"The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 7:03 am Note that prof Vinzent applies on Mcn the same Schmidt's conclusions on Mark:

Marcion, as we can see from the way he put together sources like Paul's letters, is not a Shakespeare avant la lettre. He does not create his stories by using historical information. And yet, he is not a Josephus or Herodotus either, but is capable of putting Paul's letters, hence serious sources, into a geographical and biographical line - applying lots of creativity by using the spare historical information from those sources. In this way, he is a clever, but perhaps oversystematising historian. If he has done the same with his gospel material, then we can assume that he brought together reliable sources, but also applied a similarly creative way in putting them together, waving them into a neat biography and creating a narrative that is geographically (important for a naukleros) and biographically neat and coherent.

Change the subject of any phrase from "Marcion" to "Mark" and you have Schmidt who talks.

Note how the implication is that Marcion was not a Shakespeare avant la lettre, not a monstruous genius.
It seems to me that isn't exactly Schmidt's point, especially not in the example I gave.

Even if Schmidt didn't say so explicitly, he probably did not point to a contrast between good and bad author but rather to a contrast between typical oral storytelling and literary writing.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 5:31 am
In an informal exchange, one Jesus story was lined up after the other. When one had finished reporting, the other continued with "and it happened that ...".

In this way complexes of several stories were created, which were separated from each other by a mere "καὶ". “καὶ” or the Aramaic correlate became a caesura, a caesura of the most primitive kind ...

It seems that Schmidt assumed that the phrase "And it came to pass" is an idiomatic expression which could only appear in repeated oral storytelling but not in written literature. I don't know whether Schmidt ever commented on this, but I have the impression that the German Schmidt imagined an analogy with the Grimm collection of fairy tales, their oral tradition and such phrases as “Once upon a time there was ...”.

Oh my little Karl Ludwig :wave:
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 10905
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Giuseppe »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 8:55 am I don't know whether Schmidt ever commented on this, but I have the impression that the German Schmidt imagined an analogy with the Grimm collection of fairy tales, their oral tradition and such phrases as “Once upon a time there was ...”.
The comparison you are doing with the Grimm fables is more serious than you have imagined: “Once upon a time there was ...” is the typical way to refer to a not better specified remote time, reason in more to think that Pilate is part of the framework and not of the collection.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 9:04 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 8:55 am I don't know whether Schmidt ever commented on this, but I have the impression that the German Schmidt imagined an analogy with the Grimm collection of fairy tales, their oral tradition and such phrases as “Once upon a time there was ...”.
The comparison you are doing with the Grimm fables is more serious than you have imagined: “Once upon a time there was ...” is the typical way to refer to a not better specified remote time, reason in more to think that Pilate is part of the framework and not of the collection.
The problem is that there are only two verses in GMark where "Καὶ ἐγένετο" can have the sense that Schmidt ascribes to the words - Mark 1:9 and 2:23. Even if we follow Schmidt and assume the same also for Mark 1:4 in a supposed pre-Markan oral tradition, it is next to nothing.

Schmidt wrote (page 16 of the German edition):
Compare the same beginning in 1:9, 1:16, 1:21, 1:40 etc. etc.

But Mark 1:16, 1:21, 1:40 do not begin with "Καὶ ἐγένετο" just with a "Καὶ".

Ultimately, without stating this explicitly (again!!!), Schmidt seems to think that it is unusual for each individual pericope to begin with an "And", even though every pericope appears to be a separate, self-contained story.

Look, it’s a new little story about Jesus and it begins with an "And". How can that be?

This is Schmidt's argument. Now I get it :D
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 12:00 pm Ultimately, without stating this explicitly (again!!!), Schmidt seems to think that it is unusual for each individual pericope to begin with an "And", even though every pericope appears to be a separate, self-contained story.

Look, it’s a new little story about Jesus and it begins with an "And". How can that be?

This is Schmidt's argument. Now I get it :D
Is Schmidt’s argument correct? Is the use of "Καὶ" in the beginning of a pericope in GMark a typical stylistic feature of oral storytelling?

As Giuseppe correctly pointed out, Schmidt distinguished Mark 1-13 and Mark 14-16. In Schmidt's view, the pericopes in Mark 1-13 are formed by oral tradition while Mark 14-16 is a written account that was fixed early on, i.e. shortly after the crucifixion.

One would therefore expect that "Καὶ" would be used significantly less as the first word of a pericope in Mark 14-16.

