Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JoeWallack · 05-25-2008, 06:05 AM

Mark 1

JW:
My own favorite Ironic story within "Mark's" Passion is Peter's Denial. "The Jews", who think they are Convicting Jesus but are actually convicting themselves, make fun of Jesus lack of display of Messianic power and specifically identify perhaps the best supposed indicator of the Messiah, the power of Prophesy. At the same time that they are making fun of this supposed deficiency in Jesus though, Jesus' famous prophecy that Peter would Deny him Three times is happening right under their long noses:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_14

(With the help of the Legendary Vorkosigan, one who speaks with Authority on "Mark" Michael A. Turton's Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Mark Index Page

Quote:

65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the officers received him with blows of their hands.

66 And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest;

67 and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and saith, Thou also wast with the Nazarene, [even] Jesus.

68 But he denied, saying, I neither know, nor understand what thou sayest: and he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.

69 And the maid saw him, and began again to say to them that stood by, This is [one] of them.

70 But he again denied it. And after a little while again they that stood by said to Peter, of a truth thou art [one] of them; for thou art a Galilaean.

71 But he began to curse, and to swear, I know not this man of whom ye speak.

72 And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

Note that "Luke" inverts the Prophecy of Peter's Denial and lacks the historical present feature of "Mark" so the Irony does not work as well. Solid evidence that "Mark" is original and "Luke" is the Editing as "Mark's" Irony is superior:

The WallGan commission going over the McJuder tape once again:

Mark 14: (KJV)
53 And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
54 And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire.
55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
56 For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.
57 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
59 But neither so did their witness agree together.
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.
65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.
66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:
67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.
68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.
69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.
70 And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto.
71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak.
72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept."

Wallack: Now the "Stone" version at 33 & 1/3:

"And they led Jesus away to the high priest" (Jesus taken by Force)
"And Peter followed him afar off" (Peter taken Voluntarily)

"and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes." (Jesus' audience is Authority)
"and he sat with the servants" (Peter's audience is Servants)

"For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together." (Jesus' witnesses are False)
"they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto." (Peter's witnesses are True)

"And Jesus said, I am." (Jesus defends with the Truth)
"But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak." (Peter defends with a Lie)

"Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death." (Jesus' audience doesn't believe a True defense)
"And when he thought thereon, he wept" (Peter's audience believes a False defense)

Wallack:
Play back Mark 14:66 (KJV)
"And as Peter was beneath in the palace"

Play back Matthew 26:69 (KJV)
"Now Peter sat without in the palace"

Vorkosigan:
"Mark's" use of the historical present in Greek makes it clearer that the Jesus/Peter stories are intended to happen simultaneously. Just like you'd see in a split screen or a Play.

Wallack:
Agreed. Play back Mark 14:72:
"And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept."

Note the implication that the accusers believed Peter and left him alone to cry. Play back Matthew 26:75:

"And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly."

The implication is that Peter was not believed so he had to leave before he could cry. This is more believable historically but lessens the contrast of the Jesus/Peter story. So the little changes, "Mark's" simultaneous stories and consistent contrast in the Jesus/Peter stories are more contrived literature and less plausible historically. The consistent contrast between "Mark's" Jesus and Peter is consistent with "Mark's" theme that everyone failed Jesus. Peter's purpose in "Mark" is not to show a disciple who continued the Jesus movement but on the contrary to show that even Jesus' most trusted disciple and his #1 failed him. Note that in "Mark", unlike "Matthew", this is the last we hear of Peter. The implication is that even Peter realized he had failed Jesus. Permanently. This is why the fraudulent addition of "Mark" 16:9-20 is so significant.

Vorkosigan:
Therefore, the evidence indicates that "Mark" shot JFK (Jesus F. Krist) first and Acted alone without "Matthew" (the second Gospelman theory).

Wallack:
Agreed.

