Tommy

One must acknowledge that gMark does strive to present itself as testimony - a charming feature of 14:54 is that it allowed Peter to witness the discussion in front of the Sanhedrin. Only a couple of lines between Christ and Pilate behind closed doors would have had to be improvised.

"A voice coming out of heaven when Jesus is baptized? Jesus tempted for 40 days in the wilderness?" - who is to say that the evangelist wasn't the only member of a finite crowd to record a voice from heaven?, furthermore, the author merely claims to have been aware of what was happening in the wilderness with non-committal accounts of animals and angels.

"Jesus talking to demons and sending them into pigs, who somehow drown themselves although they are not close to a body of water? Not to mention the numerous geographic errors."

As with the voice from heaven, if the evangelist believed there really was discourse with demons and not what we can now see as obvious examples of epilepsy and schizophrenia...
As for apparent errors - a testimony may well be sincere even if misinterpretation or clouded memory or errors in transcription, copying or translation affect historical credibility.
My feeling is that from a historiographical point of view gMark is a useful source even if it falls short of expectations for a divinely inspired text

Toto

I don't think you will find any contemporary historians who agree with this.

The mere fact that it could possibly have been the result of an eyewitness, if that eyewitness didn't see very well and made a lot of mistakes, does not make it a historical source.

But you are dragging this thread off topic. The historical value of Mark has been discussed here often enough, and found wanting. This thread is about Stephan Huller's attempt to identify Marcion with Mark at some level.

Chili

Tommy

Yeah, and someone claimed (possibly sincerely) that they witnessed such things. A UFO-encounter witness may be sincere in their claim to have encountered the extraordinary. The extraordinary content of the testimony does not of itself negate the sincerity of the testament.

Regarding 7 in gMark - the author records an absence of a body in the tomb noted by three women. The author gives credit to the stement that Jesus has departed to Gallilee to an unidentified third party in that tomb. (Quite conservative reportage, I would think).

Chili

They are very similar as look-alikes and neither went to heaven . . . and back to Galilee they go.

Remember how Eusebius call him a sophist in that letter?

I suspect that I can never convince anyone here that 'back to Galilee' equals hell on earth.

Tommy

Fine, fine, argument from authority.

Of course it doesn't necessarily make it a trustworthy and I would never argue as much, (the "didn't see very well" thing is silly).

As you wish, it was you who who initially quoted my comment.

stephan huller

bbws = 'little boy'
mrqws = Mark (Marcus)
nwn = fish, nwnws = little fish

aa5874

Claims about UFO encounters may be false.

The visitors were told Jesus was Risen--See Mark 16.6

outhouse

Gmark was written by what is claimed as a unknown author who obviously had no real idea what was going on in another culture from his own.

Gmark writes to and for a Roman audience, and clearly explains Jewish law to and for gentiles who do not understand these laws.

Its obvious it is a Hellenized legend of a what the author finds to be a Jewish teacher healer in Galilee.

Written in Koine with no tell tale translations from another language is also a compilation of previous sources both written and oral, that a eyewitness would not need to have compiled.

spin

My browser doesn't show your Estrangelo and shows little boxes, which is a good reason for you to supply a transliteration, but, if I understand you correctly, MRQWS is claimed as a diminutive. Someone then mistakenly converts that into Greek Μαρκιων (Marcion). Μαρκιων doesn't look like a diminutive in Greek, which would have an omicron as the last vowel. In fact Μαρκιων looks in form like other names, such as Νηρων or Τρυφων. What am I missing out on here?