The Best Markan Ending That "Mark" Never Wrote. An Inventory

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by Ben C. Smith »

rakovsky wrote:IMO there are way bigger problems for the objective historical certainty of the OT and NT than what you are raising.
I do not see what I raised as an "issue" in the way I think you are suggesting. I am trying to deduce Mark's motives for writing, and to tease out his sources (if any). That is all. Objective historical certainty is not on the table yet for me in this context.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: The Best Markan Ending That "Mark" Never Wrote. An Inven

Post by Ulan »

I agree with the notion that Mark doesn't seem to be concerned with making sure that some of his key scenes have eyewitnesses. Whatever the reason may be, he seems to push for the opposite quite often, whether it's just to stress the theme of desertion and lack of understanding or something else.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: The Best Markan Ending That "Mark" Never Wrote. An Inven

Post by Ulan »

Apologists like Peter Gurry at least don't talk around their motivations. The last step is the statement "If God didn't want something to be in the Bible, it wouldn't be in there", which is the last, mostly unassailable fortress against more rational approaches.
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by rakovsky »

Ben C. Smith wrote:
rakovsky wrote:IMO there are way bigger problems for the objective historical certainty of the OT and NT than what you are raising.
I do not see what I raised as an "issue" in the way I think you are suggesting. I am trying to deduce Mark's motives for writing, and to tease out his sources (if any). That is all. Objective historical certainty is not on the table yet for me in this context.
Oh. Ok.
Some scholars think there is overlap between john, mark, John mark, and the books ascribed to John like revelation.
Mark is probably mentioned in the NT and pre Constantine church writings. That can help explain motives.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

andrewcriddle wrote:
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
andrewcriddle wrote:IMHO we are meant to suppose that the Peter et al hear the beginning of Jesus' desperate prayer just before they fall asleep.
imho it may be not completely impossible that it's simply one of Mark's stories
just to clarify.

I'm talking about what Mark is implying, what we are meant to suppose, not necessarily what actually happened.
Thanks. I think I have understand it. But I friendly disagree (again). imho it’s not Mark, it’s the reader.

If a reader suppose that Mark wished to tell “historical” events, then, and only then, the reader will also suppose that there are implied witnesses and sources. I think that a few fellow members are such readers, but others aren't.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: The Best Markan Ending That "Mark" Never Wrote. An Inven

Post by Charles Wilson »

Ben -- After all these years I haven't convinced you that there's something else going on? I'm gonna have to write a lot more... :cheers:

1. When Apologetix gets mixed up with Honest Scholarship with no resolution, then mebbe it's time to look at another alternative:
"The Man Carrying the Water Jar": We get all sorts of analysis over whether "The Man..." is doing woman's work, etc. No Resolution.

Perhaps "The Man Carrying the Water Jar" doesn't refer to a real, live man at all. My Ex's mother had a painting of "The Chinaman's Hat", an island in the middle of Oahu, Hawai'i. Above the water is "The Chinaman's Hat". Below the water is a man in repose, a "Chinaman" (Can I write that these days?).

"OMG!!! There's a Chinaman being held UNDER WATER?!?? MAYBE HE'S DROWNING!!! HE'S..." No...No...It's a descriptive Figure of Speech.
So, the "Man Carrying the Water Jar" may be...a Shadow that lines up with a door in Antonia during the Passover, mebbe? If you look beyond the savior/god Motif, other possibilities suggest themselves.

2.
james_C wrote:
Jesus will be waiting for them and he will meet with them.
2000 + years and christians have failed to produce a living jesus. jesus thought that the high priest would see the son of man, but the high priest died. i wonder if "going before you to galilee" means a literal seeing ?
high priest did not literally see any son of man riding on clouds.
Beautiful! "Preceeding you to Galilee..." has a simple, OTHER explanation. The Mishmarot Priesthood. See about 257 other Posts on this one. The Gospels (as well as Josephus) present a view of the corrupt High Priesthood, the Pharisees, the Herodians, the Romans, et. al. Where is the Priesthood? Aside from a few mentions in Luke on the Origins of John (of Bilgah) and the "Jesus" character (of Immer), very little direct mention is made.

3. So it goes with the Ending of Mark. There is something else that presents itself as a possibility.
The Women wander around and either follow orders or do not. "When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout".
Some other idea goin' on perhaps?

CW

PS: Rakovsky: I've gotta clear out some PMs to get to an answer to you. Soon. Mebbe. I hope...
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by andrewcriddle »

Ben C. Smith wrote:
andrewcriddle wrote:
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: imho it may be not completely impossible that it's simply one of Mark's stories
just to clarify.

I'm talking about what Mark is implying, what we are meant to suppose, not necessarily what actually happened.
My problem with this is that Mark himself does not seem to be concerned that the reader suppose such a thing; what are the clues that the narrator is making certain we as readers can trace the story's origins back to earwitnesses?
Peter James and John are regularly used by Mark as purported witnesses to special events in the ministry of Jesus. They are witnesses to the raising of Jairus' daughter they are witnesses to the transfiguration and they are witnesses to the agony in the garden of Gethsemane.

(On reflection I no longer regard the distinction between a little distance in Mark and Matthew and a stone's throw in Luke as particularly significant.)

Andrew Criddle
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

andrewcriddle wrote:Peter James and John are regularly used by Mark as purported witnesses to special events in the ministry of Jesus. They are witnesses to the raising of Jairus' daughter they are witnesses to the transfiguration and they are witnesses to the agony in the garden of Gethsemane.
The function as "witnesses" could be questionable.
Mk 5:43 He strictly ordered them that no one should know this
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: The Best Markan Ending That "Mark" Never Wrote. An Inven

Post by iskander »

Nevertheless they were witnesses .
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Missing the Mark

Post by rakovsky »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: The function as "witnesses" could be questionable.
Mk 5:43 He strictly ordered them that no one should know this
The opposite.

Remember the time it says Jesus healed someone and told him not to tell anyone, but the healed person went and told everyone anyway?

Two chapters later Mark dispels any conclusions from Mark 5:43:
7:36 Jesus ordered them not to tell anyone. But the more He ordered them, the more widely they proclaimed it.
:D

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
Post Reply