Re: [Synoptic-L] Mark 13 (and Twelve)
I believe it wise not to argue too long about the 'four speeches' structure. I am simply ordering the text as it stands. It appears that Mark deliberately alternated certain 'signs' ( in the Johannine sense of the word) and speeches of instruction that were illustrated by these signs. John borrowed the idea of alternating from Mark I think. The four lengthy assembly of instructions are part of the entire structural lay-out.
It may or may not be that trios existed in a previous 'layer' but these are not in the text we have.
As to the Greek named Andrew. There is hardly a name more Greek than Andrew. Since you rightly agree Iscariot was not part of the original twelve; how do you explain that in a Galilean family one was called Sjemon and the other Andreas? They were not living in multi-cultural America. Andrew was the 'spiritual' brother of Simon, representing the Gentiles. .Jesus called both! But in the remainder of the story, dealing with Jesus interaction with his disciples (except Mc 13! 'Peter' had no brother next to him.
----- Original Message -----
From: E Bruce Brooks
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 3:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Mark 13 (and Twelve)
In Response To: Karel Hanhart
On: Mark 13 (and Twelve)
Karel's conclusions about these and related matters are embodied in a book,
and thus perhaps in his own view not very malleable. Some of the points he
takes up seem to me to admit of other possibilities, and I thought it might
open up discussion to mention a few of them.
I had remarked on the remarkable longness of the Mk 13 discourse.
KAREL: In Mark four 'speeches' are an constructural element. Van Iersel
recognized two of them - chps 4 and 13 - others have recognized 10,32 -
42, Richardson ); I added 7,5 -23; hence structurally chps 4 - 7 - 10 - 13.
BRUCE: I notice the progression of chapter numbers, but I am not prepared to
attach much weight to it; some of that for me is in different textual
layers, and thus cannot be a design of the original writer, or of any one
subsequent writer. The last writer might have had something like that in
mind in placing his material, and an intentional spacing of that sort thus
cannot be ruled out. But for me, Mk 4 and Mk 13 are at almost the extreme
ends of the Markan textual growth process, and I think that theories of
intentional arrangement need to be formulated, or reformulated, in those
terms in order to be convincing.
I had further noted the anomaly of Andrew as questioner in Mk 13.
KAREL: Andrew is the Greek named follower, next to the Hebrew named trio:
``Simon, Johanan and Jaakob. Together with the fictitious Iscariot.
BRUCE: I agree that Judas Iscariot was not originally regarded as one of the
Twelve; I also agree with whoever researched Acts that the last place on the
list was originally occupied by Judas of James. As for Greek names on the
Twelve list, what about Philip? And in any case, the issue wasn't about
Andrew's Greekness or nonGreekness, but about his uncharacteristic
appearance as an interlocutor in Mk 13. His only moment in the sun, and a
sufficiently strange sun it is.
Visit Your Group
Going Green Zone
Save the planet.
Your resources to go green.
Everyday Wellness Zone
Check out featured
healthy living groups.
Y! Groups blog
The place to go
to stay informed
on Groups news!
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 5.6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 3085 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]