Vinnie

In a word, no. In a few more words, see this:

http://www.acfaith.com/marcaninvention.html

Vinnie

Cretinist

Looking at what Paul says on divorce and remarriage, I would say this is not immediately obvious. Both Jesus in GMark and Paul quote Gen. 2:24 ("The two shall be one flesh"), but in somewhat different contexts. Paul is talking about fornication, not marriage, though one could use his point to emphasize the wrongness of divorce.

What line of reasoning leads one to believe Mark wasn't aware of Paul's letters?

Vinnie

1 Cor 7:10-11

It is generally believed that Paul's letters were collected after the completion of Mark's Gospel. Other than that, can you show any places where Mark is dependent upon Paul? I cannpot refute the notion that the author may have seen one of Paul's letters before but I do not need to do that either. There wouldn't have been much to copy for the author of Mark anyways. Isn't Paul silent about details?

Vinnie

Cretinist

Paul is silent about details. For instance, on his teaching about divorce, he attributes it to "the Lord", in contrast with his own teaching about staying with unbelievers. Why doesn't Paul mention that Jesus taught this himself, in a response to the Pharisees?

I don't think material that is both in GMark and Paul supports a historical Jesus, at least not anymore than it supports GMark being familiar with Paul, especially considering Paul's vagueness about the source of his teachings (or not even mentioning a source).

Vinnie

Why should Paul be required to mention details of the saying? The lack of sayings material in Paul shows he was certainly not at liberty to create it and even his own words demonstrate this where he distinguishes between the commands of Jesus and himself.

We do not know if Paul even knew of the context of this saying and it is possible that Jesus taught on divorce in different contexts. We need not assume that he taught prohibition of divorce only one time but at any rate there can be no reasonable doubt that Jesus said something about divorces.

Further, when did I ever say Jesus said that in response to Pharisees? It is well known that the synoptic evangelists are largely responsible for the context of their sayings material. If you can show me multiply attested sources where the saying is directed in response to attempted stumpings by Pharisees then this context being an original one will become more likely.

Why I feel Jesus prohibited divorce:

The material occurs in the Pauline corpus (first stratum), in two different forms (twice in Matthew) in the synoptics* (multiple attestation), and both Paul and Matthew seem to have had difficulty with the saying (it goes against the grain).

The best discussion I have seen on this saying is by Sanders and Davies in Studying the Synoptic Gospels, pp 324-328.

Reconstructing exactly what Jesus said and in what context is difficult. As Sanders and Davies conclude their discussion of this with, "On grounds of what is common we are inclined to accept the short form in general: remarriage was prohibited. On grounds of intrinsic probability the long form looks more likely. We cannot resolve this problem, and so we leave it here. We have gained good general knowledge about a saying by Jesus, but we do not have the precise nuance, and we cannot be certain of the grounds for his statement."


Also, Sanders & Davies wrote, "As we pointed out above, one cannot study this passage--the most securely attested saying by Jesus--and conclude that he carefully taught his disciples to memorize his aying and that they did so. On the contrary, the teaching was revises as it was applied to different situations."

Vinnie

*Found in Q

Volker.Doormann

Well, I think one should think about. There is an other redacted version of Mark’s Gospel, that contains some elements of a drama, which are most identical to some other myths well known to that time. Clemens wrote to this: For example, after ,"And they were in the road going up to Jerusalem," and what follows, until "After three days he shall arise ," the secret Gospel brings the following material word for word:

"And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan."

After these words follows the text, "And James and John come to him," and all that section. And after the words, "And he comes into Jericho," **) the secret Gospel adds only, "And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them."

**) “And they came to Jericho: _ _ _ and as he went out of Jericho … “ ???

This well known myth of ‘La_zarus’, aka ‘El_Asar’ aka ‘God_Osiris’ known also from the Egyptian Book of death by Mark is tailored by him to a story of this figure Jesus as his own fate again later in this drama as a 'Big finish', using the three days of the Hebrew Jonah story, which was known also as a parable of an 'ascending soul' (from this netherworld) after death .

All this are symbols, spiritual symbols to illuminate the process of death of a body and its freedom as soul from this bondage in a body (=tomb) in a spiritual manner. Neither the Jews in the Gospels nor the Egypt's in the Exodus have done evil things in reality, they are only taken in myth's as figures to symbol the imperfection in this world. No one would blame the President of the U.S.A. for a movie (-script), in that a figure of a President is corrupt....

Volker

Bede

Volker,

The Secret Gospel of Mark is probably a 20th century fake made by the academic M Smith who 'discovered' it. The text is not extant and has been mysteriously 'lost' since before Smith made his finding public. If the James ossury is a bit fishy, Secret Mark stinks.

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Volker.Doormann

Bede,

However. If you do not accept this letter of Clement as true, this does not changed much, because there is only one Lazarus story less. I can cite you here the origin Egyptian story of (god) Osiris and Isis if you like, and can show you, that this is the model of both, the » La_zarus (El_Azar) = God Osiris myth « and the three stories in the Gospels, once as a parable written by Luke and second as a drama by John, and third - as we all know, in the ‘Big Finish’ after the death of that figure Jesus. If you do not believe, that Clements letter is genuine, maybe you accept Luke’s or John’s telling about Lazarus/Elasar/Osisis containing the very same story elements as to be found in the after death scenario of Jesus.

Luke: “And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, .. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, ..”

John: “Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha . (It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick. Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick. When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby. Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. When he had heard therefore that he was sick, he abode two days still in the same place where he was. Then after that saith he to his disciples, Let us go into Judaea again. His disciples say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee; and goest thou thither again? Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world. But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him. These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly,Lazarus is dead . And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go unto him. Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his fellowdisciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him. Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lain in the grave four days already. Now Bethany was nigh unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off: And many of the Jews came to Martha and Mary, to comfort them concerning their brother. Then Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met him: but Mary sat still in the house. Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee. Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world. And when she had so said, she went her way, and called Mary her sister secretly, saying, The Master is come, and calleth for thee. As soon as she heard that, she arose quickly, and came unto him. Now Jesus was not yet come into the town, but was in that place where Martha met him. The Jews then which were with her in the house, and comforted her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up hastily and went out, followed her, saying, She goeth unto the grave to weep there. Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see. Jesus wept. Then said the Jews, Behold how he loved him! And some of them said, Could not this man, which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died? Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it. Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days . Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God? Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid . And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me. And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin.”

You know well the elements of the after death scenario of Jesus: dead man, tomb, stone, two woman, woman loves dead man in linen, three days, arising from death - as a spiritual soul to 'heaven'.

You can reject the letter of Clement, but you cannot ignore the meaning of the myth of “God Osiris (El Asar = Lazarus) and Isis” known to all people in that region of palestine long before 1 C.E. and also to Mark and John.

I do not see ‘Starwars’ movies, because I have seen all that stories in the 50s in cinemas, because the only difference is, that they now use phaser guns instead 45er rifles. It should not be of a great intelligence, to recognize the resurrection story assisted by John's Lazarus as a remake of the Egyptian Osiris & Isis myth, also without the Clement letter.

Volker

Bede

"I can cite you here the origin Egyptian story of (god) Osiris and Isis if you like, and can show you, that this is the model of both, the » La_zarus (El_Azar) = God Osiris myth «"

Please do.

B

Toto

There has been some interesting comment on Jesus and Horus on Crosstalk, especially by Frank McCoy.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/13224

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crosstalk2/message/13236

There are indications that Lazarus was meant to be seen as an Osiris-type figure, that Jesus was a Horus figure, and that Mary and Martha are analogous to Osiris's two sisters who mourned for him, Isis and Nepthys.