Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Mark's gospel: claimed deficiencies

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mark's gospel: claimed deficiencies

    Writing in 2006, Robert Price states that Mark shows evidence that it may have been a second century work, citing as one item of evidence the author’s anachronistic reference to synagogues in the Galilee region; depicting “synagogues scattered throughout Galilee when in fact they were largely confined to Judea before CE 70[1]”. Three years later, in 2009, archaeologists unearthed a first century synagogue in Magdala, with a second being discovered in 2020[2]. Meantime, a rural district also yielded a synagogue, dating to 20 – 40CE, discovered seventeen kilometres from Nazareth[3]. It is not clear why Price made his incautious claim: the excavation of a synagogue at Gamla in 1976[4] predated publication of the book by three decades.

    Price further states that Mark uses the term, Rabbi, “which did not enter common usage until the end of the first century[5]” The term may not have been in common use as a formal honorific for accredited teachers, but informal use at an earlier stage is by no means precluded: in the texts people are addressed as “rabbi,” but not identified by title as rabbis. Catherine Hezser notes, "Rabbi as an Honorary Address ... Since Jesus was called "Rabbi" but did not conform to the traditional image of post-70 Jewish rabbis, and since pre-70 sages do not bear the title "Rabbi" in the Mishnah, most scholars assume that the meaning and usage of the term "Rabbi" at the time of Jesus differed from the meaning which it acquired after the destruction of the Temple: in pre-70 times, "Rabbi" was used as an unofficial honorary address for any person held in high esteem; after 70 it was almost exclusively applied to ordained teachers of the Law[6]."


    Side Note: The objections raised with regard to what the gospels fail to reveal about Jesus is adequately explained by Hezser on pages 13-14.

    [1] Robert Price. The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts Kindle Edition, (Salt Lake City. Signature Books, 2006), 104

    [2] https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...ury-synagogue/

    [3] https://www.timesofisrael.com/archae...m-jesuss-time/

    [4] Lidia Matassa. Invention of the First Century Synagogue PDF, (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018), 187

    [5] Price, 104

    [6] Catherine Hezser, The social structure of the rabbinic movement in Roman Palestine, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 59

    Last edited by tabibito; 02-24-2022, 11:22 AM.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

  • #2
    Note: What I post here will be piecemeal - it's quite a lengthy topic. If anyone knows of particular criticisms of Mark, feel free to post them - I'll see what I can do to address them.
    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
    Scripture before Tradition:
    but that won't prevent others from
    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
    of the right to call yourself Christian.

    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

    Comment


    • #3

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #4
        JEWISH RITUAL PURITY

        Robert Stein observes, Mark declares that the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they first {ritually} wash, and that they observe a number of other traditions.[1] This “all,” Stein continues, is simply being used as a broad generalisation[2]. His is a reasonable explanation, if not formally accurate[3], but it does not address the question that such a broad sweeping assertion raises: why did Mark attribute this activity to “all Jews” when it was practiced only by a minority? While it is not possible to precisely identify who the Jews were during the first century, it is readily apparent from the Gospel of John that when the term was used “in house,” only a subgroup of the Hebrews[4] was referred to: so also in other gospels. The claim that Mark was unaware of religious practices among the Jews is based in the idea that “Jew” meant the same thing in his time that it does today. That is not the case. In Gentile terms it was a person of Judaea, in Hebrew terms, the gospels attest that it was a person adherent to the temple rite. The latter seems to be a continuing circumstance that had arisen among Hebrews with the return of the Babylonian exiles, who considered that those who had not been exiled were not real Jews.

        [1] Robert H Stein. Mark, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 6-7: cf Mark 7:3-4

        [2] ibid

        [3] The word “pas” does not deny the possibility of exceptions, translating to “all” as a nearest equivalent. “All excluding none” is the seldom used “apas.”

        [4] See https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...79#post1355379 for more detail

        Hanko.jpg
        Last edited by tabibito; 02-25-2022, 12:42 AM.
        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
        Scripture before Tradition:
        but that won't prevent others from
        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
        of the right to call yourself Christian.

