jakejones said
so mark like a pagan thought that his god delegated power to a creature, whats the problem ?
The problem is that is not what Mark thought. Mark though Jesus was the son of the blessed one. He is the heir who was loved by the father before being sent into the world. He was only sent into the world as a last resort because the previous servants had been rejected and abused. He’s not a creature chosen to be the son of god, or given divine powers.
mark also says that if people don’t have faith, jesus cannot do miracles
all i see you saying is that moses has access to some divine powers and jesus has access to a longer list than moses, then this means jesus is the same as the father? this is nonsense.
but he isn’t IDENTICAL to the father who is the “authorizer” in the gospel of mark. moses and joshua and isaiah do things which ONLY god does in the ot.
In Mark Jesus is a human being. And everything Jesus does as a human everyone else can do the same through faith.
However unlike Moses and Joshua and Isaiah, Jesus in Mark is stated to be the son of god, heir to the god’s vineyard, and the lord of Isaiah 40:3
Nobody is saying Jesus is IDENTICAL to the father. He certainly isn’t in Mark and would be contrary to trinitarianism.
did mark know of isaiah 1:9 ?
god is the one electing the few survivours.
In Isaiah 1:9 it is the ‘lord of hosts’ that saves the survivors. Mark thinks Jesus is the lord of Isaiah. He thinks Jesus will command the angels of heaven when he comes on the clouds at the end of days.
“The problem is that is not what Mark thought. Mark though Jesus was the son of the blessed one. He is the heir who was loved by the father before being sent into the world.”
its a parable. the father needs an object eternally to love before he sends? where does mark say this? why is trinitarianism being read into mark?
where does mark indicate that yhwhs powers are being inherited ?
“He was only sent into the world as a last resort because the previous servants had been rejected and abused.”
but they were sent like the son. NONE of this indicates they had pre-existence, just like the son .
“He’s not a creature chosen to be the son of god, or given divine powers.”
thats exactly what mark says. a chosen one who is given authority (not powers). father = primary mover, son = instrumented by father.
“In Mark Jesus is a human being. And everything Jesus does as a human everyone else can do the same through faith.”
and he is nothing other than human being in mark.
“However unlike Moses and Joshua and Isaiah, Jesus in Mark is stated to be the son of god, heir to the god’s vineyard, and the lord of ** you do not have permission to see this link **
moses is called “elohim”
how does being a “heir” imply co-existence, co-equality?
3 A voice cries out:
“In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord,
make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
how does yhwh do this?
Prepare the way of the Lord
Isaiah issues a call in the wilderness to prepare the way of the Lord (1:2-3), but then John the Baptist appears, ** you do not have permission to see this link ** differently?
“Nobody is saying Jesus is IDENTICAL to the father. He certainly isn’t in Mark and would be contrary to trinitarianism.”
the father has properties marks jesus does not have. the father delegating his powers like pagan gods, does not imply that the object which receives powers = yhwh.
“Mark thinks Jesus is the lord of Isaiah. He thinks Jesus will command the angels of heaven when he comes on the clouds at the end of days.”
in marks world view , normal human beings can command things. some human beings might have more special status than others and can command a list of things, but it nowhere is evidence that human beings in mark are “fully god and fully not god”
jakejones said
its a parable. the father needs an object eternally to love before he sends? where does mark say this? why is trinitarianism being read into mark?where does mark indicate that yhwhs powers are being inherited ?
but they were sent like the son. NONE of this indicates they had pre-existence, just like the son .
Yes its a parable about the son of god. It’s the nearest indication in all of the NT about what exactly the writers mean by “son of god”.
In the parable its “son” in the ordinary sense of the word. Who is the heir to the vineyard. He is loved by the owner before being sent to the vineyard, and is only sent after the failure of the other servants. The son is pre-existent and utterly non-adoptionistic.
The servants are sent at the due time and nothing indicates their pre-existence.
The son is the heir to the owner and taking the ordinary sense of the words will have the full authority of the owner as his inheritance.
thats exactly what mark says. a chosen one who is given authority (not powers). father = primary mover, son = instrumented by father.
You can say father is primary mover and son is instrument of the father if you want. But Mark never calls him a chosen one.
and he is nothing other than human being in mark.
He is the Son of Man and Son of God in Mark.
moses is called “elohim”
he will be elohim to pharoah and aaron will be his prophet. It just means aaron will speak for Moses.
how does being a “heir” imply co-existence, co-equality?
It doesn’t, it means he will receive the kingdom and title and name.
Prepare the way of the Lord
Isaiah issues a call in the wilderness to prepare the way of the Lord (1:2-3), but then John the Baptist appears, ** you do not have permission to see this link ** differently?
Yes, Mark tells us what he means.
John the baptist was the voice calling in wilderness about “one more powerful than I, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie“
this was in fulfillment of Isaiah’s “Prepare the way for the Lord” who is Jesus the messiah the son of god, whom the spirit has David call his Lord.
“I will send my messenger ahead of you who will prepare your way”, is for Mark, God speaking to his Son about John the baptist preparing the way.
the father has properties marks jesus does not have. the father delegating his powers like pagan gods, does not imply that the object which receives powers = yhwh
Jesus being lord when there is only one lord, implies Jesus is yhwh.
in marks world view , normal human beings can command things. some human beings might have more special status than others and can command a list of things, but it nowhere is evidence that human beings in mark are “fully god and fully not god”
Mark 12 tells us that the son of god, whom he loves, will be sent to earth in the form of a servant because of the past failings of actual servants.
“Yes its a parable about the son of god.”
so you take parables as real things ?
