Solo

Don't let that discourage you Stephan The place is always noisy.

So, what do you think ? I think I can make an argument for my reading of the robbers, but would like to see if anyone else has any ideas. You especially.

Now it looks like Matthew references Mark in those two characters and wants to tell his audience they are a bad lot. Luke wants to steer out of arguments between the two earlier gospels, just like with the Transfiguration, or Jesus walking on water (which cannot be reconciled, so he drops it).

Give it a shot !

Jiri

Solo

aa...you give up too easily - but it is good eye ! Consider it possible that Mark is not referencing specifically the robbers in 15:32. Ok, I give you the verses that references both 27 and 32....

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God : for if righteousness [come] by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Jiri

stephan huller

I am working on something else right now Jiri but this might be of interest:

bacht

Maybe this is too obvious, but is Mark paralleling the Transfiguration here?

Solo

No, he is not paralleling the Transfiguration butbut there is a key to understanding Mark's schema built into his koan (4:10-4:12):

Three agents have access to the gospel but only one to the mystery :

they are: the disciples, including Peter and the Zebedees who only get to see Jesus as a man, in local time of Tiberius, they do not understand the spirit that he receives at the Jordan. Hence all the misunderstandings, and their thickness, and faithlessness. The disciples think of him as Davidic Messiah, and to this Peter makes his confession.
The Sanhendrin also believe that Jesus proclaims himself the Davidic king. But no, Jesus of Nazareth of Mark is a Messiah to Jerusalem above.

Then they are the Twelve (ignore 3:17-3:19, it's a later synoptizing interpolation, the renaming of Peter does not relate to the ordination of the Twelve, but to something else.)

Then there are the demons - who know Jesus, but they are dumb and may not speak of him.

The demons belong a mysterious, larger entity: let's call it "CC" which apprehends everything in the mystery, according to Mark. "CC" and Jesus of Nazareth are one.

So, the Twelve (until Judas Iscariot incarnates at an appointed time and delivers Jesus up for the group), and "CC" are the ones who have full access to the story "non-locally". Mark liberally inserts characters from this group into the story.

Here's your decipering keys.

Jiri

aa5874

It really has ZERO to do with a "good eye". If you want to dicuss gMark then you are OBLIGATED to write EXACTLY what is found in gMark.

First of all, it was TWO thieves, NOT "robbers", that were crucified with Jesus in gMark and the ACTIVITIES during the crucifixion of the TWO thieves END at Mark 15.27.

I have ZERO obligation to agree with you. This an open discussion and I can completely DISAGREE with your claims.

In gMark, Jesus COMMANDED his disciples NOT to tell anyone he was Christ but in the Pauline writings "Paul" claimed Jesus had a NAME above every name and that every KNEE should BOW before Jesus Christ.

It is CLEAR TO ME that the author of gMark was NOT at all AWARE of the Pauline writings.

Solo

Thanks Stephan: that is the problem in exegesis, starting from the patristic church. Origen was very bright, unfortunately (he admitted himself) had no clue to the original mysteries - why ? Because he was reading the texts from a harmonized perspective. With the spirit driven out of the church in favour of apostolic authority, one could not get much out of Mark that way. He wrote an allegorical letter (he would not call it 'gospel' himself, I don't think) for the Nazarenes around in his neighbourhood. He also sent the texts the Pharisees, ridiculing them by having Jesus defeat them by illogical arguments and meshugah use of the scriptures, into which he sneaked Paul wholesale.

The key thing to grasp is that Mark is pre-church. Acts is a fairytale. From where I am sitting there was no semblance of Christianity (that we would recognize) anywhere until Matthew responded to Mark. Matthew's writ consolidated the church structures - and caused probably half of the Paulines to defect to the Gnostics over his vandalizing the great mystery gospel of Simon Magus.

Did I say that ? Ok. It's out.

Jiri

mountainman

Hi Solo,

Their names are provided by the gnostic author of the "Acts of Pilate" / "Gospel of Nicodemus".

"And let "Dysmas" and "Gestas", the two malefactors, be crucified with you."

So according to the authors of this text, who called themselves "Leucius" and "Karinus", the robbers were named "Dysmas" and "Gestas".

Best wishes



Pete

Solo

I did not ask you to agree with me, mein lieber nummerierender Freund . I asked you to consider something as a possibility.

Jiri

Solo

Thanks, Pete...that's useful.

Jiri