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

Re: [XTalk] John Mark

Expand Messages
  • E Bruce Brooks
    To: Crosstalk In Response To: Rikk Watts On: John Mark From: Bruce RIKK: Presumably, Mark sees his Jesus as the one coherent figure, . . ., BRUCE: Presumably
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 31, 2011
      To: Crosstalk
      In Response To: Rikk Watts
      On: John Mark
      From: Bruce

      RIKK: Presumably, Mark sees his Jesus as the one coherent figure, . . .,

      BRUCE: "Presumably" is precisely a presumption. If the presumption is
      correct, the way to show it is to state what Mark's Christology is. Could
      Rikk oblige?

      RIKK: . . so I doubt if it is fair to Mark to claim that he has jostling
      Christologies.

      BRUCE: "fair" is a moral judgement. I am trying to deal with the relatively
      objective facts about the case. For a recent report on the state of the
      question, see Jacob Chacko Naluparayil, Jesus of the Gospel of Mark, Present
      State of Research, CurBS v8 (2000) 191-226.

      RIKK: It might be more accurate to say that his Jesus has only one
      Christology
      (self-understanding) and that it draws on a range of Jewish figures,
      sometimes in unexpected ways . . .

      BRUCE: Or it could be that Jesus had no Christology in the sense in which
      that term is currently used, and that the Christologies we encounter in the
      texts (there seem to be several, and Paul for one is very concerned to argue
      for some and against others) are all later attributions. A lot of things
      could be. The job of history is to see what the early texts think the
      alternatives are, and then do what we can to discover if any of them is
      earlier than the rest.

      RIKK: . . . (hence Mark's account of the disciples' and the crowds'
      confusion), in order fully to express his mission and identity. This strikes
      me as quite historically probable.

      BRUCE: Well, not me. I think probably Jesus had at most one idea about
      himself (at any given time, and we may have to allow for changes of opinion
      during his life; Mark seems to chart just such a progression). And if he was
      any kind of communicator at all, the crowds will have known what that idea
      was, what was the message about him, or at any rate the message of
      importance to them. More importantly, Mk 4:10f does not say that the crowds
      are confused. It says they have been deliberately misled. With a quotation
      from Isaiah to make that pill go down easier, though it still creates a
      problem for many readers. But never mind them, the question is: Did it
      create a problem for the later Synoptists? I gather that it did: Luke et al
      are inclined to take some of the sting out of it. To me, those are
      diagnostically suggestive moments.

      RIKK: If the earliest writers on Jesus felt that four Bioi were necessary to
      capture the complexity of his person, . . .

      BRUCE: If they got together, perhaps in some Evangelists Club, to talk the
      matter over before any of them wrote anything, and decide who would take
      what aspect, we might have such a picture. I don't find this or any
      functional equivalent credible. All the literary evidence shows that Mark
      wrote before Matthew and Luke, and that for both of them, Mark's Gospel was
      a given. There can have been no preconference at which Mark was given an
      assignment to which Matthew and Luke were also privy. The texts of Matthew
      and Luke show them constantly reworking Mark, suggesting that if there had
      been such an understanding, Mark had loused up his part of it. Further, the
      Trajectory Arguments (eg, Jesus is progressively divinized in the Gospels if
      read in their apparent sequence of composition, Mk > Mt > Lk > Jn) show
      linear succession, and not horizontal agreement. What I get from the texts
      themselves is disagreement. The harmonization, it seems to me, is all done
      by later interpretation, up to and including the present.

      Can any of this be checked? In the case of Luke, we are perhaps not reduced
      to speculation. Does Luke say to Theophilus, in effect, (a) You already know
      some aspects of Jesus, here is another one to add to your perception, and
      make it more adequate; or (b) You may have seen the various accounts of
      Jesus, but here is the REAL story, verified with sources and checked from
      beginning to end? I read Luke as saying something along the lines of (b); he
      does not want to supplement Mark, he wants to transform and replace Mark.
      This I think goes against any theory of intentional collaboration in an
      enterprise each of whose parts is intentionally incomplete, the true picture
      being gained only when they are assembled.

      If so, then the "four bioi" model does not seem to fit. Except from a 2c
      point of view, according to which Four Gospels were not only tolerable, they
      were cosmically necessary. We know that line was taken, and we know some of
      the people who took it. But I think that is merely an early harmonizing
      interpretation. Marcion saw more clearly that the Gospels differed, and that
      for his purposes (and those of his many followers), some were better than
      others. That is, he took a view of Luke that seems to agree rather well with
      the view which Luke himself took of Luke.

