Freethought & Rationalism Archive

03-20-2004, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zaphod pog
I am curious to know if anyone (especially theists) have any idea why Mark, the oldest of the Gospel texts, was completely silent on the divine conception as well as any post-resurrection appearances of Jesus?

Because Mark is the pagan persective and they would have no knowledge of inspired things such as Immaculate Conception and paradise regained.

They just report what the casual observer would see without any theology or spiritual insights.

Layman · 03-20-2004, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amaleq13
How would something like that happen?

If we assume there was originally more to Mark's story, isn't it more likely to have been intentionally deleted and replaced than "lost"?

I see you can't be troubled by reading the article in question.

Quote:

III. What Happened to the Original Ending?

If Mark did not end at verse 8 and the modern version is not original to the text, what happened to the original ending? Whatever it was--and we will likely never know--it probably happened fairly early in the textual tradition. Nevertheless, the most likely explanation is that the manuscript was damaged.

This is not an unlikely event. As B.H. Streeter points, the ending of a gospel written on a scroll would be a particularly vulnerable part of the manuscript. If such a manuscript was damaged, the ending (or the beginning) would be the most likely part to suffer. "There is no difficulty in supposing that the original copy of Mark, especially if the Gospel was written for the Church of Rome about A.D. 65, almost immediately lost its conclusion. The two ends of a roll would always be the most exposed to damage; the beginning ran the greater risk, but, in a book rolled from both ends, the conclusion was not safe." B.H. Streeter, The Four Gospels, A Study of Origins, at 333. N.T. Wright provides confirmation, and an interesting example, of this proposition. "[T]he beginning and ending of a scroll were always vulnerable. A glance at any edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, in particular at facsimile photographs, will reveal that even the scrolls which are preserved almost in their entirety are in many cases damaged at both ends." The Resurrection of the Son of God, at 619. Gundry adds further support for this point. "At first thought it may seem difficult to imagine that a break occurred at all; for the last segment of a scroll, by being the innermost when the scroll is rolled up, is the most protected. But on second thought, when a scroll is not rolled up at the time of a break, the last segment has been subjected to the most stress by being rolled up the most tightly, and deteriorative dampness may have been trapped in it when the scroll was rolled up." Gundry, at 1017.

Streeter adds these additional thoughts:

How in the case of Mark the damage occurred it is useless to speculate. At Rome in Nero's day a variety of "accidents" were by way of occurring to Christians and their possessions. The author of Hebrews, writing to the Roman Church, alludes to the patient endurance of "spoiling of their goods." That the little library of the Church, kept in the house of some prominent adherent, should have suffered in some 'pogram' is highly credible. Curiously enough, there is evidence that copies of Romans were in circulation which lacked the last two chapters, which looks as if one of the earliest copies of that Epistle, the one other documents of which we can be quite sure that the Roman Church had a copy of at this time, was similarly mutilated.
Streeter, at 333.

Accordingly, there is nothing extraordinary about postulating that an early manuscript of Mark was damaged. Especially if--as Mark's many latinisms suggest--it was written in Rome, the site of the great fires and early persecution of Christians by Nero.

In any event, if there was a longer ending, you are ignoring the very reason we would think that it existed. As the article explains, the text of Mark foretells resurrection appearances in Galilee. While Luke may have little interest in them, Matthew sure would.

I see little reason to conclude that the original ending was suppressed by other Christians. Why preserve the Gospel at all if it was so disturbing and there were alternatives? No, if there was an extended ending it was lost through accident, weathering, or destruction by pagans. Or perhaps a combination of the above.

