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

Re: [XTalk] Gospel of Mary Magdalene -- > Peter vs. Mary

Expand Messages
  • Ted Weeden
    Vincent Sapone wrote :Thursday, November 27, 2003: Subject: Re: [XTalk] Gospel of Mary Magdalene -- Peter vs. Mary ... that the Gospel of Mark is anti-Peter
    Message 1 of 37 , Dec 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Vincent Sapone wrote :Thursday, November 27, 2003:

      Subject: Re: [XTalk] Gospel of Mary Magdalene -- > Peter vs. Mary


      > > Ted Weeden wrote> Based upon Karen's work, I am working on the thesis
      that the Gospel of Mark is anti-Peter and Mark uses the Mary tradition as
      the coup de grace in his vendetta against Peter and the disciples from
      15:40-16:8, with 16:8
      as the final blow to the apostolic authority of Peter, i.e., Mary (and her
      two cohorts) narratively never reported out the message of the young man in
      the tomb to anyone, a narrative defrocking clincher that Matthew and Luke
      "correct" by reporting a Petrine resurrection experience, thereby restoring
      Peter to apostolic status.< <

      > I have not read Karen King's work but it seems like something I would
      > enjoy. I find the above to be a pretty interesting theory but I have
      > a few questions and comments and one objection (comes towards the
      > end).

      Vincent, thank you for your interest in my theory. I will try to respond
      to your questions, comments and objection in a post which will also address
      issues raised in the thread, "Messiah in spite of himself." As I indicated
      in my post to Bob Schacht tonight, my response will be in the form of a
      lengthy essay/article which Jeffrey Gibson will upload in the Xtalk
      archives, as soon as I get it to him --- hopefully, next week. If I do not
      respond in that essay to all your concerns, I would be happy to address
      those that I do not subsequently.

      Ted Weeden
    • Karel Hanhart
      ... From: Mike Grondin To: Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 5:48 AM Subject: Re: [XTalk] Gospel of Mary
      Message 37 of 37 , Dec 18, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Mike Grondin" <mwgrondin@...>
        To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 5:48 AM
        Subject: Re: [XTalk] Gospel of Mary Magdalene -- > Peter vs. Mary


        > --- Karel Hanhart wrote:
        > > [Mark] wrote for first century Jews ...
        >
        > Then why was it necessary to explain to the reader that:
        >
        > "The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they carefully
        > wash their hands, thus observing the traditions of the elders; and
        > when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they
        > cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have
        > received in order to observe ..." (Mk7:3-4)
        >
        > Since Steve alludes to such passages as this in his assertion that
        > GMk was written for Gentiles, the ball seems to be in your court
        > to explain the presence of such passages, rather than merely
        > contradicting Steve's position without explanation. Should one
        > assume that your position is that canonical GMk was redacted or
        > edited for Gentiles? If so, do you have any guess as to when this
        > happened, or how extensive a revision it might have been?
        >
        > Mike Grondin
        > Mt. Clemens, MI
        >
        > Dear Mike,

        You are right, of course. The ball is in my court with a brief comment like
        that. The question of the addressees of Mark's Gospel is shrouded in mist
        and our knowledge of such introductory questions is therefore limited. My
        comment was based on the fact that Mark never cites non-Jewish authors but
        frequently refers to Tenach. His subject matter is a first century Jewish
        Passover story with rather complicated midrashim. Evidently, Gentile
        readers were included in the community for which Mark wrote, traditionally
        Rome. And Mark added his comment for that reason.
        Since it has been recognized that canonical Mark was the result of redaction
        and since in his epilogue he refers to LXX Isa 22,16, I take it that the
        redaction took place after the destruction of the temple. The number of
        Gentiles joining the
        ecclesia apparently warranted this explanatory note, because the Gospel was
        read out loud in the worship service.

        These remarks are admittedly too brief. But the type of scholarly exchange
        through doesn't permit lengthy argumentation.

        cordially,

        Karel


        >
        > The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/
        >
        > To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
        crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > List managers may be contacted directly at:
        crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.