Just some keyword tidbits. The Vista black screen issue still draws more visitors than anything else (suggesting that the latest Windows OS is undergoing meltdown and it may not be long before a mass exodus to Linux and/or Mac occurs). But a close second is hermaphrodite sex. I can't help wondering whether there are lots of people out there interested in this subject...and why. Apparently a search for the exact phrase "are few and unspectacular" also takes one to my blog, and more importantly to an entry on the subject of the conference paper I'll be presenting at the Midwest SBL meeting, i.e. the missing ending of Mark's Gospel.
Also high in the rankings are "sarah connor know thyself" and "how to be a good christian".
Welcome, visitors, however you found your way here! I hope you enjoy your visit!
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
In a response to your entry on the missing ending of Mark's Gospel, I suggested that Mk originally ended at 15:39 and that 15:40-16:8 is a polemic against certain positions in Th.
A reason for thinking that there is an inclusio between Mk 1:1-11 and Mk 15:32-39 is that they have these common elements in the same sequential order:
1. Jesus is called Christ. Mk 1:a, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ.” Mk 15:32a, “Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down from the cross now.”
2. There is the crying out of a voice. Mk 1:3a “A voice crying out (phwne bowntos) in the wilderness.” Mk 15:34b “Jesus cried out in a great voice (eboesen…phwne).
3. There is a reference to Elijah. Mk 1:6a, “And John had been clothed in camel-hairs and a leather belt around his waist (Here, John is implicitly identified as being Elijah come again—compare II (IV) Kings 1:8, “And they said to him (i.e., Ochozias, the King of Israel), ‘He was a hairy man, and fit with a leather girdle about his loins.’ And he said, ‘This is Elijah, the Thesbite’”). Mk 15:35b, “Look! He calls for Elijah!”
4. There is the rending of the heavens, which is explicit in Mk 1:10b, “He saw the heavens being rent (schisomenous)” and implicit in Mk 15:38, “And the temple curtain was rent (eschisthe) in two from top to bottom (This curtain apparently had a representation of the heavens on it--see the Jesus Seminar, the Acts of Jesus, p. 158)
5. Jesus is declared to be God’s Son. Mk 1:11a, “And there was a voice out of the heavens, “You are my Son.” Mk 15:39b, “Truly, this man was Son of God!”
Since the first part of this inclusio is the beginning of Mk, its last part must be the original end of Mk. Therefore, it appears, Mk originally ended at Mk 15:39b with the triumphant cry, “Truly, this man was Son of God.”
Next, let us turn to an argument that the ending of Mk in 16:6-8 is a response to the ending of Th in 114.
Mk 16:6-8 reads:
But he (i.e., the young man) says to them (i.e., the three women), “Do not be amazed. You seek Jesus the Nazarene, the one having been crucified. He was raised (egerthe). He is not here. Look, the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He goes before you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’” And, having gone out, they fled from the tomb—for trembling and ecstasy seized them. And they told no one nothing—for they were afraid!
Th 114 reads:
Simon Peter said to them, “Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life.” Jesus said, “I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven.”
There are at least four major contrasts between these two passages:
1. In Mk 16:6-8, it is said that Jesus will go before his disciples and Peter—and they are all men. In Th 114, Jesus will lead Mary—and she is a woman.
2. In Mk 16:6-8, it is declared that Jesus has risen and that his body is no longer present—the clear implication being that he has become a living body. In Th 114, Jesus declares that he will make Mary a living spirit.
3. In Mk 16:6-8, Peter looks good. A young man tells the women “But go, tell his disciples and Peter…”. Here, Peter, although he had been one of Jesus’ disciples, is differentiated from Jesus’ disciples because, with the death of Jesus, he has been elevated above them into the unique status of being the legitimate successor to Jesus as the earthly head of his movement. In Th 114, Peter looks bad, with Jesus rebuking him for his position on women.
4. In Mk 16:6-8, the women look bad, fleeing the tomb and failing to tell the disciples and Peter what they were told. In Th 114, Mary, a woman, looks good, for Jesus says that he will make her a living spirit.
I think that there is a fifth major contrast between Mk 16:6-8 and Th 114 as well—with it implicit in Mk 16:6-8 that the Kingdom is a future earthly reality and explicit in Th 114 that the Kingdom is a present spiritual reality.
In particular, I think that Theodore J. Weeden, Sr. is correct in maintaining that the message of the young man regards the return of the risen Jesus to Galilee help inaugurate the Kingdom. In Mark Traditions in Conflict (p. 110), he states:
The announcement “He is not here. See the place where they laid him” states unequivocally that Jesus is no longer present on this earthly plane of existence. At this point one of Hamilton’s insights is right on target: “In the place of the presence of the risen Jesus, Mark simply and strikingly affirmed his absence.” The importance of the angel’s words for our evangelist could not have been more sharply perceived. Jesus is absent! He is absent not just from the grave. He has completely left the human scene and will not return until the parousia! He has been translated (egerthe) to his Father. There he must await the time when the kingdom dawns in power (9:1) and he is re-united with his community (13:26-27).
In this case, there is a fifth major contrast between Mk 16:6-8, where the Kingdom is taken to be a future earthly reality that will dawn at the time that Jesus returns to earth from heaven, and Th 114, where the Kingdom is a present spiritual reality entered by living spirits.
These five contrasts highlight these major areas of dispute between the Markan group and the Thomasine group:
(1) Who was the legitimate successor to Jesus as the earthly head of his movement? Was it Peter (so the Markan group) or was it James (so the Thomas group)?
(2) What is the role of women in the Jesus movement? Should they be kept in subordination to the men (the position of the Markan group) or should they have the right, like the men, to be empowered (the position of the Thomasine group)?
(3) Is the Kingdom a future earthly reality to be bodily entered (so the Markan group) or a present spiritual reality to be entered as a soul/spirit (so the Thomasine group)?
In any event, that there appear to be five major contrasts between Mk 16:6-8 and Th 114 is quite remarkable. Further, since each passage is only three verses long and occurs at the very end of the gospel in which it appears, it is difficult to maintain that this is mere coincidence. Rather, I suggest, Mk 16:6-8 is designed to be a refutation of Thomasine viewpoints found in Th 114. Seen as such, it is a satisfactory end to Mk as far as the Markan group was concerned, for it (in their eyes) demolishes what they perceived to be some erroneous viewpoints of the Thomasine group. It is only when Mk 16:6-8 is viewed in light of the endings of gospels written later than Mk (i.e., Mt, Lk and Jn) that its ending appears unsatisfactory. But this is, I suggest, to view it anachronistically
Post a Comment