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

Re: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN

Expand Messages
  • Robert Raphael
    An possible obstacle to attributing the passion narrative(PN) to the Gospel Mark (GM) is improbability that the GM was written in the vicinity of Palestine.
    Message 1 of 12 , Jul 29, 2001
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      An possible obstacle to attributing the passion narrative(PN) to the Gospel
      Mark (GM) is improbability that the GM was written in the vicinity of
      Palestine. In this regard I understand that the GM betrays ignorance of
      Palestine geography.

      The most likely place of origin of the PN is Jerusalem because of the close
      proximity to where the events occurred. In this regard some have suggested
      that the GM was composed in Rome.

      Crossan in his book the "Birth of Christianity" argues for Jerusalem as the
      origin of the PN which he states existed as a separate "Cross Gospel" that
      was later incorporated in the canonical gospels and the noncanonical Gospel
      of Peter.

      Robert Raphael


      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ted Weeden <weedent@...>
      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Monday, July 30, 2001 12:19 AM
      Subject: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN


      >Bob Schacht wrote on Saturday, July 28, 2001 12:31 PM in response to Bill
      >Arnal's post of 7/28/01
      >
      >> If Q had no PN, and Mark created it, what are the distinctive Markan
      >> fingerprints to be found in his PN? Or maybe I should be directing
      this
      >> question to Ted Weeden (but I'd appreciate your answer anyway!)
      >
      >Bill Arnal replied in a post, Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:20 AM
      >
      >> ... I HAPPEN to think that Mark DID fabricate his passion narrative, and
      >> see his theological fingerprints in not only the presence but the
      >> amplification in the Passion of such motifs as > irony, victory in
      >> suffering, allusions to apocalyptic scenarios, the stupidity of the
      >> disciples, the perfidy of the Jews, and so on.
      >
      >>> Or maybe I [Bob Schacht] should be directing this question to Ted Weeden
      >>> (but I'd appreciate your answer anyway!)
      >
      >> Yeah, a more informed and detailed answer to Markan features in the
      >> Passion would have to come from Ted Weeden.
      >
      >My response [TJW]:
      >
      >I have just returned from a bike trip in the Canadian Rockies to find a
      >number of posts in response to my essay-post, "Taking the Markan Polemic
      >Seriously," and my position that Mark invented Judas' betrayal and the
      >Petrine denial, along with the passion narrative as we know it in the
      >canonical gospels, and upon which the other canonical gospels are directly
      >dependent in the formulating of their own respective passion narratives.
      >The post exchange between Bill and Bob, as well as critiques of others,
      have
      >led me to the decision to concentrate on the betrayal of Judas, setting
      >aside the Petrine denial for now, and show in a far more complete and
      >comprehensive way, than I have thus far, why I think the evidence is so
      >convincing that Mark created Judas and his betrayal, and as well, at least
      >for now, that part of the passion narrative in which Judas is involved
      >
      >In an essay-post that I hope will be completed by the end of the week, I
      >will seek to demonstrate (1) evidence of clear Markan fingerprints (Markan
      >intercalation) in incorporating Mark's own Judas material into the Markan
      >Last Supper tradition, along with evidence of Matthean and Johannine
      >verbatim appropriation of a significant part of that Markan intercalated
      >material, (2) evidence that, aside from the bare-bones Markan material on
      >Judas, there is no essential, multiple attestation among the other
      canonical
      >authors for any of the other Judas material found in their respective
      >gospels but not in Mark, (3) evidence that the additional information on
      >Judas supplied by the other gospel writers (e.g. Judas' motive for
      betraying
      >Jesus and the narratives of Judas' death) was motivated by the other
      >canonical authors' interest in filling in the Markan narrative gaps and
      >resolving Markan narrative ambiguities ( a la Meir Sternberg), (4) evidence
      >that the other canonical authors lapsed into narrator "fatique" (a la Mark
      >Goodacre) in trying to deal with Mark's creation of Judas, and (5) evidence
      >that Paul, once again, shows no knowledge of the betrayal as underscored by
      >the fact that his tradition's use of paradidomai in I Cor. 11:23, contra
      >John Lupia (Thank you for your post, John), refers not to Judas handing
      >Jesus over but rather God handing Jesus over, a la Isa. 53:6 (KURIOS
      >PAREDWKEN AUTON TAIS hAMARTIAIS hHMWN) and the suffering servant motif
      >that clearly lies behind the LS tradition Paul received, as well as the
      >early creed of I Cor. 15:3-5.
      >
      >Ted Weeden
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org
      >
      >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/
      >
      >
    • Ted Weeden
      Robert Raphael wrote Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:29 PM ... Gospel ... close ... the ... Gospel ... My response: Thank you, Raphael, for your post. I locate the
      Message 2 of 12 , Jul 30, 2001
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Robert Raphael wrote Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:29 PM

        > An possible obstacle to attributing the passion narrative(PN) to the
        Gospel
        > Mark (GM) is improbability that the GM was written in the vicinity of
        > Palestine. In this regard I understand that the GM betrays ignorance of
        > Palestine geography.
        >
        > The most likely place of origin of the PN is Jerusalem because of the
        close
        > proximity to where the events occurred. In this regard some have suggested
        > that the GM was composed in Rome.
        >
        > Crossan in his book the "Birth of Christianity" argues for Jerusalem as
        the
        > origin of the PN which he states existed as a separate "Cross Gospel" that
        > was later incorporated in the canonical gospels and the noncanonical
        Gospel
        > of Peter.

        My response:

        Thank you, Raphael, for your post. I locate the Markan community in the
        village region of Caesarea Philippi. On 2/29/00 I posted an essay,
        "Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community," on X Talk, in which I argued
        for that provenance, taking into consideration the georgraphical issues
        you mention. Since I have referred in other recent posts to my argument
        for the Caesarea Philippi region as the Markan provenance, I have enclosed
        below my essay of 2/29/00 for your interest and the possible interest of
        others.

        With respect to Caesarea Philippi as the Markan provenance, I am
        not the first to suggest that. Chris Berger (_Einfuehrung in die
        Formgeschichte_, 197, 202) is to my knowledge the first to locate Mark's
        community there. But he does not give any rationale for his position. I
        first came upon Berger's proposal through Gerd Theissen's reference to it in
        his _The Gospels in Context_. I asked Theissen, via e-mail, if he was
        aware of where Berger may have presented a developed argument for his
        position. Theissen responded that he was unaware of anything. I have not
        inquired of Berger directly. I need to say with respect to a Judean
        provenance that Mahlon Smith has argued that and raised questions with me
        regarding a Judean vs Caesarea Philippi provenance in an exchange on XTalk
        over a year and a half ago. Unfortunately, I have been diverted by other
        issues and matters and have not engaged Mahlon on the issue as yet.

        You are probably aware that many Markan scholars now locate Mark in northern
        Palestine or southern Syria, as noted in my essay. Joel Markus (_Mark
        1-8_, 35-36) is one of the most recent to do so. It is my developing
        thesis (1) that the Q community, the Matthean community and the Johannnine
        community are located in same general region of northern Palestine and
        southern Syria, (2) that Mark knew and used Q correctively, (3) that Matthew
        and John borrowed from Mark and transformed Mark for their own respective
        christological/theological purposes, and (4) that one can identify a
        trajectory in the use of the Son of the Human term from Q to Mark to John,
        with its beginning in Q, as no more than a sociological term, to Mark's
        appropriation and transformation of Q's sociological usage into his
        preferred christological title (identifying Jesus as the righteous
        suffering-servant vindicated in the end time) to John's appropriation and
        transformation of Mark's christological usage of the term into his
        christology
        of triumphalism.

