Kata Markon

[JFAlward AT aol.com]

Gibson writes:

With respect to the genre of GMark, List Members might like to have a look at 
the
first chapter of  Adela Yarbro Collins'  _Beginning of the Gospel: Probing of
Mark in Context_  entitled "Is Mark's Gospel a Life of Jesus? The Question of
Genre_. I would also recommend Christoper Bryan's _A Preface to Mark: Notes on
the Gospel in Its Literary and Cultural Setting_. Bryan also takes up the 
issue
of the genre of Mark and picks up and expands upon much of what R. Burridge 
did
in his exploration of the Gospels compared with ancient BIOI.
==========
Alward:

It's just not practical at this time to seek these texts and search for the 
arguments you have in mind, and I'm sure you don't expect anyone to suspend 
their arguments until they've done so.   If you believe that there are in the 
books you've mentioned strong arguments against the evidence I've presented 
that Mark's gospel is partly fictional, I would be very happy to have you 
present them.  
==========
Gibson:

In any case, it seems clear to me that those here  who have been making 
statement
about what GMark **is** would be well served to first insure or demonstrate 
that
they can answer the questions of how closely (or not) GMark conforms to the
characteristics of the Hellenistic "Lives" and whether or not the author of 
Mark
employs many (any?) of the standard topoi and techniques that authors of
Hellenistic "lives" employed.
===========
Alward:

If you will present an argument, I will be happy to try to respond.  I 
believe the author(s) of Mark created fictional or partially fictional 
stories about Jesus that were partly or completely based on scripture.  If 
you believe that this is not true, I suggest we take something concrete to 
discuss.  Perhaps you could look at the the loaves and fishes story, for 
example, and show me where you think my argument fails.  It's at 

http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Loaves_and_Fishes.htm


Regards,  

Joe Alward