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

[Synoptic-L] Re: [XTalk] Was the Young Man a Therapeutae?

Expand Messages
  • Karel Hanhart
    ... Frank, I appear to have problems with retaining a message on my screen when I shift to the reply mode. So I ll respond to your last post by heart. 1.
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 7, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      :

      > FMMCCOY wrote:
      >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "Bob Schacht" <r_schacht@...>
      > > To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 3:40 PM
      > > Subject: Re: [XTalk] Fallacies
      > >
      > > > At 02:42 PM 2/17/2002 -0600, FMMCCOY wrote:
      > > >
      > > > >----- Original Message -----
      > > > >From: <sammer@...>
      > > > >To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      > > > >Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:40 AM
      > > > >Subject: Re: [XTalk] The 'Empty' Tomb
      > > > >...
      >
      > > (Frank)
      > > > >Where is the logical fallacy? As the Essenes belonged to the class of
      > > > >people who sometimes wore white garb, and as the young man was wearing
      > > white
      > > > >garb (and, so, might have been a person who sometimes wore white garb),
      > > this
      > > > >raises the possibility that the young man had been an Essene. As the
      > > > >Therapeutae belonged to the class of people who sometimes wore white
      > > garb,
      > > > >and as the young man was wearing white garb (and, so, might have been a
      > > > >person who sometimes wore white garb), this raises the possibility that
      > > the
      > > > >young man had been a Therapeutae.

      Frank,

      I appear to have problems with retaining a message on my screen when I shift to the
      'reply' mode.
      So I'll respond to your last post by heart.
      1. There may well be a link between Essenes and Thereputae. It is an area that needs
      to be investigated further.
      2. I noted your observation that these Theraputae didn't only wear white garbs and
      spent time in gardens; they didnot drink wine at all.
      My question is, why would Mark have this youth (Gr. neaniskos) in his white stola
      pronouce the most important phrase in the entire gospel, 16,7 - a heavenly message -
      while Mark reports that Jesus and the Twelve drank from the cup of wine?
      A second question is: Why would soldiers try to grab this Therapeut and what was he
      doing there? He apparently followed Jesus as a thirteenth disciple, for in Greek we
      read sun-akolouthei (14,50) .
      As Mark describes the scene this youth was wrapped in linen cloth like a sheet; for
      as soon as a soldier got hold of him he turned out to be naked. Periballo {in the
      passiv} may mean 'to be clothed with', all right, but in this (symbolic) context the
      emphasis is on his being naked. In Scripture the biblical connotation of 'nakedness'
      is that of divine judgment in most cases. For a number of reasons I believe the youth
      symbolically stands for the controversial 'thirteenth disciple' , 'untimely born',
      who before his conversion first sided with the high priest (like Judas), persecuting
      the ecclesia and risking divine wrath, whose Latin name Paulus means "little, of no
      account", hence neaniskos, a diminuitive Of all possible solutions I indeed believe
      Mark is referring here to Paul. This thirteenth apostle had written in 2 Cor 5,3 - a
      most important verse - dealing with his personal hope in the face of death - of the
      possibilty of "being found naked" before the "judgment seat of Christ" ( 2 Cor 5,10),
      but he also expresses his confidence and hope in the face of death, because in baptism
      he was 'clothed with Christ' and received life in the Spirit. Here you have 'naked'
      and 'clothed in white' side by side as in Mark.
      Paul fits here, because as an anonymous 'thirteenth disciple' he was only symbolically
      present in Getsemane. In other words, he was retrojected into the story to bring out
      his important future role as the thirteenth apostle of Jesus. Mark (and Mark alone)
      has him act here in Gethsemane and in the memorial tomb, because the author attaches
      great importance to Paul's (controversial) teachings and writings which had reached
      him in Rome.
      In short, why the struggle in Gethsemane?, was Jesus in your view also a
      Therapeut? why this flight from Getsemane? Why did he risk divine wrath? Why was he
      afterwards clothed in a white stola, which I take to be a baptismal garb?


