2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by MrMacSon »

DCHindley wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:24 am
According to the index to Irenaeus in volume 1 of 'the Ante Nicene Fathers', the following passages in Mark are either quoted or alluded to:
  • 1:1,. 2,24;. 3:27; 4:28; 5:22,31; 6:41,44; 8:31; 9:2,23; 10:17,38; 13:32,33; 14:21; 16:17,18,19.
I took the time to find them in AH itself to cite them by ET chapter & verse:

ANF vol 1
AH bk.ch.sec
Mark
319 1.3.3 5.31
338 1.14.6 9.2
345 1.20.3 10.17
345 1.21.2 10.38
388 2.20.3 16.17-18
389 2.20.5 14.21
395 2.24.4 6.41, 44
401 2.28.6 13.32
425 3.10.5 1.2
426 3.10.5 16.19
441 3.16.3 1.1
442 3.16.5 8.31
469 4.6.6 1.24
486 4.18.4 4.28
520 4.27.5 9.23
536 5.10.1 13.33
539 5.13.1 5.22
550 5.21.3 3.27

Not sure which of these are direct quotes1, or allusions1, or whether these passages were part of one of Irenaeus' apparent conflations of Matthew, Mark & Luke1.

The index to Harvey adds or expands a few more but this may have only related to his commentary, and he doesn't cite Mk 4:28.
wow! Thank you, DCH.

1 It's hard to know, isn't it??

eta -
DCHindley wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:24 am
According to the index to Irenaeus in volume 1 of 'the Ante Nicene Fathers', the following passages in Mark are either quoted or alluded to:
  • 1:1,. 2,24;. 3:27; 4:28; 5:22,31; 6:41,44; 8:31; 9:2,23; 10:17,38; 13:32,33; 14:21; 16:17,18,19.
There's only one verse per chapter there.

.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by MrMacSon »

Secret Alias wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:07 am But we should always distinguish between
  1. the citation of Markan material (i.e. material known to us from the 'Mark-part' of the four gospel canonical set1), and
  2. explicit citation that the material in question comes from a gospel named Mark according to the early Patristic witness
Justin, for example, cites Markan material from what is almost certainly his 'gospel harmony.' There is no evidence he ever know of a gospel 'according to' someone named Mark or cited from that text.
lsayre wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:31 am
Would Justin have recognized his own source as a 'gospel harmony'?
Secret Alias wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:05 pm
Certainly not. Even modern scholars see the "harmonization" of Deuteronomy and Exodus in Qumran fragments and Samaritan Exodus as "harmonization."
Cheers.

1 Yes, vs. material common to Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by MrMacSon »

John2 wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:35 am
I was thinking of starting another thread on this but maybe I can squeeze it in here (and feel free to ignore it if it seems off track).

I think 1 Peter is genuine. I think it is in keeping with the Peter/Cephas of Galatians 2 (if they are the same person), a Jewish Christian influenced to some extent by Paul. For example, while I take 1 Peter as being addressed to Jewish Christians (as some argue), and it seems similar in some respects to the Dead Sea Scrolls (namely the ideas of suffering and "being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices"), on the other hand other things about it do seem "Pauline" to me (and to others).
  • For example, it was ostensibly written with the help of Silvanus, who is mentioned by Paul in 1 Cor. 1:19, 1 Thes. 1:1 and (since I'm presently considering the idea that 2 Thes. is genuine) 2 Thes. 1:1 (and which some say is why 1 Peter was written in good Greek) ...
Papia... says about there being an original Hebrew Matthew that was translated into Greek holds water to me, and since he is also the first to mention the gospel of Mark by name I'm taking another look at what he says about it.

First, I think it's interesting that 1 Peter is addressed to "Jews from Asia" (to use Acts' terminology), which is where Papias was from (not to imply that I think he was Jewish). Papias also used Revelation (which I think is Jewish Christian too and is addressed to "the seven churches in the province of Asia"), so, at least geographically speaking, Papias was in a position to know something about Peter.

And he is said to have known 1 Peter and something from the Jewish Christian Gospel of the Hebrews in EH 3.39.16:
And the same writer uses testimonies from the first Epistle of John and from that of Peter likewise. And he relates another story of a woman, who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews.

And this is what he says about Mark in EH 3.39.15:
This also the presbyter said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord's discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely. These things are related by Papias concerning Mark.

