Re: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and JB in the Pepysian Harmony (Conclusion)
> From: Maluflen@...(Conclusion)
> To: Synoptic-L@...
> Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and JB in the Pepysian Harmony
> Date: Monday, April 10, 2000 8:05 PMobject
> In a message dated 4/10/2000 12:43:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> yuku@... writes:
> << Mt 14:11
> His head was brought in on a platter and given to the
> girl, who carried it to her mother.
> John's disciples came and took his body and buried it.
> Then they went and told Jesus.
> When Jesus heard what had happened, he withdrew by boat
> privately to a solitary place. Hearing of this, the
> crowds followed him on foot from the towns.>>
> Yuri, is this your own, or a standard translation of Matt 14:13? It is, I
> think, in either case, inaccurate. The participle akousas, modifying ho
> Ieesous, has no direct object ("what had happened"), and its implied
> is probably what was narrated in 14:1-2. In good biblical-narrative styleit
> is the threatening disposition of the local tyrant that causes Jesus to(2:12),
> "withdraw" (anechooreesen), as the wisemen had from an earlier Herod
> and as Jesus' father had from Herod the Great's son Archilaus (2:22). TheThis is a standard translation, Leonard. New International Version (NIV).
> narrative in the intervening verses is, I think, a kind of parenthetical
Others are also quite similar.
> <<It is interesting here that, in v 12, John's disciples buried the body,and
> then they went and "told Jesus". And then, in v 15, "the disciples cameto
> Jesus". It seems pretty clearly implied in this text that the disciplesof
> JB and the disciples of Jesus are all gathered together after the deathof
> JB -- indeed if they are not the same people.>>in
> This doesn't seem so clear to me. The two sets of disciples are mentioned
> even closer proximity in Matt 9:14-15, without any hint of amalgamation.A matter of interpretation, of course. But they are certainly very closely
associated in PH.
> [Yuri, commenting on Mark's text:]is
> << "Laid it in a tomb" seems like a later expansion here. Also, nothing
> said about John's disciples going to tell Jesus about JB's death. On thereturning
> other hand, as the next verse 30 shows, Mk reports the apostles
> to Jesus right after the death of JB, while Mt postpones this return fora
> few verses until his v 15.>>in
> I think it is inaccurate to speak of the "return" of [Jesus'] disciples
> Matt. In Matt, the disciples were sent out many chapters ago (9:35 --11:1),
> and at the conclusion of the "sending out" discourse, the disciples don'tgo
> anywhere. Thus their "approaching" Jesus in Matt 14:15 is not a "return".Yes, I suppose you're right, so I stand corrected. If we go only by the
canonical Mt the disciples don't really leave after 11:1, and it's
difficult to speak about "the Return of the Disciples" in this passage.
Nevertheless, in Mk and Lk "the Return of the Disciples" is quite obvious
in this place of the narrative, so most biblical commentators, assuming the
priority of Mk, also label this scene in Mt as "the Return of the
But perhaps this constitutes a difficulty for the standard Matthean
priority theories? Because it may appear to a casual observer that Mk and
Lk in this case preserve the original sequence, while in Mt this sequence
was padded up and expanded with more teaching scenes where the disciples
And still the important point remains that the disciples of Jesus are
closely associated with JB's disciples in this passage in Mt.
> << But at this point, PH switches over to Jn's version (Jn 6:3ff). Jesusis
> portrayed on the mountain, perhaps similar to Moses,(pp.
> "and went hym vpon a mountayne and satte hym there with his deciples."
> Perhaps both Jn and PH are conflating here with the other feeding story
> Matt (cf. Matt 15:29ff).Thanks for pointing out that this parallel of Jn 6:3ff and Matt 15:29ff.
It's possible that here Jn is based on Mt, or on Mt's source. But PH
narrative and sequence still seem earlier.
Now it looks to me like Mt may have used some early material from the first
feeding, as preserved better in PH, for the second feeding.
Both Lk and Jn have only one feeding. So it may seem probable that
originally, in the earliest narratives, there was only one feeding of 5000,
and that the feeding of 4000 was added only to Mt and to Mk as later
expansions reflecting the opening to the Gentiles.
True, as you can see below, PH also has a second feeding. So we cannot
speak of PH as entirely a very early document representing only the
earliest material. PH seems to represent a mixed collection with some very
early materials, and some materials that were added later. But this is
pretty obvious on the surface of things, seeing that PH has the infancy
narratives which were probably not a feature of the earliest Jesus
> << And later, Jesus descends from the mountain when he sees themultitudes
> that came, bringing with them the sick and the lame (brougGtten alle theYes, PH has the second feeding in Par. 54. It is very short and using Mt
> seeke men and the blynde and the croked with hem), to implore his
> attention, and begins the healings and the feeding.>>
> Yes, just as in Matt 15:30-31. Yuri, does PH have a feeding of the four
> thousand, with parallels to these Matthean verses there?
15:32-39a, along with Mk 8:1-10a. But it's not using Mt 15:30-31.
> << It seems to me that PH in this case preserves the narrative sequencethat
> is earlier than all the four canonicals. It is possible that all fournarrative
> canonicals were using an account similar to PH to produce their
> I'm not even sure Brian Wilson will buy this conclusion from the evidence
> presented.Well, I'm not sure what Brian thinks. Perhaps he may like to make his views
known? But one of the maxims of textual criticism is "brevior lectio
potior" (the shorter reading is preferable). From this point of view, PH is
> <<What we see in PH is a very close association of JB's disciples withJesus'
> disciples. JB's status is quite exalted, he's described as "an angel",and
> seemingly even greater than Jesus.>>Septuagint has "hAGGELON", and the standard translation is "messenger".
> Isn't JB described as "my angel" already in Matt 11:10 p ?
Vulgate has angelum,
hic enim est de quo scriptum est
ecce ego mitto angelum meum
ante faciem tuam qui praeparabit
viam tuam ante te
So it is possible that PH had been Vulgatised in this passage.
Now, in regard to the historicity of the whole incident of the beheading of
JB, Hans Radax posted to Loisy-L a passage from Josephus indicating that JB
was killed at the frontier "Black Fortress" of Machaerus, and that Herod
may have been there at the time while on a military expedition against
Arabs. But if he was on a military expedition, would he have taken his
family including also his young daughter with him? So this whole incident
does not really seem historical in so far as the daughter's role is
concerned. While Herod probably did kill JB, the dancing daughter may seem
like an embellishment. But this may be a very early embellishment going to
the earliest stratum of the narrative.
Yuri Kuchinsky | Toronto | http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/bbl.htm
Biblical history list http://www.egroups.com/group/loisy - unmoderated
The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is
equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian