Dating the Gospel of Mark

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
outhouse
Posts: 3577
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by outhouse »

toejam wrote:Does a hypothetical proto-Mark count as "Mark"?

.
I don't think so. I don't think we would recognize it prior.

Its my belief the scribe collected and coalesced it into a smooth flowing rhetorical piece focusing more on his theological motives such as the messianic secret and other theology important to that community. Rather then just cobbling pre existing traditions into unification.
outhouse
Posts: 3577
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by outhouse »

neilgodfrey wrote:. He needs the Gospel of Mark to be unliterary to justify using it as a record of memories and traditions of historical events.
I don't think that is in any way his motive.

He is trapped in the old "Mark is a stitching together of traditions" model and ignores the studies of its literary structure.
Scholars rarely place this forward.

A compilation of traditions coalesced into rhetorical pseudo history to teach and spread a communities theological needs that were found to be important as information was no longer being exchanged at Passover.

Is however how most scholars explain it, which also flows with Crossley
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

Elsewhere I have offered:
The other possibility is that both Iscariot and Cyrenian refer to the same exact historical event, the sicarii revolt in Cyrene.

The madness of the Sicarii, like a disease, reached as far as the cities of Cyrenaica, because one Jonathan, a vile person, and by trade a weaver, came thither and prevailed with no small number of the poorer sort to give ear to him. He led them into the desert, upon promising them that he would show them signs and apparitions. [...] Those of the greatest dignity among the Jews of Cyrene informed Catullus, the governor of the Libyan Pentapolis, of Jonathan's march into the desert, and of the preparations he had made for it. So Catullus sent out after him both horsemen and footmen, and easily overcame them, because they were unarmed. Many were slain in the fight, but some were taken alive, and brought to Catullus. As for Jonathan, the head of this plot, he fled away at that time; but upon a great and very diligent search, which was made all the country over for him, he was at last taken.
Flavius Josephus, Jewish War 7.437-441

Thus dating the text of the Gospel of Mark after 73 CE.

But it is also (just) possible that it refers to another event of 115 CE.

http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/me ... nts16.html

When another revolt breaks out in Cyrene.

However, I do think the Simon meant here is the son of Judas and that Alexander and Rufus are the non-semitic names of two grandsons of Judas, active in the First Jewish Revolt, in general use. That is why the Gospel of Mark can refer to them without explanation. And this kind of "common knowledge" suggests a first century date for the Gospel of Mark, after 73 CE but before 100 CE, when most people who knew it first hand would be gone.
And if so, that would help us date the Gospel of Mark.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
toejam
Posts: 754
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by toejam »

^I'm totally lost on how you're making the connection between Jewish War 7.437-441 and the dating of Gospel of Mark to post-73CE. Because it mentions the town of Cyrene?
My study list: https://www.facebook.com/notes/scott-bignell/judeo-christian-origins-bibliography/851830651507208
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

If mentions of "Judas Iscariot" and "Simon the Cyrene" are (veiled) references to the revolt in Cyrene by the sicarii, which took place in 73 CE.

This is the post where I develop that idea:
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=1356

It's not a completely secure identification by any means.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
ericbwonder
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 11:41 am

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by ericbwonder »

I suppose I just don't buy the idea that early Christianity developed in some strict linear progression, as if Mark couldn't represent a branch of 'Christianity' that wasn't still practicing the Torah in the post-70ce era, or if he maybe didn't feel obligated to address any conflicts or engage in polemics on 'hot topics' in the 'early church'.

What is this monolithic entity called the 'early church' anyway?
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8015
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

ericbwonder wrote:I suppose I just don't buy the idea that early Christianity developed in some strict linear progression, as if Mark couldn't represent a branch of 'Christianity' that wasn't still practicing the Torah in the post-70ce era, or if he maybe didn't feel obligated to address any conflicts or engage in polemics on 'hot topics' in the 'early church'.

What is this monolithic entity called the 'early church' anyway?
I don't know. Whom is this reply for?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
ericbwonder
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 11:41 am

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by ericbwonder »

Just in general on Crossley's arguments for dating discussed on the first page. I posted before I realized the thread was longer.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2878
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by maryhelena »

Peter Kirby wrote:If mentions of "Judas Iscariot" and "Simon the Cyrene" are (veiled) references to the revolt in Cyrene by the sicarii, which took place in 73 CE.

This is the post where I develop that idea:
http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=1356

It's not a completely secure identification by any means.
:)

If one wants to seek a connection between Judas Iscariot and Simon from Cyrene i.e. to connect both names to zealot activity, then why not go back to when the 'zealot' activity began? Way back - to Judas Maccabeus and his brother Simon Maccabeus...That would indicate that it is not only the events post 70 c.e. that are reflected in gMark but earlier events are also reflected in the gMark story. Seeking only to use a reflection of a later event, post 70 c.e., as the deciding factor in dating gMark is not allowing gMark the full scope of it's story.

Strange is it not, that prominent zealots mentioned by Josephus are named 'Judas'..


Slavonic Josephus

And at that time was
a revolt of the people against him.
For there were in the city two wise men
who observed
the ancestral laws
and (were) famous
in Judaea for this:
Judas, son of Sepphoraeus, and [Matthew, son of Margalos)
Many young people were coming to them,
enquiring about the Law.
And they used to assemble every day
like an army.

Come men of Judaea, now is the time
men to behave like men, to show what
reverence we have for the Law of Moses.
Let not our race be shamed, let us not bring
disgrace on our Law-giver.
‘Let us take as the model for (our) exploits
Eleazar – first – and the seven Maccabee brothers

and the mother who made men (of them).
For, when Antiochus had conquered and
subjugated our land and was ruling over
use, he was defeated by these 7 youths
and (their) old teacher and an old woman.
Let us also be worthy of them, let us not
prove weaker than a woman. But even if we
are to be tortured for our zeal for God
a greater wreath – has been –plaited for us.
And if they kill us, our soul as it
leaves (this) dark abode and will return to
(our) forefathers, where Abraham and
his offspring (dwell).
Now the people, fearing that the king’s
wrath would fall on them all, begged him
to kill
those (arrested)
but leave the rest.
And he ordered a furnace to be lit
and cast them into it alive. And it was so.

Josephus’ Jewish War and Its Slavonic Version: A Synoptic Comparison. Leeming (editor) K. Leeming (editor)

my formatting

Eleazar Maccabeus being the brother of Judas and Simon who was killed re the incident with an elephant during battle with the Seleucid army.

Interesting, War 1.33 makes no mention of either Eleazar or the 7 Maccabee brothers....What the Slavonic text does indicate is that as late as the end of the rule of Herod I the 'spirit' of the zealot movement was not simply anti Herod and anti Rome - it was pro Maccabee/Hasmonean.

So - if mention of a Judas and a Simon in gMark is a connection to a zealot linkage - then that linkage goes back a long way to the two Maccabee brothers, Judas and Simon.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats
outhouse
Posts: 3577
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Dating the Gospel of Mark

Post by outhouse »

maryhelena wrote:Slavonic Josephus

.

Up your game.

Stop using discredited sources
Post Reply