Monday, July 22, 2024

“Even Richard Dawkins, God bless him, has decided to dial the God-hatred back a bit and now says he’s also a cultural Christian. Christianity, for him, is a “fundamentally decent religion,” unlike a certain other form of monotheism, of which Dawkins doesn’t approve”. Dr Philippa Martyr Taken from: https://www.catholicweekly.com.au/a-catholic-revival-is-upon-us-feel-free-to-enjoy-it/ A Catholic revival is upon us. Feel free to enjoy it By Dr Philippa Martyr April 14, 2024 If you’ve been reading the international Catholic media lately, you’ll know what an exciting Easter it’s been. Westminster Cathedral in London had to turn people away from the Triduum ceremonies because the cathedral was overflowing. Other churches reported record crowds over Easter. In France, around 1.6 million Catholics turn up to Sunday Mass on a regular basis. But there’s been a 30 per cent increase in adult baptisms since 2023, to a whopping 7,135 in 2024. Next door in Belgium, there’s around 460,000 Catholics going to Mass on Sundays. But the number of adult converts there has doubled in 10 years from 186 in 2014 to 362 in 2024. I wish I could tell you how many adult converts came into the Church in Australia this Easter, but outside Sydney where the bumper RCIA group was even noticed overseas, I don’t know. We don’t collect or publish that data centrally, which I think is a shame. This Easter, Tammy Peterson also became a Catholic. Tammy is the wife of Dr Jordan Peterson—the psychologist, speaker, and author who is probably best described as “Christian-adjacent.” Many of us have great hopes for Dr P’s eventual conversion. But I think it will need more prayers, as he’s already announced he won’t be rushing into anything soon. Media pundits are saying that there’s a Christian revival going on in the UK. Prominent public figures there like Tom Holland and Douglas Murray have publicly praised the social and cultural value of Christianity. Even Richard Dawkins, God bless him, has decided to dial the God-hatred back a bit and now says he’s also a cultural Christian. Christianity, for him, is a “fundamentally decent religion,” unlike a certain other form of monotheism, of which Dawkins doesn’t approve. But none of them has become a Christian yet (and Douglas Murray is openly gay so that’s going to be a hard sell). Nor has Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose recent embrace of Christianity is based not on her belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God, but her belief in Christianity’s ability to withstand the coming fall of Western civilisation. And that’s the rub. This kind of “secular Christianity” is a response to fears about radical Islam and its increasing public presence in the UK. Even the most virulent anti-Christian public figures have started to realise that radical Islam does not tolerate most of the things they value. Is any of this okay? Of course it is. It’s nice when prominent people stop publicly hating your religion 24 hours a day. We should all enjoy the breather. Huge influxes of people into our churches at Christmas and Easter are also not a new thing, and some of the crowds may have been coming in a tidal wave of post-COVID relief. But of course, they’re all welcome. There’s also an online social media trend in “ChristianCore” and “CatholicCore,” where getting your Catholic weird on is increasingly attractive to bored and disenchanted young people. …. The church is here to stay. It has been planted very firmly in the world to save it. But the Christian tide comes in and goes out in different parts of the world over time. God is very patient. He is deeply immersed in his relationship with the individual soul who he is wooing over time and space. We can help him best by getting out of his way. What won’t help is to rush in and start watering down church teaching in the hope of head-hunting famous people who aren’t ready to love God back just yet. Conversion is a journey. Some people like to admire the scenery on the way to the beach while they’re wondering just how cold the water will be when they decide to plunge in. This means that those of us already in the water should be having the best time we can in it. The water is glorious but we might need to signal that more often to the ones still waiting to come in.