Schmidt wrote
The structure of the report on the public ministry of Jesus has proved to us to be chronologically and topographically insufficient. Individual stories or small story complexes are available in great abundance and are not in a secure chronological sequence of events, but are presented within an outline that only has the value of a framework. On the whole, each individual narrative has the character of a self-contained pericope, sometimes framed, sometimes more or less unframed. (page 303 of the German edition)
...
The Passion story requires a different literary evaluation. It is the only passage in the Gospels that gives precise details of place and time, even day and hour. It is immediately clear that a continuous narrative was intended here from the outset. (page 303)
...
For the oldest community, which laid down the account of the martyrdom soon after Jesus' death, was the story itself apology enough. The particularly high, immediate historical value of the Passion story becomes clear from what has been said. (page 306)
...
The phenomena discussed do not alter the overall character of the Passion story as a continuous chronological report. There are gaps and the connection is not always very solid, but on the whole it is not possible to rearrange the individual scenes and trace them back to different layers of tradition.(page 309)

The ESV distinguishes the following pericopes in Mark 14:

The plot to kill Jesus 14:1 It was now the Passover (Ἦν δὲ τὸ πάσχα) and the feast of unleavened bread
Jesus anointed at Bethany 14:3 And he being (Καὶ ὄντος αὐτοῦ) in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper
Judas to betray Jesus 14:10 And Judas Iscariot (Καὶ Ἰούδας Ἰσκαριὼθ), one of the Twelve, went away
The Passover with the disciples 14:12 And on the first day (Καὶ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ) of unleavened bread, when
Institution of the Lord’s Supper 14:22 And as they were eating (Καὶ ἐσθιόντων), having taken bread,
Jesus foretells Peter’s denial 14:27 And Jesus says to them (Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς), “You will all fall away
Jesus prays in Gethsemane 14:32 And they come (Καὶ ἔρχονται) to a place, the name of which is Gethsemane
Betrayal and arrest of Jesus 14:43 And immediately (Καὶ εὐθὺς) while yet he is speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve
A young man flees 14:51 And a certain young man (Καὶ νεανίσκος τις) was following him
Jesus before the council 14:53 And they led away (Καὶ ἀπήγαγον) Jesus to the high priest. And all the chief priests
Peter denies Jesus 14:66 And Peter being (Καὶ ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου) below in the courtyard, one of the servant girls

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 5:31 am Ron Decker wrote
Mark’s usage can be quantified in various ways. Metzger, e.g., observes that 80 of 88 sections in Mark begin with καί.

This looks impressive, doesn't it?

Whatever the sense of Mark's use of "Καὶ" was, it has absolutely nothing to do with Schmidt's argument and his claim of oral storytelling regarding the pericopes in Mark 1-13.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 10905
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Giuseppe »

The fact that Καὶ occurs also in Mark 14-16 can't be used as confutation of Schmidt's assertion, and for an obvious reason: the sequence of Καὶ takes immediately sense in Mark 14-16 as a cause-effect relation.

Where Καὶ doesn't the same effect is obviously in Mark 1-13.
Which says us that "Mark" wanted to impose a fictitious cause-effect relation on Mark 1-13, contra factum that he couldn't.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Giuseppe wrote: Sun May 22, 2022 5:05 am The fact that Καὶ occurs also in Mark 14-16 can't be used as confutation of Schmidt's assertion, and for an obvious reason: the sequence of Καὶ takes immediately sense in Mark 14-16 as a cause-effect relation.

Where Καὶ doesn't the same effect is obviously in Mark 1-13.
Which says us that "Mark" wanted to impose a fictitious cause-effect relation on Mark 1-13, contra factum that he couldn't.
This is not possible according to Schmidt's theory. In Mark 14-16, Schmidt sees the older, historical document that Mark only adopted. The use of Καὶ in Mark 1-13, on the other hand, is said to go back directly to oral tradition and proved it.

