Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TedM · 03-27-2006, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

Is there a doubt that Mark knew Paul ?

Regards

MW

I've yet to see a strong argument for the that Mark (or a 2nd century writer of GMark) was influenced by Paul's works. I think that if the writer(s) were creating fiction from Paul's works we might expect some things we don't see (like a reference to Paul, circumcision, gentile salvation), and not see some things we do see (the different portrayal of brother James)..

If GMark was written around 70AD, the writer would almost certainly have KNOWN of Paul and his mission, but of course, Jesus would not have. IF GMark were written in the mid-late 2nd century, not only is the reference to this generation not passing away problematic, but also is the relative lack of references to the spread of Christianity throughout the known world.

IMO the silences in Mark argue against both fiction inspired by Paul and the idea of creation in the mid-late 2nd century.

ted

michael wellenberg · 03-28-2006, 01:19 AM

Thanks for your reply, Ted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

I've yet to see a strong argument for the that Mark (or a 2nd century writer of GMark) was influenced by Paul's works. I think that if the writer(s) were creating fiction from Paul's works we might expect some things we don't see (like a reference to Paul, circumcision, gentile salvation), and not see some things we do see (the different portrayal of brother James)..

If GMark was written around 70AD, the writer would almost certainly have KNOWN of Paul and his mission, but of course, Jesus would not have. IF GMark were written in the mid-late 2nd century, not only is the reference to this generation not passing away problematic, but also is the relative lack of references to the spread of Christianity throughout the known world.

IMO the silences in Mark argue against both fiction inspired by Paul and the idea of creation in the mid-late 2nd century.

ted

There is indeed the problem with this generation not passing away that contends against a very late date. But is this not a problem for a date around 70, as well, given a short life time of 1st century people ?
To put it another way : what would preclude Mark and Paul being roughly contemporaries, aiming at the same goal but expressing their theological concepts in different literary genres ?

Michael

TedM · 03-28-2006, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michael wellenberg

There is indeed the problem with this generation not passing away that contends against a very late date. But is this not a problem for a date around 70, as well, given a short life time of 1st century people ?

Maybe, but not without an answer if people from "that" generation were still alive at 70AD. In other words, if the interpretation of the writer and others was that Jesus was saying "I'll return before all of you are dead", then since some of those alive during that time were still alive in 70AD, this could be considered 'acceptable'.

The longer the delay though, the more problematic it becomes. One could certainly use this as an argument for a date EARLIER than 70AD.

ted

Clivedurdle · 03-29-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

His unusually long period of office (A.D. 26-36) covers the whole of the active ministry both of St. John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ.....

....Pilate is a type of the worldly man, knowing the right and anxious to do it so far as it can be done without personal sacrifice of any kind, but yielding easily to pressure from those whose interest it is that he should act otherwise. He would gladly have acquitted Christ, and even made serious efforts in that direction, but gave way at once when his own position was threatened.

The other events of his rule are not of very great importance. Philo (Ad Gaium, 38) speaks of him as inflexible, merciless, and obstinate. ....

... The incident mentioned in St. Luke 13:1, of the Galilaeans whose blood Pilate mingled with the sacrifices, is not elsewhere referred to, but is quite in keeping with other authentic events of his rule. He was, therefore, anxious that no further hostile reports should be sent to the emperor concerning him.

The tendency, already discernible in the canonical Gospels, to lay stress on the efforts of Pilate to acquit Christ, and thus pass as lenient a judgment as possible upon his crime, goes further in the apocryphal Gospels and led in later years to the claim that he actually became a Christian. The Abyssinian Church reckons him as a saint, and assigns 25 June to him and to Claudia Procula, his wife. The belief that she became a Christian goes back to the second century, and may be found in Origen (Hom., in Mat., xxxv). The Greek Church assigns her a feast on 27 October. Tertullian and Justin Martyr both speak of a report on the Crucifixion (not extant) sent in by Pilate to Tiberius, from which idea a large amount of apocryphal literature originated. Some of these were Christian in origin (Gospel of Nicodemus), others came from the heathen, but these have all perished.....

That is the last we know of Pilate from authentic sources, but legend has been busy with his name. He is said by Eusebius (H.E., ii, 7), on the authority of earlier writers, whom he does not name, to have fallen into great misfortunes under Caligula, and eventually to have committed suicide. Other details come from less respectable sources. His body, says the "Mors Pilati", was thrown into the Tiber, but the waters were so disturbed by evil spirits that the body was taken to Vienne and sunk in the Rhône, where a monument, called Pilate's tomb, is still to be seen. As the same thing occurred there, it was again removed and sunk in the lake at Lausanne. Its final disposition was in a deep and lonely mountain tarn, which, according to later tradition, was on a mountain, still called Pilatus, close to Lucerne. The real origin of this name is, however, to be sought in the cap of cloud which often covers the mountain, and serves as a barometer to the inhabitants of Lucerne. The are many other legends about Pilate in the folklore of Germany, but none of them have the slightest authority.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12083c.htm

Catholic encyclopaedia (edited down)

Isn't dating of Jesus and therefore of Paul and Gospels dependent on Pilate?

If Pilate was used "as a type" caution is needed on all dates that seem to refer back to him!

TedM · 03-29-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12083c.htm

Catholic encyclopaedia (edited down)

Isn't dating of Jesus and therefore of Paul and Gospels dependent on Pilate?

If Pilate was used "as a type" caution is needed on all dates that seem to refer back to him!

Hi Clive. I may be misunderstanding your question here.. I recall offhand that Jesus' life can be dated by a number of other factors: The birth accounts--ie census on Herods, Luke's reference to him being 'about thirty', John the Baptist's death, Salome, John's reference to the temple taking 46 years to build, all come to mind..

Paul, I recall, refers to Agrippa, who ruled in the 50's, so Jesus' would have had to pre-date that..

ted

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.