Sunday, July 21, 2024

New Adam tends the Garden neglected by the Old Adam

“Trust the gardener (and stay in his garden!) and Jesus will grow new life out of the husk of your old life. Please, stay in the garden. Yes, I know it’s easy to get depressed about ecclesial garbage. But just remember, even beautiful gardens have a compost pile”. Brian Zahnd Taken from: https://www.ecodisciple.com/blog/god-the-cosmic-gardener/ God the Cosmic Gardener May 25, 2023 - The whole of creation is a magnificent garden created by God. Every aspect of that creation God looked at and proclaimed “It is good.” By Christine Sine …. ________________________________________ Not long ago we celebrated Earth Day, and recently I had the privilege of sharing the sermon at Seattle Mennonite church. This was not another doom and gloom talk about climate change. I think we are all aware and concerned about the future of our planet. I couldn’t open my computer in the last few weeks without another story shouting its concern. Some feel we only have a decade in which to make changes. It overwhelms us but research suggests that it does not galvanize us into action; in fact, quite the reverse. It actually makes us less likely to respond, because we feel so helpless. We need new language and new perspectives that inspire us with the enthusiasm and passion to get out and make a difference. We need to re-enchant and re-wonder peoples’ view of the world. Part of our problem is that we have lost the language to describe the beauty around us. When the Oxford Junior dictionary was last updated, some words were removed and new ones added. All the words removed were about nature. One of them was dandelion. Can you imagine? No wonder we think of dandelions as weeds to be eradicated rather than recognizing them as one of the most nutritious plants in the garden and, to a child, one of the most beautiful too. I love that the Bible begins and ends with a garden. The Eternal God, the cosmic gardener, starts by creating a garden. Our creator doesn’t just go to the local nursery and buy a few plants, but creates every single element of that garden. The divine spirit is infused through every aspect of creation. The flora, the fauna, even the soil, pregnant with life, shimmers with the vibrant presence and glory of God. It’s not just Eden that is a garden, though; the whole of creation is a magnificent garden created by God. Every aspect of that creation God looked at and proclaimed “It is good.” In the Voice translation of Genesis 2:7-9 we read: “The Eternal God planted a garden in the east in Eden – a place of utter delight – and placed the human whom they had sculpted there. In this garden, the Creator of all made the ground pregnant with life – bursting forth with nourishing food and luxuriant beauty.” God took all the good stuff of creation and formed it into a garden of utter delight. It gives me a feeling of delight just to think about it. The great Irish teacher John Scotus Eriugena taught that God speaks to us through two books - the physically small book of scripture and the big book of creation, vast as the universe. Eriugena invites us to listen to the two books in stereo, to listen to the strains of the human heart in scripture and discern within them the sound of God and to listen to the murmurings and thunders of creation and know within them the music of God’s Being. To listen to one without the other is to only half-listen. To listen to scripture without creation is to lose the cosmic vastness of the song. To listen to creation without scripture is to lose the personal intimacy of the voice. At the end of the Bible in Revelation 22 there is another garden. This is a garden city, a garden that inspires me with possibilities for how to beautify our urban world today. Imagine it—garden cities multiplying throughout the world. I am deeply touched by the verse, “On each bank of the river stood the tree of life, firmly planted, bearing twelve kinds of fruit and producing its sweet crop every month throughout the year.” I will never forget my first experience of holding a child dying of starvation in my arms when I worked in the refugee camps on the Thai Cambodian border in the mid 80's. Then, from Africa, more images of starvation are seared in my brain. Starvation is seasonal. If the harvest is poor, stored crops will run out before new crops are ready for harvest. In the Middle Ages, it was known as the hunger season. I close my eyes and think of it—a tree that gives fruit twelve months of the year. Can you imagine abundant, lush harvests every month of the year? In God’s garden there is no hunger season, no chance of a child dying in infancy— abundance and provision for everyone and every creature at all times. Jesus is the gardener of this new creation garden. We heard it at Easter. When Mary Magdalene encounters the resurrected Jesus as depicted in John 20:15, she was coming to the garden tomb looking for Christ’s body. Instead she finds a very much alive Jesus and she thinks he is the gardener. This is not a throwaway line. It is of cosmic significance! Jesus is indeed the gardener of the new creation and asks us to once again join him in its care. Soil must be fertilized, seeds planted, watered, and nurtured and fruit harvested. Animals must be tended and cared for. I don’t think this is a spiritual metaphor. Jesus loved creation and delighted in using it as the focus for his parables. Several years ago I read