        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
          Writing in 2006, Robert Price states that Mark shows evidence that it may have been a second century work, citing as one item of evidence the author’s anachronistic reference to synagogues in the Galilee region; depicting “synagogues scattered throughout Galilee when in fact they were largely confined to Judea before CE 70[1]”. Three years later, in 2009, archaeologists unearthed a first century synagogue in Magdala, with a second being discovered in 2020[2]. Meantime, a rural district also yielded a synagogue, dating to 20 – 40CE, discovered seventeen kilometres from Nazareth[3]. It is not clear why Price made his incautious claim: the excavation of a synagogue at Gamla in 1976[4] predated publication of the book by three decades.
          My emphasis. That does not invalidate Price's comment.

          His complete sentence reads:

          Mark also contains several anachronisms such as the depiction of synagogues scattered throughout Galilee when in fact they seem to have been largely confined to Judea before CE 70, after which time the scribes and Pharisees perforce moved north.


          Being "largely confined to Judaea" does not entirely reject the existence of synagogues elsewhere.


          Originally posted by tabibito;n1357540Price further states that Mark uses the term, Rabbi, “[I
          which did not enter common usage until the end of the first century[/I][5]” The term may not have been in common use as a formal honorific for accredited teachers, but informal use at an earlier stage is by no means precluded: in the texts people are addressed as “rabbi,” but not identified by title as rabbis. Catherine Hezser notes, "Rabbi as an Honorary Address ... Since Jesus was called "Rabbi" but did not conform to the traditional image of post-70 Jewish rabbis, and since pre-70 sages do not bear the title "Rabbi" in the Mishnah, most scholars assume that the meaning and usage of the term "Rabbi" at the time of Jesus differed from the meaning which it acquired after the destruction of the Temple: in pre-70 times, "Rabbi" was used as an unofficial honorary address for any person held in high esteem; after 70 it was almost exclusively applied to ordained teachers of the Law[6]."
          Or it could have been introduced by scribes in later copies. After all we have no original MS.



          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


            Or it could have been introduced by scribes in later copies. After all we have no original MS.
            For something to be found in EVERY copy suggests that this insertion had to be so early that it was "added" to the original MS.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              For something to be found in EVERY copy suggests that this insertion had to be so early that it was "added" to the original MS.
              As Bart Ehrman notes:

              We don’t have any copy of any kind of Mark until around 200 CE – and that copy is highly fragmentary: it contains *portions* (sometimes just a few verses) of just eight of the Gospels sixteen chapters. We don’t have a complete Gospel until around 370 CE.
              "It ain't necessarily so
              The things that you're liable
              To read in the Bible
              It ain't necessarily so
              ."

              Sportin' Life
              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                My emphasis. That does not invalidate Price's comment.

                His complete sentence reads:

                Mark also contains several anachronisms such as the depiction of synagogues scattered throughout Galilee when in fact they seem to have been largely confined to Judea before CE 70, after which time the scribes and Pharisees perforce moved north.


                Being "largely confined to Judaea" does not entirely reject the existence of synagogues elsewhere.
                Except that Price uses the claim to reject the possibility that there were synagogues in the Galilee region during the early first century: Labelling Mark's reference to synagogues in first century Galilee as "anachronisms" most certainly claims that they did not exist.


                Or it could have been introduced by scribes in later copies. After all we have no original MS.
                Rather unlikely, as shown by Hershel Shanks: "It would seem that the adoption of the term “rabbi” would include the use of the title apart from its subsequently adopted formal requirements; so that far from disproving the use of the term “rabbi” during Jesus’ lifetime, the facts … serve only to confirm its earlier unofficial use. That the term was used as an honorific, but unofficial vocative in Jesus’ lifetime is not simply consistent with the history of the term as an official title; it is supported by this history.[1]"

                And again, rejecting the possibility that the term was in use during the early first century on the basis that the term had no formal recognition at that time is far from a compelling argument. Jesus was called Rabbi according to the Biblical record - hardly a title that would be misappropriated by Mark: Jesus had none of the formally required qualifications even by Mark's own record. That simply stands in opposition to the argument that the term's use is an anachronism.
                [1] Hershel Shanks. “Is The Title “Rabbi” Anachronistic in the Gospels” in The Jewish Quarterly Review Vol 53:4 (April 1963), 340-341



                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                .
                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                Scripture before Tradition:
                but that won't prevent others from
                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                  As Bart Ehrman notes:

                  We don’t have any copy of any kind of Mark until around 200 CE – and that copy is highly fragmentary: it contains *portions* (sometimes just a few verses) of just eight of the Gospels sixteen chapters. We don’t have a complete Gospel until around 370 CE.
                  And do any copies omit "rabbi"?

