Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Steven Carr · 05-20-2012, 01:44 AM

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/20...ark-community/

Another very excellent article by Larry Hurtado.

I quote '“The Markan community has failed to provide even the semblance of a control on readings of the Gospel of Mark. . . . .The reason for this is that virtually every scholar who discovers a Markan community behind the Gospel . . . discovers a different Markan community.”

NT scholars continue positing a “community” behind Mark and other NT texts because “that is what we do”, and as historical critics most operate with a sense that the provenance of a text can provide a necessary control on interpretation.

The Markan “community” is “the product of highly speculative, viciously circular and ultimately unpersuasive and inconclusive reading.” '

All you have to do is substitute 'historical Jesus ' for 'Markan community' and you will get an accurate portrayal of mainstream New Testament scholarship.

Of course, that is the very thing you are not allowed to do.

Duvduv · 05-20-2012, 02:27 AM

Steven, there are many examples of arguments claiming that some group followed this or that gospel as a holy Scripture, but there is no actual evidence that this is so. There is no evidence that the original writers of any Christian sect thought they were writing holy writ.
This is seen in the fact of so many texts, gospels and books of Acts. Not to mention the fact of all the contradictions among the story lines and theologies. Had they intended to put together a set of holy Scriptures there would be much greater consistency.

Duvduv · 05-20-2012, 08:17 AM

I think it is clear that the people who wrote all the assorted Acts and gospels of the apocrypha and Nag Hammadi did not intend to provide their own contribution to a canon of a New Testament. And it stands to reason that the authors of the epistles and canonical gospels also did not intend their texts for such a purpose. It is only within the context of the emerged church with its officialdom and hierarchy that a canon was of importance and was composed of texts from among the many that were circulating around.

If that is so, then the author of Mark also did not intend to write a supplement to the Hebrew Scriptures as any kind of "new testament" text. Certainly the authors of the other canonical gospels and the epistles did not have such an intention either. If one wanted to write a holy writ, why would he do so in the form of letters at all?

Then why were any of these texts (canonical, apocryphal, gnostic) preserved at all if they were not intended to be revered as a supplement to the Hebrew Scriptures? It isn't sufficient to say that the Orthodox regime wrote them all from scratch since there are some texts that are not in the canon that were written by others. But if all the other texts followed on after the canonical ones, what purpose were they supposed to serve?

Duvduv · 05-20-2012, 08:18 AM

Of course one must ask what a "Markan community" (of which there is no evidence of the existence of such a community at all) was supposed to represent focused solely on one little story called GMark, especially assuming that such a group did not consider the gospel story to be equivalent to the writings of the Tanakh.

James The Least · 05-20-2012, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

The Markan “community” is “the product of highly speculative, viciously circular and ultimately unpersuasive and inconclusive reading.” '

All you have to do is substitute 'historical Jesus ' for 'Markan community' and you will get an accurate portrayal of mainstream New Testament scholarship.

It's interesting that Bible scholars can readily focus on some aspect of Bible study being "highly speculative (and) viciously circular," but not see that the same is true of Biblical studies in general.

aa5874 · 05-20-2012, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/20...ark-community/

Quote:

......“The Markan community has failed to provide even the semblance of a control on readings of the Gospel of Mark. . . . .The reason for this is that virtually every scholar who discovers a Markan community behind the Gospel . . . discovers a different Markan community.” (152)....

Who can discover a Markan community WITHOUT any DATA for such a community???

There is NO precise date of authorship, No known place where it was composed and no DATED gMark in the 1st century.

So how did any Scholar DISCOVER a Markan community in the first place???

From speculation and circular reasonning!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

...The Markan “community” is “the product of highly speculative, viciously circular and ultimately unpersuasive and inconclusive reading.”

What discoveries do we have in Scholarship??? Scholars use their IMAGINATION as historical DATA.

Scholarship is IN SHAMBLES.

Duvduv · 05-20-2012, 10:45 AM

And I must agree with AA here as well......

mountainman · 05-20-2012, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/20...ark-community/

Quote:

......“The Markan community has failed to provide even the semblance of a control on readings of the Gospel of Mark. . . . .The reason for this is that virtually every scholar who discovers a Markan community behind the Gospel . . . discovers a different Markan community.” (152)....

Who can discover a Markan community WITHOUT any DATA for such a community???

There is NO precise date of authorship, No known place where it was composed and no DATED gMark in the 1st century.

So how did any Scholar DISCOVER a Markan community in the first place???

From speculation and circular reasonning!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

...The Markan “community” is “the product of highly speculative, viciously circular and ultimately unpersuasive and inconclusive reading.”

What discoveries do we have in Scholarship??? Scholars use their IMAGINATION as historical DATA.

Scholarship is IN SHAMBLES.

But we have before us the scholarship on the scholarship of Eusebius, the 4th century historian of the heresiological church, who tells us all about the mark community in Alexandria.