And 1 Peter 5:13 mentions someone named Mark (and some argue that this is the gospel writer):
She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark.
And the word "son" is defined as, "properly, a son (by birth or adoption); (figuratively) anyone sharing the same nature as their Father. For the believer, becoming a son of God begins with being reborn (adopted) by the heavenly Father – through Christ (the work of the eternal Son). In the NT, 5207 /hyiós ("son") equally refers to female believers (Gal 3:28)." - http://biblehub.com/greek/5207.htm

So it doesn't necessarily mean that this Mark was literally Peter's son.

And while the gospel of Mark does seem "Pauline" to me in some respects, it is knowledgeable about Judaism (e.g., Mk. 7:3-4: "The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles"), which is something I've previously ascribed to Mark knowing Paul or people who knew Paul, but now, in light of Papias, maybe he learned about it from Peter. And that could place Mark in the first century CE.

After having reservations about this for twenty years, I'm now willing to consider that perhaps there could be something to Papias' account after all. In any event, Papias is someone from the second century CE who mentions Mark, and since he is the first person to do so I think his account is worth taking another look at.
Hi John2. I have wondered whether the Peter epistles related to Mark, too. And whether there was some tie with Paul, or at least they reflect an attempt to tie Paul to the synoptics. However, there's this view -
Most scholars also reject the tradition which ascribes [the Gospel of Mark] to [a[ Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

5 Burkett, Delbert (2002). An introduction to the New Testament and the origins of Christianity. Cambridge University Press; p. 156.
I also doubt the Eusebius's 'accounts' of Papias in EH can be relied upon.

Also, we have to aske: Is the Mark in Papias the same Mark in other patristic texts?

I certainly think the geography of Peter's activities are interestingly in they way they somewhat align with Paul, and other NT books.
.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by MrMacSon »

Apparently Justin Martyr has a passage in Chapter XLV of First Apology remarkably similar to the wording of Mk. 16:20

Justin treats Psalm 110 as a Messianic prophecy and states that Ps. 110:2 was fulfilled when Jesus' disciples, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere. Justin's wording is remarkably similar to the wording of Mk. 16:20 and is consistent with Justin's use of a Synoptics-Harmony in which Mark 16:20 was blended with Lk. 24:53.

And, Justin's [supposed] student, Tatian (c. 172), incorporated almost all of Mark 16:9-20 into his Diatessaron

based on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16#E ... ger_Ending

So, as with Irenaeus Adv. Haers, alignments with the long-ending of Make 16.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by John2 »

MrMacSon,

I want to look into this issue more, and I see that Black says here on pages 62-63:

... does the conjunction of Peter, Silvanus, and Mark betoken a distinctive religious tradition within primitive Christianity, a "Petrine circle," whose tendencies the recipients of 1 Peter are being encouraged to adopt? Various interpreters seem to think so, even though there exists no scholarly consensus on the dimensions or character of that group's perspective. (a) The "traditional" view, espoused (among others) by E.G. Selwyn and W.C. van Unnik, hypothesizes that 1 Peter was essentially authored by the apostle Peter, whose accounts of the Lord were memorized and compiled by Mark, the Second Evangelist, and adapted by Silvanus to the needs of Christians in Asia Minor.

https://books.google.com/books?id=L91ti ... rk&f=false
This would be my developing view then.

Black goes on to note the "difficulties" of this view, which I have already addressed in my post above (entirely on my own) and they don't seem like very difficult problems to me.
The difficulties of this approach are at least threefold. First, as I have already noted, the apostolic authorship of 1 Peter is sufficiently problematic that it can no longer be assumed without argument. Second, neither may we automatically presume a correlation of the religious perspectives of 1 Peter and the Gospel of Mark, although an argument for the kind of relationship between those documents can be constructed (as we shall observe in chap. 7 of this study). Third, this traditional coordination of Peter, Mark, and Silvanus rests less on the evidence of relevant New Testament documents and more on later patristic traditons about those documents.
And yes, this brings us back to Papias, who, as I said, I'm getting more respect for and think deserves another look.
Last edited by John2 on Sat Sep 30, 2017 3:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by neilgodfrey »

According to Tempelman, A. D. (2000). The Patchwork Gospels: the origins of the four gospels. Milford, NH: Aratee.

Tertullian in ~193 (On Bapt.11):
the baptism of repentance was...
a baptism for (future) release of
errors.
Function: to show the
need for Christ’s baptism of “spirit
and fire” against those who
thought baptism not for repentance,
since Christ, who was
sinless took it for himself.
Mark 1:4
John happened to be baptizing in
the desert and proclaiming a baptism
of mind-change into release of
errors.
Tertullian in ~208 (Adv.Prax.2 6):
We know you, who you are, the
holy son of god.
Function: to
prove that even the devils know
the difference between father and
son. We watch Tertullian fabricate
here for his purposes, even if
he altered only one word. False in
one, false in all. It appears that
Mark was not written first, as
contemporary scholarship maintains,
but last, as a basket for
leftovers from the magical prolificity
of the prophetic feast.
Mark 1:23-24
23 And immediately there was in their
synagogue a person in an unclean
24 spirit and he croaked out, saying:
What to us and to you, Jesus Nazarene?
Have you come to destroy us?
We know who you are, the holy one
of god.
Justin Martyr in ~135 (Trypho
106)
: “It is said that he changed
the name of one of the apostles to
Peter...and that he changed the
names of two other brothers, the
sons of Zebedee, to Boanerges,
which means sons of thunder...

Function: To fulfil Psalm 22:22:
“I will tell of your name to my
brothers.” This, Justin thought,
would woo the Judeans to Christ
by seeing how one of their ancient
writings was miraculously fulfilled
by his acts. There is no
reference to thunder or sons of
thunder before this one in Justin,
except frequently in the OT, where
thunder represents the angry voice
of god.

Not until Tertullian in ~205 at On
Idolatry 12
do we see the names
James and John given to two
disciples called by Jesus to follow
him: “James and John, called by
the lord, do leave quite behind
both father and ship.
Mark 3:14, 16, 17
14 And he made them twelve,
16 and he gave Simon the name Peter;
17 And Jacob the son of Zebedai and
John
the brother of Jacob, he also
gave them the name Boanerges,
which is “sons of thunder.
Irenaeus in ~185 (4,18,4):
First the blade, then the ear, then
the full com in the ear....

Function: to show the bounty of
the creator, vs. the Gnostics.

Tertullian in ~205 (Praesc.Her.
22)
: “When they were alone, he
used to expound all things which
were obscure...
Function: this is
Tertullian’s way of telling where
he gets many of his own ideas and
even many of his sayings of
Christ. We see what Mark was
used for, against nearly all current
scholarship.
Mark 4:26, 34
26 Thus is the government of god as
a man casts seed on the ground,
and sleeps and arises night and
day, and the seed sprouts and
grows, he knows not how. Automatically
the earth produces fruit
first the blade, then the ear, then
the full corn in the ear.
But when
ripens the fruit, immediately he
apostles out the scythe, because the
harvest is standing by.

34 But without a parable he said nothing
to them, but in private he analyzed
every thing for his own disciples.
Irenaeus in ~185 (4,37,5):
All things are possible to him
that believes.
" Function: showing 23
the power that humans have even
to believe or not to believe.
Irenaeus was no Calvinist, putting
all the responsibility on the
individual.

2 Clement 7,6 in ~150 knows only
Isa 66:24 not Jesus: “Their worm a a
shall not die, and their fires shall
not be extinguished, and they shall
be a spectacle for all flesh
.
” Also
Irenaeus in ~185 (2,32,1): “He
shall send the unjust...into ageless
fire, where their worm shall not 4g
die, and the fire shall not be put
out.
” Nor is this yet known by
Irenaeus to be Jesan, but from Isa
66:24 only.
Mark 9:23, 44,46,48
23 If you can! All things are possible
to him who believes.


44 “where their worm does not end,
and the fire is not extinguished.

45 “where their worm does not end,
and the fire is not extinguished.

48 “where their worm does not die,
and the fire is not put out.
Justin at Trypho 101 in ~135 is
first with: “He answered to one
who addressed him as Good
Teacher, Why do you call me
good? One is good, my father in
heaven.
" Function: this also
shows Justin’s early and easy view
of Christ’s possible sinful human
nature.
And as we saw at Luke 18:19 Paul
at Romans 13:9 first set out the
precursor for Irenaeus’s “five-step
program” of essential rules: No
adultery, no killing, no theft, no
coveting, and love of neighbor as
oneself.
Irenaeus in ~185 is first at
AH 4,12,5
to combine Paul and
Justin. He omits the coveting,
making this the rich manvs
problem. “Christ replied to him
who asked him what he might do
to inherit ageless life, If you want
to enter into life, keep the commandments.
But upon the other
asking which, again the lord
replies
. Do not commit adultery,
do not kill, do not steal
, do not
bear false witness, honor father
and mother
, you shall love your
neighbor as yourself
, setting the
precepts of the law just like an
ascending series (velut gradus)
as
an entrance to life, before those
who wished to follow him. And
what he then said to one he said to
all (that is, contrary to Gnostic
teachings, it was public and open
teaching, not a private revelation)
but when the former said. All
these I have done, the lord exposing
him, said to him, If vou want
to be perfect, go, sell all that you
have, and distribute to the poor,
and come, follow me.


Clement Alx in ~200 (RMS4)
adds detail to known precursors:
Going out to him on the road
someone coining up knelt saying
,
Good Teacher, what shall I do,
that 1 may inherit ageless life? But
Jesus said, Why do you call me
good?
No one is good except one,
god. You know the rules: do not
adulterate, do not kill, do not steal
,
do not be a false martyr, honor
your father and your mother. And
in reply he says to him All these I
have kept
from my youth. And
Jesus looking on loved him, and
said. One thing you lack
, if vou
want to be perfect, mature
, sell
whatever you have and distribute
to the poor
, and you will have
treasure in the sky
, and come
follow me
. But looking gloomy on
the advice he went away sadly.
For he was one who had many
riches and lands.

Looking around Jesus says to his
disciples, How peevishly those
who have riches will come into
the kingdom of god. And the
disciples were amazed at his
sayings. But again Jesus says to
them in reply, Children, how
peevish it is for those who trust in
securities to enter into the kingdom
of god.

Note the existential present tense
in both Clement and Mark, lost to
RSV. (See also P2,3.) Function:
Christ advises getting rid of costly
vessels, and of one’s passions,
for wealth, and for any earthly
values, but not to throw away all
ones wealth, even to the poor!
Clement is closer to later Mark
than to Matt or Luke here. “With
better colon through the eye of a
needle will a camel enter than a
rich person into the kingdom of
god. And they were greatly astonished
and said, Who then is able to
be saved? But looking on them he
with men, with god is possible.
Peter began to say to him. See, we
have left everything and have
followed you. And Jesus said to
them in answer, I tell you truly,
whoever leaves his own things,
and parents and brothers and
valuables for my sake and the sake
of the gospel he will get back 100-
fold. Now in this harvest time
fields and riches and houses and
brothers with persecutions into
where? But in the future life is
agelong. Some first will be last,
and some last first.

Note how the saying makes more
sense as advice to divest of great
holdings and hope in the life to
come in Clement, whereas in
Mark it has become a justification
for church holdings, plus future
life.

There is no manuscript evidence
for this text earlier than -350 in
the uncials. The speculations of
Morton Smith, H. Koester, and
J.D. Crossan on Clement’s knowledge
of a Secret Gospel of Mark
related to this Rich Young Man
obviously have no ground in
Clement’s RMS on Mk 10:17s. In
SGM 2, in -250, after Jesus raises
a youth from death, “The youth,
looking at him, loved him and
began to beseech him that he
might be with him. And going out
of the tomb they came to the
house of the youth, for he was
rich.”
Mark 10:17,19-25,29-30
17 And he going out on the road one ran
up and kneeling begged him: Good
Teacher, what shall I do that I may
inherit agelong life? But Jesus said
to him. Why do you call me good?

19 No one is good except one, god.
You know the rules: do not kill,
do not adulterate, do not steal
, do
not be a false martyr
, do not turn
away, honor your father and your
20 mother. And he said to him. Teacher,
all these I have kept from my
21 youth. And Jesus looking on him
loved him
and said to him. One
thing you lack
: go, sell whatever
you have and
give to the poor, and
you will have treasure in the sky
,
and come follow me.
22 But looking gloomy on the advice he
went away sadly, for he was one
having many properties.

23 And looking around Jesus says to
his disciples. How peevishly those
who have riches will come into the

24 kingdom of god. And the disciples
were amazed at his sayings. And
Jesus again says to them in reply:
Children, how discontenting it is
to come into the kingdom of god.

25 Easier beaten it is for a camel
through the eye of a needle than
for a rich person to enter into the
kingdom of god. And they were
greatly astonished saying to themselves,
And who is able to be saved?
Looking upon them Jesus says
(existential
present tense). With men
impossible, but not with god; for
every thing is possible with god.
Peter began to say to him. Look, we
have left everything and followed

29 you. Jesus said. Truly I tell you,
there is no one who leaves house
or brothers or sisters or mother
or father or children or fields for
my sake and the sake of the gospel,

30 who will not get 100-fold now in
this harvest time houses and brothers
and sisters and mothers and
children and lands ith persecutions,
and in the coming age agelong
life. And many first will be
last and last first.



Irenaeus in ~185 (AH 2,28,6):
Even the lord, the very son of
god, allowed that the father alone
knows the very day and hour of
judgment, when he plainly declares:
But of that day and that hour
no one knows, neither the son, but
the father only.
" Function: showing
that the Gnostics are “inflated”
beyond reason to say that they
alone know the unspeakable mysteries
of god. Is it not interesting
that Irenaeus is also the first to
know of the phrase at Acts 1:7:
which the father had fixed by his
own authority.
Mark 13:32
32 But of that day or that hour no
one knows
not even the angels in
heaven, nor the son, but only the
father
.
Tertullian (Praescript. 1,30) in
~205: "It was even necessary that
the lord should be betrayed. But
woe to the traitor.
" Function: to
show how Marcion is damned
even though he repented. This is a
curse of Marcion, not of Judas.

Clement Alx in ~200:
The cry Abba, Father!” This is
the true speech which god wel-
comes from his children.

The Secret Gospel of Mark 2 in
~250 is first with: “In the evening
the youth
(raised by Jesus in a
version of the Lazarus story)
comes to him, wearing a linen 51
cloth over his naked body. And he
remained with him that night, for
Jesus taught him the mystery of
the kingdom of god.
” Cf Mark
15:46. Function: later Mark probably
takes elements like this out
of SGM (Koester 1983, Crossan
1985), weaving them into a short
synopsis of later Matt and Luke.

Clement Alx in ~200 (Frag.Jd):
In the gospel of Mark the lord
questioned by the chief priest if he
were the Christ, the son of the
blessed god, answering, said, I
am, and you shall see the son of
man sitting at the right hand of
power
.' Function: Clement compares
“other gospels” silence of
Christ except for “you say.” But
only Mt 26:64 has that.

Mark 14:21, 36, 51, 61

21 For the son of man goes as it is
written of him, but woe to that
man by whom
the son of man is
betrayed!

It would have been better for him
if he had not been born.

36 Abba, Father, All things are possible
for you. Let this cup pass away
from me. But not what I want, but
what you do.

51 And a certain young man followed
clothed, linen on nakedness, and they
seized him; but he ditched the linen
and fled naked.


61 Again the high priest asked him. Are
you the Christ, the son of the blessed?
But Jesus said, 1 am, and you
shall see “the son of man” “sitting
at the right hand of power”
and
“coming with the clouds of the
sky.”

(quotes from Ex 3 :14, Ps 109:1, Dan 7:13 LXX)
Gospel of Peter 12:52s in ~190:
And they said...But who will roll
away the stone for us that is set on
the door of the memorial?... For
the stone was great, and we fear
lest anyone see us.... So coming
up to it they found the grave
opened. And going forward they
stooped there and saw there some
youth seated on the center of the
grave, handsome and clothed with
a bright, shining robe, who said to
them. Why did you come? Whom ,
do you seek? What, that crucified
one? He arose again and went
away. But if you don’t believe it,
kneel and see the place where he
was laid, because he is not here.
For he arose again and went away
there where he was apostled. Then
the women fled terrified.


Tertullian in ~203 De Anima 25:
Seven spirits as in the case of the
Magdalene....

Function: vs. Plato, many demons
can inhabit one body, not only one
soul.

Tertullian in -207 Res. Flesh 51:
Jesus is still sitting there at the
right hand of the father, man, yet
god.
Adv. Prax. 30 "It is the son
too who ascends to the height of
heaven.
" Function: these two final
acts of divinity guarantee the
resurrection of human flesh, vs.
the Gnostics.



Mark 16:3, 4-9, 19

3 And they said to each other. Who
will roll away the stone for us from
the door of the memorial?

4b For it was very big.
4a And looking up they saw that the
5 stone was rolled back. And going
into the memorial they saw a youth
seated on the
right hand clothed
in a white robe
, and they were astounded.
6 And he said to them. Don’t
be astounded, Jesus the Nazarene
you seek, the crucified: he is raised;
he is not here. Look the place where

7 he was laid. But go tell his disciples
and Peter that he goes ahead of you
8 into Galilee. And leaving they fled
from the memorial, for trembling and
ecstasy seized them, and no one said
nothing, for they were terrified.
9 And arising again early on the first
of the sabbath he appeared first to
Mary Magdalene, from whom he
had cast out seven demons
.