      Your Karel


      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Maluflen@aol.com
      In a message dated 3/7/2002 10:55:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... Karel: this is a fascinating theory. Is it your own? Have you published anything on it? I
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 7, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 3/7/2002 10:55:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, K.Hanhart@... writes:


        <<As Mark describes the scene this youth  was wrapped in linen cloth like a sheet; for as soon as a soldier got hold of him he turned out to be naked. Periballo {in the passiv} may mean 'to be clothed with', all right, but in this (symbolic) context the emphasis is on his being naked. In Scripture the biblical connotation of 'nakedness' is that of divine judgment in most cases. For a number of reasons I believe the youth symbolically stands for the controversial  'thirteenth disciple' , 'untimely born', who before his conversion first sided with the high priest (like Judas), persecuting the ecclesia and risking divine wrath, whose Latin name Paulus means "little, of no account", hence neaniskos, a diminuitive  Of all possible solutions I indeed believe Mark is referring here to Paul. This thirteenth apostle had written in 2 Cor 5,3 - a most important verse - dealing with his personal hope in the face of death - of the possibilty of "being found naked"  before the "judgment seat of Christ" ( 2 Cor 5,10), but he also expresses his confidence and hope in the face of death, because in baptism he was  'clothed with Christ'  and received life in the Spirit. Here you have 'naked' and 'clothed in white' side by side as in Mark.
        Paul fits here, because as an anonymous 'thirteenth disciple' he was only symbolically present in Getsemane. In other words, he was retrojected into the story to bring out his important future role as the thirteenth apostle of Jesus.  Mark (and Mark alone) has him act here in Gethsemane and in the memorial tomb, because the author attaches great importance to Paul's (controversial) teachings and writings which had reached him in Rome.>>
           

        Karel: this is a fascinating theory. Is it your own? Have you published anything on it? I certainly need to think about it for a while before having full confidence in its validity, but I like your ability to think "outside the box". Have you read my article on an allusive Paul in Lk 9:46-48? I argue somewhat analogously to your argument above that the "child" in this pericope is intended by Luke to represent Paul and the new group of missionaries outside the group of the twelve and "greater than they".

        Leonard Maluf
      • Karel Hanhart
        Dear Leonard, Since you are asking me, see my The Open Tomb. A New Approach, Liturgical Press, Collegeville MN USA,m 1995, pp 341 - 393. I would like to hear
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 7, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Leonard,

          Since you are asking me,

          see my The Open Tomb. A New Approach, Liturgical Press, Collegeville MN
          USA,m 1995, pp 341 - 393.

          I would like to hear your response, once you have read it.

          your Karel

          Maluflen@... wrote:

          > In a message dated 3/7/2002 10:55:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
          > K.Hanhart@... writes:
          >
          >
          >
          >> <<As Mark describes the scene this youth was wrapped in linen cloth
          >> like a sheet; for as soon as a soldier got hold of him he turned out
          >> to be naked. Periballo {in the passiv} may mean 'to be clothed
          >> with', all right, but in this (symbolic) context the emphasis is on
          >> his being naked. In Scripture the biblical connotation of
          >> 'nakedness' is that of divine judgment in most cases. For a number
          >> of reasons I believe the youth symbolically stands for the
          >> controversial 'thirteenth disciple' , 'untimely born', who before
          >> his conversion first sided with the high priest (like Judas),
          >> persecuting the ecclesia and risking divine wrath, whose Latin name
          >> Paulus means "little, of no account", hence neaniskos, a
          >> diminuitive Of all possible solutions I indeed believe Mark is
          >> referring here to Paul. This thirteenth apostle had written in 2 Cor
          >> 5,3 - a most important verse - dealing with his personal hope in the
          >> face of death - of the possibilty of "being found naked" before the
          >> "judgment seat of Christ" ( 2 Cor 5,10), but he also expresses his
          >> confidence and hope in the face of death, because in baptism he was
          >> 'clothed with Christ' and received life in the Spirit. Here you
          >> have 'naked' and 'clothed in white' side by side as in Mark.
          >> Paul fits here, because as an anonymous 'thirteenth disciple' he was
          >> only symbolically present in Getsemane. In other words, he was
          >> retrojected into the story to bring out his important future role as
          >> the thirteenth apostle of Jesus. Mark (and Mark alone) has him act
          >> here in Gethsemane and in the memorial tomb, because the author
          >> attaches great importance to Paul's (controversial) teachings and
          >> writings which had reached him in Rome.>>
          >>
          >
          >
          > Karel: this is a fascinating theory. Is it your own? Have you
          > published anything on it? I certainly need to think about it for a
          > while before having full confidence in its validity, but I like your
          > ability to think "outside the box". Have you read my article on an
          > allusive Paul in Lk 9:46-48? I argue somewhat analogously to your
          > argument above that the "child" in this pericope is intended by Luke
          > to represent Paul and the new group of missionaries outside the group
          > of the twelve and "greater than they".
          >
          > Leonard Maluf



          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Karel Hanhart
          ... Yes, Leonard, I also wondered whether Lk 9,46-48 might be an allusion to Paul. It is worthy to be pursued. In my own thinking I have outlined a slightly
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 8, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            Maluflen@... wrote:

            >
            > Karel: this is a fascinating theory. Is it your own? Have you
            > published anything on it? I certainly need to think about it for a
            > while before having full confidence in its validity, but I like your
            > ability to think "outside the box". Have you read my article on an
            > allusive Paul in Lk 9:46-48? I argue somewhat analogously to your
            > argument above that the "child" in this pericope is intended by Luke
            > to represent Paul and the new group of missionaries outside the group
            > of the twelve and "greater than they".