        Ted Weeden

        Methodological Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community
        and The Results Obtained from Their Application

        Markan scholars who have had an interest in trying to pinpoint the location
        of the Markan community have proposed several diverse geographical settings
        over the years. Before the 1950's most scholars located the community at
        Rome . Martin Hengel (STUDIES IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK) is one of the most
        recent scholars who has advocated strongly for Rome. Since the 1950's the
        tide of scholarly opinion has begun to shift to locating Mark somewhere in
        the Syrian or Palestinian region. In all the years, however, as far as I am
        aware, no one has developed a systematic methodology that would guide Markan
        scholarship in making more informed and precise judgments about the location
        of Mark's community. Since the Markan text is our only reliable source
        (Papias, Anti-Marcionite Prologue, etc., now discounted) for information
        about Mark's community, scholars remain dependent upon the text for offering
        clues to the community's location. For example, the text's rural/peasant
        ethos tells Howard Kee (COMMUNITY OF THE NEW AGE) and Richard Rohrbaugh
        ("The Social Location of Mark's Audience," INT, 1993) that the Markan
        community is situated in a rural village. Gerd Theissen (THE GOSPELS IN
        CONTEXT) also senses that the text originates in a rural context and further
        observes that Mark's calling Lake Gennesaret "the Sea of Galilee" means Mark
        lacks any realistic understanding of what constitutes a "sea." That must
        mean, Theissen submits, that his community is located far from the
        Mediterranean Sea, where there is virtually no awareness of the magnitude of
        that body of water, legitimately called a "sea."

        The Markan errors in Galilean geography have suggested to many that
        community could not be located in Galilee. However, a new light upon those
        errors has been shed by Dean Chapman ("Locating the Gospel of Mark," BTB,
        1995: 24-35) which revives the possibility, despite Markan geographical
        errors, that the Markan community could be in located in one particular
        section of Galilee or in close proximity to it. Chapman has proposed an
        interesting theory based upon Jean Piaget and Babel Inhelder's work on the
        way space is perceived and represented according to cognitive psychology.
        Chapman observes that Mark handles geography in two different ways. Mark
        uses "colloidal" mapping where he knows the topography well and
        "cosmographic" mapping for the distant horizons of which he has only minimal
        knowledge. Accordingly, based upon this thesis, Chapman submits that there
        are two regions Mark knows best, regions where he does his most accurate,
        colloidal mapping. They are (1) Jerusalem and its surrounding area, which
        includes such named places as Bethany, Bethphage, the Mount of Olives and
        the Garden of Gethsemane and (2) places on the northern rim of the Sea of
        Galilee, which include Capernaum, Gennersaret, Bethsaida and Dalmanutha and
        the route northward from Bethsaida to Caesarea Philippi. Chapman opts for
        (1) over (2) as the region where Mark's community is to be found. But, as
        shall be clear below, I opt for (2).

        These and other suggestions are helpful insights for locating the Markan
        community using clues supplied by the text. Building upon these insights I
        would like to propose a systematic way for deciphering the location of the
        Markan community from the Markan text by using the following seven
        methodological guidelines. Then I shall show how using these guidelines
        enables us to determine the likely site of Mark's home community.

        The First Guideline

        Markan allusions to his community's location in all likelihood are to be
        found where Mark exhibits accurate representation of geography, where he
        employs colloidal mapping, as Chapman argues, rather than cosmographical map
        ping. For it is logical to assume that Mark knows best the geography of
        his home area. He is less likely to err in his geographical mapping of the
        place where he lives than in areas remote from his home and only vaguely
        known by him.

        The Second Guideline

        Wherever the community is located, it must be at significant distance from
        the Mediterranean Sea. It is very unlikely that either Mark or the members
        of his community have any firsthand experience or realistic awareness of the
        magnitude of the Mediterranean Sea. If Mark, as Theissen has argued, were
        aware of the size of the Mediterranean Sea, he would not have made the
        mistake of calling Lake Gennesaret a "sea." If there are bodies of water
        in the region of Mark's community, they must be of such diminutive size that
        by comparison Lake Gennesaret seemed like a sea to Mark, and likely to his
        community also. Therefore we must look for Markan allusions to the site of
        his community in geographical settings whose remoteness from the
        Mediterranean Sea make it unlikely that Mark or members of that community
        would have any realistic knowledge about that body of water.

        The Third Guideline

        Wherever the community is, it is likely located in a rural village setting.
        Therefore, we must seek the site of the community among the village settings
        Mark mentions in his narrative.

        The Fourth Guideline

        It is most likely that the site of Mark's community is among those narrative
        places where Mark presents Jesus as actively engaged in critical theological
        issues- in particular, theological issues that the narrative gives every
        evidence of being of paramount importance to Mark, issues which he appears
        to be addressing in order to provide interpretation or "answers" to
        existential dilemmas facing his community.

        The Fifth Guideline

        Wherever the Markan community is located, it is likely in fairly close
        proximity to Galilee, if not in Galilee itself. I state this for the
        following reason. It is clear that Galilee for Mark is the center of his
        eschatological universe. It is the Markan Mecca. According to the Markan
        story, it is in Galilee that Jesus first proclaims the dawn of the kingdom.
        And it is in Galilee, according to the Markan Jesus (14:28; 16:7), where
        that final eschatological moment will occur in which he will be fully
        vindicated, glorified and empowered (13:24-26). For Mark to have such an
        existential investment in Galilee as the place where the triumphant
        eschatological fulfillment takes place makes it hard to believe that his
        community would be located so far from Galilee that distance would prevent
        Mark and the members of his community from experiencing that eschatological
        moment firsthand. Therefore we must look for Markan allusions to the site
        of his community among villages in his narrative which are within or in
        close proximity to Galilee.

        The Sixth Guideline

        The narrative places which meet the first five criteria and are not those
        that the historical Jesus is likely to have frequented are more likely to be
        the site of the Markan community. I posit this on the following basis. As
        Rohrbaugh (390) has pointed out with respect to Mark's narrative world: "We
        can be sure that at some points this narrative world corresponds with the
        real world of Jesus, while at others it most certainly does not." A good
        example of the Markan narrative diverging from Jesus' real world and
        reflecting more closely the real world of Mark's own community is Mark 13.
        The events of that chapter clearly postdate the real world of the historical
        Jesus. Thus: if, after applying the first five guidelines to the Markan
        narrative, some places which emerge as probable sites of Mark's community
        turn out to be places where the historical Jesus, according to critical
        analysis, is unlikely to have conducted his ministry, then it is in one of
        those particular places that the site of the Markan community is likely to
        be found.

        The Seventh Guideline

        Having followed the first six guidelines and having thus arrived at a likely
        geographical site of the Markan community, as alluded to by Mark in his
        narrative, that geographical site should be in relatively near proximity of
        the place of origin or a probable place of circulation of Mark's sources in
        order to account for how he would have gained access to those sources. The
        principle underlying this guideline is that one can better account for Mark'
        s access to a source if he is in close proximity to its place of origin or
        circulation than if he is at some remote distance from the source's
        geographical genesis or likely place of circulation.

        Results Obtained from Applying the Guidelines to the Text: The Community of
        Mark Located

        As a result of applying these seven guidelines to the Markan place
        references in search for the Markan community, I have found that the site
        that emerges as the most likely location of the Markan community is
        somewhere among the villages of Caesarea Philippi. Why? Space does not
        allow me to give full and detail argumentation for villages of Caesarea
        Philippi and against other narrative sites. But briefly outlined below are
        the reasons the villages of Caesarea Philippi, in my opinion, turns out to
        be the best candidate for the location of Mark's community..

        First, Caesarea Philippi is within one of the geographical areas which Mark
        does map accurately (first guideline). Second, Caesarea Philippi is far
        enough inland from the Mediterranean Sea for Mark, as a resident of one of
        its villages, not to have a realistic knowledge of what constitutes the size
        of a "real" sea. Thus, without such awareness, it is easy to understand why
        his experience of the size of the Lake of Gennesaret would cause him to
        mistakenly think it qualified being called a "sea" (second guideline).
        Such a mistake in judgment could well have arisen as a result of Mark's
        comparison of Lake Gennesaret with Lake Huleh, the lake nearest to him..
        Lake Gennersaret would have appeared to him to be of enormous proportions
        compared to Lake Huleh. If Lake Huleh was called a "lake," then the size of
        Lake Gennesaret by comparison qualified in Mark's mind in being called a
        "sea." Third, the villages of Caesarea Philippi are obviously a part of a
        village rural setting (third guideline).