A New Heaven and A New Earth by Richard Middleton. It both inspired and stunned me. Middleton suggested that our purpose is to transform the whole earth into a fitting and hospitable place not just for humankind but also for God to dwell. Can you imagine it? God longs for a beautiful place where all creation flourishes and all creatures enjoy abundant provision. A place in which God, too, feels welcomed and comfortable, able to walk once more in relationship with humankind. I like to close my eyes and think about this. What kind of world would God feel comfortable in? Obviously, one in which justice and peace reign, but also one in which creation is restored and cared for. This is why Earth Day is so important for me. It is not just about climate change and our concern for a world humankind has abused, but about our longing to be able to walk once more with our God in a world of beauty where creation flourishes and all are abundantly provided for. How could this view change how we approach God’s good creation and the destruction we often unwittingly contribute to? How could we make this world more inviting for God to dwell in? What difference would it make if we saw God as the cosmic gardener and Jesus as the gardener of the new creation? My husband Tom and I live in a small intentional community with three two-bedroom units. One of our foundational guidelines is sustainability. Recently, we became full for the first time in several years with keen gardeners, and we look forward to sharing an abundant harvest of salad greens straight out of the garden, as well as tomatoes, squash, and beans. In our parking strip, we have several fruit trees, including three apple trees that sometimes produce up to 400 pounds of apples. Over the last 15 years we have probably harvested 5,000 pounds of apples from the trees. Talk about the abundance of a generous God. "I am not a gardener!" you might exclaim. "I have a black thumb. I don’t have space or time for gardening. I don’t like dirty hands." Well it doesn’t matter. There are many ways to become a co-worker with Jesus to create the new world that Easter beckons us into. It is not just about plants and gardens; it is also about justice and concern for those whose lives are increasingly devastated by the impact of climate change, which usually hits the poorest in our world and communities hardest. …. And, taken from: https://brianzahnd.com/2018/03/mistaken-as-the-gardener/ Mistaken As the Gardener Brian Zahnd “Mary Magdalene turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not know it was Jesus…supposing him to be the gardener.” –John 20:14, 15 “On the third day the friends of Christ coming at day-break to the place found the grave empty and the stone rolled away. In varying ways they realized the new wonder; the world had died in the night. What they were looking at was the first day of a new creation, with a new heaven and a new earth; and in a semblance of a gardener God walked again in the garden, not in the cool of the evening, but in the dawn.” –G.K. Chesterton The first person to encounter the risen Christ was Mary Magdalene. It happened in a garden. At first Mary thought Jesus was the gardener. A logical mistake. Or a prophetic mistake. Or a beautiful mistake. Or perhaps not a mistake at all. On Good Friday Jesus was buried in a garden. A garden is a place to cultivate and grow living things. An appropriate place for Jesus to be buried. A few days before his crucifixion Jesus had said, “Unless a seed falls into the ground and dies it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.” (John 12:24) On Holy Saturday the Son of God was a holy seed sown in a peaceful garden. On Easter Sunday the garden brought forth the first fruits of resurrection — “Jesus Christ declared to be the Son of God by resurrection from the dead.” (Romans 1:4) The first seed raised by God in the garden of resurrection became the gardener. When Mary Magdalene “supposed him to be the gardener,” she was exactly right! Jesus is now the gardener of resurrection, cultivating new life in all who believe. The first Adam was a gardener who failed in his task and the world became a wasteland of war and sin. But the second Adam will succeed in his task — Christ will restore the ruined garden. With Christ as the gardener of new creation we have a hopeful eschatology. Instead of the thorn bush shall come up the juniper; Instead of the briar shall come up the myrtle. –Isaiah 55:13 “On either side of the river is the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, producing its fruit each month; and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. Nothing accursed will be there anymore.” –Revelation 22:2, 3 Jesus is the gardener who turns blighted wastelands into verdant gardens. Jesus is NOT a conductor punching tickets for a train ride to heaven. Christian hope is not so much about getting from earth to heaven, as it is about getting heaven to earth. Jesus is NOT a lawyer to get us out of a legal jam with his angry dad. God is not mad at sinners. Jesus told Mary to tell his disciples that his Father was their Father too! Jesus is NOT a banker making loans of his surplus righteousness. Modern people love economic metaphors…but they are terrible! Economic metaphors invariably produce bad theology. Jesus IS a gardener! A gardener cultivating resurrection life in all who will come to him. The conductor, lawyer, banker metaphors are mostly false, giving