Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Huon · 10-31-2012, 08:14 AM

The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew :
1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33)
2. Healing many at Gennesaret (Mk 06:53-56, Mt 14:34-36)
3. Controversy with Pharisees over eating with unwashed hands (Mk 07:01-13, Mt 15:01-09)
4. Exorcising the daughter of the woman from Tyre/Sidon (Mk 07:24-30, Mt 15:21-28)
5. Healing (with saliva) the deaf-mute in region of Decapolis (Mk 07:31-37)
6. Feeding the 4000 in the wilderness (Mk 08:01-10, Mt 15:32-39)
7. Controversy with Pharisees over a sign and warning of leaven of Pharisees and Herod (Mk 08:11-21, Mt 16:01-12)
8. Healing the blind man (after two attempts) (Mk 08:22-26).

Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

sotto voce · 10-31-2012, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew :
1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33)
2. Healing many at Gennesaret (Mk 06:53-56, Mt 14:34-36)
3. Controversy with Pharisees over eating with unwashed hands (Mk 07:01-13, Mt 15:01-09)
4. Exorcising the daughter of the woman from Tyre/Sidon (Mk 07:24-30, Mt 15:21-28)
5. Healing (with saliva) the deaf-mute in region of Decapolis (Mk 07:31-37)
6. Feeding the 4000 in the wilderness (Mk 08:01-10, Mt 15:32-39)
7. Controversy with Pharisees over a sign and warning of leaven of Pharisees and Herod (Mk 08:11-21, Mt 16:01-12)
8. Healing the blind man (after two attempts) (Mk 08:22-26).

Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

What reason could there be?

Iskander · 10-31-2012, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew :
1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33)
2. Healing many at Gennesaret (Mk 06:53-56, Mt 14:34-36)
3. Controversy with Pharisees over eating with unwashed hands (Mk 07:01-13, Mt 15:01-09)
4. Exorcising the daughter of the woman from Tyre/Sidon (Mk 07:24-30, Mt 15:21-28)
5. Healing (with saliva) the deaf-mute in region of Decapolis (Mk 07:31-37)
6. Feeding the 4000 in the wilderness (Mk 08:01-10, Mt 15:32-39)
7. Controversy with Pharisees over a sign and warning of leaven of Pharisees and Herod (Mk 08:11-21, Mt 16:01-12)
8. Healing the blind man (after two attempts) (Mk 08:22-26).

Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

One obvious explanation is that Luke did not witness every happening in the busy life of his teacher. Luke may have been doing some errand for the team and he only wrote in his dairy what he had witnessed.

The alleged miracles not found in Luke’s will remain unknown to the readers of Luke , but fortunately the homework of the other students helps to give the full picture, or near it, anyway:devil1:

Juststeve · 10-31-2012, 09:54 AM

First Like doesn't claim to have witnessed any of the events he talks about in his Gospel. He claims to have made an investigation for the purpose of setting forth an orderly account.

Many modern scholars think at least part of his investigation included use of the Gospel of Mark

When Luke leaves things from the Gospel of Mark out of his own account the simplest explanation is that he did not believe Mark's account.

It appears that Luke did not regard Mark as inerrant.

Steve

Huon · 10-31-2012, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juststeve

Many modern scholars think at least part of his investigation included use of the Gospel of Mark

When Luke leaves things from the Gospel of Mark out of his own account the simplest explanation is that he did not believe Mark's account.

It appears that Luke did not regard Mark as inerrant.

Steve

Another explanation could be that gMark and gMatt were "improved" at a late date ?

Toto · 10-31-2012, 10:22 AM

This is known as the "great omission." (Unfortunately, if you try to google that term, you are overwhelmed with references to a book of that title that has nothing to do with this issue.)

I think there was a recent thread on this. I'll try to find it.

Some Christians speculate that Luke had a copy of Mark without those passages.

Bernard Muller's explanation

Vridar on anti-Marcionite implications

Quote:

Firstly, Mark had written that the disciples thought they were seeing a spirit when they saw Jesus walking past them on water. If Marcion’s Jesus came down directly from heaven and had more the appearance of a man than the reality, this episode might well have lent itself to supporting a view of Jesus more ethereal than fleshy and boney.