Joseph

Question. An interogative statement used to test knowledge. But that's not important now.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

JoeWallack · 05-26-2008, 12:04 PM

Vacation's Over

The Mark of a Prophet is...prophecy. We have the following levels of Ironic prophecy during Jesus' trials and tribulations:

At the Text level:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_14

Quote:

14:30 And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, that thou to-day, [even] this night, before the cock crow twice, shalt deny me thrice.

14:31 But he spake exceedingly vehemently, If I must die with thee, I will not deny thee. And in like manner also said they all.
...
14:65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the officers received him with blows of their hands.
...
14:72 And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

Here Jesus' prophecy at the Text level is demonstrated as correct and recognized as correct at the Text level by Peter. Ironically, this is the only instruction from Jesus, that Peter would fail as a Disciple, that Peter the Disciple ever remembered. This prophecy is also unrecognized at the Text level by the Council but recognized at the Sub-text level by the Reader with the prophecy fulfillment happening right under the noses, so to speak, of the Council.

The next prophecy, [understatement] somewhat relevant to the High Priest [/understatement], is the prophecy of the destruction of the Temple:

Quote:

14:57 And there stood up certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,

14:58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.

14:59 And not even so did their witness agree together.

Presumably, if not "John's" Jesus (reacting to "Mark's") this refers to:

Quote:

13:1 And as he went forth out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Teacher, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings!

13:2 And Jesus said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left here one stone upon another, which shall not be thrown down.

Since this is subsequent to the Text there can be no recognition at the Text level. At the Sub-text level though, the Reader knows that this is another correct prophecy Ironically applicable to the High Priest.

The Last (so to speak) prophecy of Jesus at the trial though:

Quote:

14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

14:62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.

Clearly, this is an unrecognized prophecy at the Text level. Ironically, it also appears to be unrecognized at the Sub-text or Reader level. The External evidence indicates that "Mark" was written after Papias and before Marcion, c. 125. If it was, since "Mark" places the offending prophecy c. 30, than "Mark's" intent seems to be a Failed prophecy here (those living c.125 could be pretty sure that "Marks" Jesus had not returned within his generation).

Joseph

PROPHECY, n.
The art and practice of selling one's credibility for future delivery.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

JoeWallack · 05-28-2008, 07:19 AM

JW:
On the subject of Ironic Contrast, Transfer and Reversal, Bart Ehrman recently had a debate with Daniel Wallace on the issue (so to speak) of Textual reliability (Toto, maybe you can find a transcript). Gawd! Talk about a mismatch. Ehrman is probably the foremost Textual critic of all time while Wallace reminds one of David Spade's gay Hollywood assistant character on SNL, "You are...? You're with...?" Wallace's criticism of Ehrman's criticism is always the same, "We already knew that.", mindful of PeeWee Herman's "I meant to do that." Should have matched Wallace with MM instead.

I saw on the Internet that Ehrman and Wallace supposedly agreed that Mark 16:9-20, 1 John 5:8, John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 1:41 are all examples of significant Editing. Regarding Mark 1:41, I previously noted in my Thread here:

The Word According To [Garp], (Mork), Mark. Significant Editing Of The First Gospel

Angry Young Man

Significant Variant #6:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1:41

"And being moved with compassion, he stretched forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou made clean. (ASV)"

http://www.zhubert.com/bible?book=Ma...ter=1&verse=41

"καὶ σπλαγχνισθεὶς ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ ἥψατο καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ θέλω καθαρίσθητι"

http://www.zhubert.com/bible?source=...ef=Mark+1%3A41

Quote:

ὀργισθεὶς [angry] D ita itd itff2 itr1 (Diatessaron) Ephraem

σπλαγχνισθεὶς [compassionate] �*א A B C E F G K L W Δ Θ �* Σ 090 0130 0233 f1 f13 28 33 157 180 205 565 579 597 700 892 1006 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1243 1253 1292 1342 1344 1365 1424 1505 1546 1646 2148 2174 2427 Byz Lect itaur itc ite itf itl itq vg syrs syrp syrh syrpal copsa copbo goth arm eth geo slav Basil Ambrosevid ς WH

