Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Bernard Muller wrote:What would have caused that? I think the fact of (false) (Jewish or Jewish Christian) Christs & prophets appearing in Mark's community, likely calling for vengeance & rebellion or predicting the "end" to come soon, and probably gathering followers around them (Mk 13:5-6, 21-23).
"Mark" was afraid his own community would joined them. The message was: stay where you are, because, if you do, you will be the elects to enter the Kingdom of God, which will happen very soon.

I agree that the deceivers are a very important issue of Mark’s Olivet discourse, but I’m not sure that there is a “Sitz im Leben”. Paul had the same theme in 1 Thessalonians.

Secret Alias wrote: So what is the current chapter in Mark saying and what did the gospel originally say are two different things. Originally it was all about the temple and then later not so much.

Charles Wilson wrote:As I have said before, from the fact that the "Jesus Stories" were written from Sources, it does not follow that the Sources were about "Jesus". I am asserting, as plainly as I can, that Mark 13 is a rewrite of Alexander Jannaeus' defeat at the hands of the Greek General Demetrius Eucerus at Shechem, near the Temple at Gerizim. This Story is not about a "Jesus". Mark 13 is a Story about the Hasmonean King and High Priest Alexander Jannaeus. It was Demetrius Eucerus who committed the Abomination of Desolation and the Fake Story from Josephus concerning the reactions of the Mercenaries and Demetrius supports this.

Jannaeus flees to the mountains for 6 years, marches on Jerusalem and takes over. He crucifies 800 of his enemies and slits the throats of their pregnant wives and children in front of them as they are being crucified. This is restated in the verse Mark 13: 14: " Woe to women with child and to women who give suck"

Okay. But as both of you know, I’m rather interested in the known GMark than in the unknown “original” story or gospel.

MrMacSon wrote:Cheers, Kunigunde. I did look at hieron from naos. I guess I was as interested in your reference to ''temple area" or "temple area with the courts" in terms of ruins.

Apparently "In addition to restoration of the Temple, its courtyards and porticoes, Herod also built the Antonia Fortress, abutting the northwestern corner of the Temple Mount."

There is reference to now being able to visit and enter "inner courtyards of the ancient Temple" and a "Women's Courtyard in the east".

Jo­sephus wrote of an open-air courtyard “laid with stones of all sorts.”

Cheers. I surmise I don't get the exact point of your interest.

Ben C. Smith wrote:I keep staring at Mark 13.10; it looks so out of place. Hermann Detering, in The Synoptic Apocalypse, a Document From the Time of Bar Kochba, gives three reasons for thinking that Mark abbreviated Matthew's apocalypse rather than that Matthew bolstered Mark's, and Mark 13.10 is, IMHO, the only one of the three reasons with any teeth to it:
Detering writes:

The word πρῶτον (“first”) in Mark 13:10 doesn't make sense, since it is not clear from the preceding text to what it refers. Mark can hardly have wanted to say that the gospel must be spread across the whole world prior to the persecution of Christians referred to in 13:9. That matter is treated in 13:7 and 13:13. But the substantial gap in between makes it impossible to any longer detect the connection. From this it follows that Mark was writing with a document in view — such as Matthew 24:13-14 — in which the proclamation of the gospel and the coming End formed a meaningful connection.

The verse Mark 13:10 consequently appears to derive from the text of Matthew 24:14. It was only that Mark, who wrote his own version, failed to incorporate half of the verse, “and then the end will come.” Nevertheless Mark did, in his own mind, retain the spirit of the passage. That accounts for the term πρῶτον (“first”), which now becomes a revealing indicator of his dependence on the text he had before him.

It could be also an argument that Sinaiticus is on the right path

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Mark 13:10

καὶ εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη πρῶτον δεῖ κηρυχθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον
And to all the nations first it behoves to proclaim the gospel

laparola

πρῶτον δεῖ] ‭אc B D Ψ 28 892 pc vg WH
δεῖ πρῶτον] A L f1 f13 Byz itq syrh ς
πρῶτον δὲ δεῖ] W Θ 565 pc it syrp
πρῶτον λαὸν δεῖ] ‭א*

Perhaps the reading of the Codex Sinaiticus means

to all the nations - first (to the) Israelites

Comment

(laos) is the usual term for "the people of God" and thus typically used in the LXX (OT) and the Gospels, for believing Israel (Jews).

