Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: gmark digest: October 26, 2002

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: SCHunnicut AT aol.com
  • To: gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: gmark digest: October 26, 2002
  • Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 06:42:14 EST

I have been checking in on this conversation on and off since Mr. Gibson posted his paper, which I thought was quite interesting.  I do not have a Ph.D. in New Testament Studies, but I do have a Master's degree.  I studied with Werner Kelber and spent several years in the 1980s struggling to come to terms with the narrative shape of the gospel, and with parables.  I wrote an M.A. thesis entitled, "Jesus' Parables, Language and the Common World:  A Response to Dominic Crossan's Theology of Story." 

The question I would like to ask is this:  Why is Mr. Alward dominating this discussion?  I have read his credentials in solid state physics, and I have been to his web site.  His professional credentials do not seem relevant to the discussion on this list, and his web site makes it clear that he finds all of the New Testament writings to lack historical and spiritual integrity.  (I am not sure the term spiritual integrity is a meaningful one for Mr. Alward, but it is for me, and perhaps for others.)

I am horrified by the lack of respect he has shown in this discussion.  I am horrified that he is allowed to continue to do this.  Is he going to be in Toronto?  Does he frequently attend these seminars?

It is fine, I think, for a person to find the New Testament documents to lack integrity.  But it seems only good manners not to interfere in a conversation like this where others have invested years in study and believe what they are doing is worthy of the time they have invested.  Given Mr. Alward's opinions about the New Testament in general, I think he should find a more fruitful and responsible way to spend his personal time, and allow the members of this list to carry on their discussion.

On being asleep:  I think this clearly could be metaphorical language about the disciples' failure to grasp the true pathos and import of this moment in Jesus' life and ministry.  In Mark 4:12 Jesus says that people who are "outside" look but don't percieve, listen, but don't understand.  This is a prophetic idiom rooted in Isaiah 6:  "Make the mind of this people dull, and stop their ears, and shut their eyes, so that they may not look with their eyes, and listen with their ears, and comprehend with their minds and turn and be healed."  People who are sleeping have their eyes closed, and are pretty much insensible to what is going on around them.  Being asleep can be seen as an extension of the prophetic idiom. 

I think the whole point is INSENSIBILITY.  Not being in touch, and not being touchable.  If the crucifixion of the son of God cannot touch someone at the core of their being, cannot WAKE THEM UP, what can?  It was inconceivable to the disciples that this could happen to the son of God.  But the whole point of Mark, it seems to me, is that it can.  They are sleeping through it. 

Jesus tells them, "Your watchfulness, your presence, your understanding of this moment are important."  Meaning, I think, significant for the unfolding of salvation history.  And their closed eyes make all of these things, watchfulness, presence, understanding, impossible.

There are issues in this gospel that I think are quite relevant to my life and the lives of other people, and they are not being discussed on this list.  Someone needs to take responsibility for keeping this conversation focused. 

I don't think Mr. Gibson should spend anymore time in this conversation if others do not step in.  It is a waste of his time.  .
Susan Hunnicutt
Royal Oak, Michigan


 






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page