On Mark's Gospel: Tradition has it that some thirty years or more after the death of Christ, Mark wrote down the oral history about Jesus, as given by Peter. This "Gospel" consists of a series of energetic brief stories, called pericopes, that fit well with oral storytelling. One can imagine Peter -- an eyewitness of Jesus and one of three disciples in Jesus's inner circle -- later telling these stories in various sermons and in various synagogues. These pericopes include small descriptive details seen by an eyewitness account. John Mark would then have written these down later to preserve the oral teachings.
There are some good online references for a study in Mark. Here are a few I found.
A Jesus Creed blog post discusses the 30 year transition from oral history of Jesus to printed reports as given in the gospel of Mark.
The Bible Project has a nice video survey of Mark. (I recommend the nice book summaries from the Bible Project!) As emphasized in this video, Mark's goal is to introduce Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.
Overview Bible has a simple introduction and synopsis of this book.
EasyEnglish has a commentary on Mark intended for English as a Second Language (ESL) learners.
Here is another Jesus Creed blog post on the healing of the blind man in Mark 8 and the immediate question it raises, "Who is this man, Jesus?!"
EasyEnglish has a commentary on Mark intended for English as a Second Language (ESL) learners.
Rummaging through online resources I found this 8 hour (!) youtube video study through the Gospel of Mark. (It is in a "King James only" viewpoint. No, I don't really recommend this....)
But I do recommend this commentary by William Barclay. I am trying to read through this book as I post the various chapters.
Tomorrow we return to the Pericopes of Peter! We will continue in Mark 4.
Make sure you know how to pronounce "pericopes" (purr -- rick -- cup-- pees) and then impress your friends with your Bible training! No. Sorry. Don't!
But I do recommend this commentary by William Barclay. I am trying to read through this book as I post the various chapters.
Tomorrow we return to the Pericopes of Peter! We will continue in Mark 4.
Make sure you know how to pronounce "pericopes" (purr -- rick -- cup-- pees) and then impress your friends with your Bible training! No. Sorry. Don't!
I find it humorous how modern theologians disect the Gospels without ever looking scholarly at the culture of the early church that first 200 years, Furthermore, can they loik up the Aramaic or Greek fragments of oldest copies to read fir themselves before debating? Otherwise their arguement's premise or opinions are less reliable than those written before them. I say this yet confess I read not Aramaic and little Greek. I have studied the culture, arts & history.
ReplyDeleteMany theologians, like the rest of us in academia, have to publish a doctoral dissertation on some area of the Bible. This has the effect of encouraging speculation and new hypotheses. Sometimes this may be beneficial, but some theological treatises I've read say more (to me) about the writer's creativity than about their knowledge of ancient texts or ancient culture!
ReplyDeleteYeah, what seems to be the case is so much of the critical biblical scholarship is writing to one another. It's not that they don't look at the culture of the time or know the languages, but modern theory often tends to trump the ancient data or become the lens through which they explore the data. I'm very much a theory guy and believe that a judicious use of theory can illuminate the meaning of the text as well as the context in which it was written. But I do think that a lot of scholarship in this field, as Ken suggests, is written to impress a dissertation committee or panel of scholars with the person's inventiveness. I also think a lot of scholarship is produced from hearts of unbelief and the critical approach actually becomes a way to avoid seeing the glory of God in the scriptures. Harsh indictment, I know. It is a commonplace that St. Augustine said "I believe that I may understand." In some way, I do believe that belief and true understanding of the Bible as objectively the Word of God--and subjectively God's word to me--are mysteriously bound together. I also believe that the glory of God is always present in the text, there for the eye of faith to see at the moment it is opened. And the Holy Spirit is ultimately irresistible when he brings that creative, illuminating power to bear (ok, yes, that is my Edwardsean Calvinism talking there).
ReplyDelete