a distorted view of salvation. The gardener (and physician) metaphor is beautiful and faithfully depicts the process of salvation in our lives. A gardener’s work is earthy and intimate. Gardeners have their hands in the humus. (We are humans from the humus.) Conductors and lawyers and bankers are concerned with abstract and impersonal things like tickets, laws, and money. But gardeners handle living things with living hands. Jesus is not afraid to get his hands dirty in the humus of humanity. That Jesus is a gardener with a good heart and a green thumb should change your perspective on life. I promise you that your life is not so messed up that Jesus can’t nurture you into a flourishing state. This is the good news! Take a leap of faith and believe it! Trust the gardener (and stay in his garden!) and Jesus will grow new life out of the husk of your old life. Please, stay in the garden. Yes, I know it’s easy to get depressed about ecclesial garbage. But just remember, even beautiful gardens have a compost pile. Believing that Jesus is a good gardener tending to your soul really does change your perspective on life. So when “stuff” happens (you know the expression), don’t despair. Allow Jesus to use “it” as fertilizer to help you grow. Paul says something about God causing all things to work together for good… Then there are those times when the gardener pulls out his shears. Oh, no! Pruning time! Pruning is the painful experience of loss. No one likes to be cut back. But the gracious intention of the good gardener is always the same: to prepare you to flourish. Jesus says, “every branch of mine that bears fruit is pruned, that it may bear more fruit.” (John 15:2) I know in my own life any fruitful result from my work of writing has only been possible because of pruning. If I had remained a church-growth, success-in-life unpruned pastor I could never have written on forgiveness and beauty, peace and love as I have. I had to be pruned. It was painful. Very painful. But I thank the gardener for it. So take heart, if you’re in the garden, the gardener is there. You may not always recognize him at first, but he is there. He calls you by name and his desire is for you to flourish. Believe in the gardener…for he is risen!

Friday, July 19, 2024

Mercy of God the answer to the specific problems of our times

“The Message of Divine Mercy has always been near and dear to me… which I took with me to the See of Peter and which it in a sense forms the image of this Pontificate”. Pope St. John Paul II Taken from: https://www.thedivinemercy.org/message/john-paul-ii The Great Mercy Pope It was St. Pope John Paul II who told the Marian Fathers: “Be apostles of Divine Mercy under the maternal and loving guidance of Mary.” We've been faithfully following his instructions ever since. Both in his teaching and personal life, St. Pope John Paul II strove to live and teach the message of Divine Mercy. As the great Mercy Pope, he wrote an encyclical on Divine Mercy: "The Message of Divine Mercy has always been near and dear to me… which I took with me to the See of Peter and which it in a sense forms the image of this Pontificate." In his writings and homilies, he has described Divine Mercy as the answer to the world’s problems and the message of the third millennium. He beatified and canonized Sr. Maria Faustina Kowalska, the nun associated with the message, and he did it in Rome and not in Poland to underscore that Divine Mercy is for the whole world. Establishing Divine Mercy Sunday for the Entire Church When St. Pope John Paul canonized Sr. Faustina (making her St. Faustina), he also, on the same day, surprised the entire world by establishing Divine Mercy Sunday (the feast day associated with the message) as a feast day for the entire Church. The feast day falls on the Second Sunday of the Easter season. On that day, John Paul II declared, "This is the happiest day of my life." Entrusting the World to Divine Mercy In 2002, the Pope entrusted the whole world to Divine Mercy when he consecrated the International Shrine of The Divine Mercy in Lagiewniki, a suburb of Krakow in Poland. This is where St. Faustina’s mortal remains are entombed. The saint lived in a convent nearby. The Pope himself remembers as a young man working in the Solvay Quarry, just a few meters from the present-day Shrine. He also says that he had been thinking about Sr. Faustina for a long time when he wrote his encyclical on Divine Mercy. Further, the Holy Father has frequently quoted from the Diary of Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska and has prayed The Chaplet of The Divine Mercy at the saint’s tomb. Beyond the Life of John Paul II Given all these connections to Divine Mercy and St. Faustina, is it any wonder that Pope John Paul II died on the Vigil of Divine Mercy Sunday (the evening before the feast day), which fell that year on April 3? It is also no surprise that the Great Mercy Pope left us a message for Divine Mercy Sunday, which was read on the feast day by a Vatican official to the faithful in St. Peter’s after a Mass that had been celebrated for the repose of the soul of the Pope. Repeatedly Pope John Paul II has written and spoken about the need for us to turn to the mercy of God as the answer to the specific problems of our times. He has placed a strong and significant focus on the Divine Mercy message and devotion throughout his pontificate that will carry the Church long after his death.