And Metzger commentary:

Quote:

1.41 σπλαγχνισθείς {B}
It is difficult to come to a firm decision concerning the original text. On the one hand, it is easy to see why ὀργισθείς (“being angry”) would have prompted over-scrupulous copyists to alter it to σπλαγχνισθείς (“being filled with compassion”), but not easy to account for the opposite change. On the other hand, a majority of the Committee was impressed by the following considerations. (1) The character of the external evidence in support of ὀργισθείς is less impressive than the diversity and character of evidence that supports σπλαγχνισθείς. (2) At least two other passages in Mark, which represent Jesus as angry (3.5) or indignant (10.14), have not prompted over-scrupulous copyists to make corrections. (3) It is possible that the reading ὀργισθείς either (a) was suggested by ἐμβριμησάμενος of ver. 43, or (b) arose from confusion between similar words in Aramaic (compare Syriac ethraḥam, “he had pity,” with ethra‘em, “he was enraged”).6

Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. 1994. A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) . United Bible Societies: London; New York

JW:
The Evidence for "Mark's" Jesus being angry here is even better than what Metzger says above. Moving up the Textual Critic scale France points out in NIGTC that unlike the other two examples of "Mark's" Jesus being angry cited by Metzger, in 1:41 there is no apparent reason why Jesus would be angry. Trying to supply a reason has resulted in some entertaining Apologymnastics.

As we move further up the Textual Critic scale (me) there is another reason for "Mark" to attribute anger to his Jesus here. Throughout "Mark" the author uses the Literary Technique of assigning the same Emotion at the Start and End of Related Blocks of his story. The "Amazing/Surprised" emotion is the most common. This Emotion helps create a Tone for the entire related story.

Mark 1: (NIV)

38 "Jesus replied, "Let us go somewhere else—to the nearby villages—so I can preach there also. That is why I have come." 39So he traveled throughout Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and driving out demons.
A Man With Leprosy
40A man with leprosy[f] came to him and begged him on his knees, "If you are willing, you can make me clean."
41Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!" 42Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured. "

JW:
So at the Start of the Galilean ministry Jesus is Angry.

Mark 3 (NIV)

"1 Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there. 2Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath. 3Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."
4Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.
5He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored. 6Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.
Crowds Follow Jesus
7Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. 8When they heard all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. 9Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him. 10For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him. 11Whenever the evil[a] spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God." 12But he gave them strict orders not to tell who he was.
The Appointing of the Twelve Apostles
13Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him. 14He appointed twelve—designating them apostles[b]—that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15and to have authority to drive out demons. 16These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter 17James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder 18Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot 19and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him."

JW:
So at the End of the Galilean ministry Jesus is Angry.

An important Christian Doctrine is that Jesus was a perfect role model for human behaviour. In 1:41 a Jesus who gets angry for no apparent reason is less than a perfect role model.

Using Literary conventions like this is another argument for Markan priority as "Matthew" and "Luke" tend to undo this kind of Emotional Connection at the Start and End of Sections. This Type of Intentional Editing is a very good category of Evidence for Markan priority.

"Mark's" use of "angry" for Jesus' emotion at the Start (1:41) and End (3:1) of Jesus first Ministry (Galilean) provides an excellent Ironic Contrast to Jesus' lack of emotion at his final Mission (Passion) and displays once again Reversal and Transfer of Emotion, here anger, to those opposed to Jesus ("The Jews").