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    And do any copies omit "rabbi"?
                    I missed your earlier comment amid all the cross checking. It is an important point - if there had been any appreciable delay in inserting extra material into the text, there would be two (or more) versions of whatever text was affected.


                    Aside from the Dead Sea Scrolls, we have no written records originating in Judaea for almost all of the two centuries 100BCE to 100CE.
                    Last edited by tabibito; 02-25-2022, 12:12 PM.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                      Except that Price uses the claim to reject the possibility that there were synagogues in the Galilee region during the early first century: Labelling Mark's reference to synagogues in first century Galilee as "anachronisms" most certainly claims that they did not exist.




                      Rather unlikely, as shown by Hershel Shanks: "It would seem that the adoption of the term “rabbi” would include the use of the title apart from its subsequently adopted formal requirements; so that far from disproving the use of the term “rabbi” during Jesus’ lifetime, the facts … serve only to confirm its earlier unofficial use. That the term was used as an honorific, but unofficial vocative in Jesus’ lifetime is not simply consistent with the history of the term as an official title; it is supported by this history.[1]"

                      And again, rejecting the possibility that the term was in use during the early first century on the basis that the term had no formal recognition at that time is far from a compelling argument. Jesus was called Rabbi according to the Biblical record - hardly a title that would be misappropriated by Mark: Jesus had none of the formally required qualifications even by Mark's own record. That simply stands in opposition to the argument that the term's use is an anachronism.
                      [1] Hershel Shanks. “Is The Title “Rabbi” Anachronistic in the Gospels” in The Jewish Quarterly Review Vol 53:4 (April 1963), 340-341


                      An interesting scholarly exchange given Zeitlin's reply but just one question.

                      Why did you not quote all of that section from Shanks in its entirety?
                      "It ain't necessarily so
                      The things that you're liable
                      To read in the Bible
                      It ain't necessarily so
                      ."

                      Sportin' Life
                      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                        An interesting scholarly exchange given Zeitlin's reply but just one question.

                        Why did you not quote all of that section from Shanks in its entirety?
                        Habit - I'm used to restrictions on word count.
                        1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                        .
                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                        Scripture before Tradition:
                        but that won't prevent others from
                        taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                        of the right to call yourself Christian.

                        ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                          Habit - I'm used to restrictions on word count.
                          An interesting response but your reply was hardly over-long. I would have thought referencing Sherira's letter would have added some weight.
                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                            I missed your earlier comment amid all the cross checking. It is an important point - if there had been any appreciable delay in inserting extra material into the text, there would be two (or more) versions of whatever text was affected.


                            Aside from the Dead Sea Scrolls, we have no written records originating in Judaea for almost all of the two centuries 100BCE to 100CE.
                            There is an entire discipline devoted to tracing the "lineage" of documents based on changes in it made by copyists and the like.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                              Except that Price uses the claim to reject the possibility that there were synagogues in the Galilee region during the early first century:
                              I omitted to refer to this in my previous reply

                              Price does no such thing. Read what he wrote.

                              Originally posted by tabibito View Post

                              I missed your earlier comment amid all the cross checking. It is an important point - if there had been any appreciable delay in inserting extra material into the text, there would be two (or more) versions of whatever text was affected.
                              Why? And on what evidence?

                              Have you read this? If not, perhaps you should.


                              "It ain't necessarily so
                              The things that you're liable
                              To read in the Bible
                              It ain't necessarily so
                              ."

                              Sportin' Life
                              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                              39 responses
                              197 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                              21 responses
                              132 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                              80 responses
                              428 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post tabibito  
                              Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                              45 responses
                              305 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                              406 responses
                              2,518 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post tabibito  
                              Working...
                              X