Giuseppe wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 9:04 amreason in more to think that Pilate is part of the framework and not of the collection.
You misunderstand Schmidt on this point. For Schmidt, Mark 14-16 is a historical document and not framework. The crucifixion under Pilate is in Schmidt's view historically true. His framework theory relates only to Mark 1-13.
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun May 22, 2022 4:00 am Schmidt wrote
For the oldest community, which laid down the account of the martyrdom soon after Jesus' death, was the story itself apology enough. The particularly high, immediate historical value of the Passion story becomes clear from what has been said. (page 306)

User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 10905
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Giuseppe »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 6:47 am For Schmidt, Mark 14-16 is a historical document and not framework. The crucifixion under Pilate is in Schmidt's view historically true.
I am distinguishing beetwen the mere fact of Pilate crucifying Jesus ("fact" because Schmidt is historicist), and the fact, recognized probably by Schmidt, that the Passion story in Mark is a concentrate of Jewish midrash highly elaborated etc.

However I don't find quotes in Schimdt pointing to the fictitious scenario of the Passion story. I would be surprised if Schmidt had thought that the Passion story is true in its principal lines and not only (as one would expect usually by a serious historicist) about the essential event (Pilate condemning Jesus to death).
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 5:31 am Schmidt wrote
In this way complexes of several stories were created, which were separated from each other by a mere "καὶ". “καὶ” or the Aramaic correlate became a caesura, a caesura of the most primitive kind. It is possible that such complexes were written down for use in worship, in order to read several stories one after the other. But then again only a story, a pericope, was presented. The "καὶ" remained, just as we read the Sunday gospel in our churches today and start with an "And". Despite all this, the individual stories continued to pass from mouth to mouth, and even then the "καὶ" remained. Finally the Evangelist came, who collected the individual stories and tried to bring them into context. Even then, the "καὶ" remained in many instances.

Before Schmidt's next point, I want to note that modern Markan scholarship is currently accepting Armin Baum's suggestion that Mark's use of "καὶ" is a matter of a so-called secondary semitism. I favor the idea that Mark intentionally adapted the style of the LXX.

Armin Baum, “Mark's Paratactic καί as a Secondary Syntactic Semitism.” Novum Testamentum 58, no. 1 (2016): 1–26.

Baum25.jpg
Baum25.jpg (196.51 KiB) Viewed 209 times
Baum26.jpg
Baum26.jpg (67.93 KiB) Viewed 209 times
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by mlinssen »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 11:11 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 5:31 am Schmidt wrote
In this way complexes of several stories were created, which were separated from each other by a mere "καὶ". “καὶ” or the Aramaic correlate became a caesura, a caesura of the most primitive kind. It is possible that such complexes were written down for use in worship, in order to read several stories one after the other. But then again only a story, a pericope, was presented. The "καὶ" remained, just as we read the Sunday gospel in our churches today and start with an "And". Despite all this, the individual stories continued to pass from mouth to mouth, and even then the "καὶ" remained. Finally the Evangelist came, who collected the individual stories and tried to bring them into context. Even then, the "καὶ" remained in many instances.

Before Schmidt's next point, I want to note that modern Markan scholarship is currently accepting Armin Baum's suggestion that Mark's use of "καὶ" is a matter of a so-called secondary semitism. I favor the idea that Mark intentionally adapted the style of the LXX.

Armin Baum, “Mark's Paratactic καί as a Secondary Syntactic Semitism.” Novum Testamentum 58, no. 1 (2016): 1–26.


Baum25.jpg
Baum26.jpg
I have gone by 2 texts, looking for case-sensitive And and But. Quick & Dirty, yes - my Hebrew not so good

ESV OT:

And: 5923
But: 1130

And-But ratio: 5.24

Berean Mark:

And: 576
But: 44

And-But ratio: 13.09

13.09 / 5.24 = Mark's And-But ratio is 2.5 times greater than that of the OT

Took me 5 minutes. I really praise, love and adore biblical academic research! Such great quality
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1625
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: "The Framework of the Story of Jesus" by Karl Ludwig Schmidt

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

mlinssen wrote: Mon May 23, 2022 11:46 am I have gone by 2 texts, looking for case-sensitive And and But. Quick & Dirty, yes - my Hebrew not so good

ESV OT:

And: 5923
But: 1130

And-But ratio: 5.24

Berean Mark:

And: 576
But: 44

And-But ratio: 13.09

13.09 / 5.24 = Mark's And-But ratio is 2.5 times greater than that of the OT

Took me 5 minutes. I really praise, love and adore biblical academic research! Such great quality
Baum presented also tables based on the Greek text. Some non-biblical Greek text with a ratio under 1/1 are on the next page :D
Baum16.jpg
Baum16.jpg (109.34 KiB) Viewed 189 times
Post Reply