      RIKK: . . .why would one ever be tempted to think in terms of Jesus himself
      having only "one Christology" such as we narrowly define them?

      BRUCE: Again the imputations of wrongdoing ("temptation") and of imported
      modern ideas ("as we define them"). I don't think that the complications and
      contradictions in the Gospels are a modern creation (to mention only the
      Gospels; for real internal vituperation, and literal reading out of the
      church and into Hell of Christians who disagree with the speaker
      theologically, see the Pauline and General Epistles). On the contrary, I
      think they are in grain, that the writer of 1 John and the writer of 2 Cor
      were very concerned about them, and tried to make one side of the argument
      win out, over against the other.

      RIKK: This strikes me as anachronistic. Paul seems to have no problem with
      such combinations. Why Mark?

      BRUCE: That Paul has no problem with doctrinal deviations, with the means of
      salvation, with the right way of celebrating the sacraments of his time,
      will I think be news to Paul. As for Jesus in Mark, again, why did he go to
      the trouble of speaking to his crowd in parables in the first place, if the
      intended result was that they would NOT understand him, and NOT repent
      (""turn") and NOT be forgiven, and that only the Secret Disciples would know
      the truth of the matter? Was the whole Galilee preaching of Jesus not only a
      sham, but an intentional sham? I have heard some hard things said about
      Jesus, but this really takes the cake.

      It it was not true, and it certainly diminishes the moral stature of Jesus
      if it IS true, why did Mark (or somebody) write it? It at this point, it
      seems to me, that we begin to get at the real problem from a perhaps useful
      angle, an angle from which it could conceivably be solved.

      The possibility of a solution interests me.

      Bruce

      E Bruce Brooks
      Warring States Project
      University of Massachusetts at Amherst

      PS: As before, some Crosstalk members seem to be interested in some of my
      suggestions (the most recent communication concerned the stratified Mark
      model), but it seems they don't care to say so online. I appreciate their
      interest, but all the same, I can't afford the time for multiple single
      communications; talking to a list is already time-consuming. The best I can
      offer is to refer them to the Biblica section of the Project web site, where
      some data lists and some working solutions (I should emphasize that they are
      no more than that) are available for view. Anyone who wants to offer a
      correction, or request more information, can write to me (at the Project)
      from any page of that site. With the understanding that the answer may be a
      book which is not scheduled until 2014.

      Biblica is undergoing radical editing currently; radical but slow. It too is
      time-consuming, and time is scarce. The idea is to have online only those
      pages which meet current standards, including current prudential thoughts
      about copyright and intellectual priority, but given the size of the site,
      this is not a fully achievable objective. We do what we can, and hope for
      tolerance, and indeed collaboration, beyond that point. Thanks in advance.

      http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
    • Joseph Codsi
      Bruce, You gave the following link to Biblica: http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html Unfortunately the link works for the index, not for most of the
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 31, 2011
        Bruce,

        You gave the following link to Biblica:

        http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html

        Unfortunately the link works for the index, not for most of the topics.
        What pertains to Mark

        * Stratification in Mark
        * The Original Markan Narrative
        * Commentary
        * The Historical Jesus

        is not accessible.

        Can you please make sure the index is properly linked to the various
        topics?

        Thank you.

        Joseph Codsi
        Seattle


        ________________________________


        Biblica is undergoing radical editing currently; radical but slow. It
        too is
        time-consuming, and time is scarce. The idea is to have online only
        those
        pages which meet current standards, including current prudential
        thoughts
        about copyright and intellectual priority, but given the size of the
        site,
        this is not a fully achievable objective. We do what we can, and hope
        for
        tolerance, and indeed collaboration, beyond that point. Thanks in
        advance.

        http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
      • E Bruce Brooks
        Joseph, Things not now accessible in the Biblica section are for the most part intentionally not accessible; those pages are either being recast/updated, or
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 31, 2011
          Joseph,

          Things not now accessible in the Biblica section are for the most part
          intentionally not accessible; those pages are either being recast/updated,
          or temporarily withheld for other reasons. But I have your list, and will do
          what I can to put it at the top of *my* list.

