Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by andrewcriddle »

There is dispute about whether Justin Martyr knew the long ending of Mark.
It has been argued that 1st Apology
That which he says, "He shall send to You the rod of power out of Jerusalem," is predictive of the mighty word, which His apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere;
is based on Mark 16:20
Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
If however, as a number of scholars have suggested, Justin knew a Synoptic Gospel harmony (similar to the Diatessaron of his student Tatian but without John) then he probably knew the end of Mark in a form harmonised with Luke, something like this
And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: and at all times they were in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.
And from thence they went forth, and preached in every place; and our Lord helped them, and confirmed their sayings by the signs which they did.
(See http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... saron.html for the arrangement in the Diatessaron)

In this form the parallel with Justin is particularly striking making it likely that Justin knew a Gospel text that included the long ending of Mark.

Andrew Criddle
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by ABuddhist »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:41 am If however, as a number of scholars have suggested, Justin knew a Synoptic Gospel harmony (similar to the Diatessaron of his student Tatian but without John)
If he did, then whence did he get Jesus's birth in a cave? Surely, such a story, found in none of the 4 canonical gospels, reveals that Justin's harmony, if real, either used another gospel or was not a faithful harmonization.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by andrewcriddle »

ABuddhist wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:53 am
andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:41 am If however, as a number of scholars have suggested, Justin knew a Synoptic Gospel harmony (similar to the Diatessaron of his student Tatian but without John)
If he did, then whence did he get Jesus's birth in a cave? Surely, such a story, found in none of the 4 canonical gospels, reveals that Justin's harmony, if real, either used another gospel or was not a faithful harmonization.
For the birth narrative Justin may have been using the Protoevangelium of James which seems to be based on Matthew and Luke.
And he [Joseph] took her [Mary] down from off the ass, and said to her: Whither shall I lead you, and cover your disgrace? For the place is desert.
And he found a cave there, and led her into it; and leaving his two sons beside her, he went out to seek a midwife in the district of Bethlehem.
Andrew Criddle
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by ABuddhist »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 12:06 pm
ABuddhist wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:53 am
andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 11:41 am If however, as a number of scholars have suggested, Justin knew a Synoptic Gospel harmony (similar to the Diatessaron of his student Tatian but without John)
If he did, then whence did he get Jesus's birth in a cave? Surely, such a story, found in none of the 4 canonical gospels, reveals that Justin's harmony, if real, either used another gospel or was not a faithful harmonization.
For the birth narrative Justin may have been using the Protoevangelium of James which seems to be based on Matthew and Luke.
Which, if true, suggests that Justin was not relying upon a faithful harmonization of the synoptic gospels.
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

When In Rome...

Post by JoeWallack »

JW:
I think we can safely put Justin in the category of evidence for 16:8 as original:

Archives
Time to go on the offensive. The heart of the argument for LE is early Patristic support, some of which is questionable. I am going to introduce a radically new concept to my opponent for purposes of evaluating questionable Patristic reference to the LE. Criteria. Applicable ones ranked in order of importance are:

1. Similarity in language. The obvious one.

2. Applicability. Direct versus indirect.

3. Scope. The extent of the support.

4. Similarity in context.

5. Consistency. Coordination with other evidence.

The first Patristic witness my opponent presents for the LE whole-heartedly is Justin:

Quote:
Our next patristic witness is Justin Martyr. In his First Apology, chapter 45 (in about 160), Justin treats Psalm 110:1-3 as a prophecy and illustrates its fulfillment. He writes: "That which he says, ‘He shall send to you the rod of power out of Jerusalem,’ is predictive of the mighty word, which his apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere. And though death is decreed against those who teach or at all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it. And if you also read these words in a hostile spirit, you can do no more, as I said before, than kill us; which indeed does no harm to us, but to you and all who unjustly hate us, and do not repent, brings eternal punishment by fire."

In this short chapter Justin mentions several things mentioned in Mark 16:9-20: the ascension of Christ, victory over devils, the use of the name of Christ, a lack of true harm done to Christians, the spread of the word, and the punishment of unbelievers. But the heaviest evidence consists of the verbal parallel between Mark 16:20 and Justin’s statement that the apostles “went forth everywhere preaching.” Justin’s words are ECELQONTES PANTACOU EHKRUXAN; the same three words are found, transposed, in Mark 16:20, and Justin repeats PANTACOU (writing, “we everywhere both embrace and teach it”) as if alluding to an authoritative precedent.
We will rate the criteria on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the strongest:

1. Similarity in language.

http://www.textexcavation.com/marcanendings.html#justin

Quote:
[Justin]
εξελθοντες πανταχου εκηρυξαν
vs.

Quote:
[LE]
εξελθοντες εκηρυξαν πανταχου
The exact same 3 words but in a different order. Three sub-categories:
1 - Unusual. Are the words unique or common?

The words are "having gone out everywhere they preached". These words are in between, not common or unusual.

2 - Popular. Are the words likely to be used by the author in general due to popularity?

Yes, as these words would describe Justin's understanding of the ending of every Gospel as well as supposed Christian history.

3 - Complete phrase. is the usage a complete phrase from the original or a partial?

Here it is a partial as the complete original phrase includes "Jerusalem".
I rate this a "2" as there is no strong sub-criteria and the weaknesses of changed order, popular phrase and partial phrase.

2. Applicability.

Justin can not directly attribute to "Mark" since he is unaware of "Mark". His usage does not even explicitly identify any Gospel as a source.

A well deserved "1".

3. Scope.

3 words out of 12 verses. Another "1".

