Ben C Smith

Good show, Julian. Nice thoughts on all this.

I take it you think that James of Zebedee and James the brother of the Lord are ciphers for the same person.

I think you are right that there is a connection between 13.37 and the Gethsemane watch (or lack thereof).

Here is where we disagree, however. I think your analysis is quite likely; that is, I think Mark the evangelist intends irony between 13.37 and Gethsemane. However, to say that chapter 13 is nothing more than this goes too far. We still have the predictions of suffering for the name earlier in the chapter. IOW, the predictions of chapter 13, while literarily connected to Gethsemane in the way you suggest, do not actually, or historically, predict Gethsemane. They predict a time after the resurrection. That the disciples failed to watch in Gethsemane is a sterling example of their failure before the resurrection but does not directly comment on what Mark 13.9-13 predicts for after the resurrection, though of course it dramatically contrasts with it.

Thanks for the fertile insight.

Ben.

Julian

I was reading a book on wood finishes and techniques, of all things. I guess it must have been some sort of carpenter connection.
I am not willing to commit here, but I do find it quite curious.
Ugh. You missed an important part of my post where I say the last part of chapter 13. So far, I would agree that we cannot classify the entire chapter in this fashion, but I am working on it.
I think that Mark is just getting two birds with one stone. Smacking the disciples and getting eschatological milage, both for the price of one.

Julian

Ben C Smith

Well, Jesus was reputed to be one....

You are correct. I apologize. I read it too quickly.

Ben.

JoeWallack

JW:
Shit, I don't know (JW thrown into hell like the Guardian Bridge Wizard in The Holy Grail).



Joseph

"Can I have The One with The Worm?" - JW in Hell Ordering Tekillya from The Bar to try and quench thirst.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

JoeWallack

JW:
First, let me give you my Framework:

1) Possible Jesus with Peter & Disciples.

2) Possible Jesus does the Possible, Dies.

3) Peter & Disciples Teach about Possible Jesus.

4) Witnesses to the Possible Jesus do the Possible, Die.

5) "Mark's" Position is anyone who Taught Possible Jesus didn't really Know/Understand Jesus. "Mark" explains that Jesus was Impossible Jesus.

Thus "Mark" had no interest in Historical Legacy of Jesus, Q, as this was Evidence of Possible Jesus. Therefore, even though Q was available to "Mark" he deliberately provides little detail of Jesus' Teachings. Most Markan Stories center on Impossible Jesus. "Mark" negatively portrays Peter and The Disciples because he either knew or believed that they taught Possible Jesus.

Regardless of whether you accept this Framework the question you should be asking yourself Ben in this Thread is considering "Mark's" overall theme of The Insiders receiving the Evidence but not having the Faith and the Outsiders having the Faith but not receiving the Evidence Where is "Mark" more likely to place Peter & The Disciples considering they are consistently the Contrasting Negative example? Does he fit them with his Overall Theme of Inside are the biggest Failures or does he make them the Exception?

With that being said let's try to answer your question.

10: (NIV)
38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."

JW:
Considering that I Am about to show that James and John Literally drank the cup by Narrative and Figuratively did not drink the cup by Narrative, I, like Jesus, am Amazed that anyone would be forced to conclude the Long Term success of James and John based on 10:39. Yet that is exactly what Mainstream Christian Bible scholarship has done. In my opinion, The International Critical Commentary is the best detailed Critical Commentary available. All of the main authors of this series passed on "Mark" for the last 100 years for the same reason that Origen's commentary on "Mark" was not preserved, Brown wouldn't do The Resurrection of the Messiah, Celsus and Porphyry were sent to the Recycle Bin and 5th century Christianity provided its own commentary on The Great Library, which included Origen's commentary on "Mark", Celsus and Porphyry and even Books evidencing that Christianity destroyed every book at The Great Library (I put that one in for me and BEd). Subsequent Christianity understood that public X-Uh-Jesus of "Mark" would do more harm than good. So just flash it as an abbreviated "Matthew" showing the humanity of Jesus but don't give a detail analysis of overall Themes for God's sake. Finally in 2002, R.T. France took The Cup of "Mark" and gives us:

"The "cup" offered here to James and John , however , is not vicarious, but simply an image for destined suffering."