            Yes, Leonard, I also wondered whether Lk 9,46-48 might be an allusion to
            Paul. It is worthy to be pursued. In my own thinking I have outlined a
            slightly different scenario. Lk 9,46-48
            may have been part of proto-Mark, the document that Mark revised in the
            aftermath of the trauma of 70. I see no good reason why the action of
            putting a little child in the midst in the context of "who is the
            greatest" would not have been an action by Jesus himself - one of those
            windows through which we gain insight into his person and teaching.
            However, the diminutive paidion and the "welcome" extended to him "in
            Jesus' name" may have been Luke's own allusion to the role of Paul in
            the early ecclesia, a parallel to the neaniskos in Mark. As you may
            know, I argue from the position canonical Mark is a post-70 revision of
            proto-Mark (perhaps including a form of Q). If so John, who echoes much
            Lukan material, retrojected this same paidion (Paul) in his gospel in
            his rendition of the feeding of the 5000. He emphasizes the diminutive:
            paidarion (6,9). In that case Paul would have fitted in John's view of
            the ecclesia. Have you also included John 6,9 in your line of thought?

            your
            Karel



            >
            >
            > Leonard Maluf



            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • Maluflen@aol.com
            In a message dated 3/8/2002 3:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... No, I hadn t thought of that at all. Interesting. In the Lk 9:46-48 passage, the important
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 8, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 3/8/2002 3:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, K.Hanhart@... writes:


              ).  If so John, who echoes much
              Lukan material, retrojected this same paidion (Paul) in his gospel in
              his rendition of the feeding of the 5000. He emphasizes the diminutive:
              paidarion (6,9). In that case Paul would have fitted in John's view of
              the ecclesia. Have you also included John 6,9 in your line of thought?


              No, I hadn't thought of that at all. Interesting. In the Lk 9:46-48 passage, the important thing is to read correctly the question Luke says was being entertained within the minds of the (twelve) disciples: "who might be greater than they?", instead of: "who among them might be the greatest" (as in Lk 22). If our theories are correct, then Matt is the only non-Pauline gospel of the four. And of course some would even go further and describe it as anti-Pauline, in light of 5:19. If this text is indeed an allusion to Paul, then all four gospels may allude to Paul in one way or another.

              Leonard Maluf
            • Karel Hanhart
              ... Leonard, Amen. I agree with your conclusion. I wouldn t call Matthew anti-Pauline. I rather think her was writing for a wider public, some of whom would
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 8, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Maluflen@... wrote:

                > In a message dated 3/8/2002 3:00:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,
                > K.Hanhart@... writes:
                >
                >
                >
                >> ). If so John, who echoes much
                >> Lukan material, retrojected this same paidion (Paul) in his gospel
                >> in
                >> his rendition of the feeding of the 5000. He emphasizes the
                >> diminutive:
                >> paidarion (6,9). In that case Paul would have fitted in John's view
                >> of
                >> the ecclesia. Have you also included John 6,9 in your line of
                >> thought?
                >
                > No, I hadn't thought of that at all. Interesting. In the Lk 9:46-48
                > passage, the important thing is to read correctly the question Luke
                > says was being entertained within the minds of the (twelve) disciples:
                > "who might be greater than they?", instead of: "who among them might
                > be the greatest" (as in Lk 22). If our theories are correct, then Matt
                > is the only non-Pauline gospel of the four. And of course some would
                > even go further and describe it as anti-Pauline, in light of 5:19. If
                > this text is indeed an allusion to Paul, then all four gospels may
                > allude to Paul in one way or another.
                >
                > Leonard Maluf

                Leonard,
                Amen. I agree with your conclusion. I wouldn't call Matthew
                anti-Pauline. I rather think her was writing for a wider public, some of
                whom would not accept the high credit Mark gave to Paul.
                So Matthew decided not to include the 'neaniskos' in his passion story.


