Chris Weimer

I wouldn't place this as a criteria. I doubt that the everyone Jesus spoke to was alive when Mark was written. I do think it was before the second century, I just wouldn't use that criterion.

Ben C Smith

I do, too, but the prediction was that some (not that all) standing before Jesus would not die before certain things came to pass (9.1), that the generation would not have completely passed away (13.30), that certain opponents would still be alive to see it happen (14.62).

Anyone positing a very late date for Mark and company needs to explain why the evangelists would place a prediction that was already demonstrably false on the lips of Jesus.

Ben.

Chris Weimer

Well, if Mark were late, than there wouldn't be so much of a doubt that he knew Paul. And if Mark knew Paul, than Galatians explains that answer. Futhermore, there would be a chance that Mark knew 2 Peter, which also deals with the issue.

Ben C Smith

That sounds interesting. Please explain.

2 Peter is clearly reacting to a prediction that was (widely?) expected to have been fulfilled at or by a certain time, but apparently was not. For my money, Mark 9.1; 13.30; 14.62 fit the bill nicely. If they do not, then what does?

Ben.

Chris Weimer

No it doesn't. Please excuse me on this for a while until I can find what I was looking for. (And I'm not even sure what that was. )

Sure it does. I buy the story, remember? But if 2 Peter didn't have a problem with the predictions, perhaps neither did Mark.

Ben C Smith

2 Peter has no problem (per se) with the predictions because it has reinterpreted the timescale with an OT equation (1 day = 1000 years).

Mark 9.1 et alii have no problem with the predictions, either, but apparently without having to work any reinterpretive magic. How is this to be explained? The smoothest answer is because the designated time had run out when 2 Peter was written, but it had not yet run out when Mark wrote.

Ben.

Chris Weimer

I'm fairly certain I could work recreative magic on some parts of Mark to make it align with my presumed theory.

It takes so much more work, though, no wonder I opt for the easy route.

michael wellenberg

Is there a doubt that Mark knew Paul ?

Regards

MW

cognac

It seems to me that the underlying question behind the patchwork gospels relates to what date the documents reached their final form. That is a legitimate concern, whether or not the theory of second century authorship overstates its case.

Having been a seminary student in the 80s, and deeply ensconced in the inner circle of a denonimation for most of the 90s, what I remember is that typically when Xns speak of the gospels, like Mark, they assume that the Mark in their NT is the exact same as it was when it was written in the first century. That is the other extreme the patchwork idea mitigates against.

Roger Pearse

Not least the criminal hanging on the next cross, who may not have been alive at that time, however early you date Mark.

All the best,

Roger Pearse