Gospels not PUBLISHED until c.150 - Justin Martyr

Dec 2011
586
Perth
#81
Gday NonXNonExX and all :)

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but it's not a complete break from the topic at hand.
I have my own theory on the origin of Mark, based mainly on the alleged remarks of Papias.

Mark, the interpreter for Peter, was not familiar with the holy land, let alone any Jesus character. I think that after Peter died, he wrote down as many of the sermons of Peter that he could remember. That accounts for the somewhat disjointed nature of GMark and the errors it contains. This would be the work that Papia referred to. Later editors arranged it into a logical order until it became the book we know today. Mark was certainly no eyewitness and i think Peter only used the legend of a Jesus character as a starting point for his sermons, not paying particular attention to the ultimate truth of the details. I think this also explains why it took so long to start publiching the gospels.
But G.Mark doesn't look anything like the recorded sermons of Peter.

It never says anything like 'Peter said...'.
It does not attribute Peter as the source.
It does not contain preaching of sermons.
It's not a series of separate items.

It's a narrative, a STORY.

And - Peter looks like a dunce in the story - how could he possible be the source ?

No,
G.Mark is a religious story crafted from previous literature such as the Tanakh and the Greek mysteries.

Like all the gospels, it was UN-named until Irenaeus named them all, basing his guesses on comments like Papias and Justin.


Kapyong
 
#83
Just curious--where are the authentic sermons of Peter? I would really like to read them. You're not talking about the NT books carrying his name, right?

I guess whether GMark consists of separate pericopes strung together like a Tschaikovsky symphony or a continuous narrative depends on which expert you follow. There's no argument that a good deal of material is drawn from the OT.

Of course, no one knows who really wrote any of the gospels, but that doesn't mean it could not have been Mark who wrote some or all of GMark.

OTOH, i've never heard a theory that really covers all the bases.
 

Similar History Discussions