Was the Gospel of Mark adjusted by Christians?

RJM said:
Of course -- just drop Jesus's predicting his death and resurrection from the narrative ;)
Click to expand...
Yes, RJM, that is how I see it.
It runs smooth as can be for me if I exclude such pieces.
My beliefs about all this and other 'things' is how I became a Deist.
That's why I won't post in the Christianity section.
 
badger said:
It runs smooth as can be for me if I exclude such pieces.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, such pieces are the heart of the text. If the gospels were meant as a historical narrative about a small-time social reformer who got himself killed, they'd just say so. They are clearly written as 'faith accounts' about a great spiritual teacher -- at least on the level of the Buddha ... imo
 
Last edited:
The problem facing the post-Enlightenment redactor is that when they remove all the elements of Scripture they are unhappy with, what's left says more about the redactor than the person at the heart of the text.

The 'Quest for the Historical Jesus' has gone through three phases, the last being the Jesus Seminar, which still rumbles on, but in each case we can see that the findings offer a Jesus of the Zeitgeist; a Jesus filtered through a prevailing ideology.

The biggest stumbling block for the Deist, I would have thought, is that the basic premise of Deism is anathema to the text, and would have been anathema to a Jew of the era. To suggest there is a deist text that's been tinkered with is a tall order.
 
Thomas said:
.

The biggest stumbling block for the Deist, I would have thought, is that the basic premise of Deism is anathema to the text, and would have been anathema to a Jew of the era. To suggest there is a deist text that's been tinkered with is a tall order.
Click to expand...
Not at all.....Deism finds a lot of truth in the texts.
 
Last edited:
Mark {10:21} Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

If anyone doubts that Jesus was campaigning against unreasonable wealth in a land full of unreasonable poverty, then this verse must surely point to his absolute campaign for a return of the laws, especially the poor laws. But I have to mention that removal of 'and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross,' doesn't seem (to me) to be part of the original......just saying.
 
Mark {10:32} And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him, {10:33} [Saying,] Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: {10:34} And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again. {10:35} And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire. {10:36} And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you?

Mark {10:32} And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen.............{10:35} And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire. {10:36} And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you? .....etc

The underlined words....... part of the original? The deposition runs smoothly on without them, I think.
 
badger said:
The underlined words....... part of the original? The deposition runs smoothly on without them, I think.
Click to expand...
Of course, because you're reading from a Deist viewpoint. A text runs smoother when it says what one wants/desires. It's called eisegesis.

Your NIV intro does not mean nor allow ew International Version translation of the Gospel of Mark warns readers if there is evidence that verses were adjusted, added to or cut." But that does not mean a green light for whole-scale assumptions that the entire text was altered on the scale that you suppose.

The contested elements are Mark 1:1, and the ending from Mark 16:9 on, which is not present in the earliest manuscripts.

There are numerous minor variations across canonical texts, most clearly errors of the copyist. These are not significant in terms of meaning or message.
 
Thomas said:
Of course, there is truth in all sacra doctrina.

But that wasn't my point. The text itself is not deist.
Click to expand...
Do you accept and believe in all of the text, itself?
 
badger said:
Do you accept and believe in all of the text, itself?
Click to expand...
Answering a comment addressed to @Thomas

This is not the same as asking whether the Gospel of Mark was originally meant to show Jesus merely as a failed social justice warrior who got himself killed -- and the text later interfered with by Christians to change Jesus into a spiritual figure?
 
RJM said:
Answering a comment addressed to @Thomas

This is not the same as asking whether the Gospel of Mark was originally meant to show Jesus merely as a failed social justice warrior who got himself killed -- and the text later interfered with by Christians to change Jesus into a spiritual figure?
Click to expand...
And so, may I ask you? Do you accept and believe in all of the text?
 
Was ANY of the Christian bible NOT adjusted/edited/abridged/ by some Christian?
 
badger said:
And so, may I ask you? Do you accept and believe in all of the text?
Click to expand...
Without being a theology fundi, no I don't accept everything I read in the New Testament; however I have no doubt the primary purpose is to tell the story of Jesus a spiritual figure. In other words I do not accept the Gospel of Mark was ever intended to portray Jesus just as an ineffective (social) revolutionary. I believe the original purpose of Mark was always to portray Jesus as an elevated spiritual figure
 
Last edited:
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Was ANY of the Christian bible NOT adjusted/edited/abridged/ by some Christian?
Click to expand...
Paul was writing before the Gospels, when Peter and James were still alive -- and all of them clearly believed Jesus was a spiritual figure, not just a failed social reformer. If Peter dictated the Gospel of Mark, details aside, there's no doubt his real intention, imo,

I cannot impose my own beliefs upon scripture, and then redact it to conform ... imo
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Paul was writing before the Gospels, when Peter and James were still alive -- and all of them clearly believed Jesus was a spiritual figure, not just a failed social reformer. If Peter dictated the Gospel of Mark, details aside, there's no doubt his real intention, imo,

I cannot impose my own beliefs upon scripture, and then redact it to conform ... imo
Click to expand...
Is that confirming or denying my statement that everything that made its way into the Christian bible was written by a Christian?
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Is that confirming or denying my statement that everything that made its way into the Christian bible was written by a Christian?
Click to expand...
Do you mean Peter, or Jesus's brother James? Or Paul? What do you mean by 'Christian' in the context? Do you mean no longer Jewish?
 
It is what it is, imo. It has had a very great influence on the world and history. It cannot be minimised and explained away by mythologizing the origins.
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Do you mean Peter, or Jesus's brother James? Or Paul? What do you mean by 'Christian' in the context? Do you mean no longer Jewish?
Click to expand...
Doesn't seem that anyone other than a Christian (relating to or professing Christianity or its teachings) wrote anything that made it to the final edit of the Christian bible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top