Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 12-12-2007, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

I have a hard time reconciling the resurrection reference in 1 Cor 15 and the absence of it in GMark. I can't conceive how it's possible that "Mark" would have failed to mention every detail, unless it simply was not part of the tradition that early. And if that's true, the only logical explanation is interpolation in 1 Cor 15. Robert Price argues for it here: http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...apocrypha.html

Can anyone else explain how it's conceivable that Mark would have left out the most amazing part of the gospel account - if he knew of it?

You should also explore the possibility that 1Corinthians 15 was written after gMark and is fiction.

According to Eusebius in "Church History", Mark, a disciple of Peter, got his information about Jesus from the this Apostle. Mark, it would appear, did not know or hear of Jesus before. Now based on Acts, Peter was ignorant and unlearned.

So gMark is actually Peter's memories of the life and events surrounding Jesus, if Eusebius' story is true.

aa5874 · 12-12-2007, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

If Jesus existed in the 1st century, he could have died in many different ways. I will give you a partial list:
1. Stoned to death. 2. Beheaded. 3. Suicide. 4. Poisoned. 4. Natural causes.

I'd add drowning to the list. Perhaps he only had enough faith to hike halfway across the Sea of Galilee.

You mean after Cephas saw Jesus, he ran away, and tried to run over the sea of Galilee and drowned? He didn't want to be crucified again.

Mythra · 12-12-2007, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

You mean after Cephas saw Jesus, he ran away, and tried to run over the sea of Galilee and drowned? He didn't want to be crucified again.

I was gonna make a joke about the difficulty of walking on water with holes in one's feet - but I remembered this is BC&H, not GRD.

So, I won't.

andrewcriddle · 12-13-2007, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

One obvious possibility is that original Mark extended beyond 16:8 and that this material has been lost.

That would make sense as a possible resolution. Based on this premise, has anyone ever tried to use the post resurrection material from Matthew and Luke to try and reconstruct what an Markan ending may have looked like?

IIUC a connection has been suggested between the hypothetical lost ending of Mark and John chapter 21

Andrew Criddle

God Fearing Atheist · 12-13-2007, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

One obvious possibility is that original Mark extended beyond 16:8 and that this material has been lost.

That would make sense as a possible resolution. Based on this premise, has anyone ever tried to use the post resurrection material from Matthew and Luke to try and reconstruct what an Markan ending may have looked like?

In his chapter on the ending of Mark in The Resurrection of the Son of God, Wright suggests that, because Matthew had been following Mark closely at 28.5-8, 28.9-20 might be "an outline at least of what Mark 16 might have gone on to say."

aa5874 · 12-13-2007, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by God Fearing Atheist

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythra

That would make sense as a possible resolution. Based on this premise, has anyone ever tried to use the post resurrection material from Matthew and Luke to try and reconstruct what an Markan ending may have looked like?

In his chapter on the ending of Mark in The Resurrection of the Son of God, Wright suggests that, because Matthew had been following Mark closely at 28.5-8, 28.9-20 might be "an outline at least of what Mark 16 might have gone on to say."

The suggestion that Matthew followed Mark is of little value in order to determine the ending of gMark, since gMatthew contains events that are not in gMark, the birth of Jesus is a glaring example.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.