Ben C Smith

If the Marcan or Matthean Bethsaida section is evidence for Lucan priority, why is the Lucan central section (or travel narrative) not evidence for Marcan priority?

(I apologize for asking if you have already answered this question and I either missed it or simply forgot.)

Ben.

JoeWallack

JW:
Mark 1: (ASV)
"32 And at even, when the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were sick, and them that were possessed with demons.
33 And all the city was gathered together at the door.
34 And he healed many that were sick with divers diseases, and cast out many demons; and he suffered not the demons to speak, because they knew him."


Matthew 8: (ASV)
"16 And when even was come, they brought unto him many possessed with demons: and he cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all that were sick:
17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying: Himself took our infirmities, and bare our diseases."


Luke 4: (ASV)
"40 And when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them.
41 And demons also came out from many, crying out, and saying, Thou art the Son of God. And rebuking them, he suffered them not to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ."


JW:
My primary criticism here Yuri is that to properly determine what you are trying to determine (WhoseSonfirst?) you have to look at ALL of the underlying Greek. The English tends to hide these differences. Some of the best evidence for Markan priority is the bad grammer and inaccurate words. Why would a copier make the grammar and choice of words worse. Let's just look at the first sentence to get some idea of what you are missing:


Mark 1:32
"oyiaV de genomenhV ote edusen o hlioV eferon proV auton pantaV touV kakwV econtaV kai touV daimonizomenouV"


Matthew 8:16
"oyiaV de genomenhV proshnegkan autw daimonizomenouV pollouV"


Luke 4:40
"dunontoV de tou hliou apanteV osoi eicon asqenountaV nosoiV poikilaiV hgagon autouV proV auton o de"


"Mark" and "Matthew" agree against "Luke" as to the beginning phrase. "Mark" and "Matthew" also agree against "Luke" that they brought those possessed with demons. Unless you consider ALL the agreement/disagreement here (including specific words, conjewgations and grammar) you do sound like Youknowwho.



Joseph

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

JoeWallack

JW:
Mark 1: (ASV)
"32 And at even, when the sun did set, they brought unto him all that were sick, and them that were possessed with demons.
33 And all the city was gathered together at the door.
34 And he healed many that were sick with divers diseases, and cast out many demons; and he suffered not the demons to speak, because they knew him."


Matthew 8: (ASV)
"16 And when even was come, they brought unto him many possessed with demons: and he cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all that were sick:
17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying: Himself took our infirmities, and bare our diseases."


Luke 4: (ASV)
"40 And when the sun was setting, all they that had any sick with divers diseases brought them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them.
41 And demons also came out from many, crying out, and saying, Thou art the Son of God. And rebuking them, he suffered them not to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ."


JW:
Let's look at:

Mark
34 And he healed many that were sick with divers diseases, and cast out many demons; and he suffered not the demons to speak, because they knew him.

Luke
41 And demons also came out from many, crying out, and saying, Thou art the Son of God. And rebuking them, he suffered them not to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ.


JW:
The question is who is copying who. Ordering demons not to reveal that you are the Messiah fits extremely well with a theme of an Ironic Messianic Secret. "The Jews" don't recognize the Messiah they've waited their whole life for but the demons do and this Messiah, whose job it is to make himself known, makes sure he remains unknown. Who was more likely to have originally written this, "Mark" or "Luke", based on the overall themes of their Gospels?



Joseph

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

Yuri Kuchinsky

Are you trying to make some sort of a point here?

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky

I don't know.

None of this proves anything.

I'm now putting you on my ignore list. I've given you a chance to state your point clearly (assuming you do have some sort of a point), but so far it's just been a waste of time.

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky

You'd need to expand on this a bit, Ben. How does the Lucan central section (or travel narrative) constitute evidence for Marcan priority?

Best,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky

Hello, Ben,

I would like to follow up a bit on this testimony of Victorinus citing Lk 1:5.

Could you please give us bibliographical info for this citation? And maybe even the whole quote?

Best wishes,

Yuri.

S.C.Carlson

The Latin could be found in M. Dulaey, Victorin de Poetovio: Sur l'apocalypse et autres écrits (SC 423; Paris: Cerf, 1997). (There is also an earlier edition of the Latin by Haussleiter.)