One only has to read, for example, Robert Grant on Early Alexandrian Christianity:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert M. Grant is professor of New Testament and Early Christianity in the Divinity School of the University of Chicago, 1970

Nearly everything that is recorded about the early history of Alexandrian Christianity lies in the Church History of Eusebius. Many Alexandrian theological writings are preserved, but as might be expected they cast little light on historical events. Now the basic difficulty with Eusebius' work is that it has to be classified as "official history." It therefore contains a judicious mixture of authentic record with a good deal of suppression of fact and occasional outright lies. He wrote it in defence of himself and his friends and their outlook toward the nascent imperial church establishment under God's messenger Constantine.

He goes on to mention the markan community as follows:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Grant

Eusebius and the Alexandrian School

Origen is the main figure of the Alexandrian school in Eusebius' book, and once we have seen that his memory has been radically distorted by hagiography and apologetic it becomes highly probable that the picture of the school as a whole has suffered too.

It is clear enough that Eusebius' picture of Christian beginnings at Alexandria is an artificial construct, created by the combination of a legend about Mark as the first bishop with the notion that Philo, who had met Peter at Rome, wrote about early Christians when he described the Therapeutae. These sectarian Jews observed a "philosophical life." They allegorized the scriptures, practised noble asceticism, and observed Easter. To be sure, Philo had said they observed Pentecost, but Eusebius somehow knows that he must have had Easter in mind. The Therapeutae also knew the offices of deacon and bishop. "Anyone who is anxious for a careful examination of the points," he says, "may learn them from this man's account." [12] One may also learn how wrong Eusebius is.

So who were these Alexandrian Therapeutae ? Hmmmmmm? Hmmmmmmmm? Hmmmmmmmmmmm?

mountainman · 05-22-2012, 07:05 PM

Why SC do so many quests and threads come to a dead end with Eusebius?

The quest for the historical jesus ....

The quest for the Matthew community ...

The quest for the Mark community ...

The quest for the Luke community ...

The quest for the John community ...

The quest for the Paul community ...

The quest for the canonical christian community ...

05-20-2012, 01:44 AM	#1
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	The quest for the mark community http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/20...ark-community/ Another very excellent article by Larry Hurtado. I quote '“The Markan community has failed to provide even the semblance of a control on readings of the Gospel of Mark. . . . .The reason for this is that virtually every scholar who discovers a Markan community behind the Gospel . . . discovers a different Markan community.” NT scholars continue positing a “community” behind Mark and other NT texts because “that is what we do”, and as historical critics most operate with a sense that the provenance of a text can provide a necessary control on interpretation. The Markan “community” is “the product of highly speculative, viciously circular and ultimately unpersuasive and inconclusive reading.” ' All you have to do is substitute 'historical Jesus ' for 'Markan community' and you will get an accurate portrayal of mainstream New Testament scholarship. Of course, that is the very thing you are not allowed to do.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-20-2012, 02:27 AM	#2
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Steven, there are many examples of arguments claiming that some group followed this or that gospel as a holy Scripture, but there is no actual evidence that this is so. There is no evidence that the original writers of any Christian sect thought they were writing holy writ. This is seen in the fact of so many texts, gospels and books of Acts. Not to mention the fact of all the contradictions among the story lines and theologies. Had they intended to put together a set of holy Scriptures there would be much greater consistency.

05-20-2012, 08:17 AM	#3
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I think it is clear that the people who wrote all the assorted Acts and gospels of the apocrypha and Nag Hammadi did not intend to provide their own contribution to a canon of a New Testament. And it stands to reason that the authors of the epistles and canonical gospels also did not intend their texts for such a purpose. It is only within the context of the emerged church with its officialdom and hierarchy that a canon was of importance and was composed of texts from among the many that were circulating around. If that is so, then the author of Mark also did not intend to write a supplement to the Hebrew Scriptures as any kind of "new testament" text. Certainly the authors of the other canonical gospels and the epistles did not have such an intention either. If one wanted to write a holy writ, why would he do so in the form of letters at all? Then why were any of these texts (canonical, apocryphal, gnostic) preserved at all if they were not intended to be revered as a supplement to the Hebrew Scriptures? It isn't sufficient to say that the Orthodox regime wrote them all from scratch since there are some texts that are not in the canon that were written by others. But if all the other texts followed on after the canonical ones, what purpose were they supposed to serve?

05-20-2012, 08:18 AM	#4
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Of course one must ask what a "Markan community" (of which there is no evidence of the existence of such a community at all) was supposed to represent focused solely on one little story called GMark, especially assuming that such a group did not consider the gospel story to be equivalent to the writings of the Tanakh.

05-20-2012, 10:45 AM	#7
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	And I must agree with AA here as well......

05-22-2012, 07:05 PM	#9
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Why SC do so many quests and threads come to a dead end with Eusebius? The quest for the historical jesus .... The quest for the Matthew community ... The quest for the Mark community ... The quest for the Luke community ... The quest for the John community ... The quest for the Paul community ... The quest for the canonical christian community ...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.