Joseph

EDITOR, n.
A person who combines the judicial functions of Minos, Rhadamanthus and Aeacus, but is placable with an obolus; a severely virtuous censor, but so charitable withal that he tolerates the virtues of others and the vices of himself; who flings about him the splintering lightning and sturdy thunders of admonition till he resembles a bunch of firecrackers petulantly uttering his mind at the tail of a dog; then straightway murmurs a mild, melodious lay, soft as the cooing of a donkey intoning its prayer to the evening star. Master of mysteries and lord of law, high-pinnacled upon the throne of thought, his face suffused with the dim splendors of the Transfiguration, his legs intertwisted and his tongue a-cheek, the editor spills his will along the paper and cuts it off in lengths to suit. And at intervals from behind the veil of the temple is heard the voice of the foreman demanding three inches of wit and six lines of religious meditation, or bidding him turn off the wisdom and whack up some pathos.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Toto · 05-28-2008, 08:47 AM

Re the Wallace-Ehrman debate:

MP3 can be dowloaded for $10. (These apologists seems really excited by it.) - note the dowload site is here:

Quote:

This Download contains the full conference sessions (including the Friday night dialogue between Dr. Bart Ehrman and Dr. Daniel Wallace) of the 2008 Greer-Heard Point-Counterpoint Forum on The Textual Reliability of the New Testament in MP3 Format. In addition to the Friday Night Dialogue and concluding comments, the following sessions are included:

Michael Holmes: “Textual Transmission in the Second Century”
David Parker: “What is the Text of the New Testament”
Dale Martin: "The Necessity of a Doctrine of Scripture"
William Warren: “Who Changed the Text and Why?"

But from the press description, it sounds like they are just repeating the greatest hits. :huh:

There is more description on the youcallthisculture blog.

JoeWallack · 05-30-2008, 05:43 AM

DamnKid (DJ Boborobos)

Story background: It's Herod's Palace, Saturday night. The warm up
ACTS have just finished and the place is hoppin. The Manager/MC goes
on stage to introduce the headliner. The crowd has been whipped up
into an eschatological frenzy. If they don't get their feature act
soon, someone is going to be crucified. Showtime!

Manager: Okay, okay. I know you're all dying for our featured act,
but first I have a few announcements to make. Next week at Herod's
Palace the always popular Balaam and his talking donkey, the world's
greatest ventriloquist act. I swear you will not be able to
see the donkey's lips moving. And the week after, back by popular
request, the number one burlesque show on the Gaza Strip, Eve West and
W.C. Snake. (Lowers voice) when she's bad she's very bad but when
she disobeys she's even better. (Wrinkles eyebrows) guys, you
might want to start working on your alibis early. (Some guys in
audience start nodding in agreement). We also have a VIP with us here
tonight. Sitting in the balcony next to our own beloved King Herod is
the Governor of this region for the mighty Roman Empire, the
honorable Pontias Pilate. Pilate stands up and waves to sparse
applause.

JW:
Further Irony during Jesus' Passion is that most people that React Negatively to Jesus during his Passion at the Text level Ironically confirm Jesus Positively at the Sub-text level:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_14

Resurrection context

Quote:

14:58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands.

Confirmation that Jesus predicted the Resurrection.

Religious Context

Quote:

14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and saith unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

Confirmation that Jesus is the Messiah and son of God.

Quote:

14:65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the officers received him with blows of their hands.

14:66 And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest;

Confirmation that Jesus is a Prophet.

Political Context

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_15

Quote:

15:2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering saith unto him, Thou sayest.

Confirmation that Jesus is King of the Jews

Military Context

Quote:

15:16 And the soldiers led him away within the court, which is the Praetorium; and they call together the whole band.

15:17 And they clothe him with purple, and platting a crown of thorns, they put it on him;

15:18 and they began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews!

Confirmation that Jesus is the supreme power.

Legal Context

Quote:

15:26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Written confirmation that proper authority and procedure determined Jesus King of the Jews.

Joseph

PROPHECY, n.
The art and practice of selling one's credibility for future delivery.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

JoeWallack · 06-01-2008, 07:40 AM

Mark II

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1

Quote:

1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

It's probable that "the Son of God" is Forged and possible that "Christ" is as well (so to speak).

