CEJ said
cstu said
“The author of Mark also had access to Paul’s letters in which Paul considered Jesus a divine being.
There is no real evidence for this.”
This is what I consider evidence:
1 Cor. 11: “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for[** you do not have permission to see this link **] you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.“
Written ~20 years later:
Mark 14: “While they were eating, he took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” 23 Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, and all of them drank from it. 24 He said to them, “This is my blood of the[** you do not have permission to see this link **] covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Truly I tell you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”
What you have is evidence of a shared tradition.
Mark’s author’s access to Paul’s letters is a debated issue.
Word for word shared oral tradition? No, I don’t buy that.
Dr. James Tabor’s view on it:
Eat My Body, Drink My Blood–Did Jesus Ever Really Say This?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
I’m not saying that it’s impossible for there to be any Pauline influence on Mark. Many scholars think so. As I said they have similar soteriologies. But whether or not Mark actually knew Paul’s letters is a different issue. This shouldn’t surprise us since in Acts, Paul is the hero of the faith. and the author clearly didn’t know Paul’s letters.
Robert said
Somewhere in between, but definitely not Yahweh incarnate, rather someone who even after being raised up to heaven sits at the right hand of God.
At most I think Mark is portraying Jesus as something like an “angel” born into a human body. I even admit that may be a stretch.
At most I think Mark is portraying Jesus as something like an “angel” born into a human body. I even admit that may be a stretch.
Quite a stretch I think. I don’t see how you could get this interpretation from Mark. A close reading of the John the Baptist passage I quoted shows Jesus among the human crowds drawn to John’s message and who is set apart by God. I agree with the scholars who consider Mark’s pov as a form of adoptionism, probably the earliest christology, the one that would have been held by Jesus’ immediate disciples. Assuming Philippians 2 is an accurate record of Paul’s pov he thought Jesus was a pre-existing divine figure of some sort. I will note the similarity between these two two views in one aspect. In each Jesus is exalted from a lower status to a higher status because of his righteousness.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)