Thursday, July 4, 2024

If John used Mark’s Gospel as a template for his, it may be because John was Mark

“John sequenced his own narrative in and around the elements in Mark’s narrative so that the two Gospels fit together like puzzle pieces”. Jimmy Akin My (Damien Mackey’s) line of thought here is that, since John, as John Mark, may have written the Gospel of Mark on behalf of his untutored good friend, Peter: Gospel of Mark a collection of Saint Peter’s discourses (2) Gospel of Mark a collection of Saint Peter's discourses | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu then a fairly recent (2014) suggestion by Jimmy Akin, that John may have used the Marcan Gospel as a template for his Gospel of John, if correct, would be due to the fact that John was now using his original, simplified Gospel written for Peter as the foundation for his own personal, and more sophisticated Gospel. Let us hear Jimmy Akin tell the story (without his attempting to connect Mark and John as the one same Evangelist): https://jimmyakin.com/2014/11/did-john-use-mark-as-a-template.html Did John Use Mark as a Template? …. Isolated Evangelists? In the last several decades, it has become fashionable in biblical scholarship to say that the Evangelists were all writing for individual communities and that their Gospels were not intended to be widely circulated, so they wrote with little awareness of each other’s work. According to a common view: • Mark wrote first and so didn’t know the work of any other Evangelist. • Matthew knew Mark but not Luke or John. • Luke knew Mark but not Matthew or John. • John didn’t know any of the other three Evangelists’ work. Of course, like everything in biblical scholarship, each of these claims is disputed. British scholar Richard Bauckham published a major assault on the idea that the Gospels were written for narrow, isolated communities in a book that he edited and co-authored with several other individuals, entitled The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (New Testament Studies). It’s awesome. Did John Know Mark? One of the essays that Bauckham contributed to the book is entitled “John for Readers of Mark.” In this piece, he argues that John not only knew Mark but that you can show this because John seems to have used Mark as a template or an outline. In other words, John sequenced his own narrative in and around the elements in Mark’s narrative so that the two Gospels fit together like puzzle pieces. If this view is correct, you should be able to make a table using parallel columns to show how the two Gospels fit together. Bauckham did not provide such a table, and though he provided impressive arguments for his proposal, he did not go through the entirety of the two Gospels or test the proposal against the ideas that John might have used Matthew or Luke rather than Mark. I decided to continue Bauckham’s investigation along these lines. How Mark and John Fit Together First, here is the table I came up with of how the two Gospels fit together (italics and parentheses indicate material that is in a different sequence in one Gospel than the other): No. Section Mark John 1. Prologue — 1:1-18 2. John the Baptist, Jesus’ Baptism, & Testing 1:1-13 — 3. Early Ministry I — 1:19-2:12 4. Clearing the Temple (11:11-25) 2:13-22 5. Early Ministry II — 2:23-4:43 6. The Official’s Son — 4:44-54 7 Galilean Ministry I 1:14-6:6 — 8. Sending the Disciples 6:7-13 — 9. Fate of John the Baptist 6:14-29 — 10. Visit to Jerusalem — 5:1-47 11. Disciples Return 6:30 — 12. Feeding the Five Thousand & Walking on the Water 6:31-53 6:1-71 13. Galilean Ministry II 6:54-9:50 7:1-9 14. Judean Ministry I 10:1a 7:10-10:39 15. Transjordan Ministry 10:1b-31 10:40-42 16. Judean Ministry II — 11:1-57 17. Travel to Jerusalem 10:32-52 — 18. Anointing with Oil (14:1-11) 12:1-8 19. Triumphal Entry 11:1-10 12:9-19 20. Clearing the Temple 11:11-25 (2:13-22) 21. Before the Supper 11:27-13:37 12:20-50 22. Anointing with Oil 14:1-11 (12:1-8) 23. The Last Supper 14:12-26 13:1-14:31 24. Extended Discourse — 15:1-17:26 25. After the Supper 14:27-52 18:1-12 26. Before Annas — 18:13-23 27. Before Caiaphas 14:53-65 18:24 28. Peter’s Denial 14:66-72 18:25-26 29. Before Pilate 15:1-15 18:28-19:16 30. Crucifixion & Burial 15:16-47 19:17-42 31. Resurrection Narrative 16:1-8 (or 16:1-20) 20:1-21:25 Did John Use Mark as a Template? I then went through the table, looking for evidence for and against the proposal. Here is a summary of my findings (most of these points I got from Bauckham, but some—especially those regarding the Last Supper—are original to me): • John’s prologue introduces John the Baptist (John 1:6-8, 15) and can be seen as interacting with the beginning of Mark (Mark 1:1-13). • John 1:19-4:43 can be seen as fitting between Mark 1:13 and 1:14. • In John 1:19-34, John the Baptist gives an account of his own ministry and of how he identified Jesus as the coming one that reflects Mark 1:1-13. • The fact that John does not directly record the baptism of Jesus (a major event!) suggests that his audience already had a written account of it. • John 3:24’s reference to an incident that occurred when “John had not yet been put in prison” seems to be intended to clarify when the events of John 1:19-4:43 fit into Mark’s outline. • In Mark 6:7-13, Jesus sends the disciples on a mission from which they will return in Mark 6:30. The material between these verses is thus a time when Jesus does not have the disciples with him. This period seems to be reflected in John 5:1-47, which is a period in which the disciples are not mentioned. Further, in both John and Mark, these sections contain material recording or referring to the death of John the Baptist, with John seeming to presuppose that the audience already knows how the Baptist died (presumably from Mark’s account). • John 7:1a seems to summarize a continuation of the Galilean ministry that is recorded in Mark 6:54-9:50. Further, John 6:4 and 7:2 imply a period of six months spent in Galilee that John does not otherwise record and that seems to correspond to Mark 7-9. This period is the last time that Jesus will be in Galilee until after the Resurrection. • Mark 10:1a and John 7:10-10:39 record a period in which Jesus ministered in Judea. • Mark 10:1b-31 and John 10:40-42 record a period in which Jesus ministered in the Transjordan. • The way that the Last Supper is recorded in Mark 14:12-26 and John 13:1-14:31 suggests supplemental intent on John’s part. John omits virtually everything Mark records happening before and at the supper and provides additional material about it not found in Mark. Even when he records the one event that the two have in common (Jesus’ prediction of Judas’s betrayal) John provides supplementary detail not found in Mark. Also, the events that John narrates seem to interweave easily with the events that Mark records. The fact that John does not record the institution of the Eucharist (another major event!), which he has already foreshadowed in John 6:26-71, is strong evidence that his audience already had a written record of its institution. • John’s supplemental intent may be illustrated by his giving names to figures that are otherwise unnamed in Mark (e.g., Peter and Malchus in the incident where Peter cuts off Malchus’s ear; cf. Mark 14:47, John 18:10). • John 18:13-23 discusses the relationship between Annas and Caiaphas, provides additional detail about how Peter got into the courtyard of the high priest, and preserves an account of Jesus’ appearance before Annas, which is not mentioned in Mark. All of these may be seen as an effort to supplement Mark’s account. • John 18:24 refers, in a single verse, to the appearance of Jesus before Caiaphas, which is described in detail in Mark 14:53-65. This may be evidence of John taking Mark’s account as read. • In John 19:7, the Jewish authorities charge Jesus before Pilate with making himself out to be the Son of God. This charge is not found in John’s account of Jesus’ appearances before the Jewish authorities, but it is found in Mark’s account (Mark 14:61-64). On the other hand: • The clearing of the temple and the anointing with oil are placed differently in Mark and John. • John records Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s denial as occurring during the Last Supper, but in Mark it appears just after the supper. These differences could be counted as evidence that John was not using Mark as an outline, but it also can be understood in other ways, such as John providing additional clarity on precisely when these events occurred (or, in the case of the clearing of the temple, that it happened more than once). The dislocation of these events thus does not overcome the positive evidence that John used Mark. …. [Mackey: Jimmy Akin next proceeds to test John in the same fashion against Luke and Matthew, and finds that these do not stack up at all like as was the case with Mark]. Conclusion It thus appears that John more likely used Mark as a template than either Luke or Matthew. I thus think Bauckham is right: John likely meant his Gospel to interweave with Mark’s Gospel. Of course, this doesn’t mean that John didn’t know Matthew’s or Luke’s Gospels. He may have; he just doesn’t seem to have used them as a template the way he did Mark’s. ….