        Fourth, it is on the road to Caesarea Philippi (8:27b) and in the setting of
        its villages (8:27a) where the Markan gospel's most critical theological
        issues (the nature of christology and the nature of discipleship) are
        directly and for the first time introduced and dealt with by Jesus himself
        (fourth guideline). Christology and discipleship become then the dominant
        themes that drive the drama on from those rural villages of Caesarea
        Philippi to the temple establishment of Jerusalem, where the passion drama,
        predicted first on the way to those villages, unfolds and the gospel comes
        to an end at an empty tomb. Moreover, many of the post-Easter issues which
        the Markan Jesus addresses in Mk 13 for the benefit of the Markan community
        are addressed or at least foreshadowed by Jesus in the region of Caesarea
        Philippi. I have in mind the Christ-issue ("You are the Christ" [8:28]/
        "False christs...will arise" [13:22] ), witnessing for or being ashamed of
        Christ ("whoever is ashamed of me" [8:38]/"stand...for my sake, to bear
        testimony" [13:9], assurance of salvation ("lose your life" [8:35]/"he who
        endures to the end" [13:13]), the credibility of Jesus words ("ashamed of...
        my words" [8:38]/"my words will not pass away" [13:30]), the
        exaltation-enthronement of the "Son of man" with angels (8:38/13:26f.) and
        the assurance that the final eschatological event will happen before the end
        of the current generation ("some standing here will not taste death" [9:1]/
        "this generation will not pass away" [13:30]).

        Fifth, the villages of Caesarea Philippi are in close proximity to Galilee,
        Mark's eschatological Mecca. In fact Mark may have in his mind included his
        own village in his theological/geographical rubric "Galilee." At the time
        of Mark the former boundary established along the Jordan River that served
        to separate the province of Galilee, the tetrarchy of Antipas, from the
        tetrarchy of Philip, which included Bethsaida and Caesarea Philippi, no
        longer existed. Under Agrippa II the two former tetrarchies were merged
        into one region. Is it possible then that at the time of Mark, with the
        former boundary which divided the province of Galilee from the region east
        of the Jordan River non-existent, that Galilee in the popular mind could
        have included part of the region east of the Jordan River. The author of
        the fourth gospel seems to think so. He locates the city of Bethsaida in
        Galilee (12:21), a city which lay east of the Jordan and was formerly a part
        of Philip's tetrarchy and which Philip upgraded to a city, along with
        transforming Paneas into Caesarea Philippi.

        So at the time of John, and perhaps Mark, Galilee, at least in the popular
        mind, had been extended to include Bethsaida. Is it possible the outlying
        villages of Caesarea Philippi were also thought to be a part of Galilee.
        Avi Yonah (see Chapman, 33) has produced an early rabbinic tradition, dating
        perhaps from second-temple time, in which Caesarea Philippi was considered
        to be a part of Palestine. The only clue Mark gives us as to how he views
        the relationship of the villages of Caesarea Philippi to Galilee is his
        notation of Jesus' departure from the Caesarea Philippi region. In 9:30 he
        states: "They went on from there and passed through Galilee." The meaning
        of this statement is unclear. Does Mark mean that Jesus crossed over into
        Galilee and journeyed through Galilee or does he mean that from the section
        of Galilee Jesus was in, which included the villages of Caesarea Philippi,
        he traveled on through Galilee until he reached Capernaum in 9:33? In any
        event, which ever meaning Mark had in mind, the villages of Caesarea
        Philippi meet the criterion of the fifth guideline for locating the Markan
        community.

        Sixth, Jesus' visit to the villages of Caesarea Philippi is generally
        considered by Markan scholars to be a Markan creation. The region of
        Caesarea Philippi is not a place where the historical Jesus conducted his
        ministry (sixth guideline).

        Seventh, most of the sources that Mark draws upon originated or are thought
        to have circulated in relatively close proximity. Richard Horsley and
        Jonathan Draper (Whoever Hears you Hears Me) locate the Q community in
        Galilee. Without citing the evidence here, I am convinced that Mark had
        some direct or indirect contact with the oral "texts" of the Q community.
        Theissen makes a strong case for the eschatological tradition of Mark 13,
        the so-called "synoptic apocalypse," originating in Jerusalem in 40 C. E.
        (161f.). Theissen argues that Mark's apophthegm source originated in
        Palestine or Galilee, with "the beginnings of the sayings and narrative
        tradition [occurring prior to 39 C.E. and emerging] ... in the places where
        Jesus worked" (122) and "in a region remote from the great ocean" (119),
        namely Capernaum and the Sea of Galilee's north shore (119f.). The miracle
        stories originated, according to Theissen, in the Syria-Palestinian region
        (105), and at least the sea miracles in an area where there was no realistic
        knowledge of the Mediterranean Sea- otherwise the creators of those stories
        would not have confused Lake Gennesaret with being a sea (103f.). Theissen
        also argues that "Mark found [the legend of John the Baptist's death] in the
        vicinity of Palestine not far from those regions that in the second half of
        the first century were still ruled by male and female Herodians (96). Mark'
        s source for his passion narrative, the Cross Gospel (as reconstructed by
        John Dominic Crossan) was composed in the 40's (so Crossan, BIRTH OF
        CHRISTIANITY, 524). I think a case can be made for it originating in
        Galilee.

        Finally, if Mark's community is located in one of the villages of Caesarea
        Philippi, then there is a "realistic" explanation for why Mark located the
        transfiguration story on a high mountain (9:2). Mountains often serve as a
        setting in New Testament stories. But rarely is a mountain depicted as a
        high mountain. Aside from Matthew's appropriation of this Markan
        designation in Matthew's version of the transfiguration story (17:1), there
        are only two other places in the New Testament where one finds the
        terminology "high mountain." One is the mountain of temptation where Jesus
        is tempted by Satan in Matthew's story of the temptation (4: 8), and the
        other is in Revelation 21:10. I am convinced that the high mountain Mark
        had in mind when he set the setting for the transfiguration story was the
        highest mountain in the Northern Palestinian/Southern Syria, namely, Mount
        Hermon. Caesarea Philippi practically sits at the foot of Mt. Hermon.
        Living in a village outside of Caesarea Philippi and likely gazing almost
        daily at the presence of Mt. Hermon, Mark, I submit, saw in Mt. Hermon the
        inspiration for the mythical and high mountain of the transfiguration story.

        Theodore J. Weeden, Sr.
        2/29/01
      • expcman@aol.com
        As a foot-note to your assumption that the author does not know his geography - that has certainly been a common assumption for about 100 years but I find that
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 30, 2001
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          As a foot-note to your assumption that the author does not know his geography
          - that has certainly been a common assumption for about 100 years but I find
          that such is not necessarily the case. In fact, I have no idea about whether
          or not the author has any knowledge (first hand or otherwise) of Palestinian
          geography [his facility with koine Greek suggests to me that he is not
          himself of Palestinian origin, whatever that might mean on this topi] ... BUT
          I do know that reading through Mark with map in hand does not result in
          confusion at all, as normally alledged, but rather results with a very
          careful use of this element in how he tells his story. In fact, I would
          argue that
          his narrative is arranged on the basis of geographical location. Thus, while
          summary
          statements in cc. 1-6 speaks of Jesus' "sojourning around," the pericopae
          actually narrated are all located in Capernaum. [Why?] And then in c. 6 he
          crosses over to
          Bethsaida [why?] and then proceeds itinerating around away from Capernaum and
          out-side of Galilee [again, why?], ending up in c. 8 back in Bethsaida, so
          that there is not "progress" made as he ends up where he started. Then up to
          Caesarea Philipi
          in c. 8 from which Jesus then pilgrimages directly down the Jordan Valley (in
          cc. 8-10) ending up in Jericho, from which he departs to arrive in Jerusalem
          as the locale for cc. 11-16. This strikes me as a careful and coherent use
          of geography. While I would not make any claim for its historical accuracy,
          I cannot find much if any evidence that the author of Mark is the one
          confused. In fact, isn't it important to note that he DOES locate
          events/pericopae in specific locales ... but not specific dates ... well, not
          until the entry into Jerusalem at which point the author now specifies
          chronological as well as geographical locations. This strikes me as
          intentional literary construction on the part of the author. My only point
          here is simply to question the usual blithe assumption that the author is
          confused ... when it may be that even modern scholars may just not be
          following his logic.

          Clive


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • expcman@aol.com
          Thanks for this rejoinder, since it is the usual one ... and in fact this circuitous route does make sense ... IF Jesus is seeking to avoid the territory of
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 30, 2001
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks for this rejoinder, since it is the usual one ... and in fact this
            circuitous route
            does make sense ... IF Jesus is seeking to avoid the territory of Galilee
            (controlled by Herod Antipas, whom he may well be seen as intending to
            avoid!) in order to get back to Bethsaid (also not within Antipas' political
            control). So let's try for something more humorous and pertinent.