                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
              • dgentil@sears.com
                Karel, If you have time, could you summarize your reasons for thinking there was a proto-Mark? I also tend to think there was a proto-Mark. However, the last
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 8, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Karel,

                  If you have time, could you summarize your reasons for thinking there
                  was a proto-Mark?
                  I also tend to think there was a proto-Mark. However, the last statistical
                  study seemed to limit how much it
                  could differ from cannon Mark. It seems Matthew and Luke must have engaged
                  in a fair amount
                  of omission, for example. Also, if Luke knew and used Matthew some other
                  arguments seem
                  less effective. I'm left with a handful of features that suggest a
                  proto-Mark, but nothing fully convincing.

                  Two ideas I'm considering are that cannon Mark might have only a few
                  omissions, addition and some minor
                  minor rearrangements compared to proto-Mark, or that Mark may be the first
                  Greek language gospel,
                  but that there may have been a gospel in another language, that was
                  available to at least Mark and Luke.

                  Dave Gentile
                  Riverside, Illinois
                  M.S. Physics
                  Ph.D. Management Science






                  As you may
                  know, I argue from the position canonical Mark is a post-70 revision of
                  proto-Mark (perhaps including a form of Q).

                  your
                  Karel




                  Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                  List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                • Emmanuel Fritsch
                  ... If you read french, you may have a look on reasons for Boismard thinking there was a proto-Mark : http://archeboc.free.fr/lect/notice_promarc.html or
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 8, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > If you have time, could you summarize your reasons for thinking there
                    > was a proto-Mark?

                    If you read french, you may have a look on reasons for Boismard thinking
                    there was a proto-Mark : http://archeboc.free.fr/lect/notice_promarc.html

                    or directly the book :
                    "L'Évangile de Marc - sa Préhistoire", M.E. Boismard, Gabalda 1994.

                    a+
                    manu

                    Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                    List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                  • Karel Hanhart
                    ... Dave, I have little time indeed. As to your musings of a possible proto-Mark in a different language, I would suggest you first try out a few examples
                    Message 9 of 11 , Mar 11, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      dgentil@... wrote:

                      > Karel,
                      >
                      > If you have time, could you summarize your reasons for thinking there
                      > was a proto-Mark?
                      > I also tend to think there was a proto-Mark. However, the last statistical
                      > study seemed to limit how much it
                      > could differ from cannon Mark. It seems Matthew and Luke must have engaged
                      > in a fair amount
                      > of omission, for example. Also, if Luke knew and used Matthew some other
                      > arguments seem
                      > less effective. I'm left with a handful of features that suggest a
                      > proto-Mark, but nothing fully convincing.
                      >
                      > Two ideas I'm considering are that cannon Mark might have only a few
                      > omissions, addition and some minor
                      > minor rearrangements compared to proto-Mark, or that Mark may be the first
                      > Greek language gospel,
                      > but that there may have been a gospel in another language, that was
                      > available to at least Mark and Luke.
                      >
                      > Dave Gentile
                      > Riverside, Illinois
                      > M.S. Physics
                      > Ph.D. Management Science
                      >
                      > As you may
                      > know, I argue from the position canonical Mark is a post-70 revision of
                      > proto-Mark (perhaps including a form of Q).
                      >
                      > your
                      > Karel
                      >
                      > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                      > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...