Let's look at "Mark's" other uses of the offending Word "gospel" (εὐαγγελίου):

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_8:35

Quote:

8:35 For whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel`s shall save it.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_10:29

Quote:

10:29 Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel`s sake,

The other two uses of "Gospel" are quite Ironic which supports an intentional Ironic first use of "Gospel". The basic meaning of "εὐαγγελίου" is "good news" but also acquired a narrower meaning of "Gospel" = story of Jesus, by the time "Mark" wrote. Regardless of which meaning "Mark" meant, the basic meaning of "good news" would still be associated with the word.

As 1:1 is Editorial comment it clearly is intended for the Reader at the Sub-text level. The Irony definitely exists at the Text level:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1

Quote:

1:5 And there went out unto him all the country of Judaea, and all they of Jerusalem; And they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

1:6 And John was clothed with camel`s hair, and [had] a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey.

1:7 And he preached, saying, There cometh after me he that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.

At the Beginning everyone comes to the messenger to hear about the coming Messenger (Jesus).

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_16

Quote:

16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not amazed: ye seek Jesus, the Nazarene, who hath been crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold, the place where they laid him!

16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, He goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

16:8 And they went out, and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them: and they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid.

After this Messenger arrives and does that thing he does, at the End no one comes to the messenger to hear about the departed Messenger (Jesus).

Not such good news at the Text level. Sounds more like one of those Good News/ Bad News jokes:

Okay everyone, I've got some good news and some bad news about Jesus (Christ). First the Bad News, there is no "Good News". Now the Good News, I won't tell you the Bad News!

Despite the above, Christians still generally have Faith that there is no Irony here at the Text level. At a higher critical level, Skeptics are increasingly seeing the Irony at the Text level here. At the Sub-text level though most Skeptics do not see Irony here as they think "Mark" intended a straight-forward successful Jesus message for the Christian audience. But, as Longshanks said in the classic Braveheart when told that his plan to bring back the custom of the Lord having conjewgal rights on the first night of legalized meow was a great idea, "Is it?".

What's instructive here in the context of HJ/MJ is how "Matthew"/"Luke" changed the beginning of "Mark's" Gospel to move from Revelation as the source of the Gospel to supposed Historical witness:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Matthew_1

Quote:

1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren;

"Matthew" provides a historical context, a genealogy, but his source is the Jewish Bible.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Luke_1

Quote:

1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us,

1:2 even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word,

1:3 it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus;

1:4 that thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed.

"Luke" provides a historical context, an investigation, but his source appears to be Josephus

http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/t...us/apion1.html

Quote:

1. I SUPPOSE that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most excellent Epaphroditus, (2) have made it evident to those who peruse them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the Greek tongue. However, since I observe a considerable number of people giving ear to the reproaches that are laid against us by those who bear ill-will to us, and will not believe what I have written concerning the antiquity of our nation, while they take it for a plain sign that our nation is of a late date, because they are not so much as vouchsafed a bare mention by the most famous historiographers among the Grecians. I therefore have thought myself under an obligation to write somewhat briefly about these subjects, in order to convict those that reproach us of spite and voluntary falsehood, and to correct the ignorance of others, and withal to instruct all those who are desirous of knowing the truth of what great antiquity we really are. As for the witnesses whom I shall produce for the proof of what I say, they shall be such as are esteemed to be of the greatest reputation for truth, and the most skillful in the knowledge of all antiquity by the Greeks themselves. I will also show, that those who have written so reproachfully and falsely about us are to be convicted by what they have written themselves to the contrary. I shall also endeavor to give an account of the reasons why it hath so happened, that there have not been a great number of Greeks who have made mention of our nation in their histories. I will, however, bring those Grecians to light who have not omitted such our history, for the sake of those that either do not know them, or pretend not to know them already.

In the context of HJ/MJ both "Matthew" and "Luke" are Reacting to "Mark" as Revelation but neither appear to have any historical witness as a source.