I have three further arguments to surmise that Sinaiticus could be the original version of Mark 13:10

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:I have three further arguments to surmise that Sinaiticus could be the original version of Mark 13:10

I would love to see them. I did notice quite a bit of textual messiness in this verse and in the surrounding verses (even more than LaParola displays).

Ben C. Smith wrote:

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:I have three further arguments to surmise that Sinaiticus could be the original version of Mark 13:10

I would love to see them. I did notice quite a bit of textual messiness in this verse and in the surrounding verses (even more than LaParola displays).

Mark 13.10 apud Sinaiticus:
Bezae has an extra phrase, and the neuter plural definite article (τὰ) has been added by the corrector: Καὶ εἰς πάντα [τὰ] ἔθνη πρῶτον δεῖ κηρυχθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν.

And then it looks to me as if Mark 13.9-10 in Washingtonianus ought to be punctuated as follows (because of the δὲ): Καὶ δώσουσιν ὑμᾶς εἰς συνέδρια καὶ εἰς συναγωγὰς δαρήσεσθαι καὶ ἐπὶ ἡγεμόνων καὶ βασιλέων σταθήσεσθαι ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ εἰς μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς, καὶ εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. πρῶτον δὲ δεῖ κηρυχθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον.

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Okay. But as both of you know, I’m rather interested in the known GMark than in the unknown “original” story or gospel.

KK --

No offense intended. To me, the "Original" IS found in the known GMark. A consistent history may be found by looking at what we have and reading it with a different Intentionality, but you are not interested in that. OK.
You once asked me to explain some of this and wrt Mark 13, I did.

Oh, look! A squirrel!

'Scuse me KK, I've gotta go...

Best,

CW

Charles Wilson wrote: In the Source Material of Jannaeus
.

No evidence of such. Its a personal opinion at this point, correct?

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:.

Furthermore, there are no certain references to the historical events of the Jewish war in Mark 13, only two or three possible allusions. Jerusalem and the holy temple (ναός - naos) are not mentioned, only the temple area with the courts (ἱερόν - hieron).

I would like to discuss the question which importance these possible allusions to the historical events have for Mark’s Olivet discourse and I’m not sure that is much more than a side note.

KK,
A correct starting point is important. I believe the scope is too narrow if Mark 13 is isolated from its parallels in Matthew and Luke. I have tried to divide the middle part of the synoptic Apocalypse in different sections for ease of discussion.

	------------------Matthew 24---------------------	-----------------------Mark 13-------------------------	------------------------------Luke 21---------------------------
A	(15) So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), (16) then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains;	(14) But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains	(20) But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by legions, then know that its desolation has come near. (21) Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains
B	(17) Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house; (18) and let him who is in the field not turn back to take his mantle.	(15) let him who is on the housetop not go down, nor enter his house, to take anything away; (16) and let him who is in the field not turn back to take his mantle.	and let those who are out in the country enter it.
C			(22) for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.
D	(19) And alas for those who are with child and for those who suck in those days!		(23a) Alas for those who are with child and for those who suck in those days!
E	(20) Pray that your flight way not be in winter or on a Sabbath.
F	(21) For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.	(19) For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, no, and never will be.	(23b) For great distress shall be upon the earth and wrath upon this people;
G	(22) And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved.	(20) And if the Lord had not shortened the days, no human being would be saved;
H			(24) they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led captive among all nations; and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
I	(29) Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, the and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven.	(24) But in those days, after the tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, (25) and the stars will be falling from heaven.	(25) And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars.
J	(30) …and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.	(26) And afterwards they will see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory.	(27) And afterwards they will see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

Below I will discuss section after section of the middle part of the synoptic Apocalypse.

A. Luke is explicit in describing the siege of Jerusalem. Because of the parallels between the different section in all three synoptics, the ‘desolating sacrilege’ is connected not only to the temple (τοπος ἅγιος in Matthew) but also to the war.
Flee to save your life! The flight theme is present in all three versions.