Secondly, the events and miracles of this section are in gentile areas. If Marcion emphasized the foundational role of Paul in establishing the truth that the Jewish disciples of Jesus had failed to grasp, and that Paul’s role was directed among gentiles as a result of Jewish rejection of Christ, then Mark’s themes of Jesus working among both Jews and gentiles had to be revised.

Thirdly, the controversy with the Pharisees over eating with unwashed hands contained a message from Jesus condemning certain Jewish laws. It is not impossible that an anti-Marcionite propagandist would easily be persuaded to omit such an episode for its potential to be manipulated by Marcionites who were “anti-Jewish” to the extent that they regarded all Jewish laws as derived from either humans or the Demiurge.

Fourthly, the two-fold attempt to heal a blind man strikes most readers as having a symbolic relationship with the two-fold blindness of the disciples over the two mass feeding miracles (of 5000 and 4000). Once the second of these miracles was removed, being in a gentile area (see “Secondly” above), the Markan miracle lost its significance and merely made Jesus looked like Superman fast fading in the presence of kryptonite. And no-one wanted to advance Mark’s very human Jesus, one possessed by the spirit and who used spit to heal. There were more “spiritual” ways to counter Marcionism’s view of Jesus.

Vernon Robbins in By Land and By Sea: The We-Passages and Ancient Sea Voyages thought that Luke took the material in the Great Omission and worked it into Acts. He omitted references to the "sea" from the gospel about Jesus to avoid interfering with the theme of Paul's sea voyage towards Rome.

From p. 240:

Quote:

As Luke used the material in Mark 1-6:44, he systematically omitted references to the sea.70 As we have just previously noticed, Luke places the call of the disciples (Mark 1:16-20), the stilling of the storm (Mark 4:35-41), and the healing of the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:1-20) on "the lake." In this way he avoids reference to the sea. But when he gets to Mark 6:45, the mission of Jesus develops into a mission all around the Sea of Galilee and deep into Gentile territory. Precisely with the episode where Jesus walks on the sea (Mark 6:45-52), the author begins to omit all of the material. After this episode, Jesus and his disciples cross the sea again (Mark 6:53-56), a rationale for Gentile mission is established (Mark 7:1-23), then Jesus travels through Tyre and Sidon (7:24-37). Since the boat and the sea continue to play an important role through 8:21, the author of Luke omits all the episodes in the section from the walking on the sea (Mark 6:45-52) until the confession of Peter in 8:27-33. By omitting this material, the author narrates an uninterrupted ministry of Jesus in Galilee without excursions into Tyre and Sidon and other Gentile territory. Also, the author keeps Jesus out of a boat and off a body of water that may begin to play a major role in his ministry.

In sum, the vocabulary of Luke, the two episodes where Jesus goes onto the lake, and the great omission indicate that the two volume work of Luke-Acts has been designed to replace the Sea of Galilee with the Mediterranean Sea. The role of the we-passages is to orient early Christianity toward the sea that lies between Jerusalem and Rome. The author disapproves of the emphasis upon the Sea of Galilee in Mark. No inland body of water in Palestine should be called "the sea." The sea that explains the history of early Christianity is the Great Sea that extends to the end of the earth.

aa5874 · 10-31-2012, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juststeve

First Like doesn't claim to have witnessed any of the events he talks about in his Gospel. He claims to have made an investigation for the purpose of setting forth an orderly account.

Many modern scholars think at least part of his investigation included use of the Gospel of Mark

When Luke leaves things from the Gospel of Mark out of his own account the simplest explanation is that he did not believe Mark's account.

It appears that Luke did not regard Mark as inerrant.

Steve

Your statement about the author of gLuke is really illogical. There is really no evidence that the author of gLuke was writing actual historical accounts or was a contemporary of Pilate or knew any person in Judea during the reign of Tiberius.

gLuke is a compilation of fiction and myth fables about the product of a Ghost called the Son of God.