                      Dave,

                      I have little time indeed. As to your musings of a possible proto-Mark in a
                      different language, I would suggest you first try out a few examples that would
                      demonstrate this possibility. But I doubt it would work. It would contradict
                      the fact that throughout the Gospel Mark makes allusions to and ( in a sizable
                      number of passages) actually cites the Greek Septuagint. This manner of
                      "searching the Scriptures" in order to interpret the present would not be
                      possible if proto-Mark were a document in a different language. The readers
                      wouldn't have been able to make head or tail of it. I cannot do full justice to
                      your first question in a brief post. But here goes:
                      1. That Mark was written after the destruction of the temple is clear from his
                      last midrash in 15,42 - 16,8 on LXX Isa 22,16; 13,16 and Gn 29,2.3. Relatively
                      few scholars, debating the dating of canoncal Mark are taking in the great
                      impact of the fall of Jerusalem on the Judean population in the motherland and
                      throughout the diaspora. It was far worse and with a longer lasting effect than
                      - say - the fall of Budapest under the Russian tanks in our times. If there
                      ever was a need for a revision of a document whose author believed the kingdom
                      of God was at hand, that was the one.
                      2. In commentaries it is generally admitted (a) that a "mystery" or "secret"
                      (called by Wilhelm Wrede the Messianic Secret) is conveyed in canonical Mark
                      and (b) that this "secret" was revealed to the women and (c) that this
                      "mystery" was first announced in 4, 10-12. It stands to reason that at least
                      part of this "secret" had something to do with this turn of events.
                      3. Many believe that 4,10-12 has been inserted in the seed/harvest chapter.
                      Some say it was inserted by a later copyist, but that is unlikely. Because
                      features of this 'secret' are found throughout Mark. So it appears Mark himself
                      was dealing with a pre-70 document in which he was inserting these verses in
                      it. Since the passage is concerned with the "mystery of the kingdom/kingship of
                      God"
                      the mystery may well include the delay of the coming of that kingdom at the
                      End of time
                      4. Commentators have noted the hand of a so-called "redactor" with the
                      introduction of the "twelve" apostoloi next to Mark's mentioning the mathetai.
                      There is a good article by Ernest Best in ZNW 69 (1978), "Mark's use of the
                      Twelve" in which he is defending that 'the Twelve' belonged to original Mark.
                      He doubts that the appointment of the twelve were added by a later 'redactor'.
                      However, fact of the matter is that the hand of a redactor is found in the
                      clumsy addition of the dodeka (Twelve) in 4,10 "those around him with the
                      twelve": the sudden mention of "the twelve" when discussing the future, while
                      normally Mark mentions disciples with a broader meaning. Especially the
                      emphatic epithet of Judas "one of the twelve" in chapter 14, his crucial kiss
                      in Getsemane and the large place Judas' deed receives in the section of the
                      Last Supper, makes it clear to me that Mark was working with a proto-Mark in
                      which there was no Judas Iscariot and no mention of the Twelve but a story
                      about Jesus and his disciples among whom people like Simon, James and John
                      played a role. There are good reasons that proto-Mark too contained a passion
                      story. In fact, I concluded for other reasons that Christian Judeans in the
                      ecclesia had used this pre-70 document for their liturgy of Pesach and the
                      "first day" (of Shabuot).
                      5. Stories such as the fate of John the Baptist can be lifted out of the
                      context without great problems. Mark retained it, I believe, for both the
                      Baptist and Jesus are the protagonists of his drama and he refers specifically
                      to John horrible death at the juncture of 1,14.
                      6. In a former post I already interpreted another midrash at the beginning of
                      Mark. Quoting Malachi 3 (in a passage on judgment on the temple priest) Mark
                      doesn't mention the name of the book. It seems to have been inserted by the
                      author of Mark II in order to alert the readers, used to proto-Mark: 'Here
                      follows the same story of Jesus' preaching, his Passion, Death and Resurrection
                      but told now that the temple has been destroyed'. In other words, a post-70
                      revision.
                      This is far too short. Sometimes I wonder if a fast means of communication
                      like the internet is suitable for our work. Exegetes ought to do their work
                      slowly and carefully analysing each passage within the composition as a whole.
                      It is diffcult to summarize earlier work..
                      Still, I hope that you have gained a little insight into my thinking.

                      your,

                      Karel




                      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                    • David Gentile
                      ... communication ... work ... whole. ... Thank you for this. It was useful. I have a couple of points to look at more closely. I have one more quick question.
                      Message 10 of 11 , Mar 12, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > This is far too short. Sometimes I wonder if a fast means of
                        communication
                        > like the internet is suitable for our work. Exegetes ought to do their
                        work
                        > slowly and carefully analyzing each passage within the composition as a
                        whole.
                        > It is difficult to summarize earlier work..
                        > Still, I hope that you have gained a little insight into my thinking.
                        >
                        > your,
                        >
                        > Karel

                        Thank you for this. It was useful. I have a couple of points to look at more
                        closely. I have one more quick question. In your opinion was proto-Mark
                        likely used by Matthew and/or Luke or just by Mark?

                        About the internet - I think the internet can compliment more traditional
                        communication. I've read authors who speculate that paradigm shifts are the
                        result of a sort of "critical mass". The analogy is made to slime molds.
                        These single cell creatures group together when conditions get tough, and
                        can move together to a different location, then disband under good
                        conditions. The only difference is the strength of the trail each cell
                        leaves behind for other cells to follow.
                        Once the trails are strong enough, spontaneous clustering occurs. This is
                        just a long way of saying that the most brilliant research in the world is
                        useless, if no one, or only a handful of people are aware of it. Groups are
                        almost always better at problem solving than even the most specialized
                        individual. Obviously this format can not cover material at the depth of a
                        PhD thesis, or a book. But it can still communicate important points, and if
                        necessary other sources can be referenced.

                        Thanks again,

                        Dave Gentile
                        Riverside, Illinois
                        M.S. Physics
                        Ph.D. Management Science candidate


                        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.