Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Rhea · 03-27-2003, 10:05 AM

Forgive me if this is a common question, but...

Quote:

Mark 14
34"My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death," he said to them. "Stay here and keep watch."
35Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. 36"Abba,[1] 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."

How is it we know what Jesus prayed when he was alone and his disciples were asleep?

Mightn't he have said just about anything here?

WWSD · 03-27-2003, 11:00 AM

Divine inspirtation
Or
Literary embellishment?

You decide.

Vinnie · 03-27-2003, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhea
Forgive me if this is a common question, but...

How is it we know what Jesus prayed when he was alone and his disciples were asleep?

Mightn't he have said just about anything here?

Not just anything. We may not know exactly what Jesus said but it would have been obvious to the disciples if he was undergoing great stress and agony at the time and went away to pray. I would say that Jesus probably knew he would die at some point in his short ministry (not supernatural foreknowledge of it). I think Brown argues compellingly that the entire scene is not a Marcan creation and that Christians most likely had a tradition about Jesus struggling about his fate in prayer before he died (Death Messiah, see pp. 110-234 for commentary and historical analysis on Gethsemane).

I am not fully finished with that section yet myself and I plan on writing something on this in the near future. But basically, we don't have the exact words. This shouldn't be a surprise though.

The creativity was not wild here though. If Christians did havee the tradition Brown thinks they did then we see that their creative activity was limited. An existing tradition was modified but not created from whole cloth. Anyways, see this for more info on attributing speeches, prayers or whatever to characters:

Studying Synoptic Gospels, Sanders/Davies p. 37

Quote:

Josephus, for example who was a very self-conscious historian, and who was also fairly accurate, claimed, in retelling biblical history, that he added nothing and omitted nothing (Antiq. 1.17; cf. Antiq. 4.196; 20.260-261). In fact he omitted a great deal and added numerous items. He attributed to Moses, for example, the commandment to gather each week to study the law (Against Apion 2.175). This represents first-century practice but cannot be found in the Bible; and Josephus, if pressed, would have granted that to be true. He knew the Bible extremely well, and further he knew that many of his readers were equally well versed in it. Then why ascribe to Moses new commandments? We cannot precisely recapture his mental processes, but perhaps they went like this: It is an established tradition in our religion that we gather in synagogues on the Sabbath to study the Scripture; this has been true as far back as anyone can remember; Moses himself must have intended it; I shall use a shortcut and say that he commanded it.

Ancient historians regularly supplemented their narratives with freely created material of various kinds. They paid especial attention to the creation of suitable speeches for their heroes. Staying with Josephus, we may comment especially on the great speech which he attributes to the rebel leader Eleazar just before he and other defenders of Matsada committed suicide rather than be captured (War 7.323-336, 341-389). Eleazar's speech holds up the ideals of Josephus himself (though Josephus did not live up the them); and this, the concluding event of the last battle of the great revolt, is marked by suitable oration, though Josephus could not have known what Eleazar had actually said.

We should not exult too much over ancient historians. Below the very top level of academic biography modern authors frequently attribute statements to their subjects when, in the nature of the case, there could be no possible line of transmission. Most modern readers accept this, since the story is presented smoothly and authoritatively, without noting the absence of evidence. Ancient author's wrote in this way--only more so.

Vinnie

Rhea · 03-27-2003, 12:27 PM

Thanks. Curiously that makes perfect sense if you don't place too much importance on the actual words of jesus. But I confess it leaves me puzzled about those who do. But thanks for the response, it did answer my immediate question (i.e. is there something in the bible that hints at a listener).

Cheers,
Rhea

Christian · 03-29-2003, 05:21 AM

Maybe I�m being overly simplistic here, but if �a little further� is within earshot and Jesus said these words before the disciples fell asleep � then Peter would have heard.

Is there any reason to think that explanation would be unlikely?

Respectfully,

Christian

HelenM · 03-29-2003, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhea
Forgive me if this is a common question, but...

How is it we know what Jesus prayed when he was alone and his disciples were asleep?

Mightn't he have said just about anything here?

If I'm right, the tradition says that Mark's gospel was based on what Peter told Mark. I don't think it's far-fetched to suppose Jesus told Peter the things that are recorded in Mark about when Jesus was alone.

That isn't the only time; there's also the temptations in the wilderness. For that to be included in the gospels, Jesus must have told someone...I mean, barring some 'direct' revelation to the authors. But there's nothing to indicate any of their information was obtained that way rather than the usual one of one person telling another, who told another, etc...

Helen

Vinnie · 03-29-2003, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Christian
Maybe I�m being overly simplistic here, but if �a little further� is within earshot and Jesus said these words before the disciples fell asleep � then Peter would have heard.

Is there any reason to think that explanation would be unlikely?

Respectfully,

Christian

Are there variations of the prayer in the Gospels? It may be possible that something could have been heard.

But contra Helen, Mark was not based on what Peter said. The second century tradition is inaccurate.

I believe that taking the Gospels at face value leads to the conclusion that there was no time for Jesus to tell his disciples what he prayed. He was immediately arrested wasn't he? Doesn't Luke or one of them say a "stone's throw"? How far is that? And Jesus seemingly went away for a long time and we only have several words and he went, came back, went, came back several times didn't he? Part of the scene looks like fiction to me. Jesus stressing over his impending fate and the disciples are sleeping?

Vinnie

Christian · 03-29-2003, 06:16 AM

Vinnie,

There are variations in the prayer.

Luke does say "a stone's throw." Don't know how far that is, but probably means that overhearing is less likely. Still seeems plausible if you consider the anguish he was in ... he could have been quite loud in his prayer.

He was arrested immediately, although he could have passed on the information after his resurrection so that's not really a factor.

Respectfully,

Christian

HelenM · 03-29-2003, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vinnie
But contra Helen, Mark was not based on what Peter said. The second century tradition is inaccurate.

Maybe so - but nevertheless if Acts is correct, Jesus spent 40 days teaching his disciples after the resurrection. In which case he could easily have passed on information about what he went through at times when no other people were with him. And I think it's reasonable to suppose that such information was shared further until it was written down at some point in the gospels.

Helen

Peter Kirby · 03-29-2003, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vinnie
But contra Helen, Mark was not based on what Peter said. The second century tradition is inaccurate.

Why do we think that the author of Mark hadn't heard Peter say stuff? I haven't seen the subject addressed in detail.

best,
Peter Kirby

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

03-27-2003, 11:00 AM	#2
WWSD Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Albucrazy, New Mexico Posts: 1,425	Divine inspirtation Or Literary embellishment? You decide.

03-27-2003, 12:27 PM	#4
Rhea Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Recluse Posts: 9,040	Thanks. Curiously that makes perfect sense if you don't place too much importance on the actual words of jesus. But I confess it leaves me puzzled about those who do. But thanks for the response, it did answer my immediate question (i.e. is there something in the bible that hints at a listener). Cheers, Rhea

03-29-2003, 05:21 AM	#5
Christian Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Iraq Posts: 313	Maybe I�m being overly simplistic here, but if �a little further� is within earshot and Jesus said these words before the disciples fell asleep � then Peter would have heard. Is there any reason to think that explanation would be unlikely? Respectfully, Christian

03-29-2003, 06:16 AM	#8
Christian Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Iraq Posts: 313	Vinnie, There are variations in the prayer. Luke does say "a stone's throw." Don't know how far that is, but probably means that overhearing is less likely. Still seeems plausible if you consider the anguish he was in ... he could have been quite loud in his prayer. He was arrested immediately, although he could have passed on the information after his resurrection so that's not really a factor. Respectfully, Christian

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.