            Thanks,

            Clive


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Steve Black
            ... While I completely agree that geography plays huge part in Mark s plot - I think it fairly easy to demonstrate a rather humorous ignorance on his part.
            Message 5 of 12 , Jul 30, 2001
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              >Clive wrote



              >As a foot-note to your assumption that the author does not know his geography
              >- that has certainly been a common assumption for about 100 years but I find
              >that such is not necessarily the case. In fact, I have no idea about whether
              >or not the author has any knowledge (first hand or otherwise) of Palestinian
              >geography [his facility with koine Greek suggests to me that he is not
              >himself of Palestinian origin, whatever that might mean on this topi] ... BUT
              >I do know that reading through Mark with map in hand does not result in
              >confusion at all, as normally alledged, but rather results with a very
              >careful use of this element in how he tells his story. In fact, I would
              >argue that
              >his narrative is arranged on the basis of geographical location. Thus, while
              >summary
              >statements in cc. 1-6 speaks of Jesus' "sojourning around," the pericopae
              >actually narrated are all located in Capernaum. [Why?] And then in c. 6 he
              >crosses over to
              >Bethsaida [why?] and then proceeds itinerating around away from Capernaum and
              >out-side of Galilee [again, why?], ending up in c. 8 back in Bethsaida, so
              >that there is not "progress" made as he ends up where he started. Then up to
              >Caesarea Philipi
              >in c. 8 from which Jesus then pilgrimages directly down the Jordan Valley (in
              >cc. 8-10) ending up in Jericho, from which he departs to arrive in Jerusalem
              >as the locale for cc. 11-16. This strikes me as a careful and coherent use
              >of geography. While I would not make any claim for its historical accuracy,
              >I cannot find much if any evidence that the author of Mark is the one
              >confused. In fact, isn't it important to note that he DOES locate
              >events/pericopae in specific locales ... but not specific dates ... well, not
              >until the entry into Jerusalem at which point the author now specifies
              >chronological as well as geographical locations. This strikes me as
              >intentional literary construction on the part of the author. My only point
              >here is simply to question the usual blithe assumption that the author is
              >confused ... when it may be that even modern scholars may just not be
              >following his logic.
              >
              >

              While I completely agree that geography plays huge part in Mark's
              plot - I think it fairly easy to demonstrate a rather humorous
              ignorance on his part.
              Mark 7:31 is a great example!
              (NRSV)...Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and by way of
              Sidon, towards the sea of Galilee..

              Its like saying he returned from the United States, by way of Canada,
              towards Mexico.
              --
              Peace

              Steve Black
              Vancouver, BC
            • Barlow, James C. DOC
              It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience, would utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean manner. Has
              Message 6 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience, would
                utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean
                manner. Has anyone ever compared the thematic developments of the Passion
                Narrative(s) to thematic elements in classical Greek tragedy?
                -jb

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Ted Weeden [mailto:weedent@...]
                Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:13 PM
                To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN


                Bob Schacht wrote on Saturday, July 28, 2001 12:31 PM in response to Bill
                Arnal's post of 7/28/01

                > If Q had no PN, and Mark created it, what are the distinctive Markan
                > fingerprints to be found in his PN? Or maybe I should be directing this
                > question to Ted Weeden (but I'd appreciate your answer anyway!)

                Bill Arnal replied in a post, Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:20 AM

                > ... I HAPPEN to think that Mark DID fabricate his passion narrative, and
                > see his theological fingerprints in not only the presence but the
                > amplification in the Passion of such motifs as > irony, victory in
                > suffering, allusions to apocalyptic scenarios, the stupidity of the
                > disciples, the perfidy of the Jews, and so on.

                >> Or maybe I [Bob Schacht] should be directing this question to Ted Weeden
                >> (but I'd appreciate your answer anyway!)

                > Yeah, a more informed and detailed answer to Markan features in the
                > Passion would have to come from Ted Weeden.

                My response [TJW]:

                I have just returned from a bike trip in the Canadian Rockies to find a
                number of posts in response to my essay-post, "Taking the Markan Polemic
                Seriously," and my position that Mark invented Judas' betrayal and the
                Petrine denial, along with the passion narrative as we know it in the
                canonical gospels, and upon which the other canonical gospels are directly
                dependent in the formulating of their own respective passion narratives.
                The post exchange between Bill and Bob, as well as critiques of others, have
                led me to the decision to concentrate on the betrayal of Judas, setting
                aside the Petrine denial for now, and show in a far more complete and
                comprehensive way, than I have thus far, why I think the evidence is so
                convincing that Mark created Judas and his betrayal, and as well, at least
                for now, that part of the passion narrative in which Judas is involved

                In an essay-post that I hope will be completed by the end of the week, I
                will seek to demonstrate (1) evidence of clear Markan fingerprints (Markan
                intercalation) in incorporating Mark's own Judas material into the Markan
                Last Supper tradition, along with evidence of Matthean and Johannine
                verbatim appropriation of a significant part of that Markan intercalated
                material, (2) evidence that, aside from the bare-bones Markan material on
                Judas, there is no essential, multiple attestation among the other canonical
                authors for any of the other Judas material found in their respective
                gospels but not in Mark, (3) evidence that the additional information on
                Judas supplied by the other gospel writers (e.g. Judas' motive for betraying
                Jesus and the narratives of Judas' death) was motivated by the other
                canonical authors' interest in filling in the Markan narrative gaps and
                resolving Markan narrative ambiguities ( a la Meir Sternberg), (4) evidence
                that the other canonical authors lapsed into narrator "fatique" (a la Mark
                Goodacre) in trying to deal with Mark's creation of Judas, and (5) evidence
                that Paul, once again, shows no knowledge of the betrayal as underscored by
                the fact that his tradition's use of paradidomai in I Cor. 11:23, contra
                John Lupia (Thank you for your post, John), refers not to Judas handing
                Jesus over but rather God handing Jesus over, a la Isa. 53:6 (KURIOS
                PAREDWKEN AUTON TAIS hAMARTIAIS hHMWN) and the suffering servant motif
                that clearly lies behind the LS tradition Paul received, as well as the
                early creed of I Cor. 15:3-5.

                Ted Weeden











                The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                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/
              • Barlow, James C. DOC
                Sehr Fantastisch! -jb ... From: Jan Sammer [mailto:sammer@interpres.cz] Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:33 PM To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re:
                Message 7 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sehr Fantastisch!
                  -jb

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Jan Sammer [mailto:sammer@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:33 PM
                  To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN


                  See my website www.nazarenus.com which presents an analysis of the PN as a
                  classical tragedy in five acts. This work was conceived by Livio C.
                  Stecchini in the late seventies and completed by me in the course of the
                  eighties, with minor adjustments since then. The thesis it propounds sounds
                  admittedly outlandish at first glance: the Roman playwright, philosopher and
                  statesman Seneca wrote a play, possibly entitled Nazarenus, based on
                  information he had received from the early Christian community in Rome about
                  the founder of their religion; this play was then used by the gospel writers
                  as a major source of their passion narratives. The task the authors have set
                  for themselves is to attempt a reconstruction of the play based on the
                  gospel narratives and our knowledge of Roman tragedies. The analysis uses
                  the convention of the Roman stage to specify which characters were onstage
                  at what time, which entrances and exits they used, when the chorus arrived
                  and when it left, what scenes were played out in front of the audience, and
                  which took place offstage, etc. Even those readers who will not find the
                  thesis as a whole convincing will, I dare say, find much that is useful in
                  terms of the analysis of the dramatic structure of the passion narrative.
                  Comments are welcome.

