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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and JB in the Pepysian Harmony (Conclusion)

Expand Messages
  • Yuri Kuchinsky
    ... (Conclusion) ... object ... it ... (2:12), ... This is a standard translation, Leonard. New International Version (NIV). Others are also quite similar. ...
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 11, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      > From: Maluflen@...
      > To: Synoptic-L@...
      > Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Jesus and JB in the Pepysian Harmony
      (Conclusion)
      > Date: Monday, April 10, 2000 8:05 PM
      >
      > 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.
      > 12
      > John's disciples came and took his body and buried it.
      > Then they went and told Jesus.
      > 13
      > 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
      object
      > is probably what was narrated in 14:1-2. In good biblical-narrative style
      it
      > is the threatening disposition of the local tyrant that causes Jesus to
      > "withdraw" (anechooreesen), as the wisemen had from an earlier Herod
      (2:12),
      > and as Jesus' father had from Herod the Great's son Archilaus (2:22). The

      > narrative in the intervening verses is, I think, a kind of parenthetical
      > flashback.

      This is a standard translation, Leonard. New International Version (NIV).
      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 came
      to
      > Jesus". It seems pretty clearly implied in this text that the disciples
      of
      > JB and the disciples of Jesus are all gathered together after the death
      of
      > JB -- indeed if they are not the same people.>>
      >
      > This doesn't seem so clear to me. The two sets of disciples are mentioned
      in
      > 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:]
      >
      > << "Laid it in a tomb" seems like a later expansion here. Also, nothing
      is
      > said about John's disciples going to tell Jesus about JB's death. On the
      > other hand, as the next verse 30 shows, Mk reports the apostles
      returning
      > to Jesus right after the death of JB, while Mt postpones this return for
      a
      > few verses until his v 15.>>
      >
      > I think it is inaccurate to speak of the "return" of [Jesus'] disciples
      in
      > 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't
      go
      > 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
      Disciples".

      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
      keep appearing?

      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). Jesus
      is
      > portrayed on the mountain, perhaps similar to Moses,
      >
      > "and went hym vpon a mountayne and satte hym there with his deciples."
      (pp.
      > 45-46)>>
      >
      > Perhaps both Jn and PH are conflating here with the other feeding story
      in
      > 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
      traditions.

      > << And later, Jesus descends from the mountain when he sees the
      multitudes
      > that came, bringing with them the sick and the lame (brougGtten alle the
      > 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?

      Yes, PH has the second feeding in Par. 54. It is very short and using Mt
      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 sequence
      that
      > is earlier than all the four canonicals. It is possible that all four
      > canonicals were using an account similar to PH to produce their
      narrative
      > sequences.>>
      >
      > I'm not even sure Brian Wilson will buy this conclusion from the evidence
      you
      > 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
      clearly preferable.

      > <<What we see in PH is a very close association of JB's disciples with
      Jesus'
      > disciples. JB's status is quite exalted, he's described as "an angel",
      and
      > seemingly even greater than Jesus.>>
      >
      > Isn't JB described as "my angel" already in Matt 11:10 p ?

      Septuagint has "hAGGELON", and the standard translation is "messenger".
      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.

      Best wishes,

      Yuri.

      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
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.