Iskander

Diogenes the Cynic

Why on earth do you think I put any stock in the traditional authorship of Mark?

aa5874

Well, why do you accept the traditional view that Jesus was from Nazareth??? You discredit your sources yet Trust them for history without corroboration.

Solo

On washing hands: Jesus uses the adopted custom of the Pharisees (to maintain ritual purity as it was practiced by the temple priests) which they apparently foisted on the 'am ha'aretz, "people of the land" i.e. everyone. See Marcus' Mark 1-8, vol 1. p 440 for comments. He admits "all the Jews" is stricty speaking incorrect. To me it looks like a typical Markan exaggeration, to justify vituperative sarcasm, hurled here at the Pharisees' excessive demands. Some ancient manuscripts of Mark at 7:4 include the requirement to wash ritually (baptisountai) also beds, or dining couches (klinh).

The Sanhedrin trial is deliberately a comedy of errors. To begin with the night setting I interpret as an allusion to the experiences of severe insomnia in people high on the spirit. Note how many of the "significant events" of Mark's gospel take place between sunset and the crack of dawn. Ironically, the court obliges the one persecuted in sitting at night.

The false charge that Jesus vowed to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days is an allusion to Paul's idea of one's body as temple (1 Cr 6:19). The "rebuilding" speaks of the resurrection. Mark's assertion of Paul's concepts and sayings is of course paradoxical and used to tell a mystery. (Matthew, who was evidently incensed by Mark's shameless proclamation of Paul through the the passion play, has the Sanhedrin counsels mock Jesus by slapping him and demanding, "Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who is it that struck you?" ie. prophesy something that has already happened Mt 26:68).

The blasphemy conviction is similarly provoked by the chief priest and Jesus talking past each other. When the priest asks "Are you the Christ, son of the blessed ?" he evidently references the classical Davidic king, the same messiah that Peter confessed at Caesarea Philippi. So what the priest asks is more or less direct, are you the king that is to come ? But Jesus knows that he is not that kind of Messiah. He knows that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. So, when Jesus says "I am" he references the spiritual messiahship of the Paulines, which of course the Sanhedrin does not know anything about. The problem is that Jesus compromises himself by placing the son of man at the right hand of power (Exd 15:6 -Thy right hand, O LORD, glorious in power, thy right hand, O LORD, shatters the enemy.) The equation between himself and the heavenly power of the Lord naturally would have been seen as blasphemous, if he had made it, but that's just a dramatical ploy. Paradoxically again, this is something interpreted by the priests; it does not flow from Jesus says. Mark is fulfilling the scriptures: in this case the first half of 1 Corinthians 1:23: "Christ crucified, a stumbing block to the Jews......".

Best,
Jiri

Solo

I was commenting on the probability that Mark was making here a sarcastic comment on the discrepancy of:

1 Samuel 23:6 : When Abiathar the son of Ahimelech .....

2 Samuel 8:17 : .... and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar ...

by using the 2 Sam genealogy referencing the eating of the bread of presence.....

Best,
Jiri

aa5874

It is completely unsubstantiated that the author of gMark was aware of any Pauline writings about Universal Salvation by the Resurrection by Jesus after he was Sacrificed.

The Markan Jesus was NOT a Savior, did NOT preach that he would be Sacrificed for the Sins of all Mankind, did NOT want the Jews to be converted, did NOT want the Jews to know he was Christ and did NOT start any new religion under the name of Christ.

Mark 9 Nothing about Salvation by the Crucifixion and resurrection in gMark.

It is Chinese Whispers that the author of gMark was aware of the Pauline writings.

Diogenes the Cynic

When did I say I accepted that?

Solo

Mk 10:44-45 .... and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.
For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

compare with Paul :

1 Cr 9:19 For though I am free with respect to all, I have made myself a slave to all...
Gal 3:13 ...Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree"--
Best,
Jiri

aa5874

The author did NOT claim Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech or that Ahimelech was the son of Abiathar so we cannot assume any sarcasm.

In any event, since we have the Short-Ending gMark it is almost certain that it is BEFORE the PAULINE letters.

The short-ending gMark bears NO resemblance to the Pauline letters and deals with the supposed Life of a MIRACLE WORKER and Son of God who was REJECTED by his own people, was Crucified and Resurrected.

The Pauline writings have NOT ONE MIRACLE of Jesus and BEGINS EXACTLY where gMark ENDS.

The Pauline Jesus VISITED OVER 500 people but NOT ONE disciple-No body- was visited by Jesus in gMark.

1. gMark---Lots of MIRACLES---NO resurrection visits.

2. Pauline letters---NO Miracles--Lots of resurrection visits.


3. The earliest authors Copied the gMark story virtually 100% and word for word.

4. The earliest authors Copied 000% of the Pauline letters--ZERO words.

The PAULINE letters most likely were AFTER gMark because NONE of the early writers EMULATED his letters at all. They COMPLETELY emulated gMark.