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

A case for pMark

Expand Messages
  • lmbarre@gmail.com
    Ron, To expect that all Gospel sources should have patristic mention is unreasonable and an argument from silence. I think you need to address my evidence as
    Message 1 of 44 , Jan 2, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron,

      To expect that all Gospel sources should have patristic mention is
      unreasonable and an argument from silence.

      I think you need to address my evidence as it seems to you are trying to
      skirt it.

      One example of redactional insertion would be almost sufficient to support
      the pMark thesis, I have offered eight examples besides other additions to
      the PN.

      Note also that a pMark thesis somewhat destabilizes Markan research and will
      be psychologically resisted for that reason. I think I have uncovered here
      an Achilles heel of sorts. Certainly dogmatic fideists show a strong
      tendency to think that all biblical literature is a compositional unity.
      But as I maintained, the evidence for pMark is quite strong and probable.
      It seems that it is something that has just been overlooked. It happens.

      pMark itself is only solidly defined as those texts which form the context
      of the alleged additions. One could use these as a literary index to some
      extent. On the other hand, it is clear that Mark favors repetition with
      the extreme use of the adverb, euthus, the numerous references to amazement
      over Jesus, the use of repetition in the thrice repeated prediction of Jesus
      suffering, death and resurrection, the many times the obtuseness of the
      disciples is portrayed, the repeated naps in Gethsemane, Peter's three-fold
      denial, the twice feeding of the multitudes and so on. Note also that in
      two of the additions, we have the mature concepts of "the followers of
      Christ," and "whenever the Gospel is preached in the entire world."

      So if the thesis of pMark is sustained, it will make much difference In how
      the Gospel is interpreted, for now we are dealing with two compositions, not
      just with one as, is often assumed.

      LM Barré

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • E Bruce Brooks
      To: Synoptic In Response To: L M Barré On: pMark From: Bruce LMB: I have to say that I think you err not to conclude that we have in euthus and marker of the
      Message 44 of 44 , Jan 7, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        To: Synoptic
        In Response To: L M Barré
        On: pMark
        From: Bruce

        LMB: I have to say that I think you err not to conclude that we have in
        euthus and marker of the Markan redaction.

        EBB: Euthus is characteristic of Mark, but whether of redaction (editing of
        prior material) or composition (authorial material) I think we cannot say.
        There is also the question, not separately examined, of whether euthus is
        equally typical of the later material in Mark. The answer according to my
        own investigation is: not as much so. But there are also themes and modes in
        what I take to be original mark where euthus (immediacy in narrative) would
        not apply in any case, and if late Mark is turning to those questions (eg,
        how soon will the Second Coming be), then the style change is simply an
        artifact of the topic change. The continuing authorship or proprietorship of
        the single author (call him Mark or whatever) is not precluded.

        LMB: . So also is the much repeated "amazement" motif, which I take as
        another indicator of Markan redaction.

        EBB: Again, I sort of agree, and have used that test myself, following Dwyer
        1996 (though I think it is possible to refine his data set). But again,
        there are types of material in Mark that do not invite that motif. It would
        take more precision to make "amazement" an indicator of Markan vs
        post-Markan material.

        LMB: but also with typical repetition (another Markan stylistic marker), the
        thrice predicted passion, death and resurrection.

        EBB: I agree with Yarbro Collins that the triplets (and I would add,
        including the Passion Predictions) are late in Mark. I would not call them
        non-Markan, but they are a device of style which occurred to the late Mark,
        and were not present in the relatively straightforward early Mark.

        LMB: Let me here add that I think that the ending of Mark is indeed lost and
        that the current ending in 16:8 is not deliberate. The reason why it is
        noted that the women said nothing, is to prepare for the Great Astonishment,
        that Jesus was alive. This would be all the more shocking because they were
        unaware of the empty tomb "information" due to the women's silence.

        EBB: I agree that 16:8 was not meant to be the end of Mark, and that our
        text is artificially abbreviated. Matthew's supplied ending owes details to
        other texts, and does not come from his seeing a more complete version of
        Mark (there was none in his time), but is a good normal guess at what the
        ending might have contained, at least on the circumstantial level.

        LMB: In the logic of the story of Mark's redaction, the predicted appearance
        in Galilee is not particularly freighted. Where else would they go but home?
        Where more appropriate for Jesus to meet up with them?

        EBB: I think weight must be given to the pair of interpolations I mentioned
        earlier: 14:28 and 16:7. These predict that the disciples will see Jesus in
        Galilee. What if the story had continued without those predictions?
        Evidently in the way that the insertions predict: they would see Jesus in
        Galilee. What then do the predictions add? Simply this: Jesus's
        foreknowledge of that event. Without that element, Jesus's appearance would
        have been a surprise, not only to the disciples, but to Jesus himself. The
        prediction puts him back in control, has him fully anticipating, and thus
        fully accepting, the end of his life and its sequel.

        Bruce

        E Bruce Brooks
        Warring States Project
        University of Massachusetts at Amherst
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.