sotto voce

Oh dear. Luke's gospel is the longest book in the NT, and he's a failure. So poor Mark, with the shortest gospel, is in biiiiig trouble.

Chili

I agree and that should down most churches I know.

Oh but wait, it was his duty to omit it as it does not belong in Luke or he'd be going to hell too.

Sheshbazzar

Only for those who wish to pretend that there is infallible veracity in ancient mythology.

Chili

Infallible means to be "in charge of destiny" and is the Universal of what the Freeman is in the particular. All you need for this is to have saints in heaven (sic) instead of hoping for better luck after you die.

Net2004

dan wallace, christian evangelist scholar will help you understand why they failed to include it.



http://bible.org/article/synoptic-problem


3. Mark’s Harder Readings

There are several passages in Mark which paint a portrait of Jesus (or
the disciples, etc.) that could be misunderstood. These passages have
been altered in either Matthew or Luke or both on every occasion. It
is the conviction of many NT scholars that this category is a very
strong blow to the Griesbach hypothesis—and one which has not been
handled adequately by Matthean prioritists.29 Among the several
possible passages which scholars have noticed, the following are
particularly impressive to me. Still, the cumulative effect is what
makes the biggest impression.

(1) Mark 6:5-6/Matt 13:58—“he could not do any mighty work there
except . . . ”/“he did not do many works there . . . because of their
unbelief.” On this text Farmer comments: “the passage offers no clear
indication that . . . Matthew has ‘toned down’ a phrase in Mark which
‘might cause offense or suggest difficulties’.”30 But this ignores the
verbs used, for Mark suggests inability on Jesus’ part, while Matthew
simply indicates unwillingness (oujk ejduvnato vs. oujk ejpoivhsen).
Cf. also Mark 1:32-34/Matt 8:16/Luke 4:40 for a similar text.

(2) Mark 10:18/Matt 19:17/Luke 18:19—“Good teacher . . . Why do you
call me good?” (in Mark and Luke) vs. “Teacher . . . Why do you ask me
about what is good?” (Matthew). The text, as Mark has it, might imply
that Jesus denies his own deity. It is apparent that Luke did not read
it that way, but Matthew probably did. Indeed, in the Holtzmann/
Streeter view, Matthew and Luke copied Mark independently of one
another. Thus what might offend one would not necessarily offend the
other.31

(3) Mark 3:5/Luke 6:10—“he looked around at them with anger/he looked
around on them all.” Matthew omits the verse entirely, though he
includes material both before and after it (12:12-13). That Luke would
omit a statement regarding Jesus’ anger is perfectly understandable.

(4) Mark 1:12/Matt 4:1/Luke 4:1—“the Spirit drove him into the
desert” (Mark)/ “Jesus was led into the desert by the Spirit” (Matthew
and Luke). Mark uses the very harshejkbavllw, while Matthew and Luke
use (ajn)avgw, a much gentler term, to describe the Spirit’s role in
bringing Jesus to the desert for temptation.

(5) Mark 8:24-26—the different stages of a particular healing story,
omitted in Matthew and Luke. The blind man is partially healed the
first time by Jesus, then fully the second time. This is the only
healing story in the synoptic gospels which required two stages.
Perhaps this was the reason for its omission in Matthew/Luke, or
perhaps it was the fact that saliva was used as the means of healing.
32

(6) Mark 3:20-21—The statement that Jesus’ mother and brothers tried
to seize him because they said that he was insane (ejxevsth). Neither
Matthew nor Luke have this verse, apparently because it would cast
aspersions on Jesus’ mother and brothers.

sotto voce

Perhaps not.

Note that Mark, as you will remember from a previous lesson, is very much the reporter of Jesus' unique character, and of the reaction of others to him, writes that Jesus scolded his disciples:

'"Do you have eyes, but fail to see?"' Mk 8:18

Now Jesus is here talking about 'seeing' with understanding. And surely those disciples were being pretty dim in the brains department. Jesus and the disciples then came to Bethsaida, where some people asked Jesus to heal a blind man. Now why do you suppose they did that? Was it because they thought, with Jesus, they might get lucky? No, they asked because they knew that, if he so desired, Jesus could heal, instantly and completely, just as he could make the best wine without even moving out of his seat. The next thing is that Jesus takes the man out of the village. So what happens next is not for ordinary witnesses, and the man is afterwards told not to report it in the village. Jesus then uses his personal spittle to partially heal. What does the man think? That Jesus' reputation is not all it's cracked up to be? Or does he perhaps think that faith in Jesus has to be maintained, and cannot be of much use if not maintained? In any case, he is soon completely healed, and he has a choice of what he believes.

But the disciples are witnesses also. And they have been told that they can 'see' too little. They realise that they see with their minds as well as the man could when he saw people as trees. They need more faith. Jesus then takes his disciples north (north suggesting leadership to them), while asking them, "Who do you say I am?" Quite a good question, for Jews who had just witnessed four thousand people being fed by seven loaves. And having seen at Bethsaida how understanding does not always come at once. One of them says, "You are the Christ." It is after this that Jesus explains the real purpose of his presence with him, even though the disciple who spoke still does not understand much, earning a severe rebuke.

So now, the disciples can see clearly. Assisted by a visual parable.

Now, you see.

aa5874

Your speculation is of very little value because the author of gLuke included events found in gMark that seemed "too much like magic".

There are at least 10 events that are "too much like magic" in both gMark and gLuke. And in addition, the author of gLuke mentioned other events that are "too much like magic" which are not found in gMark.

The conception and ascension of Jesus found in gLuke is probably far more magical than any event in gMark.

The author of gLuke made it clear that Jesus was the product of a Holy Ghost--What Magic!!!

Net2004

both jesus and the blind man seem to be taking a shot @ the deciples who were "dim in the brain department" and christians assume that "dim in the brain department" deciples all of a sudden had awesome memories when mark, mat, luke and john wrote thier accounts.

sotto voce

It was not a question of memory. It was a question of application. Of course, it made sense with hindsight. We all have that sort of experience.

Net2004

do you not see that mark saw the deciples as failures and has blind man and jesus take a shot at them?

“I see men, for I see them like trees, walking around"

mark is telling you that the deciples should not be trusted , but you are too blind to see.


is it a suprise that the women said nothing to anyone because they had no FAITH and fear was greater than faith. do you not see ?