Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:43 am
Giuseppe, are you trying to get
behind the extant texts, back to a layer in which John and Jesus were at odds?
Yes. As you see, I am assuming, in the operation, a minor possible number of interpolations in Mark (specifically I am assuming that Mark 1, as we have it, is original).
Because in our extant Mark, that opposition does not seem possible.
Can I ask you simply... ...
why?
Why is John seen always as a faithful precursor of Jesus in Mark?
The only ''heretical'' thing listened by me about JtB in Mark is that he doesn't see the dove descending on Jesus. Only that.
Beyond that, if my antitheses are revealing, then the
real opposition is not so much between the
man Jesus and the
man John: afterall, the
man Jesus was only one of many who wanted to receive baptism by John, one of the his 'servants'.
My point is that the
Spirit who possessed Jesus was really opposed to the
God who sent John in the wilderness via Isaiah. That Spirit is really -
riotously - invisible for John, not the
man Jesus, his mere passive recipient.
This is equivalent to a confutation of the prophecy of John insofar the latter predicted the coming of a
man greater than him,
not of a Spirit possessing a man.
If John is a false prophet, then also
the unique explicit quotation, in Mark, of the scriptures (Mark 1:2-3), is a false prophecy. By a false god.
Can you give me shortly a list of reasons to consider:
1) ''Mark'' (author) as
not a Gnostic (one who hates the creator god),
2) ''Mark'' (author) as one who introduces a perfect continuity and identical intention between John the Baptist and Jesus (Beyond if the baptism of Jesus is historical or not)
3) ''Mark'' (author) as one who, having to opt which field to join (Marcionites or proto-catholics), would have opted for proto-catholics against Marcion.
???
Or, in alternative, where do you see continuity and/or discontinuity between John and Jesus?
The question is open to all the readers, obviously.