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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Re: Reconstructions of the original Ending of Mark

Expand Messages
  • Graham E Budd
    So, I have dug up: Schweizer, Mt 28:9-10 plus Mk 16-20 (Good News According to Mark: Eng. tr. 1970) Bartsch: Mt 28:2-5, 9-10 (Mark familiar with 1 Cor 15:3-7)
    Message 1 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
      So, I have dug up:

      Schweizer, Mt 28:9-10 plus Mk 16-20 (Good News According to Mark: Eng.
      tr. 1970)
      Bartsch: Mt 28:2-5, 9-10 (Mark familiar with 1 Cor 15:3-7) (TZ 1971)
      Farmer: most of 16:9-20 was the original.
      Osborne: Mt 28:9-10 (Resurrection Narratives), along with Trompf
      Haefner: Acts 1:13-14 links Mark 16:8 to Acts 3-4
      Burkett: has reconstructed proto-Mark A and proto-Mark B endings;
      Schmithals: Like Linnemann's, but his source also contained
      appearances to Peter (transposed to the Tranfiguration) and to the
      Twelve, which he moved to 3:13-19.

      Apparently Bartsch, Ursprungliche SchluB der Leidensgeschichte has more in!
      (in L'évangile selon Marc, pp 411-433).

      Graham

      Quoting Wieland Willker <wie@...>:

      > Ok, for the nit-pickers I rephrase my question here:
      >
      > It is very improbable that there ever was anything original
      > after 16:8 of the Gospel of Mark (published).
      >
      > Nevertheless, for the history of research it is interesting
      > that attempts have been made to find some longer, "original"
      > ending.
      >
      > So far I know of two:
      >
      > 1. Harnack/Rohrbach, 1893/94: suggested that the original
      > ending was utilized in the ending of the Gospel of Peter and
      > that it then continued along the lines of Jo 21.
      >
      > 2. Eta Linnemann 1969 suggested that Mt 28:16-17 + Mk
      > 16:15-20 was basically the original ending of Mk.
      >
      >
      > Do you know any other attempts like this?
      >
      >
      >
      > Best wishes
      > Wieland
      > <><
      > --------------------------
      > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      > http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      > Textcritical commentary:
      > http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • ddcanne@windstream.net
      If Mark is seen as literature, separated from the other gospels and fixed at just after the first Jewish Roman War, the ending (16:8) seems the best way it
      Message 2 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
        If Mark is seen as literature, separated from the other gospels and fixed at just after the first Jewish Roman War, the ending (16:8) seems the best way it could have been ended. It points to new hope, new possibilities. There is really no compelling reason it should have ended with appearance narratives. "God is salvation." I see the other gospel endings as "requirements" for the new religion, "apologetics." (One finds reason for this need implied in Matthew 27:64-66.)

        Dennis Dean Carpenter
        Dahlonega, Ga.


        ---- Jeff Peterson <peterson@...> wrote:
        > In his second book on the Gospels (and his third to treat the
        > question), Austin Farrer suggested that the Matthaean conclusion expands on
        > "a single, lost sentence," along the lines of "But Jesus sent forth his
        > disciples to preach the Gospel among all nations" (*St Matthew and St Mark*,
        > 1954, p. 157). I think he should have stayed with his position in his
        > earlier *Glass of Vision* and *Study in St Mark*, viz., 16:8 is the
        > conclusion as Mark wrote it.
        >
        > Jeff Peterson
        > Austin Graduate School of Theology
        > Austin, TX
        >
      • Graham E Budd
        A few more: Probyn (1925): Acts 1:6-11 is a Lucan redaction of the end of Mark. Goodspeed: like Schweizer Rendel Harris: ends for they were afraid of the
        Message 3 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
          A few more:

          Probyn (1925): Acts 1:6-11 is a Lucan redaction of the end of Mark.
          Goodspeed: like Schweizer
          Rendel Harris: ends "for they were afraid of the Jews". (!)
          Moule, ?St Mark XVI.8 Once More,? NTS 2 (1955) 58?59 has "kai euthus
          legousin tois mathhtais peri pantwn toutwn"
          Bacon: Some account of the rallying of the disciples in Galilee by Jesus.
          Streeter: Like John 21
          Kevin (1926, JBL): Complex argument that Mark ran on into John 21-like
          appearances followed by something like the beginning of Acts, that was
          later summarised by the Longer Ending.

          GB


          Quoting Graham E Budd <graham.budd@...>:

          > So, I have dug up:
          >
          > Schweizer, Mt 28:9-10 plus Mk 16-20 (Good News According to Mark: Eng.
          > tr. 1970)
          > Bartsch: Mt 28:2-5, 9-10 (Mark familiar with 1 Cor 15:3-7) (TZ 1971)
          > Farmer: most of 16:9-20 was the original.
          > Osborne: Mt 28:9-10 (Resurrection Narratives), along with Trompf
          > Haefner: Acts 1:13-14 links Mark 16:8 to Acts 3-4
          > Burkett: has reconstructed proto-Mark A and proto-Mark B endings;
          > Schmithals: Like Linnemann's, but his source also contained
          > appearances to Peter (transposed to the Tranfiguration) and to the
          > Twelve, which he moved to 3:13-19.
          >
          > Apparently Bartsch, Ursprungliche SchluB der Leidensgeschichte has more in!
          > (in L'évangile selon Marc, pp 411-433).
          >
          > Graham
          >
          > Quoting Wieland Willker <wie@...>:
          >
          >> Ok, for the nit-pickers I rephrase my question here:
          >>
          >> It is very improbable that there ever was anything original
          >> after 16:8 of the Gospel of Mark (published).
          >>
          >> Nevertheless, for the history of research it is interesting
          >> that attempts have been made to find some longer, "original"
          >> ending.
          >>
          >> So far I know of two:
          >>
          >> 1. Harnack/Rohrbach, 1893/94: suggested that the original
          >> ending was utilized in the ending of the Gospel of Peter and
          >> that it then continued along the lines of Jo 21.
          >>
          >> 2. Eta Linnemann 1969 suggested that Mt 28:16-17 + Mk
          >> 16:15-20 was basically the original ending of Mk.
          >>
          >>
          >> Do you know any other attempts like this?
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> Best wishes
          >> Wieland
          >> <><
          >> --------------------------
          >> Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          >> http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          >> Textcritical commentary:
          >> http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Wieland Willker
          Wow, Graham, that s great stuff! Thank you! Didn t know about the Harris quote. Interesting suggestion! I will look all these up for the commentary. Of
          Message 4 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
            Wow, Graham, that's great stuff!
            Thank you!
            Didn't know about the Harris quote. Interesting suggestion!

