Kata Markon

["Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 AT comcast.net>]

George Young wrote:

> Dear Mr. Patton:
>
> The Messianic predictions which Jesus gives concerning
> the Son of Man are very interesting, especially that
> the Son of Man  META TREIS HMERAS ANASTHSETAI.
> Perhaps one might ask: "Just how should we interpret
> the *three day* predictions in the teaching of Jesus?"
>  (e.g., Mk 8:31, 9:31, 10:34).  And all the more so,
> since the Gospel of Mark states that "very early on
> the first day of the week" the women arrive at the
> tomb and the stone is already rolled away (Mk. 16:4).
> Still more, it is worth adding that they see a
> NEANISKON wearing a white robe.  Well, we all can do
> the math, yes?  According to the Gospel of Mark, Jesus
> was crucified on Friday and rose again on Monday -
> that’s three days.

Where ever do you get Monday?

> But not three days and nights (cf.
> Matthew. & Luke).   If I may for a moment deviate from
> strict Markan diet, I will partially respond to your
> observations.  While Jesus was in *Dalmanoutha,* the
> Pharisees attacked Him viciously with words, even
> asking Him for a sign from Heaven!  Jesus responds by
> saying "If a sign shall be given to this generation, I
> am not the Christ" (Mk. 8:10-13).   What do we do with
> those ‘other sayings,’ like the "Sign of the Prophet
> Jonah?"  We hear Him say: "As Jonah was three days and
> nights in the belly of the whale so shall the Son of
> Man be three days and nights in the heart of the
> earth" (Matt. 12:40).  What can one say about the Sign
> of the Prophet Jonah? Perhaps one might echo E. Von
> Dobschutz when he wrote "Nobody… has succeeded in
> giving a fair explanation of what the sign of the
> prophet Jonah might mean" (1910 AD).   Or, one might
> risk an explanation (see that offered up by Jeffery
> Gibson, 2004 http://ntgateway.com/gospels/gibson.pdf).
>  The problem, of course, is that in the former case
> Von Dobschutz gives up and does not know what to do
> (except to implicitly claim that since he doesn’t
> know, nobody else can know either).

Have you actually read the Von Dobschutz article?  And is AD necessary.
Does anyone here think that there was anyone named Von Dobschutz living
in 1910 BCE or that he's be writing then in English?

>  In the latter
> case, Gibson refuses to give up, but can’t speak above
> the sound of the crowd (it all sounds the same).

What crowd?  And to whom does it all sound the same?

> To
> be sure, Gibson offers up 17 pages of explanation and
> 54 footnotes - but never once considers the meaning of
> the name "Jonah" - which means "to suppress" and
> "oppress."

And there's a good reason for my never considering it.  and that's
because "to suppress" or "to oppress" is t's not what Jonah means.

Is there a point to what you write above that is relevant to the issue
under consideration, namely, what Mark refers to when he speaks of the
AofD?

Jeffrey Gibson

--
Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
Chicago, Illinois
e-mail jgibson000 AT comcast.net