Atticus_Finch

There were a number of recent articles on this subject. Here is an example.

My question is this: Is there any evidence or suggestion that the contents of this library may influence or effect thought on the history of early Christianity or the composition of the Bible? It is my understanding that the library was buried in volcanic ash in 79 A.D. According to church history there were Christians in Rome by that date and even some among the emperor's household.

Pure speculation on my part, but it certainly could answer some amazing questions. What if there were copies of the four canonical gospels in the library?

I'm not looking for an argument on this issue. Although I'm sure I would enjoy reading one if there are differing view

Regards,

Finch

mike_decock

Just imagine if they found a copy of Mark with the original ending intact. What if it the original ending described how the disciples stole the body, or that they found that Jesus hadn't really died on the cross and lived out the rest of his life in hiding.

-Mike...

Atticus_Finch

That would be amazing. As a Christian, it certainly would cause me to reconsider my position.

But really, my main point is not the "what ifs" but actual information on the implications of the library.

Regards,

Finch

mike_decock

I think that's a healthy stance to take. The evidence should determine the veracity of your beliefs, not vice-versa.

If there is any evidence referring to Christians in the area or any Christian documents, I would be surprised. There is little evidence outside the NT documenting the early Christian Church and most of the copies of those documents date to centuries later when Christianity was already a state religion.

If nothing is found referring to Christianity, it would be yet another "argument from silence" which, unfortunately for the nonbelievers, doesn't do much to convince believers to reconsider their position.

-Mike...

Vinnie

How would that be consistent with the rest of Mark's Gospel?

Vinnie

mike_decock

Mark portrays Jesus as an imperfect healer. He could "do no mighty work" in Nazarath (Mark 6:5) and took more than one attempt to heal a blind man (Mark 8:23-25).

Jesus is also portrayed as impatient, asking "how long shall I suffer you?" (Mark 9:19).

When addressed as "Good Master", he says that there is none good, but God (Mark 10:17-18)

Do those passage portray Jesus as an omnipotent, perfect deity?

The "Messianic Secret" is a central theme in Mark. He orders the "unclean spirits" not to tell anyone he is the "Son of God" (Mark 3:11-12) and commands his disciples not to tell anyone he is "the Christ" (Mark 8:28-30).

This "Messianic Secret" is usually interpreted as "Don't tell them the truth of me being the Messiah", but you could also think of it as "Don't tell people I am the Messiah, because I am NOT the Messiah".

If the original ending revealed the "truth" that Jesus was not resurrected, it certainly would have been destroyed when the resurrected, deified Christ became central to Christian theology.

-Mike...

Vinnie

Again I ask, "How would that be consistent with the rest of Mark's Gospel?"


Mark portrays Jesus positively as a miracle worker. He could not work miracles where there was no faith, however. This is not a negative portrayal by any means.

Here are some cites:

Lets look at Marcan miracles:

Gospels x 4
Feeding of the 5,000 (Matthew14:15-21, Mark 6:35-44, Luke 9:12-17, John 6:6-13

Synoptics x3

Man with Leprosy (Matt 8:2-4, Mark 1:40-42, Luke 5:12-13)
Peter’s Mother in Law (Matt 8:14-15, Mark 1:30-31, Luke 4:38-35)
Two Men From Gadara (8:28-34, Mark 5:1-15, Luke 8:27-35)
Paralyzed Man (Matthew 9:2-7, Mark 2:3-12, Luke 5:18-25)
Woman With Bleeding (Matthew 9:20-22, Mark 5:25-29, Luke 8:43-48)
Man with a Shriveled hand (Matthew 12:10-13, Mark 3:1-5, Luke 6:6-10)
Boy With a Demon (Matthew 17:14-18, Mark 9:17-29, Luke 9:38-43)
Two Blind Men (Bartimaues) (Matthew 20:29-34, Mark 10:46-52, Luke 18:35-43)
Calming the Storm (Matthew 8:23-27, Mark 4:37-41, Luke 8:22-25)
Jarius’s Daughter (Matthew 9:18-19, 23-25, Mark 5:22-24, 38-42, Luke 8:41-42,49-56)



John , Matthew and Mark x 3

Walking on Water (Matthew 14:25, Mark 6:48-51, John 6:19-21)

Synoptics x2 Matt and Mark

Canaanite Woman’s Daughter (Matthew 15:21-28, Mark 7:24-30)
Feeding of the 4,000 (Matthew 15:32-38, Mark 8:1-9)
Fig Tree Withered (Matthew 21:18-22, Mark 11:12-14,20-25)

Synoptics x2 Mark and Luke
Possessed Man in Synagogue (Mark 1:23-26, Luke 4:33-35)

Synoptics x1 Mark

Deaf Mute (Mark 7:31-37)
Blind Man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:22-26)

Were you saying something about healings in Mark?


Newsflash. Mark's redactional work concerning the apsotles is well noted. Though overall, they are portrayed positively disput all the idiocy Mark attributes to them. This portrayal of the disciples is for polemical reasons in Mark. Matthew and Luke leave out several Marcan elements regarding the apostles.


Actually, the messianic secret stems from the fact that either Jesus didn't use the term Messiah to refer to himself or he did consider himself the Messiah but Jesus never publically
designated himself as Messiah. All three sysnoptic authors are at pains to present Jesus as the messiah but they could support little direct evidence that he claimed to be such. What again were you using this argument for?



I wonder if you have actually read Mark any time recently???

Next I suppose you will be quoting Jesus on the Cross saying "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me"??
as further evidence

Vinnie

Vinnie

I think you might have missed the Pauline corpus all of which pre-dates GMark and some of which by 20 years (Thessalonians). Not to mention the "received tradition" and pre-Pauline creedal formulas.

Vinnie

Vinnie

GMark ends with an empty tomb and a man in white telling the woman Jesus rose from the dead.

Go back to

8:31 "He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. "

Go back to the bapotism where a heavenly voice proclaims Jesus as God's beloved son. See mark's opening line (1:1)

"1The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God."

Does gospel = good news? is mark not teaching the goodnews of Jesus Christ????

Vinnie

Vinnie

wrong button