TedM

We will have to agree to disagree. There are methods of analyzing biased material to gleen the real truth.

TedM

ok

Ok, but I still intend to address the other ones you have already spent time on.

That's true. I trust my incredulilty...perhaps more than I should..perhaps not. That's why I posted here -- as a way to test my own reactions to it all.

aa5874

How do you intend to discredit the author of gMark and then turn around and use the very author, without external corroboration, to glean YOUR truth?

You are attempting to imagine your own truth and ignore evidence.

Please state exactly what you know to be historical with respect to Jesus in gMark?

TedM

It is speculation, I agree. But, unlike other later gospels that seem to cover a 3-4 year ministry, Mark's covers a much shorter period. This might be closer to the truth. The shorter the duration, the less would really be known about him.


Ok. Personally I think it is odd to portray the Messiah as having an apparently normal upbringing prior to suddenly displaying all these wondrous abilities. Seems more likely to be based on some history than fiction based the expectations for a Messiah.

Why do you think the mother was mentioned and not the father? Because he is the "Son of God"? Well, whoever said he should have a mother then? Why does Mark not talk about this relationship between God and Mary? Might it make more sense that he had a human father who was no longer living--which coincides with a tradition about Joseph having been older? Or a human father who was unknown--which coincides with the Jewish tradition that he was the product of a illegitimate union?


Mark's Jesus was extremely offensive to the Pharisees. He is at odds with them throughout the entire book. It would have been embarrassing to a good Jew for the Messiah to be breaking Jewish law and cavorting with sinners. Mark doesn't show evidence of embarrassment because he isn't embarrassed for Jesus. Maybe 'embarrassing' is not the right word here. He does recognize that Jesus' conduct was contrary to what was considered appropriate to the highest religious authorities.

The idea that the highest religious authorities were behind the crucifixion could arguably have first appeared in gMark. Very interesting. Seems an unlikely source for the killing of the Messiah..What was the source for that, I wonder?..just thinking out loud here.

TedM

Not MY truth--THE truth. How? By using superior intelligence of course!

What is not said or how something is said is often more important than what is said. Since you don't understand that, we have no need to continue.

aa5874

Why does speculation help in determining the truth in gMark?

You must also agree that speculation resolves nothing in gMark.

TedM

It's called testing a hypothesis. We know that Mark either is
1. creating a fictional Jesus with full knowledge
2. passing along traditions of a fictional Jesus with or without knowing he is fictional
3. passing along traditions of a real Jesus
4. some combination of the above.

Each criteria would come with a different set of expectations and evidence.
Speculation can help in testing which scenario(s) a hypothesis best fits

aa5874

And you are going to use gMark to speculate on gMark!

What futility! What a waste of time!

You will need sources external of gMark, and external of the Church writers, to TEST your proposals or "hypotheses".

You will also need to establish when gMark was written.

And again, the hypothesis or proposal that Jesus was or believed to be a mere man who lived in Galilee for about thirty years and was worshiped as a God by Jews, and was believed to be the Son of God, is totally contrary to the commandments of God.

The hypothesis or proposal that the Markan Jesus was always believed to be the Son of God is FAR BETTER and compatible with gMark.

TedM

Perhaps. Feel free to interact with my 11 points and provide your own explanations for them. Otherwise, thanks for sharing your opinions.

aa5874

But, that is exactly what I have ALREADY done.

Your 11 speculative points all fail to take into account that the author of gMark claimed the disciples WITNESSED Jesus walking of the sea and that Peter, James and John WITNESSED the transfiguration of Jesus.

Both events are NOT within the realms of human activity but of MYTHS.