Steven Carr · 03-20-2004, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman

Streeter adds these additional thoughts:

How in the case of Mark the damage occurred it is useless to speculate. At Rome in Nero's day a variety of "accidents" were by way of occurring to Christians and their possessions. The author of Hebrews, writing to the Roman Church, alludes to the patient endurance of "spoiling of their goods." That the little library of the Church, kept in the house of some prominent adherent, should have suffered in some 'pogram' is highly credible. Curiously enough, there is evidence that copies of Romans were in circulation which lacked the last two chapters, which looks as if one of the earliest copies of that Epistle, the one other documents of which we can be quite sure that the Roman Church had a copy of at this time, was similarly mutilated.
Streeter, at 333.

Do we know that Hebrews was written to the Roman Church?

It is also hard to see people in a pogram just removing the last part of a scroll.

Layman · 03-20-2004, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steven Carr
Do we know that Hebrews was written to the Roman Church?

It is also hard to see people in a pogram just removing the last part of a scroll.

What does the Letter of Hebrews have to do with it?

If you mean Mark, we do not know that it was written in Rome. But that seems a likely place of origin given the latinisms and the tradition. Of course, the vulnerability of the end of the scroll is not dependent on the Gospel being written in Rome.

graymouser · 03-20-2004, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos
Because Mark is the pagan persective and they would have no knowledge of inspired things such as Immaculate Conception and paradise regained.

They just report what the casual observer would see without any theology or spiritual insights.

Immaculate Conception is a pagan concept, Amos, and not at all a Jewish one. (The author of Matthew gives one of the worst scriptural citations in history to try and make it wash with his audience.) It is precisely pagans who would've been impressed by a virgin birth, a plentiful model in Mediterranean mythology.

Please at least try not to make claims that are entirely counterfactual.

-Wayne

Layman · 03-20-2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by graymouser
Immaculate Conception is a pagan concept, Amos, and not at all a Jewish one. (The author of Matthew gives one of the worst scriptural citations in history to try and make it wash with his audience.) It is precisely pagans who would've been impressed by a virgin birth, a plentiful model in Mediterranean mythology.

Please at least try not to make claims that are entirely counterfactual.

-Wayne

Which virgin births in Mediterranean mythology? I was under the impression that most such births followed sexual intercourse between the divinity in human form and the "virgin."

graymouser · 03-20-2004, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Layman
Which virgin births in Mediterranean mythology? I was under the impression that most such births followed sexual intercourse between the divinity in human form and the "virgin."

Well, that's part of the general form in classical mythology.

The odd births of Dionysus (with virgin elements) aside, Mithras springs to mind as an extremely strong example.

-Wayne

Mageth · 03-20-2004, 10:41 AM

Guys: The Immaculate Conception is a belief about the sinless conception and birth of Mary (resulting from otherwise natural sexual intercourse between her mother and father), not about the birth narrative of Jesus.

Layman · 03-20-2004, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by graymouser
Well, that's part of the general form in classical mythology.

The odd births of Dionysus (with virgin elements) aside, Mithras springs to mind as an extremely strong example.

-Wayne

Mithra springing from a rock is a virgin birth?

And I'm not sure classifying a birth as "odd" proves some sort of correlation.

So what examples of virgin births do you have?

Mageth · 03-20-2004, 11:10 AM

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olym...8/sh02003.html

Quote:

About two thousand years before the Christian era Mut-em-ua, the virgin Queen of Egypt, was said to have given birth to the Pharaoh Amenkept (or Amenophis) III, who built the temple of Luxor, on the walls of which were represented:-

1. The Annunciation: the god Taht announcing to the virgin Queen that she is about to become a mother.

2. The Immaculate Conception: the god Kneph (the Holy Spirit) mystically impregnating the virgin by holding a cross, the symbol of life, to her mouth.

3. The Birth of the Man-god.

4. The Adoration of the newly born infant by gods and men, including three kings (or Magi ?), who are offering him gifts. In this sculpture the cross again appears as a symbol.

There are more examples on that page.

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

03-20-2004, 10:41 AM	#18
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Guys: The Immaculate Conception is a belief about the sinless conception and birth of Mary (resulting from otherwise natural sexual intercourse between her mother and father), not about the birth narrative of Jesus.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.