No mention of the Literal drinking of the Cup by Narrative and Figurative Failure to drink from the Cup. Reluctance to drink from the Cup of Disciple Failure may have been due to Brown already drinking from it:

The Death of The Messiah

"The simplest interpretation of 10:38-39 is that the disciples are being challenged to drink the cup of suffering that Jesus has already begun to drink (note the present tense in 10:38), a cup of suffering that will culminate in an anguished death as a condemned criminal. They are being asked if they can accept being plunged into the waters of affliction in their proclamation of the kingdom,"

JW:
Yes, Raymond, I noticed the present tense. Did you? This then is the Bad X-Uh-Jesus that Christianity currently subscribes to. Only consider 10:39 as a prediction of The Disciples Post Jesus Future.

Now for the Good X-Uh-Jesus:

Now let's look at the End of the related Pericope because that's where The Author, through Jesus' mouth, explains the Meaning:

10: (NIV)
35 "Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask."
36 "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked.
37 They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory."
38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."
41 When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. 42Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

JW:
"45For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

This story was preceded by explaining Who Jesus is so presumably this story explains who The Disciples were, or at least Who James and John were. This story ends with the explanation that Jesus came to Serve. The prediction in question is:

38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."

We have the following General reasons to think that a purpose of this Pericope is to portray James and John Negatively:

1) The Disciples are normally shown as displaying Negative behaviour which Contrasts with a positive Counter.

2) Jesus has explained that he must Sacrifice himself and James and John react by arguing which is Greater.

3) The Author previously used the same formula with Peter and had Peter Explicitly condemned by Jesus.

4) Jesus is The One Contrasted with James and John here so...you get the picture.

We have the following Specific reasons to think that a purpose of this Pericope is to portray James and John Negatively:

1) Jesus responds that they don't understand what it means to "drink the Cup".

2) Jesus responds that they won't be in The Position Jesus will be in.

3) In spite of The Disciples' Misunderstanding of Jesus and Misguided response to his sacrifice The Clever Author still has Jesus' prediction that they will drink Jesus' Cup Ironically Literally fulfilled (Right up The Author's Eli)

14: (NIV)
23 "Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it.
24"This is my blood of the[b] covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them."

And so Jesus Served The Disciples just as the End of the related story predicted.

4) In co-Ordination of the Ironic Literal fulfillment of drinking from Jesus' Cup, which Served to Confirm Jesus' Positive treatment rather than The Disciples, The Author shows The Disciples as Failing to take the Cup that Jesus took (the important one):

14: (NIV)
36"Abba,[e] Father," he said, "everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will."
37Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."
39Once more he went away and prayed the same thing. 40When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him.
41Returning the third time, he said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting?"

So, in order to take ""You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with" as good evidence of the success of The Disciples after the resurrection with no post resurrection meeting, you have to:

1) Ignore the overall Theme of The Disciples being used as Negative Counter examples.

2) Ignore the otherwise Negative portrayal of The Disciples in the specific story.

3) Ignore the parallel Peter story where Peter is explcitly condemned.

4) Ignore the Literal fulfillment of the prediction by drinking from Jesus' Cup.

5) Ignore the Narrative of a Figurative Failure to drink from the Cup.

6) Ignore the lack of Narrative showing Positive Fulfillment.

Raymond, R.T., Ben, Christian Bible Scholarship, this is Bad X-Uh-Jesus.

Ben, if you consider 10:39 some of your best Evidence that should tell you something.



Joseph

EUCHARIST, n.
A sacred feast of the religious sect of Theophagi.
A dispute once unhappily arose among the members of this sect as to what it was that they ate. In this controversy some five hundred thousand have already been slain, and the question is still unsettled.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Ben C Smith

Hi, Joe.