                  Jan Sammer
                  sammer@...
                  Prague, Czech Republic

                  From: "Barlow, James C. DOC" <James.Barlow@...>

                  > It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience,
                  would
                  > utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean
                  > manner. Has anyone ever compared the thematic developments of the Passion
                  > Narrative(s) to thematic elements in classical Greek tragedy?
                  > -jb
                  >




                  The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                  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/
                • Jan Sammer
                  See my website www.nazarenus.com which presents an analysis of the PN as a classical tragedy in five acts. This work was conceived by Livio C. Stecchini in the
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    See my website www.nazarenus.com which presents an analysis of the PN as a
                    classical tragedy in five acts. This work was conceived by Livio C.
                    Stecchini in the late seventies and completed by me in the course of the
                    eighties, with minor adjustments since then. The thesis it propounds sounds
                    admittedly outlandish at first glance: the Roman playwright, philosopher and
                    statesman Seneca wrote a play, possibly entitled Nazarenus, based on
                    information he had received from the early Christian community in Rome about
                    the founder of their religion; this play was then used by the gospel writers
                    as a major source of their passion narratives. The task the authors have set
                    for themselves is to attempt a reconstruction of the play based on the
                    gospel narratives and our knowledge of Roman tragedies. The analysis uses
                    the convention of the Roman stage to specify which characters were onstage
                    at what time, which entrances and exits they used, when the chorus arrived
                    and when it left, what scenes were played out in front of the audience, and
                    which took place offstage, etc. Even those readers who will not find the
                    thesis as a whole convincing will, I dare say, find much that is useful in
                    terms of the analysis of the dramatic structure of the passion narrative.
                    Comments are welcome.

                    Jan Sammer
                    sammer@...
                    Prague, Czech Republic

                    From: "Barlow, James C. DOC" <James.Barlow@...>

                    > It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience,
                    would
                    > utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean
                    > manner. Has anyone ever compared the thematic developments of the Passion
                    > Narrative(s) to thematic elements in classical Greek tragedy?
                    > -jb
                    >
                  • Jan Sammer
                    What I asked for were comments, not putdowns. :) I hope readers can appreciate the work at least as a thought experiment that can contribute to our
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      What I asked for were comments, not putdowns. :) I hope readers can
                      appreciate the work at least as a thought experiment that can contribute to
                      our understanding of the structure of the PN, independently of the validity
                      of the proposed thesis (which is admittedly hypothetical and probably
                      unprovable in any event).

                      Jan

                      From: Barlow, James C.

                      > Sehr Fantastisch!
                      > -jb
                      >

                      > See my website www.nazarenus.com which presents an analysis of the PN as a
                      > classical tragedy in five acts. This work was conceived by Livio C.
                      > Stecchini in the late seventies and completed by me in the course of the
                      > eighties, with minor adjustments since then. The thesis it propounds
                      sounds
                      > admittedly outlandish at first glance: the Roman playwright, philosopher
                      and
                      > statesman Seneca wrote a play, possibly entitled Nazarenus, based on
                      > information he had received from the early Christian community in Rome
                      about
                      > the founder of their religion; this play was then used by the gospel
                      writers
                      > as a major source of their passion narratives. The task the authors have
                      set
                      > for themselves is to attempt a reconstruction of the play based on the
                      > gospel narratives and our knowledge of Roman tragedies. The analysis uses
                      > the convention of the Roman stage to specify which characters were onstage
                      > at what time, which entrances and exits they used, when the chorus arrived
                      > and when it left, what scenes were played out in front of the audience,
                      and
                      > which took place offstage, etc. Even those readers who will not find the
                      > thesis as a whole convincing will, I dare say, find much that is useful in
                      > terms of the analysis of the dramatic structure of the passion narrative.
                      > Comments are welcome.
                      >
                      > Jan Sammer
                      > sammer@...
                      > Prague, Czech Republic
                      >
                      > From: "Barlow, James C. DOC" <James.Barlow@...>
                      >
                      > > It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience,
                      > would
                      > > utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean
                      > > manner. Has anyone ever compared the thematic developments of the
                      Passion
                      > > Narrative(s) to thematic elements in classical Greek tragedy?
                      > > -jb
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org
                      >
                      > 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/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org
                      >
                      > 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/
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • Barlow, James C. DOC
                      Not a putdown at all! As a playwright who s just now finishing a 4 Act play and on the way to writing a tragedy about Pilate I think the whole concept is
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Not a putdown at all! As a playwright who's just now finishing a 4 Act play
                        and on the way to writing a tragedy about Pilate I think the whole concept
                        is grand!
                        My comments to follow.
                        -jb

                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Jan Sammer [mailto:sammer@...]
                        Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:10 PM
                        To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: Re: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN


                        What I asked for were comments, not putdowns. :) I hope readers can
                        appreciate the work at least as a thought experiment that can contribute to
                        our understanding of the structure of the PN, independently of the validity
                        of the proposed thesis (which is admittedly hypothetical and probably
                        unprovable in any event).

                        Jan

                        From: Barlow, James C.

                        > Sehr Fantastisch!
                        > -jb
                        >

                        > See my website www.nazarenus.com which presents an analysis of the PN as a
                        > classical tragedy in five acts. This work was conceived by Livio C.
                        > Stecchini in the late seventies and completed by me in the course of the
                        > eighties, with minor adjustments since then. The thesis it propounds
                        sounds
                        > admittedly outlandish at first glance: the Roman playwright, philosopher
                        and
                        > statesman Seneca wrote a play, possibly entitled Nazarenus, based on
                        > information he had received from the early Christian community in Rome
                        about
                        > the founder of their religion; this play was then used by the gospel
                        writers
                        > as a major source of their passion narratives. The task the authors have
                        set
                        > for themselves is to attempt a reconstruction of the play based on the
                        > gospel narratives and our knowledge of Roman tragedies. The analysis uses
                        > the convention of the Roman stage to specify which characters were onstage
                        > at what time, which entrances and exits they used, when the chorus arrived
                        > and when it left, what scenes were played out in front of the audience,
                        and
                        > which took place offstage, etc. Even those readers who will not find the
                        > thesis as a whole convincing will, I dare say, find much that is useful in
                        > terms of the analysis of the dramatic structure of the passion narrative.
                        > Comments are welcome.
                        >
                        > Jan Sammer
                        > sammer@...
                        > Prague, Czech Republic
                        >
                        > From: "Barlow, James C. DOC" <James.Barlow@...>
                        >
                        > > It makes sense that Mark, writing for an increasingly Greek audience,
                        > would
                        > > utilize this literary elements in a very appealing, almost Sophoclean
                        > > manner. Has anyone ever compared the thematic developments of the
                        Passion
                        > > Narrative(s) to thematic elements in classical Greek tragedy?
                        > > -jb
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org
                        >
                        > 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/
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org
                        >
                        > 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/
                        >
                        >
                        >



                        The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                        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/
                      • Barlow, James C. DOC
                        Professor Weeden, I want to thank you for this. To my appalling ignorance and amateurish mind, this makes perfect sense to me. Thanks again. -jb ... From:
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Professor Weeden, I want to thank you for this. To my appalling ignorance
                          and amateurish mind, this makes perfect sense to me. Thanks again.
                          -jb

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Ted Weeden [mailto:weedent@...]
                          Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 9:20 AM
                          To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [XTalk] Markan Invention of Judas and PN


                          Robert Raphael wrote Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:29 PM

                          > An possible obstacle to attributing the passion narrative(PN) to the
                          Gospel
                          > Mark (GM) is improbability that the GM was written in the vicinity of
                          > Palestine. In this regard I understand that the GM betrays ignorance of
                          > Palestine geography.
                          >
                          > The most likely place of origin of the PN is Jerusalem because of the
                          close
                          > proximity to where the events occurred. In this regard some have suggested
                          > that the GM was composed in Rome.
                          >
                          > Crossan in his book the "Birth of Christianity" argues for Jerusalem as
                          the
                          > origin of the PN which he states existed as a separate "Cross Gospel" that
                          > was later incorporated in the canonical gospels and the noncanonical
                          Gospel
                          > of Peter.

                          My response:

                          Thank you, Raphael, for your post. I locate the Markan community in the
                          village region of Caesarea Philippi. On 2/29/00 I posted an essay,
                          "Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community," on X Talk, in which I argued
                          for that provenance, taking into consideration the georgraphical issues
                          you mention. Since I have referred in other recent posts to my argument
                          for the Caesarea Philippi region as the Markan provenance, I have enclosed
                          below my essay of 2/29/00 for your interest and the possible interest of
                          others.

                          With respect to Caesarea Philippi as the Markan provenance, I am
                          not the first to suggest that. Chris Berger (_Einfuehrung in die
                          Formgeschichte_, 197, 202) is to my knowledge the first to locate Mark's
                          community there. But he does not give any rationale for his position. I
                          first came upon Berger's proposal through Gerd Theissen's reference to it in
                          his _The Gospels in Context_. I asked Theissen, via e-mail, if he was
                          aware of where Berger may have presented a developed argument for his
                          position. Theissen responded that he was unaware of anything. I have not
                          inquired of Berger directly. I need to say with respect to a Judean
                          provenance that Mahlon Smith has argued that and raised questions with me
                          regarding a Judean vs Caesarea Philippi provenance in an exchange on XTalk
                          over a year and a half ago. Unfortunately, I have been diverted by other
                          issues and matters and have not engaged Mahlon on the issue as yet.

