Comments on: “Who is this guy?”: The Gospel of Mark on the identity of Jesus (NT 1.3)

By: Phil Harland

Phil Harland — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:12:35 +0000

Hello Tony. That would be great if you could either quote the appropriate section right here (if you have an English translation) or send it as an email. Phil

By: tony prost

tony prost — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:05:32 +0000

it may be useful, in explicating this passage, to see the Paraphrase of the Gospel of John by Nonnos of Panopolis, on this text. Written in greek verse, approximately 450 AD in ALexandria.

If you are intested, I can email you the text.

By: Phil Harland

Phil Harland — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 13:52:43 +0000

Point well taken, Stephen. I think that what I was trying to say is that you and Loren seem motivated by questions relating to the historical Jesus rather than by the question of how Jesus functions in Mark’s narrative. You certainly did deal with the latter however, which is where my comment would be in need of revision. Phil

By: Stephen C. Carlson

Stephen C. Carlson — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:48:14 +0000

Hi, Phil.

Thanks for linking to my post. I am curious, however, how it could seem that I was “more focussed on questions relating to the historical Jesus, rather than Mark’s portrayal of Jesus” from my own comment about what “Mark’s audience would have expected.”

By: past tense » Blog Archive » History bloggers

past tense » Blog Archive » History bloggers — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 13:43:48 +0000

[...] And finally, I think I’ll be reading this bit of a certain book again. I didn’t know it was so interesting. [...]

By: Loren Rosson

Loren Rosson — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 20:09:07 +0000

Hi Phil,

Yes, I’ve been trying to cover the historical Jesus and gospel narratives at the same time. Insofar as the historical Jesus is concerned, the question hinges on how accomodating a prophet could have been with the word “king” vis-a-vis messiahship. A text like Mt 19:28/Lk 22:29-30 suggests kingship indeed, though even E.P. Sanders prefers that Jesus envisioned himself more as a “viceroy” than a “king”. What would “king of the Judeans”, as put by Pilate, have suggested in the minds of most? Probably popular kingship, which Jesus rejected.

If Pilate had used the term “messiah” (as the priesthood is reported doing), Jesus’ “you say so” would then easily be interpreted as “yes”, as I suggested in my first post. But I’m on the fence with what “you say so” means in answer to the specific charge of kingship. I can go either way.

Thanks for intitiating all of this.

By: Better Bibles Blog

Better Bibles Blog — Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:43:27 +0000

Translating συ λεγεις of Mark 15:2

Biblical scholars often wrestle with what is the communicative (rhetorical) meaning of Jesus’ answer to Pilate, συ λεγεις (literally, “You say so”) in Mark 15:2. Mark Goodacre, a Markan scholar, has just poste…