Please, explain why the author of gLuke after "investigation" believed the following in gMark:

1. The Baptism of Jesus with the Holy GHost Bird and the voice from heaven. Mark 1--Luke 3

2. The instant healing of the Leper. Mark 1--Luke 5.

3. The instant healing of the Paralytic. Mark 2--Luke 5.

4. The instant healing of the man with the withered hand--Mark 3--Luke 6.

5. The instant calming of the sea. Mark 4--Luke 8.

6. The instant raising the dead. Mark 5--Luke 8.

7. The Feeding of the 5 thousand. Mark 6--Luke 9.

8. The instant healing of the dumb. Mark 9--Luke 9.

9. The instant healing of the blind. Mark 10--Luke 16.

10. Transfiguration of Jesus. Mark 9--Luke 9.

11. The Resurrection of Jesus. Mark 16--Luke 24.

By the way there are ONLY two miracles in ALL Four Gospels.

1. The feeding of the Five thousand.

2. The Resurrection.

JoeWallack · 10-31-2012, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew :
1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33)
...
Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

JW:
Keep in mind that the original Gospel narrative, "Mark", did not intend to present historical witness. I know because the author says so (rePeatedly). In "Luke's" time, the author does want to present supposed historical witness. As you know, "Luke" was intended as a replacement for "Mark", not a supplement. Celsus writes against the Gospels c. 177 and correctly deduces that the subsequent Gospels are apologies for the original. He accurately notes that "Mark's" Sea of Galilee was not really a Sea. "Luke" realized this was a valid criticism and therefore exorcised it.

Sea Kartagraphy Markoff, Missing the Mark. Did "Mark" Get Any Geography Right?

Joseph

ErrancyWiki

Adam · 10-31-2012, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew :
1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33)
8. Healing the blind man (after two attempts) (Mk 08:22-26).

Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

That the place name "Bethsaida" occurs both at Mk 6:45 and 8:22 leads to two non-theological conclusions. (1) The Marcan Interpolation here describes an excursion by Jesus with (probably a pair of) his disciples that the source for the rest of Mark did not attend, but written down later by the same scribe who wrote the rest of gMark. (2) The opposite is equally likely. After transcribing to "Bethsaida" from his source document, Luke next picked up his scroll at Bethsaida again, but two chapters farther on.

Vorkosigan · 10-31-2012, 04:56 PM

GMark between ch 6 and ch 11 has been extensively altered by an editor. Because the block of missing parts is long and contiguous, I'm with those who argue that the writer of GLuke had a copy of GMark without those passages.

Vorkosigan

10-31-2012, 08:14 AM	#1
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Omissions in gLuke The Gospel of Luke omits a number of events which are mentioned in gMark and gMatthew : 1. Jesus walking on the sea of Galilee (Mk 06:45-52, Mt 14:22-33) 2. Healing many at Gennesaret (Mk 06:53-56, Mt 14:34-36) 3. Controversy with Pharisees over eating with unwashed hands (Mk 07:01-13, Mt 15:01-09) 4. Exorcising the daughter of the woman from Tyre/Sidon (Mk 07:24-30, Mt 15:21-28) 5. Healing (with saliva) the deaf-mute in region of Decapolis (Mk 07:31-37) 6. Feeding the 4000 in the wilderness (Mk 08:01-10, Mt 15:32-39) 7. Controversy with Pharisees over a sign and warning of leaven of Pharisees and Herod (Mk 08:11-21, Mt 16:01-12) 8. Healing the blind man (after two attempts) (Mk 08:22-26). Are there explanations for this ? Are these miracles invalid for some reason ?

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

10-31-2012, 09:54 AM	#4
Juststeve Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 758	First Like doesn't claim to have witnessed any of the events he talks about in his Gospel. He claims to have made an investigation for the purpose of setting forth an orderly account. Many modern scholars think at least part of his investigation included use of the Gospel of Mark When Luke leaves things from the Gospel of Mark out of his own account the simplest explanation is that he did not believe Mark's account. It appears that Luke did not regard Mark as inerrant. Steve

10-31-2012, 04:56 PM	#10
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	GMark between ch 6 and ch 11 has been extensively altered by an editor. Because the block of missing parts is long and contiguous, I'm with those who argue that the writer of GLuke had a copy of GMark without those passages. Vorkosigan

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.