aa5874

The GOSPEL of the resurrection can ONLY be preached AFTER the resurrection.

Mark 8:35, Mark 10:29, Mark 13:10, Mark 14:9 are about GOOD NEWS of the FUTURE resurrection of Jesus. The Gospel MUST first be preached throughout the world.

At Mark 16.8, the last verse of Sinaiticus gMark, the visitors had NOT WITNESSED the resurrected Jesus.

If Jesus was an ACTUAL man and his body was missing THEN there would have been no Gospel, No Good News that could have been PREACHED throughout the world.

The Visitors FLED DUMBSTRUCK from the Grave after the disciples had already ABANDONED and DENIED Jesus and that is the END of the HJ of Nazareth story.

The Gospel to be preached throughout the world ONLY NEED Mark 16.9-20, all of the Sinaiticus gMark can be discarded.

In effect, we really don't need HJ just the resurrected Myth Jesus.

MCalavera

Yeah, you definitely don't deny the whole collective verses in Mark stating that Jesus is the Messiah. :devil1:

Bingo the Clown-O

Right.

Bingo the Clown-O

Not if it’s fiction. And not if the GOSPEL mentioned in Mark had nothing to do with a resurrection. One could argue that the GOSPEL mentioned in Mark 1:14, Mark 1:15, Mark 8:35, Mark 10:29, Mark 13:10, and Mark 14:9 did not include the resurrection motif.

Well, the “preached throughout the world” motif is definitely there, but I can’t find any direct support for the resurrection motif.

I’m not sure what my point is. I’m just trying to keep us honest.

------------

Fwiw, the GOSPEL could be an empty literary device. – Something that has no meaning or substance outside of the story. What I mean is, maybe Mark didn’t really expect his readers to know (in any detail) what he meant by "GOSPEL". Maybe the author was just making shit up.

aa5874

You INITIALLY only showed Mark 8.35, Mark 10.29, Mark 13.10 and Mark 14.9 and those verses do NOT mention the gospel of the Kingdom of God found in Mark 1.14-15.

Once you Examine MARK 8 you will see that it was in that very chapter Mark 8.31 when Jesus began to TEACH his disciples he would RESURRECT on the THIRD day.

Mark 8:31 - The GOOD NEWS, the gospel, is that Jesus Christ was RESURRECTED on the THIRD day.

The Good News, the gospel, of the resurrection was to be preached throughout the world.

Mark 14.9It was AFTER the supposed resurrection that the resurrected MYTH Jesus COMMISSIONED the disciples to PREACH the gospel to EVERY creature throughout the world.
Mark 16:15

MCalavera

The original Gospel had to do with the coming Kingdom of God (which never came).

Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher.

Bingo the Clown-O

Well, yea. I know. But that still allows for some flexibility. - Some room to improvise.

----------------------

Btw, was Mark's "Kingdom of God" coming to earth?

Was it all based on Hosea 6:1-2?

Maybe the followers were supposed to be resurrected on earth right along with their messiah.

I can’t be sure.

I wasn’t there.

Horatio Parker

I don't deny that the author of gMark meant to suggest that Jesus was the Messiah.

My point is that he chose to do so in an indirect fashion. And the best reason to go about it that way is to provoke thought. Down the line, someone apparently thought Mark was too vague and added the post resurrection verses.

Solo

...ehm, no, you are not getting the spiritual pun that this story represents.

The gospel constantly harps on the dichotomy of "body" as flesh and "body" that is something else. Mark simply puns and dances allegorically around Paul's discourse in 1 Cor 15:35-53:

But someone will ask "how are the dead raised ? With what kind of body do they come ?" You foolish man ! ......
So it is in the resurrection of the dead.......what is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. Is is sown in dishonour, it is raised inglory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body !

Did not Mark say in 4:11, explaining the sower parable (hello ?) that to the clueless everything (meaning the whole gospel) was in parables ?

Jesus was sown as a physical body but was raised as a spiritual body ! How could anyone be so thick to think Mark was going to leave a corpse behind ?

Isn't what Paul said to his church: Now, YOU are the body of Christ (1 Cr 12;27) ? So the solution to the missing body was that to Mark the church was the mystery of the resurrection.

When Joseph of Arimathea (=harimatha'im, Hbr. 'a pile of decay') goes to Pilate to request body of Jesus, as he also believes in the Kingdom of God, he is asking for the spiritual body (that Paul was talking about). But Pilate thinks Joe is asking not for the 'soma' but the 'ptoma' (corpse) and reacts with surprise to the notion that Jesus was already dead !

Is Joe Wallack the only guy here who can read a simple plot ?

Jiri

aa5874

Please, gMark has ZERO to do with the Pauline writings. ZERO. The Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles are MASSIVE FORGERIES written well after the 1ST century based on gMark, gMatthew, Justin Martyr, "Against Heresies" 2.22 and Aristide's Apology.

I will NOT accept any PRESUMPTIONS at all about the Pauline writings. P 46 has been dated to the mid 2nd-3rd century.