Joseph

PROPHECY, n.
The art and practice of selling one's credibility for future delivery.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Solo · 06-01-2008, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeWallack

Let's look at "Mark's" other uses of the offending Word "gospel" (εὐαγγελίου):

The other two uses of "Gospel" are quite Ironic which supports an intentional Ironic first use of "Gospel". The basic meaning of "εὐαγγελίου" is "good news" but also acquired a narrower meaning of "Gospel" = story of Jesus, by the time "Mark" wrote.

A strange assertion from someone who maintans Mark was pulling the story out of thin air. It would be good to see also some internal evidence that ευαγγελίον actually did mean a "story of Jesus" when Mark was updating the Pauline usage of the term.

Quote:

After this Messenger arrives and does that thing he does, at the End no one comes to the messenger to hear about the departed Messenger (Jesus).

Actually, there are two women who come to the messenger and hear about the departed Messenger.

Quote:

Not such good news at the Text level.

You are out of your mind, JW. The good news IS the TEXT LEVEL !!!
Mark uses intuitively a self-referencing, recursive pattern of exposition which in denying the disciples access to the ευαγγελίον, grants it to the reader of the text. This is what Levy-Bruhl called participation mystique. Mark inserts the reader into the texts (by proxies). That's the whole (or, at any rate, most of the) clever setup of Mark. How ironic that you can't see that !

Quote:

Sounds more like one of those Good News/ Bad News jokes:

Okay everyone, I've got some good news and some bad news about Jesus (Christ). First the Bad News, there is no "Good News". Now the Good News, I won't tell you the Bad News!

Despite the above, Christians still generally have Faith that there is no Irony here at the Text level.

There is no irony at the "Text level": the TEXT level says FAITH=JESUS=GOSPEL=SALVATION.

Quote:

8:35 For whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel`s shall save it.

The alternative to FAITH, to the miracles through pneuma, the healing powers, the resurrected body of Christ, and to a dreamed up connection to Jesus, was for Mark to agree with his detractors and admit that he (and and his Jesus) are insane ! Don't you get that, Joe Wallack ? Here is how my manic theory of Christ works, in the words of Chesterton:

The madman is not the man who has lost his reason.
The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason.
The madman’s explanation of a thing is always complete, and often
in a purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly, the
insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this may
be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of madness.
If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against him, you
cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that they are
conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators would do. His explanation
covers the facts as much as yours. Or if a man says that he is the rightful King of
England, it is no complete answer to say that the existing authorities call him mad;
for if he were the King of England that might be the wisest thing for the existing
authorities to do. Or if a man says that he is Jesus Christ, it is no answer to tell him
that the world denies his divinity; for the world denied Christ’s.
- G.K.Chesterton, The Maniac (in Collected Works I.) (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Mark could have written this.

Ironic enough for you ?! :wave:

Jiri

JoeWallack · 06-03-2008, 07:41 AM

Mark II

JW:
Regarding the Ironic Contrast, Transfer and Reversal of "Family" in "Mark":

Jesus Literal Family

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_6:3

Quote:

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended in him.

"Mark's" Jesus' Definition of Family

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_3

Quote:

3:31 And there come his mother and his brethren; and, standing without, they sent unto him, calling him.

3:32 And a multitude was sitting about him; and they say unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

3:33 And he answereth them, and saith, Who is my mother and my brethren?

3:34 And looking round on them that sat round about him, he saith, Behold, my mother and my brethren!

3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

"Mark's" Jesus' Spiritual Family

1) Mary, the Mother of Brothers:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_15

Quote:

Mark 15:40 And there were also women beholding from afar: among whom [were] both Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;

2) Brother James:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1

Quote:

1:19 And going on a little further, he saw James the [son] of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the boat mending the nets.

