Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?

[badger]

An extract from the Catholic education research centre......... CERC.

In answering this question the first thing to understand is what kind of documents the gospels are. To do this we have to first say what they are not. The gospels are not factual news reports. They are not a bald list of events and eyewitness testimony as might be compiled, say, in a police report: "Just the facts ma'am." They are not typical biography or the work of a professional historian. Neither are the gospels academic historical documents which are cross referenced with multiple documentary, archeological and anecdotal evidence. They don't pretend to be this kind of document, so it is ridiculous to blame them for not being so.

I'm not blaming the gospels for their content, I'm simply sifting through one of them to discover an historical account.
Now...... again...... 'Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?'

 

[RJM]

I asked a question:-
Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?
.... and now I'm getting some answers.

such as from @RJM :- I mean feeding of 5000 may be more like 500 -- and perhaps the eviction of the temple traders may have been a bit exaggerated () that a net full beyond breaking with 153 large fishes may have contained a few less, the Gadarene swine episode may have actually been a bit less dramatic,

I'm getting there......... slowly. And it would appear that many Christians see the gospels as more spiritual than temporal........ I'm getting there.

What if it was 4995 people? Was it obvious fraud?

The incarnation is the practical manifestation of the spiritual within the temporal. That's the whole message. It's not two different interpretations, imo

 

[RJM]

Now...... again...... 'Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?'

It is what it is -- an extremely brief overall account of the main significant life events of Jesus the Christ assembled from available evidence of the time, including his brother and closest followers, imo

 

[badger]

What if it was 4995 people? Was it obvious fraud?

I was simply asking you a direct question...... you had written '...I mean feeding the 5000 may be more like 500..'
Do you wish to adjust that to 4995 folks now?

The incarnation is the practical manifestation of the spiritual within the temporal. That's the whole message. It's not two different interpretations, imo

I don't get that concept at all, I wonder if many Deists would.
I have read several posts by (specifically) Catholic Christians who have seemed to found their opinions about the gospels upon scholarship, the scholars, the experts....about the gospels and their contents, constantly repeated, to the point where one might think that the only way to Catholic salvation was via academia and intellect, and then, suddenly I was reading about declarations of the gospel messages being spiritual, solely focused upon Faith (I guess) than historical detail.... and for any simple person to understand.

If the gospels are written as a spiritual guide then high scholarship (for a course to steer) seems to me to be an impost.

 

[badger]

LOL, that says something!

Hmmmm....... I had tea and biscuits with a very strong Catholic on Tuesday morning. We talked about our beliefs for the time it took to drink two mugs of tea and not once did they laugh out loud at me. Not once. .......... that says something. And so open.... I wasn't speaking to obscurity but to an open person, maybe that's why I trusted more?

But Badger – You've declared your agenda from the get go! How can you say that in all seriousness?

And your previous posts have shown that you follow Catholic doctrine, I think.
One of your posts read:-
My belief is Catholic I believe in the spirit of the text, not necessarily the letter.

I'm getting there, ........

 

[RJM]

I don't get that concept at all, I wonder if many Deists would.

That us entirely up to you

 

[Thomas]

Now...... again...... 'Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?'

No.

The possible inclusion of 'Son of God' in Mark 1:1, and the missing final chapters in some of the early texts are something for scholars to pore over, but nothing is conclusive, so a succinct answer: No.