            I will look all these up for the commentary.
            Of learning there is no end ...


            Btw, the book "Side-lights on New Testament research" from
            Rendel Harris might be a good addition to archive.org. So if
            someone has it within reach ...

            Thanks all!

            Best wishes
            Wieland
            <><
            --------------------------
            Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
            http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
            Textcritical commentary:
            http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
          • Mark Goodacre
            ... Agreed -- some interesting stuff there! ... It s available in toto on Google Books: http://books.google.com/books?id=LuTvz7V3YkUC Is this one of those that
            Message 5 of 23 , Feb 19, 2011
              On 19 February 2011 10:56, Wieland Willker <wie@...> wrote:
              >
              > Wow, Graham, that's great stuff!
              > Thank you!
              > Didn't know about the Harris quote. Interesting suggestion!

              Agreed -- some interesting stuff there!

              > Btw, the book "Side-lights on New Testament research" from
              > Rendel Harris might be a good addition to archive.org. So if
              > someone has it within reach ...

              It's available in toto on Google Books:

              http://books.google.com/books?id=LuTvz7V3YkUC

              Is this one of those that is locked down to users outside the US? If
              so, I could send you a PDF.

              Cheers
              Markl
              >
              > Thanks all!
              >
              > Best wishes
              > Wieland
              > <><
              > --------------------------
              > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
              > http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
              > Textcritical commentary:
              > http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
              >
              >


              --
              Mark Goodacre
              Duke University
              Department of Religion
              Gray Building / Box 90964
              Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
              Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

              http://www.markgoodacre.org
            • Wieland Willker
              ... Schmithals is cool. He thinks that there was no ending, but that Mk added Mk 14:28 and 16:7 to remind the readers of something like 1Co 15:5. The two
              Message 6 of 23 , Feb 23, 2011
                Graham E Budd wrote:
                > Schmithals: Like Linnemann's, but his source also contained
                > appearances to Peter (transposed to the Tranfiguration) and to
                > the Twelve, which he moved to 3:13-19.


                Schmithals is cool. He thinks that there was no ending, but that Mk added Mk
                14:28 and 16:7 to remind the readers of something like 1Co 15:5. The two
                verses are superfluous if the appearances to Peter and the Twelve are
                actually told at the end of the Gospel. Compare:
                Mark 14:28 But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee."
                Mark 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you
                to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you."

                Schmithals continues with the idea that Mk nevertheless knew the stories
                about Jesus appearance to Peter and the Twelve from his source, but inserted
                them in a pre-Easter context.
                Peter: Mk 9:2-8 (the transfiguration), the Twelve: Mk 3:13-19 (the
                appointment of the disciples).
                He further knew Mk 16:15-20 from his source! Thus, according to Schmithals
                the complete ending in Mark's *source* was:
                16:1-6, 8 + 9:2-8a + 3:13-19 + 16:15-20 (not literally, but the basic
                content).


                Best wishes
                Wieland
                <><
                --------------------------
                Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
                Textcritical commentary:
                http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
              • Chuck Jones
                Wieland, If Schmithals is correct, then his analysis begs the question, Why would Mk do all this surgery to his source? Here s an obvious answer:  Mk knew
                Message 7 of 23 , Feb 23, 2011
                  Wieland,

                  If Schmithals is correct, then his analysis begs the question, Why would Mk do all this surgery to his source?

                  Here's an obvious answer:  Mk knew that the third-day Jerusalem appearance legends were just that, and that the appearances of Jesus in fact occurred in Galilee, some time after Jesus' death.  He walks a redactical tightrope by including the (legendary, I believe) empty tomb story without an appearance of Jesus taking place!
                  Rev. Chuck Jones
                  Atlanta, Georgia
                  ___________________

                  Schmithals is cool. He thinks that there was no ending, but that Mk added Mk

                  14:28 and 16:7 to remind the readers of something like 1Co 15:5. The two

                  verses are superfluous if the appearances to Peter and the Twelve are

                  actually told at the end of the Gospel. Compare:

                  Mark 14:28 But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee."

                  Mark 16:7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you

                  to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you."



                  Schmithals continues with the idea that Mk nevertheless knew the stories

                  about Jesus appearance to Peter and the Twelve from his source, but inserted

                  them in a pre-Easter context.

                  Peter: Mk 9:2-8 (the transfiguration), the Twelve: Mk 3:13-19 (the

                  appointment of the disciples).

                  He further knew Mk 16:15-20 from his source! Thus, according to Schmithals

                  the complete ending in Mark's *source* was:

                  16:1-6, 8 + 9:2-8a + 3:13-19 + 16:15-20 (not literally, but the basic

                  content).



                  Best wishes

                  Wieland

                  <><

                  --------------------------

                  Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany

                  http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie

                  Textcritical commentary:

                  http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/






























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