Two follow-up questions:

1. If (for Mark) the eucharistic cup in Mark 14.23 fulfilled the cup half of Mark 10.39, what (for Mark) fulfilled the baptism half of Mark 10.39?
2. If (for Mark) the cup that Jesus was destined to drink in 10.38 is actually the eucharistic cup of Mark 14.23, why (for Mark) is there still a cup from which to drink in Mark 14.36?

Thanks.

Ben.

JoeWallack

10: (NIV)
38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."


JW:
Jesus, that's a tough one. What fulfilled the baptism half of Mark 10.39 considering that Jesus says "24"This is my blood of the[b] covenant, which is poured out for many," (NIV 14) referring to Exodus 24:8 (and the "New" that Christianity saw fit to Forge here wouldn't be considered "Lying" would it?) and Baptism thereby follows Drinking from the Cup in 10:39 and 14:24 and "Mark's" JB predicted Jesus would Baptize with (the) holy spirit?

While I Am pondering this here is a question for you. Considering that Jesus follows with:

14: (NIV)
25 "I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God."

and τοῦτό (Just for you Ben) Author has no Explicit Post resurrection meeting, doesn't 14:25 Imply that No one will be seeing much of Jesus until he comes in power allah Daniel? A related question is Why would The Disciples Believe that Jesus was resurrected even if they saw him in Galilee? This Author has described in tortuous detail that The Disciples never understood what Jesus meant when he said he would be Raised, they all Deserted Jesus and therefore didn't Witness his Death and you Confess that The Disciples were never told by anyone that Jesus resurrected. If The Disciples than saw Jesus in Galilee, wouldn't they just Believe that he never died? This Author's Jesus Explicitly says that there would be No sign for This Generation. What Evidence has This Author provided that This group of Disciples, who never had Faith based on Evidence, would accept This resurrection as Evidence that they should have This Faith in Jesus?

Isn't it easier to have Faith that "Mark's" scenario was Jesus died and no one witnessed the resurrection or the resurrected Jesus. Jesus Ascended like Elijah and you just have to have Faith that Jesus resurrected and Watch for him to come in the Clouds because it could happen in the next Pericope.



Joseph

"The only things I have Faith in are Sex, Death and Taxes. But at least you don't get nauseous after Death." - Woody Allen

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Ben C Smith

Mark 14.25 implies that Jesus will not drink wine until kingdom come. I do not see how it would imply that nobody would see him. It is a mysterious saying at any rate, admitting of multiple possible meanings, IMHO.

Ben.

JoeWallack

JW:
You're a smart guy Ben and you like to research. I have a Great project for you. One Traditionally Avoided/Ignored (and that's where The Glory is) by Mainstream Christian Bible scholarship (Yuri, look out!):

How do the Sinoptics differ on the Issuing of Baptism?

Here, I'll even get you started with a few Key questions:
1) When Jesus first sends out The Disciples what Baptism instructions are there?
2) What instructions does "Mark's" Jesus give regarding Baptism?
3) Why did Subsequent Christianity Forge Baptism instructions in "Mark's" Ending?
4) What is the difference in "Matthew" and "Luke's" Jesuses' Baptism instructions?
5) Give a "why" for 4).



Joseph

BAPTISM, n.
A sacred rite of such efficacy that he who finds himself in heaven without having undergone it will be unhappy forever. It is performed with water in two ways -- by immersion, or plunging, and by aspersion, or sprinkling.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Steven Avery

Joe is playing the cheap debating trick of assuming his own view, that the traditional ending of Mark, with its overwhelming textual and early church writer substantiation, is a "forgery". Tacky.

We have a number of threads and discussions about this here, so there is no reason to reinvent the wheel other than to caveat the emptor of Joe's statement above.

eg. here are early church writer references with the ending of Mark.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php...2&postcount=31
Last 12 Verses of Mark - Early Church Writers

And a 2005 thread with a lot of good information.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=125251

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic