Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Charles Wilson »

Giuseppe --

Do you read "Lord" as "Mar-Yah"?

CW
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Giuseppe »

Charles Wilson wrote: Sun May 27, 2018 10:45 pm Giuseppe --

Do you read "Lord" as "Mar-Yah"?

CW
No idea you are talking about.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Charles Wilson »

Thank you.

CW
Martin Klatt

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Martin Klatt »

<:)>
Last edited by Martin Klatt on Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:45 am, edited 5 times in total.
Martin Klatt

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Martin Klatt »

<:)>
Last edited by Martin Klatt on Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:45 am, edited 3 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Giuseppe »

It is curious that none of the comments above identifies Mark 15:48-50 as another point of break of the Messianic Secret in (proto-)Mark by ''Mark'' (redactor):
Giuseppe wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:24 am Neil does an interesting question:
How would you go about determining that such passages in Mark were composed to counter Marcionism and not that Marcion came later and disagreed with such passages?
https://vridar.org/2018/06/17/is-this-s ... ment-85729

My answer may be not to his same his level:
Thank you for the optimal question, Neil.

My answer: Since Mark 15:48-50 breaks the Messianic Secret in proto-Mark, by having a Jesus who remembers to his enemies the fact that he was not an unknown person (i.e. unknown as a robber is by definition) but was someone *very well known* during the day. So it is an anti-marcionite interpolation.
So I have found another break of the Messianic Secret in proto-Mark by "Mark". :cheers:
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Giuseppe »

Following the logic of the previous comment above, I wonder if even the Barabbas episode breaks someway the Messianic Secret. Afterall, it is an attempt to identify with more precision Jesus by contrasting him against anohter man (Jesus Barabbas) who surely is not him (since he is a brigand and the true Jesus can't be a brigand).
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Martin Klatt

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Martin Klatt »

. . .
Last edited by Martin Klatt on Fri Aug 30, 2019 11:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Giuseppe »

Martin Klatt wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:14 am
Giuseppe wrote: Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:40 am It is curious that none of the comments above identifies Mark 15:48-50 as another point of break of the Messianic Secret in (proto-)Mark by ''Mark'' (redactor):

In my Bible these lines are missing. What are you talking about?
Ops, I mean Mark 14:48-50. Follow the link above.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Martin Klatt

Re: Where didn't Mark preserve the Secret motif ?

Post by Martin Klatt »

. . .
Last edited by Martin Klatt on Fri Aug 30, 2019 11:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Post Reply