Wednesday, July 3, 2024

Gospel of Mark a collection of Saint Peter’s discourses

“Mark begins with the preaching of John the Baptist and ends with the resurrection and ascension, paralleling the public preaching of Peter as we see it summarized in the Book of Acts”. J. Warner Wallace https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/good-reasons-to-believe-peter-is-the-source-of-marks-gospel/ Good Reasons To Believe Peter Is The Source Of Mark’s Gospel By J. Warner Wallace Published August 24, 2018 The authorship of Mark’s Gospel is of great importance to those of us making a case for the reliability of the New Testament. Mark isn’t mentioned as an eyewitness in any of the Gospel accounts. Mackey’s comment: Or, was Mark actually Peter’s good and loyal friend John, himself, under the composite name of John Mark. ACTS 15:37 Now Barnabas was determined to take with them John called Mark. Warner Wallace continues: How did Mark get his information about Jesus? Why should we consider his information to be reliable? There are several good reasons to believe Peter is the trustworthy source of information for Mark, beginning with the historical attributions of the early Church Fathers who affirm the relationship Mark and Peter had in the 1st Century. Beyond this, however, there are additional evidences within Mark’s text supporting the claim Peter (Mark’s mentor in Rome) is the source for Mark’s information. I’ve described the evidential case in much more detail in Cold-Case Christianity, but this brief summary may be helpful: The Writing Style Is Consistent With Mark’s Background The traditional view recognizes Mark as a Palestinian Jew who wrote his Gospel using Peter as his source. Most scholars believe the Gospel of Mark demonstrates a writing style and literary syntax exposing the author’s first language as something other than Greek. In fact, the writing style seems to indicate the author’s first language was probably a Semitic language such as Aramaic. Mackey’s comment: Why not Galilean Hebrew? Jesus was a Hebrew, not Aramaïc, speaker (2) Jesus was a Hebrew, not Aramaïc, speaker | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Warner Wallace continues: This would be consistent with the idea Mark, a Palestinian Jew (who most likely spoke Aramaic) was the author of the Gospel. In addition to this, the Gospel of Mark includes a number of vivid and tangential details unnecessary to the narrative, but consistent with observations of an eyewitness to the events. This would indicate the author had access to an eyewitness such as Peter. The Outline of the Gospel Is Consistent With Peter’s Outline Papias maintained the Gospel of Mark was simply a collection of Peter’s discourses (or his preaching) as this information was received and recalled by Mark. If we examine the typical preaching style of Peter in the Book of Acts (1:21-22 and Acts 10:37-41 for example) we see Peter always limited his preaching to the public life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus. Mark’s Gospel omits the private birth narrative and other details of Jesus’ life described in the opening chapters of Luke and Matthew. Mark begins with the preaching of John the Baptist and ends with the resurrection and ascension, paralleling the public preaching of Peter as we see it summarized in the Book of Acts. The Omissions of the Gospel Are Consistent With Peter’s Influence There are many details in the Gospel of Mark consistent with Peter’s special input and influence, including omissions related to events involving Peter. How can Mark be a memoir of Peter if, in fact, the book contains so many omissions of events involving Peter specifically? It’s important to evaluate the entire catalogue of omissions pertaining to Peter to understand the answer here. The vast majority of these omissions involve incidents in which Peter did or said something rash or embarrassing. It’s not surprising these details were omitted by the author who wanted to protect Peter’s standing in the Christian community. Mark was quite discreet in his retelling of the narrative (other Gospel writers who were present at the time do, however, provide details of Peters [sic] ‘indiscretions’ in their own accounts). Here are some examples of Petrine Omissions grounded in an effort to minimize embarrassment to Peter (see Cold-Case Christianity for a more detailed explanation