19 So the lord Jesus after speaking to
them was taken up into the sky and
sat at the right hand of god
.
(though not supported by early manuscript
evidence, Tertullian's use of this makes it
earlier than most of Mark's gospel.)

vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8046
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

MrMacSon wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:46 pm
Peter Kirby wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:15 am
Another possible point of contact: The parable of the Growing Seed (Mark 4:26-29) is unique to the Gospel of Mark.

Irenaeus at Adv. Haer. 4.18.4 references the same phrase used in that parable.
But how can they be consistent with themselves, [when they say] that the bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord, and the cup His blood, if they do not call Himself the Son of the Creator of the world, that is, His Word, through whom the wood fructifies, and the fountains gush forth, and the earth gives "first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear."
Cheers. It's interesting this is a second allusion in Irenaeus's Adv Haers to the long ending of Mark: Adv Haers 3.10.5 aligns with Mark 16:19
It is? I thought this was an allusion to Mark 4:26-29, the parable of the growing seed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8046
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

DCHindley wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:24 am According to the index to Irenaeus in volume 1 of the Ante Nicene Fathers, the following passages in Mark are either quoted or alluded to: 1:1,2,24; 3:27; 4:28; 5:22,31; 6:41,44; 8:31; 9:2,23; 10:17,38; 13:32,33; 14:21; 16:17,18,19.

I took the time to find them in AH itself to cite them by ET chapter & verse:

ANF vol 1
AH bk.ch.sec
Mark
319 1.3.3 5.31
338 1.14.6 9.2
345 1.20.3 10.17
345 1.21.2 10.38
388 2.20.3 16.17-18
389 2.20.5 14.21
395 2.24.4 6.41, 44
401 2.28.6 13.32
425 3.10.5 1.2
426 3.10.5 16.19
441 3.16.3 1.1
442 3.16.5 8.31
469 4.6.6 1.24
486 4.18.4 4.28
520 4.27.5 9.23
536 5.10.1 13.33
539 5.13.1 5.22
550 5.21.3 3.27


Not sure which of these are direct quotes, or allusions, or whether these passages were part of one of Irenaeus' apparent conflations of Matthew, Mark & Luke.

The index to Harvey adds or expands a few more but this may have only related to his commentary, and he doesn't cite Mk 4:28.

DCH
You can get a lot of the same data by going through http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/ (indexed by verse in Mark).

Most times, you can't prove it comes from Mark instead of Matthew or Luke.

Of course, that's kinda expected by reading the synoptics themselves -- it's hard to locate unique Markan material in general.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by MrMacSon »

Peter Kirby wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:40 pm
MrMacSon wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:46 pm Cheers. It's interesting this is a second allusion in Irenaeus's Adv Haers to the long ending of Mark: Adv Haers 3.10.5 aligns with Mark 16:19
It is? I thought this was an allusion to Mark 4:26-29, the parable of the growing seed.
Ugh. I meant this post [is, interestingly, a second allusion in Irenaeus's Adv Haers to the long ending of Mark: Adv Haers 3.10.5 aligns with Mark 16:19] -
Peter Kirby wrote: Sat Sep 30, 2017 1:24 am Adv. Haer. 2.20.3 quotes the words of the resurrected Jesus in the Longer Ending of Mark (Mark 16:18).

The search into the greatness of the Father became to her a passion leading to destruction; but the Lord, having suffered, and bestowing the knowledge of the Father, conferred on us salvation. Her passion, as they declare, gave origin to a female offspring, weak, infirm, unformed, and ineffective; but His passion gave rise to strength and power. For the Lord, through means of suffering, "ascending into the lofty place, led captivity captive, gave gifts to men," and conferred on those that believe in Him the power "to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the enemy," that is, of the leader of apostasy

Similar is spotted in Luke 10:19, but the context of resurrection speech seems to fit better what Irenaeus is saying.
I've deleted the other incorrect one.
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8046
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 2nd Century Mentions of Mark

Post by Peter Kirby »

MrMacSon wrote:As I said elsewhere recently: I wonder if texts like Justin's, Irenaeus's, and Tertullian's (+/- others) are fore-runners to the NT gospels, not consequences to, or reflections on, them.
How do we go from A to B? This is obviously the most precarious part of the whole thing. It's in no way obvious / apparent / evident that "texts like Justin's, Irenaeus's, and Tertullian's (+/- others) are fore-runners to the NT gospels..."

Can this get anywhere beyond "wondering"?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Post Reply