Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Ben C. Smith wrote:Okay, Marcan scholars, I am interested in interpretations of the hometown rejection in Mark 6.1-6a:

1 Jesus went out from there and come into His hometown; and His disciples follow Him. 2 When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these things, and what is this wisdom given to Him, and such miracles as these performed by His hands? 3 Is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?”

And they took offense at Him. 4 Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and among his own relatives and in his own household.” 5 And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them. 6a And He wondered at their unbelief.

The first paragraph above seems to be leading in a positive direction. The local boy has come back home a wise and accomplished worker of miracles. Even the listing of his family members does not seem negative in that context.

But then the tables turn, and people are offended with him. Why? What is the offense?

After the listing of relatives, Matthew 13.53-58 adds, "Where then did this man get all these things?" This seems like a not altogether successful attempt to spell out the source of the offense more clearly. Luke 4.16-30 is much more complete here, and gives ample reason for the townspeople to resent Jesus.

Make no mistake: I can think of reasons for the people to be offended at Jesus (jealousy, past rivalries, a sense that Jesus no longer knows his proper place), but without more of a hint from the author such thoughts are really only guesses.

Even more striking to my eye is the following contrast:

• Where did this man get... such miracles as these performed by His hands?
• And He could do no miracle there... and He wondered at their unbelief.

But they seem to very much believe that he can do miracles; that is a big part of their astonishment. What exactly do they not believe here?

Thoughts?

Ben.

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Do you wish to say that Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are nitwits who didn't understand what they wrote?

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:.
I think the "unbelief" is primarily that God's chosen one is identified as a simple human being

Ulan wrote:No, he says that it doesn't matter what Mark, Matthew, Luke and John allegedly wrote, because they are all 2nd century rewrites from a single precursor gospel that had, instead of the text versions you compare, a flying, supernatural Jesus who came down to his "hometown" Jerusalem. Which easily explains why nobody wanted to listen, because the "home" was all of Israel who rejected the message.

Of course, this depends on accepting that the "supergospel" (Paul's?) that can be found in Justin and Ephrem was really earlier than the others. Which most here probably won't.

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:

Ulan wrote:No, he says that it doesn't matter what Mark, Matthew, Luke and John allegedly wrote, because they are all 2nd century rewrites from a single precursor gospel that had, instead of the text versions you compare, a flying, supernatural Jesus who came down to his "hometown" Jerusalem. Which easily explains why nobody wanted to listen, because the "home" was all of Israel who rejected the message.

Of course, this depends on accepting that the "supergospel" (Paul's?) that can be found in Justin and Ephrem was really earlier than the others. Which most here probably won't.

Fine. An interpretation miles away from the text, even from Marcion's gospel.