                          You are probably aware that many Markan scholars now locate Mark in northern
                          Palestine or southern Syria, as noted in my essay. Joel Markus (_Mark
                          1-8_, 35-36) is one of the most recent to do so. It is my developing
                          thesis (1) that the Q community, the Matthean community and the Johannnine
                          community are located in same general region of northern Palestine and
                          southern Syria, (2) that Mark knew and used Q correctively, (3) that Matthew
                          and John borrowed from Mark and transformed Mark for their own respective
                          christological/theological purposes, and (4) that one can identify a
                          trajectory in the use of the Son of the Human term from Q to Mark to John,
                          with its beginning in Q, as no more than a sociological term, to Mark's
                          appropriation and transformation of Q's sociological usage into his
                          preferred christological title (identifying Jesus as the righteous
                          suffering-servant vindicated in the end time) to John's appropriation and
                          transformation of Mark's christological usage of the term into his
                          christology
                          of triumphalism.

                          Ted Weeden

                          Methodological Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community
                          and The Results Obtained from Their Application

                          Markan scholars who have had an interest in trying to pinpoint the location
                          of the Markan community have proposed several diverse geographical settings
                          over the years. Before the 1950's most scholars located the community at
                          Rome . Martin Hengel (STUDIES IN THE GOSPEL OF MARK) is one of the most
                          recent scholars who has advocated strongly for Rome. Since the 1950's the
                          tide of scholarly opinion has begun to shift to locating Mark somewhere in
                          the Syrian or Palestinian region. In all the years, however, as far as I am
                          aware, no one has developed a systematic methodology that would guide Markan
                          scholarship in making more informed and precise judgments about the location
                          of Mark's community. Since the Markan text is our only reliable source
                          (Papias, Anti-Marcionite Prologue, etc., now discounted) for information
                          about Mark's community, scholars remain dependent upon the text for offering
                          clues to the community's location. For example, the text's rural/peasant
                          ethos tells Howard Kee (COMMUNITY OF THE NEW AGE) and Richard Rohrbaugh
                          ("The Social Location of Mark's Audience," INT, 1993) that the Markan
                          community is situated in a rural village. Gerd Theissen (THE GOSPELS IN
                          CONTEXT) also senses that the text originates in a rural context and further
                          observes that Mark's calling Lake Gennesaret "the Sea of Galilee" means Mark
                          lacks any realistic understanding of what constitutes a "sea." That must
                          mean, Theissen submits, that his community is located far from the
                          Mediterranean Sea, where there is virtually no awareness of the magnitude of
                          that body of water, legitimately called a "sea."

                          The Markan errors in Galilean geography have suggested to many that
                          community could not be located in Galilee. However, a new light upon those
                          errors has been shed by Dean Chapman ("Locating the Gospel of Mark," BTB,
                          1995: 24-35) which revives the possibility, despite Markan geographical
                          errors, that the Markan community could be in located in one particular
                          section of Galilee or in close proximity to it. Chapman has proposed an
                          interesting theory based upon Jean Piaget and Babel Inhelder's work on the
                          way space is perceived and represented according to cognitive psychology.
                          Chapman observes that Mark handles geography in two different ways. Mark
                          uses "colloidal" mapping where he knows the topography well and
                          "cosmographic" mapping for the distant horizons of which he has only minimal
                          knowledge. Accordingly, based upon this thesis, Chapman submits that there
                          are two regions Mark knows best, regions where he does his most accurate,
                          colloidal mapping. They are (1) Jerusalem and its surrounding area, which
                          includes such named places as Bethany, Bethphage, the Mount of Olives and
                          the Garden of Gethsemane and (2) places on the northern rim of the Sea of
                          Galilee, which include Capernaum, Gennersaret, Bethsaida and Dalmanutha and
                          the route northward from Bethsaida to Caesarea Philippi. Chapman opts for
                          (1) over (2) as the region where Mark's community is to be found. But, as
                          shall be clear below, I opt for (2).

                          These and other suggestions are helpful insights for locating the Markan
                          community using clues supplied by the text. Building upon these insights I
                          would like to propose a systematic way for deciphering the location of the
                          Markan community from the Markan text by using the following seven
                          methodological guidelines. Then I shall show how using these guidelines
                          enables us to determine the likely site of Mark's home community.

                          The First Guideline

                          Markan allusions to his community's location in all likelihood are to be
                          found where Mark exhibits accurate representation of geography, where he
                          employs colloidal mapping, as Chapman argues, rather than cosmographical map
                          ping. For it is logical to assume that Mark knows best the geography of
                          his home area. He is less likely to err in his geographical mapping of the
                          place where he lives than in areas remote from his home and only vaguely
                          known by him.

                          The Second Guideline

                          Wherever the community is located, it must be at significant distance from
                          the Mediterranean Sea. It is very unlikely that either Mark or the members
                          of his community have any firsthand experience or realistic awareness of the
                          magnitude of the Mediterranean Sea. If Mark, as Theissen has argued, were
                          aware of the size of the Mediterranean Sea, he would not have made the
                          mistake of calling Lake Gennesaret a "sea." If there are bodies of water
                          in the region of Mark's community, they must be of such diminutive size that
                          by comparison Lake Gennesaret seemed like a sea to Mark, and likely to his
                          community also. Therefore we must look for Markan allusions to the site of
                          his community in geographical settings whose remoteness from the
                          Mediterranean Sea make it unlikely that Mark or members of that community
                          would have any realistic knowledge about that body of water.

                          The Third Guideline

                          Wherever the community is, it is likely located in a rural village setting.
                          Therefore, we must seek the site of the community among the village settings
                          Mark mentions in his narrative.

                          The Fourth Guideline

                          It is most likely that the site of Mark's community is among those narrative
                          places where Mark presents Jesus as actively engaged in critical theological
                          issues- in particular, theological issues that the narrative gives every
                          evidence of being of paramount importance to Mark, issues which he appears
                          to be addressing in order to provide interpretation or "answers" to
                          existential dilemmas facing his community.

                          The Fifth Guideline

                          Wherever the Markan community is located, it is likely in fairly close
                          proximity to Galilee, if not in Galilee itself. I state this for the
                          following reason. It is clear that Galilee for Mark is the center of his
                          eschatological universe. It is the Markan Mecca. According to the Markan
                          story, it is in Galilee that Jesus first proclaims the dawn of the kingdom.
                          And it is in Galilee, according to the Markan Jesus (14:28; 16:7), where
                          that final eschatological moment will occur in which he will be fully
                          vindicated, glorified and empowered (13:24-26). For Mark to have such an
                          existential investment in Galilee as the place where the triumphant
                          eschatological fulfillment takes place makes it hard to believe that his
                          community would be located so far from Galilee that distance would prevent
                          Mark and the members of his community from experiencing that eschatological
                          moment firsthand. Therefore we must look for Markan allusions to the site
                          of his community among villages in his narrative which are within or in
                          close proximity to Galilee.

                          The Sixth Guideline

                          The narrative places which meet the first five criteria and are not those
                          that the historical Jesus is likely to have frequented are more likely to be
                          the site of the Markan community. I posit this on the following basis. As
                          Rohrbaugh (390) has pointed out with respect to Mark's narrative world: "We
                          can be sure that at some points this narrative world corresponds with the
                          real world of Jesus, while at others it most certainly does not." A good
                          example of the Markan narrative diverging from Jesus' real world and
                          reflecting more closely the real world of Mark's own community is Mark 13.
                          The events of that chapter clearly postdate the real world of the historical
                          Jesus. Thus: if, after applying the first five guidelines to the Markan
                          narrative, some places which emerge as probable sites of Mark's community
                          turn out to be places where the historical Jesus, according to critical
                          analysis, is unlikely to have conducted his ministry, then it is in one of
                          those particular places that the site of the Markan community is likely to
                          be found.

