Kata Markon

["James Crossley" <crossleyjames AT hotmail.com>]

> From: "Stefan Lücking" <stefan.luecking AT uni-muenster.de>
> Reply-To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Subject: [gmark] Mark 7:3-4 and the readers of Mark
> Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 15:46:43
>
> The long explanation of Jewish purity customs in Mark 7,3-4 normally serves
> as argument that the Markan readers are gentile Christians. But the
> uniqueness of this gloss within the gospel of Mark makes me doubt if it
> alone is sufficient proof for this thesis with its repercussions on the
> understanding of the whole Gospel.
>         First of all, it is the only explanation of Jewish customs (by the 
> author
> of Mark) I found in the whole Gospel. In other debates about Jewish customs
> there are no such explanations.
>         Second, the use of "all Jews/Judaeans" (PANTES hOI IOUDAIOI) is 
> unique to
> the gospel and appears to me very unmarkan. Elsewhere, Mark uses the word
> "Judaeans" (IOUDAIOI) only in the mouth of gentiles (Pilate 15:2, 15:9,
> 15:12; the Roman soldiers 15:28) and in the Roman inscription on the cross
> whereas Jewish mockers use the expression "King of Israel" (15:32).
>         Third, there are so many unexplained allusions to and suppositions 
> from a
> Jewish background in the gospel of Mark, that I can hardly imagine how
> gentile Christians could understand large parts of the gospel (e.g., the
> prologue) if they had not been so deeply introduced into Jewish culture
> that it would not make any sense to speak of a "gentile" Christians (but of
> Christian "proselytes" or so).
>         Fourth, I don t see where problems which are specific for gentile
> Christians (as e.g. social relations to the gentile environment) are
> treated. Just compare the problems Paul discusses in 1 Corinthians.
> Monotheism is self evident as one side of the highest command (Mark
> 12:28-34), but there is no polemic against polytheism - apart from very
> subtle allusions to Scripture as in Mark 5:1-20. Typically Jewish Christian
> problems, however, as the Sabbath, purity laws, the temple are treated
> throughout the gospel.
>
>         So, I am really puzzled. For, on the one hand, Mark 7:3-4 is very 
> strong
> evidence for gentile readers with few knowledge about Jewish life. On the
> other hand a lot of other indicators point to Jewish Christian readers.
>         Now, I would like to ask: What can I do with this contradictory 
> evidence
> concerning the readers of Mark? Related to this question are a couple of
> other questions: Is there any other evidence for gentile Christian readers
> in the Gospel of Mark? If so: how could these readers understand the
> allusions and hidden quotes from Scripture and other Jewish literature? On
> the other hand: if the Markan readers were Jewish Christian, how can the
> gloss in Mark 7:2-4 be explained?
>
> Thank you in advance for your answers.
>
> Stefan Lücking
> University of Münster, Germany
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to gmark as: crossleyjames AT hotmail.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> $subst('Email.Unsub')

Some responses:
Mark 7:2-4 can be seen as an explanation of detailed halakah for an 
unfamiliar gentile audience.  The reason why practices such as the Sabbath 
are not explained is because Jews were famous for celebrating it in the 
ancient world.  We could say the same about avoidance of pork,  for example. 
 The Temple was also well known by gentiles and was apparently a 
monumentous sight. Citing scripture without referencing is typical in the 
New Testament so we can assume that many from the audience were familiar 
with the Hebrew bible and would therefore be familiar with practices such as 
Sabbath or the building of the Temple. As Mark 7:2-4 is not explicitly 
biblical (teaching of the elders) we have another reason why it must be 
explained. I suspect that Mark's audience almost certainly contained 
gentiles.

Another point I think that needs discussion is the translation of IOUDAIOI 
as 'Judeans'.  I suspect 'Jews' would be a better translation.  It is 
analagous to the Johannine usage which has been distorted by the translation 
'Judeans' or the like (e.g. Jewish leaders.  Compare John 2:13 'the passover 
of the Jews (IOUDAIOI)' would make little sense as Passover of the Judeans 
or Jewish leaders.

Yours,

James Crossley,
Dept. of Theology,
University of Nottingham,
U.K.

crossleyjames AT hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com