3) Joses

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_15

Quote:

15:43 there came Joseph of Arimathaea, a councillor of honorable estate, who also himself was looking for the kingdom of God; and he boldly went in unto Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.

4) No Replacement for Judas:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_14

Quote:

14:21 For the Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him: but woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had not been born.

5) Simon

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_1

Quote:

1:16 And passing along by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting a net in the sea; for they were fishers.

So all literal Mothers and Brothers of Jesus are Replaced by Followers of Jesus except for Judas. Ironic Transfer.

Another ReMarkable parallel is that all the Brother names here can be found in a familyiar Josephus story:

Antiquities of the Jews 20.102

Quote:

"CONCERNING THEUDAS AND THE SONS OF JUDAS THE GALILEAN; AS ALSO WHAT CALAMITY FELL UPON THE JEWS ON THE DAY OF THE PASSOVER.

[97] NOW it came to pass, while Fadus was procurator of Judea, that a certain magician, whose name was Theudas, 1 persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it; and many were deluded by his words. However, Fadus did not permit them to make any advantage of his wild attempt, but sent a troop of horsemen out against them; who, falling upon them unexpectedly, slew many of them, and took many of them alive. They also took Theudas alive, and cut off his head, and carried it to Jerusalem. This was what befell the Jews in the time of Cuspius Fadus's government.

[100] Then came Tiberius Alexander as successor to Fadus; he was the son of Alexander the alabarch of Alexandria, which Alexander was a principal person among all his contemporaries, both for his family and wealth: he was also more eminent for his piety than this his son Alexander, for he did not continue in the religion of his country. Under these procurators that great famine happened in Judea, in which queen Helena bought corn in Egypt at a great expense, and distributed it to those that were in want, as I have related already. And besides this, the sons of Judas of Galilee were now slain; I mean of that Judas who caused the people to revolt, when Cyrenius came to take an account of the estates of the Jews, as we have showed in a foregoing book. The names of those sons were James and Simon], whom Alexander commanded to be crucified. But now Herod, king of Chalcis, removed Joseph, the son of Camydus, from the high priesthood, and made Ananias, the son of Nebedeu, his successor. And now it was that Cumanus came as successor to Tiberius Alexander; as also that Herod, brother of Agrippa the great king, departed this life, in the eighth year of the reign of Claudius Caesar. He left behind him three sons; Aristobulus, whom he had by his first wife, with Bernicianus, and Hyrcanus, both whom he had by Bernice his brother's daughter. But Claudius Caesar bestowed his dominions on Agrippa, junior.

[105] Now while the Jewish affairs were under the administration of Cureanus, there happened a great tumult at the city of Jerusalem, and many of the Jews perished therein. But I shall first explain the occasion whence it was derived. When that feast which is called the passover was at hand, at which time our custom is to use unleavened bread, and a great multitude was gathered together from all parts to that feast, Cumanus was afraid lest some attempt of innovation should then be made by them; so he ordered that one regiment of the army should take their arms, and stand in the temple cloisters, to repress any attempts of innovation, if perchance any such should begin; and this was no more than what the former procurators of Judea did at such festivals. But on the fourth day of the feast, a certain soldier let down his breeches, and exposed his privy members to the multitude,"

There are also interesting parallels to John the Baptist and the Passover Plot.

Note that "Mark's" likely primary source, Paul, gives no instruction in 1 Thessalonians regarding Families, where he gives instruction on how to escape the coming Wrath:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?tit...hessalonians_5

Quote:

5:12 But we beseech you, brethren, to know them that labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;

5:13 and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for their work`s sake. Be at peace among yourselves.

5:14 And we exhort you, brethren, admonish the disorderly, encourage the fainthearted, support the weak, be longsuffering toward all.

5:15 See that none render unto any one evil for evil; but always follow after that which is good, one toward another, and toward all.

5:16 Rejoice always;

5:17 pray without ceasing;

5:18 in everything give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus to you-ward.