“It’s the nearest indication in all of the NT about what exactly the writers mean by “son of god”.”
its a story about rejecting yhwhs favourite .
“In the parable its “son” in the ordinary sense of the word. Who is the heir to the vineyard. He is loved by the owner before being sent to the vineyard, and is only sent after the failure of the other servants. “
so its a story about yhwhs favourite ?
“The son is pre-existent and utterly non-adoptionistic. “
no it doesnt say that he is “pre-existent”
“The servants are sent at the due time and nothing indicates their pre-existence.”
they are SENT like the son. what are you talking about ?
he sent a slave to the tenants to collect from them his share of the produce of the vineyard. 3 But they seized him, and beat him, and sent him away empty-handed. 4 And again he sent another slave to them; this one they beat over the head and insulted. 5 Then he sent another, and that one they killed. And so it was with many others; some they beat, and others they killed. 6 He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 7 But those tenants said to one another,
where is this saying “pre-existence” ? “co-equality” ?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“The son is the heir to the owner and taking the ordinary sense of the words will have the full authority of the owner as his inheritance.”
because its yhwhs favourite ? nothing about co-equality or pre-existence.
thats exactly what mark says. a chosen one who is given authority (not powers). father = primary mover, son = instrumented by father.
“You can say father is primary mover and son is instrument of the father if you want. But Mark never calls him a chosen one. “
yhwh chooses who he wants to instrument
so he is a chosen one.
how does this imply pre-existence?
and he is nothing other than human being in mark.
“He is the Son of Man and Son of God in Mark.”
a chosen son of god ? how does this prove pre-existant “son of god” co-equal with INHERENT powers that the father has?
moses is called “elohim”
“he will be elohim to pharoah and aaron will be his prophet. It just means aaron will speak for Moses.”
he has a name which belongs to god.
how does being a “heir” imply co-existence, co-equality?
“It doesn’t, it means he will receive the kingdom and title and name.”
it does not mean he always owns kingdom, title and name in trinitarian sense.
Prepare the way of the Lord
Isaiah issues a call in the wilderness to prepare the way of the Lord (1:2-3), but then John the Baptist appears, ** you do not have permission to see this link ** differently?
“Yes, Mark tells us what he means.
John the baptist was the voice calling in wilderness about “one more powerful than I, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie“”
and when john baptises jesus in mark, because of jesus’ sins, he says “next” as if nothing special was noticed. john baptises jesus and clearly made himself worthy of baptising jesus, did “make way for the lord” mean that john thought yhwh was a sinner who needed baptism ?
“this was in fulfillment of Isaiah’s “Prepare the way for the Lord” who is Jesus the messiah the son of god, whom the spirit has David call his Lord.”
how is this relevant ?
“I will send my messenger ahead of you who will prepare your way”, is for Mark, God speaking to his Son about John the baptist preparing the way.”
john made himself worthy to put jesus into water because jesus was cleansed from his sins. did john think yhwh was a sinner?
the father has properties marks jesus does not have. the father delegating his powers like pagan gods, does not imply that the object which receives powers = yhwh
“Jesus being lord when there is only one lord, implies Jesus is yhwh.”
no, two gods , because god has properties jesus lacks and vice versa. jesus is not yhwh in the gospel of mark.
mark did not see an instrument of the father as yhwh. impossible.
in marks world view , normal human beings can command things. some human beings might have more special status than others and can command a list of things, but it nowhere is evidence that human beings in mark are “fully god and fully not god”
“Mark 12 tells us that the son of god, whom he loves,”
not pre-existent or co-equal
“will be sent to earth”
where is that in the text ?
“in the form of a servant because of the past failings of actual servants.”
“form of a servant ” you are now saying that mark thought jesus existed as another form? sorry mate, thats not in mark.
“The servants are sent at the due time and nothing indicates their pre-existence.”
they are SENT like the son. what are you talking about ?
he sent a slave to the tenants to collect from them his share of the produce of the vineyard. 3 But they seized him, and beat him, and sent him away empty-handed. 4 And again he sent another slave to them; this one they beat over the head and insulted. 5 Then he sent another, and that one they killed. And so it was with many others; some they beat, and others they killed. 6 He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ 7 But those tenants said to one another,
“due time” ? yhwhs favourite vs yhwhs prophets. none of this indicates pre-existence . yhwhs feelings for x, does not mean x pre-existed .
jakejones said
no it doesnt say that he is “pre-existent”
they are SENT like the son. what are you talking about ?
The owner sends servants just like god sends messengers.
But the son is different. He is sent because all the servants have failed.
Mark 12:6 “still one having, a beloved son, he sent him last”
The idea is that being sent to the vineyard is not the purpose of the son, he is the heir. He is only sent because the servants have failed. The owner does not decide to beget nor to chose a son because the servants have failed. He has a son regardless. The son exists while the servants are failing. He sends him in the end because he thinks the tenants will surely have respect for his son.
This is a parable about god’s son, who is beloved and exists while god’s messengers are failing to bring israel to repentence. He will be sent last of all.
Robert said
We must be careful when asking questions of a text that the author might not have ever imagined when composing his text. While Mark never clearly discusses any of this, I cannot imagine that he would have seen the exalted Jesus, even seated at the right hand of Power, as equal to God in any sense. Unlike Paul, Mark presumably thought of Jesus as created and not as a pre-existent instrument of all creation (1 Cor 8,6). At least there’s no clear indication of this in Mark’s text. Even Paul, with his very high christology, still certainly considered Jesus to be subordinate to the Father (1 Cor 15,24-28) so Mark likewise would probably have done so.
I think we’re on the same page about this.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)