of the events summarized here): Peter’s shame at the “Miraculous Catch” (Mark 1:16-1:20 compared to Luke 5:1-11) Peter’s foolish statement at the crowded healing (Mark 5:21-34 compared to Luke 8:42-48) Peter’s lack of understanding related to the parable (Mark 7:14-19 compared to Matthew 15:10-18 and Acts 10:9-16) Peter’s lack of faith on the lake (Mark 6:45 compared to Matthew 14:22-33) Peter’s rash statement to Jesus (Mark 8:31-33 compared to Matthew 16:21-23) Peter’s statement related to money (Mark 10:23-31 compared to Matthew 19:23-30) Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s denial (Mark 14:27-31 compared to Luke 22:31-34 and John 13:34-38) Peter’s behavior at the foot-washing (Mark 14:22-26 compared to John 13:2-9) Peter’s denial and Jesus’ direct stare (Mark 14:66-72 compared to Luke 22:54-62) There are a number of places in the Gospel of Mark where details related specifically to the words and actions of Peter have been omitted in what appears to be an effort to protect Peter from embarrassment. This doesn’t mean Peter failed to talk about these things. He may very well have included them in his sermons and teachings. But Mark, his scribe and close friend, simply chose to omit these details related to Peter, either at Peter’s request or on his own initiative. The Inclusions of the Gospel Are Consistent With Peter’s Influence In addition to the omissions we have cited, there are a number of details included in Mark’s Gospel demonstrating Peter’s involvement and connection to Mark. As we describe a few of them, notice these inclusions are relatively minor and don’t seem to add much to the narrative. Their incidental nature is an indicator the author lacked a motive other than to simply include Peter’s perspective in the account. Peter’s involvement appears to have been faithfully recorded by his scribe and assistant, Mark: Peter’s search for Jesus (Mark 1:35-37) Peter’s house in Capernaum (Mark 2:1-5 and 1:21, 29-31 compared to Matthew 4:13-16) Peter’s identification of the fig tree (Mark 11:20-21 compared to Matthew 21:18-19) Peter’s identification of the disciples (Mark 13:1-4 and Matthew 24:1-3) Respecting the limits and brief nature of blog posts, I’ve restricted my description of these internal details (compared to how I’ve described them in the book), but the verse locations should help you discover them for yourself. There is a reasonable, cumulative, circumstantial case pointing to Peter as the source of information for Mark’s Gospel. Remember, circumstantial evidence can be every bit as determinative as direct evidence in a court of law. The strength of such a case is based on the depth, quantity and quality of the individual pieces: A. Biblical Passages Confirm a Relationship Between Mark and Peter B. External Sources From History Tell Us Mark Wrote Peter’s Memoir C. Internal Indicators Reveal Peter’s Direct Influence on Mark’s Gospel There is sufficient cumulative, circumstantial evidence to conclude Mark did, in fact, form his Gospel from the teaching and preaching of the Apostle Peter. …. There is sufficient cumulative, circumstantial evidence to conclude Mark did, in fact, form his Gospel from the teaching and preaching of the Apostle Peter. If this is the case, Mark’s Gospel was written within the lifetime of Mark (and likely within the lifetime of Peter). If the Gospel of Mark was written this early, it would have undergone the scrutiny of those who were actually present and could have exposed Mark as a liar : 2 Peter 1:16 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty For more information about the reliability of the New Testament gospels and the case for Christianity, please read Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. This book teaches readers ten principles of cold-case investigations and applies these strategies to investigate the claims of the gospel authors. The book is accompanied by an eight-session Cold-Case Christianity DVD Set (and Participant’s Guide) to help individuals or small groups examine the evidence and make the case. J. Warner Wallace is a Dateline featured Cold-Case Detective, Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Adj. Professor of Christian Apologetics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, author of Cold-Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, and creator of the Case Makers Academy for kids. ….