be put out to die. Another subtle drawing upon the Scriptures.
I would consider that everything after Mark 15:39 is a later addition by a different writer.
I choose #3.
I think that's where I still land as well.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by Giuseppe »

Capernaum as the first place touched by Jesus in the incipit of Marcion finds his direct explanation, according to the first commentary (Heracleon), in Capernaum being allegory of the lower heavens. It is easy to develop an entire story from a so simple "fact".

In Mark we don't find an equally simple explanation of why Capernaum.

ADDENDA:

It is easy also to see why the 'lower heavens' were placed precisely on earth, in 'Capernaum of Galilee', by Marcion. The 'lower heavens', for them, the archontic territory, had to be more deliberately confused by anti-demiurgists, with the earth itself, the creation of YHWH, to point out its evil nature. The notice that the Son of the Unknown Father descends directly on this earth, addressed to people who placed the original descent of Jesus "in the air" (=outer space), is not a good news for the consideration of this earth and this creation: it meant the equivalence, tout court, under the sign of an identical ontological negativity, between air and earth.

In syllogistic terms:
  • 1) Jesus was crucified in outer space, where Satan rules.
  • 2) Jesus is now said descended in Capernaum.
  • 3) Heracleon: Capernaum means 'place of desolation', where Satan rules.
  • 4) the earth itself is where Satan rules.
  • 5) therefore: the creation itself is satanic, hence the creator (YHWH) is evil.
If the 'god of this world' is the creator himself, for Marcion, then it was logically 100% expected that the death of Jesus had to be placed by Marcion on this world, on this earth.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by Giuseppe »

  • Justin knows Marcion.
  • Justin doesn't know Mark.
  • Hence: Marcion precedes Mark.
rgprice
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by rgprice »

Giuseppe wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:17 am
  • Justin knows Marcion.
  • Justin doesn't know Mark.
  • Hence: Marcion precedes Mark.
If only it were that simple :p
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by Giuseppe »

rgprice wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:59 am
Giuseppe wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:17 am
  • Justin knows Marcion.
  • Justin doesn't know Mark.
  • Hence: Marcion precedes Mark.
If only it were that simple :p
Am I wrong, or is Neil here who is arrived to the conclusion that Justin didn't know Mark? ;)
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by Giuseppe »

the Marcion's Christ could reproach Peter for having spoken badly by answering "You are the Christ" (meaning obviously the Jewish Christ sent by YHWH), but it is not clear why, in Mark, that answer still provokes the anger of Jesus, who forbids Peter to repeat this to anyone, and insults him by calling him "Satan".
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Mark's relation to Gnosticism...

Post by Giuseppe »

Surely the anger of Jesus against Peter calling him the (Jewish) Christ is pure marcionism in Mark.

To eclipse a such strong debt to Marcion, one has to add more and more highly speculative hypotheses about various concepts of Messiah, for example, by saying that Peter meant a military Messiah while Jesus meant a religious Messiah.

An example of such speculative exegesis meant uniquely to elude the Mark's debt to Marcion, is the following, by Bartosz Adamczweski:
In the Marcan Gospel, such a confession, which was put by the evangelist in the mouth of Peter (Mk 8:29), is in itself evidently insufficient because it expresses merely Jewish Christian faith in Jesus as the Jewish royal Messiah (cf. Mk 8:30-9:1). In fact, Mark presented Peter as believing in Jesus as the royal Messiah (Mk 8:29) but not in the Pauline halachic consequences of Jesus'death and resurrection

(The Gospel of Mark, A Hypertextual Commentary, p. 111, my bold)
Post Reply