5:19 Quench not the Spirit;

5:20 despise not prophesyings;

5:21 prove all things; hold fast that which is good;

5:22 abstain from every form of evil.

If there is any message above for Family it's don't treat them any different than anyone else. Quite Ironic considering the best defined belief of the religious right is Family. What is especially Ironic here is that even though Paul has a top priority message of Enduring Affliction in Silence, and a low priority regarding Family, anyone who has ever been married knows that Enduring Affliction in Silence is what marriage and children are all about!

Joseph

PLAGIARISM, n.
A literary coincidence compounded of a discreditable priority and an honorable subsequence.
PLAGIARIZE, v.
To take the thought or style of another writer whom one has never, never read.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

JoeWallack · 06-15-2008, 11:44 AM

It's Good To Be The King

JW:
Regarding the Ironic Contrast, Transfer and Reversal of The Home Court Crowd in "Mark":

The Triumphal Entry

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_11

Quote:

11:7 And they bring the colt unto Jesus, and cast on him their garments; and he sat upon him.

11:8 And many spread their garments upon the way; and others branches, which they had cut from the fields.

11:9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, Hosanna; Blessed [is] he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

11:10 Blessed [is] the kingdom that cometh, [the kingdom] of our father David: Hosanna in the highest.

11:11 And he entered into Jerusalem, into the temple; and when he had looked round about upon all things, it being now eventide, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve.

Note that upon Jesus' Ascension to Jerusalem the Home Court Sincerely Acclaims Jesus as King at the Text level. At the Sub-text level though the Reader knows that this is not what makes Jesus King.

The Defeated Exit

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_15

Quote:

15:29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ha! Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,

15:30 save thyself, and come down from the cross.

15:31 In like manner also the chief priests mocking [him] among themselves with the scribes said, He saved others; himself he cannot save.

15:32 Let the Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reproached him.

Note that upon Jesus' Descent from Jerusalem the Home Court Insincerely Acclaims Jesus as King at the Text level. At the Sub-text level though the Reader knows that this is what makes Jesus King.

JC(H) doesn't quite get there but here we have the extreme Ironic Contrast that Jerusalem Sincerely recognizes Jesus as King when he is not and Insincerely recognizes Jesus as King when he is.

Joseph

PLAGIARISM, n.
A literary coincidence compounded of a discreditable priority and an honorable subsequence.
PLAGIARIZE, v.
To take the thought or style of another writer whom one has never, never read.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

JoeWallack · 06-28-2008, 03:43 PM

JW:
With apologies to Jeffrey Gibson I have to confess that I found a great example of "Markan" Irony in The Anchor Bible Commentary:

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_3

Quote:

3:1 And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there who had his hand withered.

3:2 And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him.

3:3 And he saith unto the man that had his hand withered, Stand forth.

3:4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful on the sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? to save a life, or to kill? But they held their peace.

3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth; and his hand was restored.

3:6 And the Pharisees went out, and straightway with the Herodians took counsel against him, how they might destroy him.

Here we have the Ironic contrast that "The Jews" are offended that Jesus violates the Sabbath by Healing and than go right out and plan to kill Jesus. On the Sabbath. Also note the Transfer and Reversal. In the Ministry Jesus has the Emotion, lectures and has the last word and his opponents show no emotion, are silent or silenced. In the Passion Jesus has no Emotion, is silent or silenced and it is his opponents who have emotion, lecture him and have the last word.

Joseph

SUCCESS, n.
The one unpardonable sin against one's fellows. In literature, and particularly in poetry, the elements of success are exceedingly simple, and are admirably set forth in the following lines by the reverend Father Gassalasca Jape, entitled, for some mysterious reason, "John A. Joyce."

The bard who would prosper must carry a book,
Do his thinking in prose and wear
A crimson cravat, a far-away look
And a head of hexameter hair.
Be thin in your thought and your body'll be fat;
If you wear your hair long you needn't your hat.

http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.