B. Elaboration of the flight theme.

C. The ‘day of vengeance’ is the Qumran wording for the ‘day of the Lord’, the great turning point of history. The burning of the Temple and the destruction of Jerusalem turned out to be that day /period (here ‘days’ to describe a period).

D. The pitiable fate of the pregnant women and the young mothers is a veiled description of the famine during the siege. Pregnant women and children were the most vulnerable part of the population. See the heartbreaking cannibalism story of Mary daughter of Eleazar who devoured her own child in War VI:201-213.

E. The flight theme again

F. The tribulation / great tribulation / great distress theme. Here a highly exceptional phenomenon is described: something so extremely catastrophic that it has never happened before and will never happen again in the future. Θλιψις is generally understood as a period of oppression or tribulation, but in my opinion it is the code word for an oppressive event, namely for the greatest catastrophe thinkable for the Jews: the destruction of their Temple, the center of their nation, their life, their religion. See also section I.
The ‘earth’ (γη) in Luke is to be understood territorially as the land of Israel. This happens to the Jews in the land of Israel.

G. Describes a great massacre, the murdering of the survivors of the siege at the capture of the Upper City, cfr. Josephus, War VI:404a: They [the Roman soldiers] poured into the alleys, sword in hand, massacring indiscriminately all whom they met.

H. This verse in Luke is quite explicit: War victims by the sword – the survivors are led into captivity – destruction of Jerusalem.

I. (Immediately) after the catastrophe, in other words: because of the catastrophic burning of the Temple compound, something happens in the air. Because a lot of bitumen had been used to cover the roofs of the Temple and the adjacent buildings on the Temple Mount, the burning of the buildings produces a huge pillar of smoke that first rose and afterwards spread out in the air over the environs of Jerusalem. Sun, moon and starlight couldn’t penetrate this immense cloud of smoke.

J. Now comes the culminating verse on the arrival of the messiah. Although the synoptic Apocalypse is a veiled description, the sequence of events is totally clear: the messiah arrives after the burning of the Temple.

What war elements do we discern in the middle part of the synoptic Apocalypse?
1. The siege of Jerusalem
2. To flee to save one’s life
3. Famine during the siege
4. The burning of the Temple
5. Massacre at the capture of Jerusalem
6. War victims
7. Captivity for the survivors
8. The destruction of Jerusalem
9. The immense cloud of smoke over the region caused by the burning of the Temple

This whole apocalyptic chapter is about the timing of the arrival of the messiah. First the war of 66-70 CE is described in detail, followed by the culminating message: ‘and afterwards they will see the Son of man coming’. I don’t think the war is a side note; war and arrival of the messiah are closely connected chronologically. If this isn’t evidence enough for the war thesis of the origins of Christianity: Revelation and Didache XVI tell a similar story.

Charles Wilson wrote:

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Okay. But as both of you know, I’m rather interested in the known GMark than in the unknown “original” story or gospel.

KK --

No offense intended. To me, the "Original" IS found in the known GMark. A consistent history may be found by looking at what we have and reading it with a different Intentionality, but you are not interested in that. OK.
You once asked me to explain some of this and wrt Mark 13, I did.

Oh, look! A squirrel!

'Scuse me KK, I've gotta go...

Best,

CW

I am also interested on the historical background of any changes in our history; in medicine I study how the problem of interest was then considered by professors and politicians and how it impacted on people who were alive then, etc. Religion is not different and hence I like your approach to religious literature.


Mark13:1-2 apparently belongs to chapter 12; its inclusion in chapter 13 is the result of a misleading chapter division, for 13:2 concludes the confrontation which begins in 11:27 through chapter 12.The chapter divisions in the OT and the Jewish Bible are also different one from the other, so that this problem is a frequent occurrence in the bible considered as one unit .

In Mark 13:2 , Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple and by this prediction he is embarking on a dangerous course .
The destruction of the temple is envisaged by god in 1 kings 9, 6-8; repeated by Micah 3.12; and Jeremiah 7.12-15; Uriah Jeremiah 26.20-23. In Josephus , War 6.300-309 another Jesus was put on trial for treason against the city and its temple.