JW:Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:25 pmMrMacSon wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:17 pmThe OP is about 2nd century texts that make reference to or are supposed to make reference to Mark or the gospel attributed to him (after having just looked at Irenaeus). In finding a reference to the text of Justin Maryr -quoted in the first text box- I decided to look at it more fully; in context. My comment "So, this passage is about framing the wider narrative" was almost '..this passage seems to be about framing the wider narrative.'Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2017 5:49 pm
I had always understood this to be a reference to the Gospel of Mark in the text of Justin Martyr. If the OP demurs from this view and offers a contradicting conclusion, then I am not yet able to perceive the outline of the alternative interpretation offered. Could you explain a bit more explicitly what is intended? How are you reading the text of Justin?I found always the following case interesting (taken from Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem).MrMacSon wrote: ↑Sat Sep 23, 2017 6:33 pm In reading Irenaeus's Adv. Haers. and Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, it seems more likely those commentary-texts are either the forerunner to a developing narrative, or they are developing a narrative, rather than being discussions of pre-existing texts. And it seems they're likely to be doing it together -ie. it would seem Irenaeus and Eusebius are closer in time than we have been otherwise led to believe.
Mark 111 And when they came nigh to Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth forth two of his disciples, 2 And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt (πῶλον) tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring him. 3 And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither. 4 And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him. 5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt? 6 And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go. 7 And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him.
At first glance Mark seems to refer to Zechariah 9, but at the end there is no clear textual allusion. On the other hand, there is only one "tied colt" in the LXX. It's the famous Shiloh „prophesy“ in Genesis 49:1110 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. 11 Binding his foal (πῶλον) unto the vine, and his ass' colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes:
It could be that Mark wanted to allude to both texts. Zechariah springs to mind, but the wording is related to Genesis.
Matthew 21 made the allusion to Zechariah explicit.1 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples, 2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me. 3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them. 4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, 5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. 6 And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them,
But Justin, First Apology 32, made the allusion to Genesis explicit.And the prophecy, "binding His foal to the vine, and washing His robe in the blood of the grape," was a significant symbol of the things that were to happen to Christ, and of what He was to do. For the foal of an ass stood bound to a vine at the entrance of a village, and He ordered His acquaintances to bring it to Him then; and when it was brought, He mounted and sat upon it, and entered Jerusalem, where was the vast temple of the Jews which was afterwards destroyed by you. And after this He was crucified, that the rest of the prophecy might be fulfilled. For this "washing His robe in the blood of the grape" was predictive of the passion He was to endure, cleansing by His blood those who believe in Him.
imho, both Matthew and Justin did the same thing but in different directions and neither of them mentioned Mark.
I've mentioned this before, it's clear that "Mark's" (author) primary source for The Jesus Donkey Story is The Saul Donkey Story:
Donkey King by Intendo. Saul/Jesus King Parallels.
The many parallels between the two, both important and trivial, indicate that "Mark" wanted the source known. Saul was a failed King of Israel, physically. Exactly how "Mark" wanted to show Jesus, a failed King of Israel. Physically. Did "Mark" intend to show Jesus as a failed King period (so to speak)? A question which has not received the proper attention. Again, considering The Extremely Difficult Reading Principle, any original text which implied or explicited may likewise not have survived.A popular comparison in Polemics is David/Jesus. Both sides have ammunition to play with. Fundamentalists claim that the supposed parallels are evidence that Jesus was planned/foreshadowed in The Jewish Bible. Skeptics claim that the parallels are evidence that The Jewish Bible (as opposed to history) was the source to some extent. [understatement]A less popular comparison[/understatement] is Saul/Jesus. An obvious parallel is that Saul was a literal King while Jesus was occasionally shown as some type of King (albeit unorthodox). Another obvious parallel is that with GMark both are shown as failed Kings. This is so obvious that as far as I know no one else has ever identified it. I have faith that because of the latter, I've never seen anyone do a serious analysis of the parallels.
Joseph
The New Porphyry