                          The Seventh Guideline

                          Having followed the first six guidelines and having thus arrived at a likely
                          geographical site of the Markan community, as alluded to by Mark in his
                          narrative, that geographical site should be in relatively near proximity of
                          the place of origin or a probable place of circulation of Mark's sources in
                          order to account for how he would have gained access to those sources. The
                          principle underlying this guideline is that one can better account for Mark'
                          s access to a source if he is in close proximity to its place of origin or
                          circulation than if he is at some remote distance from the source's
                          geographical genesis or likely place of circulation.

                          Results Obtained from Applying the Guidelines to the Text: The Community of
                          Mark Located

                          As a result of applying these seven guidelines to the Markan place
                          references in search for the Markan community, I have found that the site
                          that emerges as the most likely location of the Markan community is
                          somewhere among the villages of Caesarea Philippi. Why? Space does not
                          allow me to give full and detail argumentation for villages of Caesarea
                          Philippi and against other narrative sites. But briefly outlined below are
                          the reasons the villages of Caesarea Philippi, in my opinion, turns out to
                          be the best candidate for the location of Mark's community..

                          First, Caesarea Philippi is within one of the geographical areas which Mark
                          does map accurately (first guideline). Second, Caesarea Philippi is far
                          enough inland from the Mediterranean Sea for Mark, as a resident of one of
                          its villages, not to have a realistic knowledge of what constitutes the size
                          of a "real" sea. Thus, without such awareness, it is easy to understand why
                          his experience of the size of the Lake of Gennesaret would cause him to
                          mistakenly think it qualified being called a "sea" (second guideline).
                          Such a mistake in judgment could well have arisen as a result of Mark's
                          comparison of Lake Gennesaret with Lake Huleh, the lake nearest to him..
                          Lake Gennersaret would have appeared to him to be of enormous proportions
                          compared to Lake Huleh. If Lake Huleh was called a "lake," then the size of
                          Lake Gennesaret by comparison qualified in Mark's mind in being called a
                          "sea." Third, the villages of Caesarea Philippi are obviously a part of a
                          village rural setting (third guideline).

                          Fourth, it is on the road to Caesarea Philippi (8:27b) and in the setting of
                          its villages (8:27a) where the Markan gospel's most critical theological
                          issues (the nature of christology and the nature of discipleship) are
                          directly and for the first time introduced and dealt with by Jesus himself
                          (fourth guideline). Christology and discipleship become then the dominant
                          themes that drive the drama on from those rural villages of Caesarea
                          Philippi to the temple establishment of Jerusalem, where the passion drama,
                          predicted first on the way to those villages, unfolds and the gospel comes
                          to an end at an empty tomb. Moreover, many of the post-Easter issues which
                          the Markan Jesus addresses in Mk 13 for the benefit of the Markan community
                          are addressed or at least foreshadowed by Jesus in the region of Caesarea
                          Philippi. I have in mind the Christ-issue ("You are the Christ" [8:28]/
                          "False christs...will arise" [13:22] ), witnessing for or being ashamed of
                          Christ ("whoever is ashamed of me" [8:38]/"stand...for my sake, to bear
                          testimony" [13:9], assurance of salvation ("lose your life" [8:35]/"he who
                          endures to the end" [13:13]), the credibility of Jesus words ("ashamed of...
                          my words" [8:38]/"my words will not pass away" [13:30]), the
                          exaltation-enthronement of the "Son of man" with angels (8:38/13:26f.) and
                          the assurance that the final eschatological event will happen before the end
                          of the current generation ("some standing here will not taste death" [9:1]/
                          "this generation will not pass away" [13:30]).

                          Fifth, the villages of Caesarea Philippi are in close proximity to Galilee,
                          Mark's eschatological Mecca. In fact Mark may have in his mind included his
                          own village in his theological/geographical rubric "Galilee." At the time
                          of Mark the former boundary established along the Jordan River that served
                          to separate the province of Galilee, the tetrarchy of Antipas, from the
                          tetrarchy of Philip, which included Bethsaida and Caesarea Philippi, no
                          longer existed. Under Agrippa II the two former tetrarchies were merged
                          into one region. Is it possible then that at the time of Mark, with the
                          former boundary which divided the province of Galilee from the region east
                          of the Jordan River non-existent, that Galilee in the popular mind could
                          have included part of the region east of the Jordan River. The author of
                          the fourth gospel seems to think so. He locates the city of Bethsaida in
                          Galilee (12:21), a city which lay east of the Jordan and was formerly a part
                          of Philip's tetrarchy and which Philip upgraded to a city, along with
                          transforming Paneas into Caesarea Philippi.

                          So at the time of John, and perhaps Mark, Galilee, at least in the popular
                          mind, had been extended to include Bethsaida. Is it possible the outlying
                          villages of Caesarea Philippi were also thought to be a part of Galilee.
                          Avi Yonah (see Chapman, 33) has produced an early rabbinic tradition, dating
                          perhaps from second-temple time, in which Caesarea Philippi was considered
                          to be a part of Palestine. The only clue Mark gives us as to how he views
                          the relationship of the villages of Caesarea Philippi to Galilee is his
                          notation of Jesus' departure from the Caesarea Philippi region. In 9:30 he
                          states: "They went on from there and passed through Galilee." The meaning
                          of this statement is unclear. Does Mark mean that Jesus crossed over into
                          Galilee and journeyed through Galilee or does he mean that from the section
                          of Galilee Jesus was in, which included the villages of Caesarea Philippi,
                          he traveled on through Galilee until he reached Capernaum in 9:33? In any
                          event, which ever meaning Mark had in mind, the villages of Caesarea
                          Philippi meet the criterion of the fifth guideline for locating the Markan
                          community.

                          Sixth, Jesus' visit to the villages of Caesarea Philippi is generally
                          considered by Markan scholars to be a Markan creation. The region of
                          Caesarea Philippi is not a place where the historical Jesus conducted his
                          ministry (sixth guideline).

                          Seventh, most of the sources that Mark draws upon originated or are thought
                          to have circulated in relatively close proximity. Richard Horsley and
                          Jonathan Draper (Whoever Hears you Hears Me) locate the Q community in
                          Galilee. Without citing the evidence here, I am convinced that Mark had
                          some direct or indirect contact with the oral "texts" of the Q community.
                          Theissen makes a strong case for the eschatological tradition of Mark 13,
                          the so-called "synoptic apocalypse," originating in Jerusalem in 40 C. E.
                          (161f.). Theissen argues that Mark's apophthegm source originated in
                          Palestine or Galilee, with "the beginnings of the sayings and narrative
                          tradition [occurring prior to 39 C.E. and emerging] ... in the places where
                          Jesus worked" (122) and "in a region remote from the great ocean" (119),
                          namely Capernaum and the Sea of Galilee's north shore (119f.). The miracle
                          stories originated, according to Theissen, in the Syria-Palestinian region
                          (105), and at least the sea miracles in an area where there was no realistic
                          knowledge of the Mediterranean Sea- otherwise the creators of those stories
                          would not have confused Lake Gennesaret with being a sea (103f.). Theissen
                          also argues that "Mark found [the legend of John the Baptist's death] in the
                          vicinity of Palestine not far from those regions that in the second half of
                          the first century were still ruled by male and female Herodians (96). Mark'
                          s source for his passion narrative, the Cross Gospel (as reconstructed by
                          John Dominic Crossan) was composed in the 40's (so Crossan, BIRTH OF
                          CHRISTIANITY, 524). I think a case can be made for it originating in
                          Galilee.

                          Finally, if Mark's community is located in one of the villages of Caesarea
                          Philippi, then there is a "realistic" explanation for why Mark located the
                          transfiguration story on a high mountain (9:2). Mountains often serve as a
                          setting in New Testament stories. But rarely is a mountain depicted as a
                          high mountain. Aside from Matthew's appropriation of this Markan
                          designation in Matthew's version of the transfiguration story (17:1), there
                          are only two other places in the New Testament where one finds the
                          terminology "high mountain." One is the mountain of temptation where Jesus
                          is tempted by Satan in Matthew's story of the temptation (4: 8), and the
                          other is in Revelation 21:10. I am convinced that the high mountain Mark
                          had in mind when he set the setting for the transfiguration story was the
                          highest mountain in the Northern Palestinian/Southern Syria, namely, Mount
                          Hermon. Caesarea Philippi practically sits at the foot of Mt. Hermon.
                          Living in a village outside of Caesarea Philippi and likely gazing almost
                          daily at the presence of Mt. Hermon, Mark, I submit, saw in Mt. Hermon the
                          inspiration for the mythical and high mountain of the transfiguration story.