4. Similarity in context.

The context of Justin's quote is suffering for Jesus:

"And though death is decreed against those who teach or at all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it. And if you also read these words in a hostile spirit, you can do no more, as I said before, than kill us; which indeed does no harm to us,"

The context of the LE is being protected from suffering by Jesus:

"And these signs shall accompany them that believe: in my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

So the context is the opposite. Another "1". Seems unfair not to have negative rating here.

5. Consistency.

All authors before Justin show no quality evidence for the LE. Another "1".

So the ratings from Justin as evidence for the LE (scale = 1-5) are:

1. Similarity in language = 2

2. Applicability = 1

3. Scope = 1

4. Similarity in context = 1

5. Consistency = 1

Joseph

MARTYR, n. One who moves along the line of least reluctance to a desired death.

The New Porphyry
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: When In Rome...

Post by andrewcriddle »

JoeWallack wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 4:02 pm JW:
I think we can safely put Justin in the category of evidence for 16:8 as original:

Archives
Time to go on the offensive. The heart of the argument for LE is early Patristic support, some of which is questionable. I am going to introduce a radically new concept to my opponent for purposes of evaluating questionable Patristic reference to the LE. Criteria. Applicable ones ranked in order of importance are:

1. Similarity in language. The obvious one.

2. Applicability. Direct versus indirect.

3. Scope. The extent of the support.

4. Similarity in context.

5. Consistency. Coordination with other evidence.

The first Patristic witness my opponent presents for the LE whole-heartedly is Justin:

Quote:
Our next patristic witness is Justin Martyr. In his First Apology, chapter 45 (in about 160), Justin treats Psalm 110:1-3 as a prophecy and illustrates its fulfillment. He writes: "That which he says, ‘He shall send to you the rod of power out of Jerusalem,’ is predictive of the mighty word, which his apostles, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere. And though death is decreed against those who teach or at all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it. And if you also read these words in a hostile spirit, you can do no more, as I said before, than kill us; which indeed does no harm to us, but to you and all who unjustly hate us, and do not repent, brings eternal punishment by fire."

In this short chapter Justin mentions several things mentioned in Mark 16:9-20: the ascension of Christ, victory over devils, the use of the name of Christ, a lack of true harm done to Christians, the spread of the word, and the punishment of unbelievers. But the heaviest evidence consists of the verbal parallel between Mark 16:20 and Justin’s statement that the apostles “went forth everywhere preaching.” Justin’s words are ECELQONTES PANTACOU EHKRUXAN; the same three words are found, transposed, in Mark 16:20, and Justin repeats PANTACOU (writing, “we everywhere both embrace and teach it”) as if alluding to an authoritative precedent.
We will rate the criteria on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the strongest:

1. Similarity in language.

http://www.textexcavation.com/marcanendings.html#justin

Quote:
[Justin]
εξελθοντες πανταχου εκηρυξαν
vs.

Quote:
[LE]
εξελθοντες εκηρυξαν πανταχου
The exact same 3 words but in a different order. Three sub-categories:
1 - Unusual. Are the words unique or common?

The words are "having gone out everywhere they preached". These words are in between, not common or unusual.

2 - Popular. Are the words likely to be used by the author in general due to popularity?

Yes, as these words would describe Justin's understanding of the ending of every Gospel as well as supposed Christian history.

3 - Complete phrase. is the usage a complete phrase from the original or a partial?

Here it is a partial as the complete original phrase includes "Jerusalem".
I rate this a "2" as there is no strong sub-criteria and the weaknesses of changed order, popular phrase and partial phrase.

2. Applicability.

Justin can not directly attribute to "Mark" since he is unaware of "Mark". His usage does not even explicitly identify any Gospel as a source.

A well deserved "1".

3. Scope.

3 words out of 12 verses. Another "1".

4. Similarity in context.

The context of Justin's quote is suffering for Jesus:

"And though death is decreed against those who teach or at all confess the name of Christ, we everywhere both embrace and teach it. And if you also read these words in a hostile spirit, you can do no more, as I said before, than kill us; which indeed does no harm to us,"

The context of the LE is being protected from suffering by Jesus:

"And these signs shall accompany them that believe: in my name shall they cast out demons; they shall speak with new tongues;
they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall in no wise hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

So the context is the opposite. Another "1". Seems unfair not to have negative rating here.

5. Consistency.

All authors before Justin show no quality evidence for the LE. Another "1".

So the ratings from Justin as evidence for the LE (scale = 1-5) are:

1. Similarity in language = 2

2. Applicability = 1

3. Scope = 1

4. Similarity in context = 1

5. Consistency = 1

Joseph

MARTYR, n. One who moves along the line of least reluctance to a desired death.

The New Porphyry
Hi Joe

My suggestion was that if Justin is using the long ending as part of a Synoptic harmony then the parallelism would include Jerusalem (you suggested above that the absence of Jerusalem in the long ending weakened the parallelism with Justin.)

Andrew Criddle
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by Secret Alias »

Justin's writings have been posthumously edited by a Catholic editor. There is at least one example of this that has been picked up even by conservative scholars in the Dialogue dating the corruptions to the last five years of the second century - the time Irenaeus was active.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by ABuddhist »

Secret Alias wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 10:49 am Justin's writings have been posthumously edited by a Catholic editor. There is at least one example of this that has been picked up even by conservative scholars in the Dialogue dating the corruptions to the last five years of the second century - the time Irenaeus was active.
Please provide a citation.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Justin and Mark 16:9-20

Post by Secret Alias »

Craig Evans no less - an arch-conservative scholar - is cited here http://books.google.com/books?id=kHYl6r ... 22&f=false
Post Reply