Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Synoptic-L] Mark's Informants

Expand Messages
  • Adam Crumpton
    E Bruce Brooks wrote: Take Mk 14:10:11. Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. [11] And
    Message 1 of 5 , Nov 1, 2008
      E Bruce Brooks wrote:
      Take Mk 14:10:11. "Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the Twelve, went to
      the chief priests in order to betray him to them. [11] And when they heard
      it they were glad, and promised to give him money."

      The only possible witness here, among the Jesus circle, is Judas
      himself. Is
      there a scenario by which this information could have gotten back to the
      rest of the circle, to be eventually written up by one of them, or by one
      who somehow came to know what they knew? Yes, it would work if Judas had
      written the scene up immediately, and then later, on leaving the Passover
      Supper, he had said, "Well, fellas, gotta go. Here's my notes."

      Adam: I would think that any believer who had some personal anecdote
      concerning Jesus (especially about the intrigue surrounding his death)
      would have told their story every chance they got. And since according
      to Acts, many Pharisees came to believe, the story of Judas' betrayal
      could have come to light through any number of channels.
    • E Bruce Brooks
      To: Synoptic Cc: GPG In Response To: Adam Crumpton On: Mark s Informants From: Bruce ADAM: I would think that any believer who had some personal anecdote
      Message 2 of 5 , Nov 1, 2008
        To: Synoptic
        Cc: GPG
        In Response To: Adam Crumpton
        On: Mark's Informants
        From: Bruce

        ADAM: I would think that any believer who had some personal anecdote
        concerning Jesus (especially about the intrigue surrounding his death) would
        have told their story every chance they got. And since according
        to Acts, many Pharisees came to believe, the story of Judas' betrayal could
        have come to light through any number of channels.

        BRUCE: I think we have to take Acts as later tradition. Also, would any
        Pharisees have been present when Judas met with the group which Mark labels
        only as "the chief priests?" It is true that other passages here and there
        in Mark group Pharisees and scribes and Herodians and Goodness knows who
        else as in league against Jesus. That is not necessarily earliest Markan
        tradition (see again Adela Yarbro Collins' reconstruction of what I would
        call the Passion section of Proto-Mark:

        http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/quest/index.html).

        And how much did believer attention immediately focus on the intrigue, as
        distinct from merely the treachery, of Judas? How prominent was hatred of
        Jesus in the growing believer tradition? My own reading (for which I can
        make a detailed argument if desired) is that this is one of the themes that
        developed in the early Church, and was not always present at the same level.
        Deferring the detailed argument, notice what I will call the Judas
        Trajectory among the Gospels:

        FATE OF JUDAS
        Mark: Not mentioned, and presumably of no great interest
        Matthew: Returns the money; hangs himself
        Luke > Acts 1:18f: Bought a field, fell down, his bowels gushed out
        John: [Nothing; the necessity of Jesus' death is explicit]

        I think the signs, as far as they go, are consistent, and suggest that anger
        against Judas did not gather much mythic steam until after Mark was written,
        meaning that it is precisely myth and not report. Mark's readers may well
        have had their own feelings of repugnance at the treachery of Judas, but
        those feelings seem not to have been given scriptural form until the second
        tier Gospels. No?

        Bruce

        E Bruce Brooks
        Warring States Project
        University of Massachusetts at Amherst
      • Dennis Dean Carpenter
        If we look at Mark through a literary lens (strictly at Mark) and see the possibility that the twelve disciples (Mark 3) are symbols, like the sons of Jacob
        Message 3 of 5 , Nov 8, 2008
          If we look at Mark through a literary lens (strictly at Mark) and see the possibility that "the twelve" disciples (Mark 3) are symbols, like the sons of Jacob (Gen. 35), we find that the only common name in the two lists is "Judas/Judah." In the grand scheme of Mark, we have the fictional Judas (Mark 14) turning Jesus over to the henchmen of the priests, scholars and elders. This implicitly connects the Judeans (or Jews) as the unenlightened (which is generally how the Markan protagonist Jesus treats the disciples) who killed their messiah. I don't see a compelling reason to treat "Judas" as a historical figure.

          Dennis Dean Carpenter
          Dahlonega, Ga.

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Karel Hanhart
          I second Dennis position here. The expression one of the twelve is too emphatic in Mc 14 to deny the fictinal role of Iscariot in Mark s grand scheme .
          Message 4 of 5 , Nov 19, 2008
            I second Dennis' position here. The expression "one of the twelve" is too emphatic in Mc 14 to deny the "fictinal"role of Iscariot in Mark's "grand scheme". This grand scheme was FORMALLY taken from the rhetoric of a Greek tragedy (so rightly Benoit Standaert), while IN CONTENT it is a (messianic ) hagada concerning Israel's passover. The cup (trublion) - a near hapax - is unmistably connected with all of Numb 7 and the legend of the twelve tribes contributing to the house of God.

            cordially

            Karel.
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Dennis Dean Carpenter
            To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2008 9:30 PM
            Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Mark's Informants


            If we look at Mark through a literary lens (strictly at Mark) and see the possibility that "the twelve" disciples (Mark 3) are symbols, like the sons of Jacob (Gen. 35), we find that the only common name in the two lists is "Judas/Judah." In the grand scheme of Mark, we have the fictional Judas (Mark 14) turning Jesus over to the henchmen of the priests, scholars and elders. This implicitly connects the Judeans (or Jews) as the unenlightened (which is generally how the Markan protagonist Jesus treats the disciples) who killed their messiah. I don't see a compelling reason to treat "Judas" as a historical figure.

            Dennis Dean Carpenter
            Dahlonega, Ga.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            --
            I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
            We are a community of 5.6 million users fighting spam.
            SPAMfighter has removed 3053 of my spam emails to date.
            Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

            The Professional version does not have this message


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.