          The paradox for me, needless to say, is that the web site amounts to writing
          a book in advance of the actual planned book (or two). There is something
          inefficient about that, somehow. But that's my problem and I will do what I
          can with it.

          Thanks for your interest,

          Bruce

          E Bruce Brooks
          Warring States Project
          University of Massachusetts at Amherst

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Joseph Codsi" <jcodsi@...>
          To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 4:43 PM
          Subject: RE: [XTalk] John Mark


          > Bruce,
          >
          > You gave the following link to Biblica:
          >
          > http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
          >
          > Unfortunately the link works for the index, not for most of the topics.
          > What pertains to Mark
          >
          > * Stratification in Mark
          > * The Original Markan Narrative
          > * Commentary
          > * The Historical Jesus
          >
          > is not accessible.
          >
          > Can you please make sure the index is properly linked to the various
          > topics?
          >
          > Thank you.
          >
          > Joseph Codsi
          > Seattle
          >
          >
          > ________________________________
          >
          >
          > Biblica is undergoing radical editing currently; radical but slow. It
          > too is
          > time-consuming, and time is scarce. The idea is to have online only
          > those
          > pages which meet current standards, including current prudential
          > thoughts
          > about copyright and intellectual priority, but given the size of the
          > site,
          > this is not a fully achievable objective. We do what we can, and hope
          > for
          > tolerance, and indeed collaboration, beyond that point. Thanks in
          > advance.
          >
          > http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > 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
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Jack Kilmon
          Speaking of stratification, we are all aware of the Aramaic interference in Markan Greek and the consensus is that the author was an Aramaic speaker writing in
          Message 4 of 8 , Feb 1, 2011
            Speaking of stratification, we are all aware of the Aramaic interference in
            Markan Greek and the consensus is that the author was an Aramaic speaker
            writing in Greek, see Maurice Casey "Aramaic Sources of Mark's Gospel." I
            have always dealt with the Markan sayings of Jesus as good examples of
            translational Greek from an Aramaic source document (Mark's notebook) but
            now I am wondering if blocks of the narrative may not also be translational
            Greek suggesting an Aramaic draft/Ur-Markus.

            Jack

            Jack Kilmon
            San Antonio, TX

            --------------------------------------------------
            From: "E Bruce Brooks" <brooks@...>
            Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 5:23 PM
            To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
            Subject: Re: [XTalk] John Mark

            > Joseph,
            >
            > Things not now accessible in the Biblica section are for the most part
            > intentionally not accessible; those pages are either being recast/updated,
            > or temporarily withheld for other reasons. But I have your list, and will
            > do
            > what I can to put it at the top of *my* list.
            >
            > The paradox for me, needless to say, is that the web site amounts to
            > writing
            > a book in advance of the actual planned book (or two). There is something
            > inefficient about that, somehow. But that's my problem and I will do what
            > I
            > can with it.
            >
            > Thanks for your interest,
            >
            > Bruce
            >
            > E Bruce Brooks
            > Warring States Project
            > University of Massachusetts at Amherst
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "Joseph Codsi" <jcodsi@...>
            > To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 4:43 PM
            > Subject: RE: [XTalk] John Mark
            >
            >
            >> Bruce,
            >>
            >> You gave the following link to Biblica:
            >>
            >> http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
            >>
            >> Unfortunately the link works for the index, not for most of the topics.
            >> What pertains to Mark
            >>
            >> * Stratification in Mark
            >> * The Original Markan Narrative
            >> * Commentary
            >> * The Historical Jesus
            >>
            >> is not accessible.
            >>
            >> Can you please make sure the index is properly linked to the various
            >> topics?
            >>
            >> Thank you.
            >>
            >> Joseph Codsi
            >> Seattle
            >>
            >>
            >> ________________________________
            >>
            >>
            >> Biblica is undergoing radical editing currently; radical but slow. It
            >> too is
            >> time-consuming, and time is scarce. The idea is to have online only
            >> those
            >> pages which meet current standards, including current prudential
            >> thoughts
            >> about copyright and intellectual priority, but given the size of the
            >> site,
            >> this is not a fully achievable objective. We do what we can, and hope
            >> for
            >> tolerance, and indeed collaboration, beyond that point. Thanks in
            >> advance.
            >>
            >> http://www.umass.edu/wsp/biblica/index.html
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >> ------------------------------------
            >>
            >> 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
            >>
            >> Yahoo! Groups Links
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > 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
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.