The relevant quote is:

4. Simile leoni animal evangelium cata Johannem, quod, cum omnes evangelistae hominem factum Christum praedicaverunt, ille autem illum antequam descenderet et carnem sumeret deum praedicavit dicendo: Deus erat verbum et quoniam tamquam Leo fremens exclamavit, leonis vultum sustinet praedicatio ejus. Hominis Matheus enititur enuntiare nobis genus Mariae, unde carnem accepit Christus. Ergo dum enumerat ab Abraham usque ad David et ab David usque ad Joseph, tamquam de homine locutus est; ideo praedicatio ejus effigiem hominis accepit. Lucas quoque <a> sacerdotio Zachariae offerentis hostiam pro populo et apparente sibi angelo dum enumerat, propter sacerdotium et hostiam ipsa conscriptio vituli tulit imaginem. Marcus interpres Petri ea quae in munere docebat commemoratus conscripsit sed non ordine, et incipit prophetiae uerbo per Esaiam praenuntiato.

Incipiunt ergo sic dicendo. Johannes: In principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum; haec facies leonis. Matheus autem: Liber generationis Jesu Christi filii Dei filii David filii Abrahae; haec facies hominis. Lucas autem sic: Fuit sacerdos nomine Zacharias de vice Abia <et> mulier illi erat de filiabus Aaron; haec est imago vituli. Marcus incipit sic: Initium evangelii Jesu Christi sicut scriptum est in Esaia; advolante Spiritu coeptum est, ideo volantis aquilae habet et effigium.

My quickie translation of the Latin is:

4. The animal like a lion is the Gospel According to John, because, when all the (other) evangelists proclaimed that Christ was made a human, he, however, proclaimed that (he was) God before he descended and took on flesh, saying: The Word was God and because he cried out, roaring like a lion, his proclamation supported the face of a lion. Of the human, Matthew endeavors to declares to us the offspring of Mary, where Christ accepted flesh. Therefore, while he reckons from Abraham until David and from David until Joseph, he speaks as if (he is) from a human; thus, his proclamation took the likeness of a human. Also, while Luke reckons from the priesthood of Zacharias offering a sacrifice for the people and with an angel appearing to him, his description bore the image of the calf because of the very priesthood and sacrifice. Mark, Peter’s interpreter who remembered what he taught in his office wrote down but not in order, and he began with the word of prophesy announced by Isaiah.

Therefore they began in this way with John saying: In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word; this (is) the face of a lion. But Matthew: Book of the generation of Jesus Christ son of God son of David son of Abraham; this (is) the face of a human. But Luke so: There was a priest by the name of Zacharias of the order of Abijah and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron; this is the image of a calf. Mark begins so: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ as it was written in Isaiah; he began with the Spirit flying around, thus he also has the likeness of a flying eagle.

It seems to me that Luke's prologue was skipped simply because there was no way to turn it into a rationale for assigning it the image of a calf.

More interesting from a text-critical perspective, however, is that Victorinus joins with Aleph (first hand), Theta, 28, and Origen in not having "Son of God" in Mark 1:1.

Stephen

Yuri Kuchinsky

Actually, here's Irenaeus quoting Lk 1:2 in his AGAINST HERESIES, Book 3 (i.e. 150 years before Victorinus),

"Thus also does Luke, without respect of persons, deliver to us what he had learned from them, as he has himself testified, saying, 'Even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word.'"

(Courtesy of Kirby's e-Catena,

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/ )

Another citation is also found in AGAINST HERESIES Book 4.

Also, here's a somewhat different version of Victorinus' Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John,

http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-07/anf0...#P4618_1759538

[quote]

[T]he living creature like to a lion designates Mark, in whom is heard the voice of the lion roaring in the desert.

And in the figure of a man, Matthew strives to declare to us the genealogy of Mary, from whom Christ took flesh. Therefore, in enumerating from Abraham to David, and thence to Joseph, he spoke of Him as if of a man: therefore his announcement sets forth the image of a man.

Luke, in narrating the priesthood of Zacharias as he offers a sacrifice for the people, and the angel that appears to him with respect of the priesthood, and the victim in the same description bore the likeness of a calf.

John the evangelist, like to an eagle hastening on uplifted wings to greater heights, argues about the Word of God.

Mark, therefore, as an evangelist thus beginning, "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet; "24 The voice of one crying in the wilderness,"25 -- has the effigy of a lion.

And Matthew, "The hook of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham: "26 this is the form of a man.

But Luke said, "There was a priest, by name Zachariah, of the course of Abia, and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron:"27 this is the likeness of a calf.

But John, when he begins, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,"28 sets forth the likeness of a flying eagle.

[unquote]

Regards,

Yuri.

S.C.Carlson

That version is one that Jerome redacted to take out Victorinus's beliefs about the millennium. As can be seen in the quotation, Jerome altered Victorinius's commentary on the living creatures of Rev 4:4 to reflect his own (Jerome's) scheme.

Stephen