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

RE: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and disciples

Expand Messages
  • David @ Comcast
    Rev. Chuck Jones wrote: the concensus seemed to be that Mark free-composed the gospel Is free-composed just another way of saying made it up, because I
    Message 1 of 42 , Mar 16, 2009
      Rev. Chuck Jones wrote: "the concensus seemed to be that Mark free-composed
      the gospel"



      Is "free-composed" just another way of saying "made it up," because I can
      see only a limited number of possibilities for how ANYTHING is written:



      1. The author wrote about personal experiences.

      2. The author made it up (e.g. a novel).

      3. The author used verbal sources (e.g. a ghost writer writing an
      autobiography).

      4. The author used written sources (e.g. a research paper).

      5. Divine intervention (which would be a mental source?).

      6. Some combination of the above.



      Now, with the possible exception of 5), I would assume that editorial
      decisions would be made in any of the above scenarios. For example:



      1. Which experiences to include, and how to present them.

      2. Everything here is editorial (the author makes all the decisions
      about what is written or not).

      3. Does the author use the exact words spoken, 'improve' the language,
      write from a memory of a conversation/speech, etc.

      4. Which parts of the sources to include or not, whether to change the
      order, paraphrase, etc.

      5. Probably N/A

      6. Some combination of the above.



      If we assume that the author feels free to make editorial choices at all (or
      is the consensus that aMk did not feel free to do this?) then I would
      suggest that we should start by assuming scenario 6 (Some combination of the
      above), and look for markers in the text to help us determine which parts of
      Mk (and also Mt and Lk) were created using which kinds of sources.



      Perhaps I'm just missing something important here, in which case could
      someone please explain to me (or point me at previous conversations)
      explaining why "the concensus seemed to be that Mark free-composed the
      gospel," because I don't see the evidence for it.



      David Inglis

      Lafayette, CA, 94549



      _____

      From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      Of Chuck Jones
      Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 7:14 AM
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and disciples



      David,

      I may have misunderstood my conversation partners, but the concensus seemed
      to be that Mark free-composed the gospel, and that it is not correct to
      think of him has having made editorial decisions towards sources, written or
      oral.

      My point is simply that Mk is written in the same style and structure as Mt
      and Lk, which suggests strongly that all three were based on written
      sources.

      Rev. Chuck Jones
      Atlanta, Georgia

      --- On Sat, 3/14/09, David @ Comcast <davidinglis2@
      <mailto:davidinglis2%40comcast.net> comcast.net> wrote:

      From: David @ Comcast <davidinglis2@ <mailto:davidinglis2%40comcast.net>
      comcast.net>
      Subject: RE: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and disciples
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroup <mailto:Synoptic%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      Cc: gpg@yahoogroups. <mailto:gpg%40yahoogroups.com> com
      Date: Saturday, March 14, 2009, 1:23 PM

      Chuck Jones wrote:

      "I fielded a brief, failed effort to suggest to the group that Mk used
      sources rather than wrote from scratch"

      I'm not sure what kind of sources you are referring to, but when you later
      refer to "editorial/authoria l choices and goals" then this sounds to me as
      though you are referring specifically to written sources. If so, then there
      is a reasonable assumption that Mt and Lk were written by people who had
      access to at least some of the same sources. In this scenario then the
      synoptic authors could have made different "editorial/authoria l choices and
      goals" in the way you describe.

      However, I see no reason to restrict aMk to using only written sources. If
      he had access to verbal sources as well (whether eyewitness or not) then in
      my mind it's quite likely that the "almost cinematic details" are as likely
      to be evidence of verbal transmission as they are evidence of different
      editorial/authorial decisions.

      David Inglis

      Lafayette, CA, 94549

      _____

      From: Synoptic@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf
      Of Chuck Jones
      Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 5:38 AM
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroup s.com
      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and disciples

      Leonard,

      I fielded a brief, failed effort to suggest to the group that Mk used
      sources rather than wrote from scratch (I kept waiting for you to weigh
      in!).

      I agree with you that Mk is the dramatist, the playwrite of the group. He
      presents fewer total scenes, but his scenes are usually longer than their
      parallels, enlivened with almost cinematic details: "he took her hand and
      helped her up," "he looked around at them in anger, etc."

      I believe this is a result of Mk's editorial/authorial choices and goals,
      just as I believe the shorter (blander) scenes in Mt and Lk are the result
      of their decisions (gotta make room for more of those teaching passages!).

      So I do not believe that this particular stylistic difference suggests
      directionality among the three, in any direction. Directionality clues are
      to be found elsewhere. Seems to me.

      Rev. Chuck Jones
      Atlanta, Georgia
      ____________ _________ _________ __

      Leonard wrote:

      Since the primary function of these emotions [attributed to Jesus and others
      in Mk] is to heighten the dramatic effect of the story, it is not surprising
      that they are found not only in Jesus himself but in others as well,
      especially as they relate to Jesus. What is interesting in this case is the
      number of times emotions in others than Jesus are found in Mark and not in
      the triple-tradition parallels. It is difficult to make the argument here
      for the absence of the expressions in Matt and Lk having anything to do with
      a supposed Christological trajectory. For instance, why does Mark alone
      speak of Pilate (15:44) as being "amazed" that Jesus was already dead (a
      text that you?missed in your list)? The case of 16:5 and 8 is similar, as is
      that of the chief priests and scribes "fearing him" in 11:18, or even more
      to the point,?Mk 10:24, etc. These are cases where emotions in the story
      heighten the Christological drama, by comparison to Matt and Lk, and are
      a possible?indication of a late Mark.

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

      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1953 - Release Date: 02/25/09
      06:40:00

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

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



      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/2001 - Release Date: 03/16/09
      07:04:00




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Tony Buglass
      Happy Easter to all. Blessings, Rev Tony Buglass Superintendent Minister Upper Calder Methodist Circuit [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 42 of 42 , Apr 11, 2009
        Happy Easter to all.
        Blessings,
        Rev Tony Buglass
        Superintendent Minister
        Upper Calder Methodist Circuit

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