                          Theodore J. Weeden, Sr.
                          2/29/01









                          The XTalk Home Page is http://www.xtalk.org

                          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/
                        • Bob Schacht
                          ... Is Clement of Alexandria also discounted? Summarized in Eusebius, (H.E. 6.14.5-7), it reads ...Mark had this disposition : that when Peter was in Rome
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jul 31, 2001
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            At 09:20 AM 7/30/01 -0500, Ted Weeden wrote:
                            >Robert Raphael wrote Sunday, July 29, 2001 11:29 PM
                            >
                            > > An possible obstacle to attributing the passion narrative(PN) to the
                            >Gospel
                            > > Mark (GM) is improbability that the GM was written in the vicinity of
                            > > Palestine. In this regard I understand that the GM betrays ignorance of
                            > > Palestine geography.... In this regard some have suggested
                            > > that the GM was composed in Rome....
                            > >
                            > >
                            >My response:
                            >
                            >... I locate the Markan community in the
                            >village region of Caesarea Philippi. On 2/29/00 I posted an essay,
                            >"Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community," on X Talk, in which I
                            >argued for that provenance, taking into consideration the georgraphical
                            >issues you mention.
                            >...You are probably aware that many Markan scholars now locate Mark in
                            >northern Palestine or southern Syria, as noted in my essay....It is my
                            >developing thesis (1) that the Q community, the Matthean community and the
                            >Johannnine community are located in same general region of northern
                            >Palestine and southern Syria, (2) that Mark knew and used Q correctively,
                            >(3) that Matthew and John borrowed from Mark and transformed Mark for
                            >their own respective christological/theological purposes, and (4) that one
                            >can identify a trajectory in the use of the Son of the Human term ...
                            >
                            >Ted Weeden
                            >
                            >Methodological Guidelines for Locating the Markan Community
                            >and The Results Obtained from Their Application
                            >
                            >Markan scholars who have had an interest in trying to pinpoint the
                            >location of the Markan community have proposed several diverse
                            >geographical settings over the years. Before the 1950's most scholars
                            >located the community at Rome . Martin Hengel (STUDIES IN THE GOSPEL OF
                            >MARK) is one of the most recent scholars who has advocated strongly for
                            >Rome. Since the 1950's the tide of scholarly opinion has begun to shift
                            >to locating Mark somewhere in the Syrian or Palestinian region. ...
                            >Since the Markan text is our only reliable source (Papias, Anti-Marcionite
                            >Prologue, etc., now discounted)...

                            Is Clement of Alexandria also discounted? Summarized in Eusebius, (H.E.
                            6.14.5-7), it reads
                            "...Mark had this 'disposition': that when Peter was in Rome preaching the
                            word openly and proclaiming the gospel by the spirit, those present, who
                            were many, entreated Mark, as one who had followed him a long time and
                            remembered what was said, to record what was spoken; but that after he
                            composed the gospel, he shared it with those who wanted it; that, when
                            Peter found out about it, he did not actively discourage or encourage
                            it..." (Translation by Stephen Carlson in New Test. Stud. 47, p. 118)

                            >for information about Mark's community, scholars remain dependent upon the
                            >text for offering clues to the community's location. ... Gerd Theissen
                            >(THE GOSPELS IN CONTEXT) also senses that the text originates in a rural
                            >context and further observes that Mark's calling Lake Gennesaret "the Sea
                            >of Galilee" means Mark lacks any realistic understanding of what
                            >constitutes a "sea." That must mean, Theissen submits, that his community
                            >is located far from the Mediterranean Sea, where there is virtually no
                            >awareness of the magnitude of that body of water, legitimately called a "sea."

                            Ted,
                            With all due respect to you and Thiessen, I find this argument very hard to
                            swallow. It virtually requires that the author of GMark be an extremely
                            provincial person who traveled little and spoke with no travelers at any
                            great length. Palestine is a very small place. By "northern Palestine and
                            southern Syria" I assume you must mean somewhere between, say, Tiberias and
                            Damascus. But that area is only a few days walk from the Mediterranean Sea.
                            Heck, even I, computer potato though I am, could walk from Tiberias to the
                            Mediterranean coast in 3 days. Jesus in the Gospels is depicted as covering
                            a fair amount of ground by foot: from around the "Sea" of Galilee to the
                            Lebanese coast, south to Jerusalem, east to the Decapolis. But your Mark
                            must really be a homebody. Surely some of the other Marks must be ruled
                            out: No companion of Paul such as John Mark (Acts 12:25; 15:37,39 etc.)
                            could have been the author, as he was well-traveled overseas. And somehow
                            this poorly traveled homebody who seldom spoke with travelers managed to
                            learn to speak and write Greek, so it must have been a Greek city, so this
                            hometown boy would not have had to travel very far to learn Greek. No, it
                            strains my credulity to think that Mark, whom (when it is convenient) is
                            described as a literary genius, becomes a Dodo who doesn't know the
                            difference between a lake and a sea.

                            I find more convincing Eric Eve's proposal (on the morning of 7/31) that
                            Mark's choice of "sea" was a deliberate literary ploy.

                            Indeed, much of what you base your assessment of the location of the
                            community of Mark might be due to one of Mark's sources. I wish to draw to
                            your attention a summary of one of the publications of the late Philip
                            Lewis, a member of CrossTalk during the last years of his life, who posted
                            the following summary of his theory of a "boat source" for certain sections
                            of Mark (CrossTalk 3/7/98) (reference to publication at end of the quote
                            below):

                            >3. If one were to gather all the material in GMark which told of voyaging in
                            >a boat except for the Walking on the Sea, itself a resurrection appearance,
                            >and the Riddle of the Loaves of Mk.8.14-21 which was a Markan composition
                            >requiring a knowledge of both Feedings in the Gospel, one would find that
                            >the voyage took Jesus from:
                            > a. the pressure of a crowd, (Mk.3.7-12)
                            > b. to a teaching from the boat (Mk.4.1) to
                            > c. a Feeding of a multitude with "five loaves" and "two fish" (i.e. the
                            >Law for the New Age of Pisces)
                            > d. to the healing of a Gerasene demoniac, excluding the pigs
                            >embelishment, (Mk.5.1-20)
                            > e. to Magdala where a woman with a hemorrhage was healed, (Mk.5.24b-34)
                            > f. and finally to the conclusion of the voyage now in a ship not a
                            > boat, (Mk.4.35-41)
                            >with the Stilling of a Storm, presumably debarking at Capernaum.
                            >
                            >In tracing that voyage as the seams in the Gospel reveal it, one is
                            >following Mark's "Boat Source," and observing in the process that the author
                            >has dismembered his source so that he can use its event-interpretation - its
                            >*haggadoth* - to serve his own thematic purposes. Nevertheless the traces
                            >of the voyage can be reconstructed quite easily.
                            >
                            >4. What have we covered with this tale of a voyage in a "boat" which
                            >concludes in a "ship?" E. Schmidt, I think it was in his _Rahmen_, wrote
                            >that Ps.107.1-32 was the LITURGY followed in the Temple service as votive
                            >offerings were presented at Rosh Hashana, the New Year "time of accounting."
                            >The four event-interpretations of GMark's Boat Source are obviously the
                            >*haggadoth* narrating the four stages of that Psalm. As a written
                            >composition the Boat Source probably began with the *Tishri* introduction
                            >recaptured in Mk.1.14-15 (Vs.15 echoes Rosh Hashana, the ten penitential
                            >days concluding in Yom Kippur, and the promised Kingdom which lies at the
                            >root of the Feast of Booths). Possibly the original List of the Twelve,
                            >which has gone through three stages of narration in GMark, was part of the
                            >Boat Source as well.
                            >
                            >The whole of the above, 1 through 4, is a summary of an article entitled
                            >"Indications of a Liturgical Source in the Gospel According to Mark" which
                            >appeared in _Encounter_, pp.385-394, of the Journal of Christian Theological
                            >Seminary, Idianapolis, IN, Vol.39, No.4, in Autumn of 1978. I was the
                            >author of the article.

                            Now I grant that Lewis was not a scholar on the same level as you are, but
                            I find his "boat source" intriguing. Perhaps the author of Mark's boat
                            source was your parochial stay at home, and not the same as the compiler of
                            the Gospel as a whole.

                            Bob


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